2006-11-15 12:37:25 · 16 answers · asked by skeptic 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
yes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml
2006-11-15 12:50:54 · answer #1 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
3) I have by no potential met someone who adverse the warfare in Iraq and idea it replaced into bloody who honestly watched the conflict of Baghdad. From what i have considered and heard, that replaced into arguably between the most compassionate, welcomed, chilly takeovers contained in the heritage of the international. are you able to tell me of the different warfare the position the objectives and blast cases were presented in develop so as that people might want to destroy out and be probability-free? the idea of killing replaced into relentlessly (and ultimately effectively) superimposed by the yank Democrats and competing factions of Iraqis After the invasion of Iraq. each and every American soldier i have met who served in Iraq has been very proud and delighted to were waiting to assist the individuals there. 2) Many Iraqis were satisfied to be loose. No individuals were satisfied about the towers falling. a million) Who can instruct that everybody (to boot bill Clinton) informed Bush to invade Iraq? And if "someone" did, who can instruct it replaced into God? As for the "why," the different day I ran throughout an previous Reader's Digest from 1999 and replaced into startled to make sure an account of a sting operation in which a U.S. operative foiled an Iraqi attempt to purchase set off devises for missile-presented nuclear guns. the concept that there have been no Iraqi initiatives coming up guns of mass destruction is yet another submit-invasion fabrication by the "criminal liberal" left, with the idea (powerful) that if the media shout it lengthy sufficient, people will trust it. ordinary common sense might want to inform you otherwise, yet in view that for most individuals it really is too a lot difficulty, there is continually heritage if you care sufficient to look.
2016-11-29 04:30:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He did say that but then again George Bush also says a lot of things.
2006-11-15 12:40:35 · answer #3 · answered by tictac_lvr 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yep he is said.
He always calls himself the decider though so he says crazy things all the time.
2006-11-15 12:44:28 · answer #4 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesnt surprise me. Religious folks have been using their god(s) to explain why they feel the need to kill others for centuries.
2006-11-15 12:52:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he was talking about his father, he has a hard time telling the difference between them.
2006-11-15 12:41:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He said he has hit a liberal in the mouth before
2006-11-15 13:08:46 · answer #7 · answered by blood for oil 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Chaney is God, then yes.
2006-11-15 12:49:57 · answer #8 · answered by kman1830 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, he did early on in the war. And he gets laughed at for saying it.
2006-11-15 12:39:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
no way. god is not stupid. The Supreme Being will not allow that
2006-11-15 12:40:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymoose 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋