Saddam is sentenced to death. Was the verdict given today just to make the Repulican win the election?
2006-11-05 07:47:40 · 20 answers · asked by From Hangu 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The timing is very suspicious. It also makes me wonder if Bush cares enough about our soldiers' safety. He says the Iraqis are fighting more now to get people in the US to vote for the Democrats (a vote for the Democrats, is, therefore, a vote for the terrorists). If there is already extra violence because of the upcoming US election, why add fuel to the fire with a sentence against Saddam at this very moment??
2006-11-05 07:50:35 · answer #1 · answered by Red Herring 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I don't know... personally?
It's kind of funny that someone else is doing the killing for him. I guess Bush never could get a job done though! =P
Honestly, I don't think it will impact the elections very much. We pretty much knew this would be the verdict and it comes at a time when soldiers still die everyday.
Now if they suddenly found Osama Bin Laden I'd think something was amiss
2006-11-05 07:52:39 · answer #2 · answered by Big C 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
searching at a number of the previous solutions jogs my memory that those who shout loudest have the least to assert and the most to conceal. The Iraqis that Saddam killed were typically killed with the conivance and appoval of england and us of a, not that Britain has had an self sustaining voice for years, and we killed many with the sanctions we imposed on Iraq, which the politicians knew and likely became hoping may be the case, so as that they could portray what were their murderous tyrant as now an self sustaining murderous tyrant. attempt searching in the back of the headlines, a number of you.
2016-11-28 19:38:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Number one: Bush isn't running for anything. He already won the last two elections. (Not stole!...email me and I'll elaborate a bit, but I shouldn't have to).
As to the timing, it's a possibility. Our government does nothing without reason. Well, not when it comes to politcal gain. The timing does give reason to suspect. Look at the things that happened during Clinton's Whitewater and Lewinski scandals. Those people involved with Whitewater died...hmmm...still want to talk conspiracies? And Monica....he raised cigarette taxes, but not cigar taxes...hmmmm. And Sandy Berger took those documents involving Clinton and Osama so the 9/11 commission couldn't read them....hmmm....
Folks---lighten up. Unless you go to DC and whack every politician over the head until they start doing right, nobody is going to be happy with the outcome of everything. Quit yer bitchn, grow up, and vote for the person who seems the most normal. My dad voted for Kerry. He can't stand the man, but he voted for him anyway...following his party blindly...so dumb. I probably would've voted for Lieberman if he'd won the nomination. But Dems don't want normal folks in office. I'll cross party lines when it's the right thing to do.
2006-11-05 08:04:08 · answer #4 · answered by unclewill67 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah! Just like the Foley scandal was hushed by dumbocrats until a few weeks before the election. It should tell you something if the terrorists hope for a dumbocratic win, while the Iraqi government is hoping the Republicans stay in control.
2006-11-05 07:51:39 · answer #5 · answered by gunrrobot 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
The only thing that would save the Republicans from a humiliating
defeat is the second coming of the son of man
2006-11-05 07:53:20 · answer #6 · answered by miraclehand2020 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No question.
Another ploy from Karl Rove, the champion of election subversion.
He is a stone cold traitor.
2006-11-05 07:51:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I do find the timing slightly suspicious, though hopefully it'll only encourage those who think we were in Iraq in the first place to get Saddam out of power (WMDs, what?) and they're so out of touch they'd vote Rep. anyway.
2006-11-05 07:50:54 · answer #8 · answered by Vadalia 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
First, it was a foregone conclusion that he'd get death
Second, it will be appealed (and it would work in everyone's best interest if he is NOT executed. Don't need another martyr)
Third, it may not have the desired effect
2006-11-05 07:53:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
a question like this one almost verbatim was asked earlier so I will answer it the same
If the Iraqis throw a revolt of any type do you think the publicity will be good for the republicans...no the democrats will scream bloody murder and unfairness no matter what
2006-11-05 07:52:35 · answer #10 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋