Who's responsible? All the morons who voted for Bush, and all the morons who demanded that an uninvolved country be attacked because of one case of terrorism. And all the morons who didn't vote. And all the morons who accepted that a preemptive strike is a form of self defence, even with no clear threat, and that the USA is above the law. And let's not forget all the morons who signed up to kill those 35 000 civilians. Politicians start wars, but they don't happen without soldiers.
2007-01-16 01:09:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
6⤋
Well in my opinion the Iraqis are responsible,whether or not the invasion of Iraq was right or not is old news,put it behind and move on. It would be like worrying over whether the carpet bombings of some European cities which killed many civilians were really warranted when the war was over. It's irrelevant now,but unfortunately the differing factions of the society have decided to use this opportunity to lash out with all their hatreds of each other. They are proving that their hatred of each other is more important to them than the opportunity to live in a peaceful society. The one thing that can be said in Sadaam's favor is that during his reign he did mostly keep these people away from each others throat,granted he often did it by killing them as well so I'm not sure how good that was. This crap could end tommorrow if the Iraqis wanted it to,but too many see the opportunity to grab some power or lash out at those they hate. At this point I think we should just pull out and let them get it over with,but I assure you it would make the millions slaughtered in Vietnam after we pulled out look like a fine day at the park in comparison.
AD
2007-01-16 01:15:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
in the present day, I help the Commander in chief, yet i urge restraint. on the instant, I cautioned restraint at the same time as getting SHOT for the Commander in chief. Then, I had observe that I had to sue if i did not favor to die from kidney failure. THEN a neo-conSERFative "choose" determined that i changed into not "worth" of sources and gifted extraordinarily a lot each and everything and not using a VA rep (the close by courts were given rid of my VA rep, saying a participant in a opposed lawsuit hostile to ME is basically as solid as a VA rep, better basically...). So no money, AND no VA rep. however the supporters of Al Qa'ida... THEY get the spouse, the sources, the right to little ones... WHY ? because they are traitors. not high-quality fellas who imagine taxing better and delivering a lot less of each and everything yet public debt is the purely moral component to do; yet traitors. Why else at the same time as a porn celeb attacks a Congressman in public and steals his cellular telephone and sends a bootleg image aren't any OF THE "precise" the least bit disillusioned about help and convenience to the enemy ?
2016-12-02 08:55:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Powerless United Nations Organzation!!!!
If it is armed with independant power to take action on any one at first sight, things like poverty, power struggle, controlling wealth, terrorism would not be visible.. Every one will respect UNO and the decisions will be appricated....Proper justice will be seen in the places where it is totally missing!!
2007-01-16 01:08:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by SESHADRI K 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
How many died under Saddams regime especially the Kurds, that number far exceeds 35,000.
The Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party has been in power in Iraq since 1968. Under the leadership of President Saddam Hussein, who seized power in 1979, the Iraqi government has committed a vast number of crimes against the Iraqi people and others, using terror through various levels of police, military, and intelligence agencies to control and intimidate large segments of the Iraqi population.
Two Iraqi groups in particular have suffered horrific abuses—the Kurds in the north, and Shi`a populations in the south. Two decades of oppression against Iraq’s Kurds and Kurdish resistance culminated in 1988 with a genocidal campaign, and the use of chemical weapons, against Kurdish civilians, resulting in over 100,000 deaths. After the 1991 Gulf War, in the aftermath of a popular uprising in the South, Iraq drained the marsh regions and sent in the military with tanks to shell and burn villages, causing tens of thousands of Marsh Arabs, who are Shi`a, to flee to Iran. The Iraqi military has also used chemical weapons in its war against Iran, committed serious human rights violations during its occupation of Kuwait, and committed other crimes.
While Human Rights Watch has long advocated the prosecution of Saddam Hussein and others for crimes against the Iraqi people and others,1 it takes no position on the advisability or legitimacy of the use of force against Iraq or the goal of removing Saddam Hussein. See “Human Rights Watch Policy on Iraq,” http://hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/hrwpolicy.htm. As the possibility of armed conflict and a possible transition increases in Iraq, however, it is necessary to consider how such crimes should be brought to justice
2007-01-16 01:07:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Saddam Hussein
2007-01-16 01:11:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by youronmyfoot 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
Honestly, the terrorists who attacked on 9/11, and Saddam Hussein.
If we hadn't gotten attacked, we wouldn't have started the war on terror.
If Saddam would have let the UN check for WMD's, we wouldn't have brought the war on terror to Iraq.
Tis may not be the best war, but we had bad intelligence, and Saddam didn't help the situation. But anyone who thinks that we are in Iraq for oil is an idiot. Bush may not be the smartest president, but he is not a monster.
Also, why are we not getting cheaper oil, and why are we decreasing production in Iraq???
---One more thing. If the Iraqi terrorists would stop dressing like civilians, and obey the Geneva convention by wearing a uniform, there would be less dead civilians.
2007-01-16 01:03:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by I STILL hate hippies 2
·
8⤊
5⤋
Greed
2007-01-16 01:15:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why not ask us to leave aside the air we are breathing for a minute? There is no part of life where r-ligion is not relevant, since they provide an interpretational grid for all experiences.
2007-01-16 01:08:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Garius 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
It's mostly caused by difference of opinion in two flavours of Islam competing for power and seeking revenge on each other.
2007-01-16 01:04:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋