BUSH SHOULD HAVE WENT AFTER AL QUAIDA, THE ONE'S WHO ACTUALLY ATTACKED US, INSTEAD OF IRAQ.
PLEASE NEOCONS, IF YOU MUST PUT A NEOCON IN THE WHITEHOUSE; MAKE SURE HE'S NOT A RETARD FIRST!!
2006-09-26 13:33:24 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Prepare to be bashed.....Neocons hate logic like that.
2006-09-26 13:35:11 · answer #1 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 7⤊ 4⤋
in case you have been to take an purpose seem into what's occurring interior the middle east, you will not say they died for no longer something. The troops say they think of they could desire to be there. there is alot being performed, however the main significant networks do no longer desire you to nicely known. the selection a million criticism by skill of the troops final month, chatting with Democratic certainty looking team, replace into the biased information insurance that they pronounced replace into no longer something like what replace into extremely occurring in Iraq. That replace into stated by skill of a Democratic Senator. i will comprehend why you could desire to oppose the conflict, yet how approximately honest insurance by skill of CBS, NBC, and ABC, so the yankee Public can extremely tell what's occurring there. on an identical time as I trust you that Iraq had no longer something to do with 911, we are tying up alot of Islamic militants and their components that could desire to or could have been used to attack united statesa. or Britain. additionally removing a dictator that killed as much as one hundred thousand human beings a 300 and sixty 5 days is likewise a fantastically reliable reason.
2016-12-12 15:46:56 · answer #2 · answered by bornhoft 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have to first decide what you mean by 'worth'. The war has increased the revenue to Texas oil companies by 4-5 times in profits. It has also made our friends in Saudi Arabia very rich, which probably includes Osama Bin Laden. When Bush landed on the aircraft carrier and announced "Mission Accomplished", we also announced that our troops were leaving Saudi Arabian soil. This was a demand from Osama Bin Laden. So, ask where your perspective is, and who benefits, and you might find you are wasting your time trying to convince the neocons that it wasn't "worth" it.
Silverman got his insurance money for BOTH towers. Imagine that.
There is only one question for all candidates: "Are you Corporatist or Localist?"
2006-09-26 13:39:25 · answer #3 · answered by auntiegrav 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
you need to look at why bush invaded iraq. if you watch either bowling for columbine or fahrenheith 9/11, it would be clear that iraq was on the goverments list of countries to invade. also, the question of when the us is going to leave iraq would be made clear. after the dreadfull 9/11, the bush administration looked at the invasion of iraq. this is due to how oilly rich iraq is. bush went on record saying how bad sadam was by holding elections and not counting the opposing voter, but thats what but did twice. the us government know how bad its been after the "war" in iraq, losing countless soliders and money, but until they can get a way to pump the oil to american areas in the middle east america wouldn't leave.
2006-09-26 13:52:18 · answer #4 · answered by Rabz 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
as soon as everyone realizes that america is losing the war
and maybe if the lazy americans got off their asses and use their rights that so many have died for to force the government to do their jobs.
america has already lost the war in iraq...
the only way america can turn the situation in iraq around would be to use the intelligence they have, use the technology that they "do not have" (not)
they are saving their aces and their enemies have outscored them
2006-09-26 13:58:14 · answer #5 · answered by impossiblestrength 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
So, which is it? Al Quaida (your spelling) attacked us on 9/11, or 9/11 was a government frame-up to justify the invasion of Afganistan and Iraq?
I wish you Liberal rhetoric-mongers would get your stories straight.
2006-09-26 13:36:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
The neocons made out like bandits! They invested in the companies supporting the military. Yessirreee they are now ROLLIN' in the dough...
2006-09-26 13:35:20 · answer #7 · answered by special-chemical-x 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Perhaps you would feel different if Saddam had loaned out some of his mustard gas to make a bomb with and gave it to an Al-Queda operative that smuggled it into a mall where your kids are at?
Bush was the perfect president for these hard times and the only retards in politics are the democats running around leaking national secrets and compromising our national security all for politics and posturing.
2006-09-26 13:36:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
You are not but a bunch of traitors, part of the fifth column in this country. You should look in the mirror and see where the retards are. You will be seeing in history as the Chamberlains of the 21st century. Your fanaticism have damaged your thinking. You people make me sick.
2006-09-26 13:42:02 · answer #9 · answered by amistad51 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It was worth it for the companies that supported the Bush presidential campaign!!! I agree he is a retard.
2006-09-26 13:36:55 · answer #10 · answered by Red Knight 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Nobody ever admits they are wrong nowadays, liberals included. I think I'm the only person left on the planet who can admit it when he's wrong. By the way, it's considered improper etiquette to type in all caps. It's like SHOUTING.
2006-09-26 13:37:29 · answer #11 · answered by Cybeq 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋