Axis of Evil and Nuclear Weapons?

Question

Is George Bush responsible for the nuclear ambitions of Iraq and North Korea?

He made up reasons (WMD) to attack Iraq?

It seems to me that the way to prevent George Bush from attacking a country is for it to actually have weapons of mass destruction.

N. Korea has nukes...Bush is not attacking them.
Iran either is close to having them or already has them...Bush is not attacking them either.

What kind of message is this sending to rogue nations and terrorist groups? Get nukes, and Bush will leave you alone!!

Agree or Disagree??

Answer 1

... don't forget Pakistan... Osama is there, it's a HUGE base of terror, and it's a military dictatorship (just like saddam) but we run to IRAQ THAT HAS NO REAL TERROR LINKS TO fight the war on terror...

Bush and Republicans won't fight a nuclear country, no matter how many terrorists they support... that much is clear... they can't even handle a few insurgents...

it's a horrible example that we're setting with those countries...

Answer 2

Devils wear Prada!

Iraq does not have Nukes, I think you meant Iran, Bush is not responsible for Iran and North Korea, but the Presidents before YES!

Bush is cleaning up the mess that the previous presidents were doing, so he gets all the blame.

Iraq have OIL, Bush administration went to Iraq for OIL, they can not attack North Korea, cause they will not have any Return On Investment (war is an investment).

Bush admin will leave your country alone if they do not see any R.O.I. once they see, they will attack and invade your country.

Answer 3

disagree....

the countries that Bush has gone after havent had ties with any of the "superpowers" of the world so they were not a problem to attack.

N.Korea has nukes true and it also has some backing from china and russia which make it harder to do something against militarily.

Iran has alot of oil that fuels our economy and the prices would skyrocket if we did and thus go against public oppinion worse than Iraq has due to the media making it out to be bad when its not at all since we have only lost around 3k troops. tell me when the U.S. lost that few troops in a war elsewhere in our history. Also the Iranians are backed by Russia and china as well if unofficially and thus prove problems to act against until recently with sanctions coming.

and to say that if u get nukes we wont touch you is funny and not true since we the U.S. will go in and stop someone if it is acting wrongly even if they have nukes. and if the rogue state fires its 2-5 nukes on us we have a lot more we can fire back to annihilate them with

Answer 4

They never found proof that Iraq had weapons; they cited a lot of evidence which was later discovered to be fabricated. Generals who 'admitted' to the program were found out to be lying, they had simply been paid off by the US gov. to lie deliberately.

This whole 'we have nukes' thing is fighting talk; they don't have enough money to feed themselves, let alone obtain the capacity to build nuclear missiles. But it's a dangerous gamble. I think if the generals in the US mil. want war, they'll go in anyway and get another easy ride from the conservative press..

Answer 5

I don't think Iraq has nuclear ambitions. Iran certainly does.

Korea has been on going for 50 years now. The Yanks were too confident that they could win just like they did in Germany and Japan but it was different.

Answer 6

You might take into account the old axiom that our leaders are a direct reflection of us , the people no matter what party or affiliations we choose to have. don't forget that only two nukes were ever used in a war and it was us who used them.. How can you cast blame on a poor soul who is purported to have a 92 i.q.(about half of pres.clinton's) Do you have a dislike for the mentally deprived?

Answer 7

I recommend you study the quote. on your ease, i will comprise it right here. "States like those, and their terrorist allies, characterize an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the international. by making use of in seek of weapons of mass destruction, those regimes pose a grave and becoming possibility. they'd supply those hands to terrorists, giving them the skill to experience their hatred. they'd attack our allies or attempt to blackmail us of a of america. In any of those circumstances, the fee of indifference may be catastrophic." Former President George W. Bush did not point out nuclear weapons. He stated weapons of mass destruction - which comprise nuclear weapons alongside chemical, organic and organic, and radiological weapons. As for the worldwide places in the "Axis of Evil" (those being Iraq, Iran, and North Korean): Iraq possessed and used chemical weapons on it is very own inhabitants many cases. Chemical weapons have been recovered in the process the Iraq conflict, as properly to yellow cake uranium that's used to make nuclear weapons. Iran denies any desire to very own nuclear weapons and claims it is nuclear software is only for electrical energy - different than they have much extra centrifuges working than is critical for electrical energy. North Korea possesses and has examined nuclear weapons. so as which skill 2 international locations had and used WMDs, and the third is very possibly coming up them.

Answer 8

Totally agree. Bush is but a pu ssy wimp and an abusive bully with little league nations. He is a moron too. His staff, or the so called Bush administration is a sack of as s holes bent over one idea only, to get rich at our expense.

Answer 9

Disagree....Its my opinion that Sadaam was a terrorist as well,among his own people,those who do not see that are blind to facts..The US does not attack a country without a reason to,& I certainly can't blame them or the rest of the world for seeing N. Korea as a threat considering their record of the past..but until they let it be known they are out to destroy other countries why bother them?Kind of reflects Clintons thinking on Iraq ey?

Answer 10

Disagree.Iraq is about oil and the creation of the never ending war on terror for profit generated motives.Pleading and /or telling other countries no nukes is about control