do u think bush should be impeached? if so why
2006-12-03 20:23:01 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes he not only has violated his oath of office by lying to the public about Iraq,& 911, but has also consipred to deprive people of liberty, approved torture, and last but not least has aided and abetted the people who actually attacked us on 911, when he failed to respond and has continued to retain as allies and private business associates the Sadui Royal family.
2006-12-03 20:32:29 · answer #1 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
For what? Let's examine 2 major contentions on why some people believe Mr. Bush should be impeached.
Lying about causes for invading Iraq.
WMDs - We did find WMDs. The nature and scope of those weapons is debatable, but some were found none the less. There is no question that Saddam Hussein possessed and used WMDs on more than one occassion.
Terrorism -Saddam Hussein sponsored world terrorism. The man offered and made payments of 25,000 to families of suicide bombers. This by any definition is considered sponsoring terrorism.
911 - Mr. Bush has never cited 911 as a cause for invading Iraq. This is a fabrication in some instances and a misunderstanding in others, but either way it was never cited.
We did not have the right to invade Iraq
The end of the first Gilf War was not a peace, but rather a ceasefire. In the case of a ceasefire we do not need a new declaration of war to resume hostilities. Saddam Hussein not only violated 17 different UN resolutions, but also the ceasefire terms on numerous occassions and thus made himself subject to a renewal of hostilities.
The President cannot be impeached for acting on intelligence provided him. Especially when that same intelligence was viewed by Congress and most came to the same conclusion. Congress has consistently voted in the majority to continue to fund the war and this is the most compelling reason why impeachment related to the war will fail if brought. The dishonesty of the rhetoric by the left on this issue is staggering and rises at best to the level of frivolity. I know that some think this will happen, but I suspect they are not looking at this realistically and will be extremely disappointed in the end. There will be investigations, there may be impeachments, but the chances of the president being convicted and removed from office are slim at best.
2006-12-04 04:57:57 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Most definitely,
The International Red Cross is bringing up the Bush Administration on war crimes against humanity. The last time they filed charges like this and succeeded was against Hitlers regime. I hope they succeed again. This administration has done more to sell out American values and Principles and in my opinion their actions are treasonous.
2006-12-04 04:41:59 · answer #3 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Of Course...!!! Like a shot...!!! And Tony Bliar too...!!! Only by forcing them to suffer the consequences of their actions can we ever be rid of evil politicians like this. Instead of prancing around the world like demi-gods, laying down the law, they should be humbled, and made painfully aware that they remain constantly ANSWERABLE to the people.
Therefore, BOTH Bush and Bliar should be prosecuted for War Crimes. And, frankly, if the slightest lapse in standards is EVER
detected in the behaviour of ANY leader, then he or she should be "REMOVED" from office at once.
Needless to say, when the leader of any so-called "democratic" country is caught deliberately trying to deceive the people who elected them - that is about as serious a lapse in standards as it is possible to imagine...!!!
2006-12-04 04:37:18 · answer #4 · answered by TruthHurts 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Can be impeached because of breach of security for invading Iraq using American military logistics and personnel when in fact there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
2006-12-04 04:26:24 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Nope
2006-12-04 04:25:21 · answer #6 · answered by selmaguy 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
For what? "breaching" a component of the Treaty of Tripoli?
Libsanity is what this is.
2006-12-04 04:33:57 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
just a simple no
You guys that keep saying yes you have no grounds except still being mad that your Demi God Clinton really did something wrong.
2006-12-04 05:48:07 · answer #8 · answered by josh m 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Libs - Either get on with it or shut up about it. geez.
2006-12-04 05:41:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Definitely not.
2006-12-04 04:33:04 · answer #10 · answered by Max 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋