Now that George W Bush has killed more Americans than Bin Laden, who is the real terrorist?

Question

I know bin laden may be one of the worst people to walk the earth but to americans Bush has caused more harm than bin laden so in my opinion Bush is as evil and is also a terrorist

Answer 1

Why does the death of more than 3000 US servicemen make him more of a terrorist than the deaths of nearly three quarter of a million Iraqi civilians?


BRING ALL OF OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!!!

Answer 2

Look, Bush is an *** but not a terrorist. Compare what Bin Laden did and what Bush did!

Answer 3

I wouldn't say that George killed them but they did die as a result of his decision. Probably more Iraqis died than Saddam killed too. But then nobody is bothering to count them.
I don't think we'll ever see George charged. Osama's gone if they ever catch him. Probably give him a "fair trial" then execute him. So as far as the history books are concerned that would make the answer Bin Laden wouldn't it?

Answer 4

v good question. bush's hostile bloody policy, that follows the well-known American policy but with implusiveness is behind the loss of many Americans and Bin laden is the result of such policy. actually i blame both , but i blame the cause more than the result. i think now the answer is crystal clear. u urself saw this fact that's why u've asked this question !!!

Answer 5

I'm a combat medic and I'm in the Baghdad area so whenever I see these people all blown up I wonder, you know. Did we cause more harm than good over here?. Saddam may have killed people but we allowed everyone to kill eachother count U.S. mil, U.S. civ, Foreign national, and Iraqi deaths

Answer 6

Do i think of he could be President? Hmm, i be attentive to he's the President. He replaced into elected by employing greater beneficial than fifty one% of the vote casting inhabitants and replaced into given the required style of Electorial Votes, so confident. i think you could are starting to be to be out and voted for the "different" guy. Then your worldwide could be appropriate, does no longer it. i ask your self how Kerry could have dealt with the conflict, in all possibility the way he dealt with the different conflict he replaced into in, lie approximately his accomplishments. Oh, do you think of hurricane Katrina or Rita could have spared the Gulf Coast states if Kerry have been president? Get actual. i could no longer believe the President on all of his coverage, yet you ought to confess, you be attentive to the place he stands and he does precisely what he says he is going to do.

Answer 7

If the president can't control the wars that we have who can? We have had many wars and the presidents of the country at that time was not called a terriest Whats up with this question

Answer 8

This is a loaded question :P

However I do agree with you that George W. Bush is responsible for more acts of terrorism than Osama Bin Laden has commited in his life. I have a theory that it may have something to do with his desire to do something great in his life, but lacks the proper mental congnition of right and wrong to affect his decisions.

All his life he has been a failure, and he's determined not to be considered a failure in this war. His interpretation of failure isn't the incredible mess that exists now, but instead failure would mean withdrawal and giving up. Instead of the victory morally that would be.

Answer 9

How many colonists had England killed before we held a war and got lots of us killed. You miss the whole idea of giving ones life for a larger than ones life concept. Our service men volunteer. They are not drafted. So no one sent them in that sense.

Answer 10

do you even need to ask???

tell me this (because im Aussie) and dont get it:

If everyone hates Bush, and from what I read on here, most Americans dislike/hate him etc

why is it .. that he is still government??
why do people vote for him?
WHY?