with the new UN report stated over 34,000 civilian iraqi deaths, who else does bush blame except for terrorists. what a big surprise. the best scapegoat ever to come along...if all else fails, blame the terrorists, or possibly blame clinton. however, shouldnt bush look in the mirror to find who really is to blame? maybe terrorists did kill everybody. however, it was bush to started this civil war and sent that country into chaos. there is absolutely, possitively no way 34,000 civilians would have died if we had not invaded. so shouldnt the blame be put on our administration, instead of everybody else?
2007-01-16 03:05:33 · 10 answers · asked by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
what does saddam have to do with anything in this question?
2007-01-16 03:12:34 · update #1
which is it??? 250,000, 1 million...its all crap. either way, you're putting bush on the same level as him, saying he killed more than us, so its ok that we kill a few. thats sad.
2007-01-16 03:15:39 · update #2
You are right, invading the county gave insurgents and terrorists a meeting ground which escalated the violence. I do however find it obscene that the USA is deny their part in any civilian death.
With massive air strikes, and a war being fought in crowded city streets it is unrealistic to think that innocent lives have not been lost.
Terrorist seem to be a common scape goat these days. Whenever a tragedy in the world occurs it seems all to convenient to blame the terrorists.
2007-01-16 03:15:40 · answer #1 · answered by smedrik 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
it truly is too late. they are blaming him for the monetary equipment already, ever for the reason that he gained the election. And he will be blamed for each little thing in the destiny even even as he's out of workplace only because.
2016-11-24 21:09:11 · answer #2 · answered by kornreich 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you sure 34,000 wouldn't have died? Seems to me they just hanged a man who killed over a million. I'll leave God to make the decision about who killed who.
2007-01-16 03:12:06 · answer #3 · answered by kathy059 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
OK the UNs report says 34,000....WELL the officials their says only a third of that.....Bush is not killing those people its the terrorist....i think that the terrorist are doing this to make people like you confused...in thinking that its all bush's fault.
2007-01-16 03:12:29 · answer #4 · answered by Londgirl 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The terrorists are doing the killing.
Saddam was killing even more. Remember the mass graves? Also, the oil for food scam was causing starvation.
So we are helping - except for those trying to undermine us.
2007-01-16 03:17:57 · answer #5 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, he is. He's just trying to make himself look good.....but in the process...many are paying the price. The middle east is still so barbaric. And it is so apparent that is the way they prefer it. We should just let them alone.
2007-01-16 03:21:41 · answer #6 · answered by TexasRose 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am glad you know so much more about Iraq than anyone else in the country.
Since you KNOW there is No way those people wouldn't have died, you can obviously tell the future, and you should be top general in our Army!
Congratulations! You are now the smartest person on Earth, because you KNOW what would have happened!!
2007-01-16 03:11:23 · answer #7 · answered by I STILL hate hippies 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
exactly, you get it. The number I read from the UN was 350,000 to 650,000 dead civilians in Iraq, who knows? Bush said 30,000.
2007-01-16 03:14:49 · answer #8 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Um, I guess you missed the whole thing about Saddam Hussien killing 250,000 people... Do you think he got hung by his neck for no reason? You need to read a lot more and stop watching Mtv..
2007-01-16 03:10:12 · answer #9 · answered by M CEE 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
SHOULD BLAME HIS SELF.HE STARTED THIS MESS.EDD
2007-01-16 03:09:05 · answer #10 · answered by Eddy L 1 · 2⤊ 3⤋