No OIL there I suppose. Non that he can steal anyway. Also the Dictator there hasn't threatened to assasinate Daddy.
2006-09-04 14:25:55 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
good god,, he's not a humanitarian,, claimed he didn't even know about Katrina for 3 days,, did nothing for 5 days to help people dying from dehydration,,,, and lack of human efforts,,, many at the borders of NO were turned away by authorities who were trying to get in to save lives,,, Bush is a disaster for America and an oil boy who couldn't find oil in the state of Texas......
2006-09-04 14:32:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 6⤋
Our military does not have unlimited resources. Sudan is not a threat to the US or its neighbors. They aren't ready to launch missiles at their neighbors like Iran and North Korea. While there is a crisis in Sudan it is not the only one on the planet. The US refuses to intervene in many conflicts because it cannot afford to divert resources because people like you refuse to join the military. We could easily solve more of the world's problems, however, it would require reenacting the military draft law.
2006-09-04 15:37:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The tragedy in Dafur is not something that can be remedied in a battle. Bush and his cronies are incapable of thinking of a solution to a problem that is beyond war.
2006-09-04 14:48:59 · answer #3 · answered by Just Me 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
THANK YOU!!!!! All bush wants is oil oil oil. And his excuses are pathetic- North Korea told us they have WMDs, but they don't have oil. Darfur needs our intervention, but there's no oil. Unfortunately though, if we can't handle Iraq, there's no way Bush can handle being in two countries at once. For now, maybe it's best that we stay out.
2006-09-04 15:06:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i could say Reagan through fact of furnish area economics. Ask who became extra humanitarian, Reagan who gave everybody a truthful crack on the yank dream or Carter, who gave us 2 gas crises, a destroyed protection stress, a stack of affection letters to the Shah of Iran who informed Carter that he needed to kill him, and--the only stable element--a healthful dislike for sweaters? Reagan returned just about for the comparable motives!
2016-11-24 21:58:59 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're right. No natural resources to exploit.
I never saw GWB as a humanitarian. Is someone saying that about him?
I doubt the assasination thing plays any part in the decision-making process.
2006-09-04 14:29:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Fighting Black Muslims is not PC, besides you guys think the UN is the answer to everything, why ain't they involved
2006-09-04 14:48:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
because a war will not solve that problem and if war is the only option for this administration so that their haliburton buddies can get rich
2006-09-04 15:30:18 · answer #8 · answered by JR 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who actually said he was an humanitarian?
He let his own people starve and die in New Orleans. Last time I checked that was in the United States.
2006-09-04 14:28:38 · answer #9 · answered by yadedyah_dc 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
My opinion is same with you. He is oil oriented person. Besides, Sudan is a poor country (sorry to say this), so he had no benefit there...
2006-09-04 14:29:18 · answer #10 · answered by (^___^) 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋