2007-01-16 14:09:11 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
My, my, aren't there some angry and confused little possoms out there. To the looney who wants to call the FBI or whatever about my question, get a life. This is still a democracy and people still enjoy free speech, no thanks to your ilk.
2007-01-16 15:32:20 · update #1
Ya tonkie yonkie daddy bough a donkey donkey dies daddy cried ya yonkie yonkie.... I learnt that rhyme when I was 2. Michael N its now for you. Its the telling tales song:
That said there is a huge difference between a question that envokes discussion and a threat to kill someone. This question is not a threat its a perfectly appropriate question to ask. The questioner is asking if the leader of this country can be hung the way the leader of another country was hung for what may be similar crimes. What makes our President above the law? This is a perfectly justifiable quesiton to ask in light of current worl order (or lack thereof.) You dont have to agree with any side of the answers, but you ought to thank whoever you thank for our freedom of speech instead of working so hard to curb it.
2007-01-16 14:28:00 · answer #1 · answered by meldorhan 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
According to the teachings of Christ and the Catholic church hanging anyone is wrong, so no. But if you are asking if what Mr. Bush did to Iraq is as bad as Saddam's actions, yes, he should receive equal punishment. Unfortunately, the worst punishment Bush will possibly receive is impeachment rather than a jail sentence. Because, afterall, he is the President of the United States as painful as that is to say.
It is true insurgents are killing most of the innocents over there, but we had no business being over there in the first place so yes we have blood on our hands just for bringing about all the chaos. Bush's need to settle the score for his father has killed and injured nearly a million people, brought unrest to an already unstable region of the world, increased the threat of global terrorism, and put countries like Iran in a much stronger position.
Was all this worth it? Perhaps to the Bush family's dynasty and ego. But it is the rest of us who will have to pay the price for decades and decades to come. I have nothing be endless sympathy for all those who suffered as a result of this heinous war crime, both on the Iraqi and U.S. side.
2007-01-16 14:37:45 · answer #2 · answered by trumph 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Most civilians that are killed in the Iraq War by U.S. hands are usually in the crossfire (if any were). Though I think the number you got there needs a little looking up before you go around saying that. Anyways, most of the insurgents are in civilian clothes, they aren’t wearing uniforms. The insurgents hide and live in civilian areas and etc. so it’s pretty hard to not fight where the civilians are, also, if harder if you don’t know who’s a civilian or the insurgent that just wants to get closer for a better shot. Unless you could tell them for me that they should fight like men there or not fight at all.
Also I'm getting tired of the "Bush and war crimes" rhetorical questions here. The Bush and war crimes thing just came from the anti-U.S. Islamic leaders that needed more scapegoats so that attention to the domestic problems and shortcomings would be taken away to hate something further away. It also includes the very strong anti-Semitism in the Middle East, were everything is suppose to be the “Jew’s” fault because they are evil and made of monkeys and pigs, the real reason they can kill them (they seriously think that… well at least the common man bombarded with messages to hate).
P.S. The number was 300,000 last time, what's with the changes?
2007-01-16 14:27:24 · answer #3 · answered by Eh? 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Muslim Islamic Fascists are responsible for the deaths in Iraq and you should know better than to accuse the President of this. How do you think attitudes like this make America look? I hate terroists and so should you if you are a true American liberal or conservative. They have also beheaded our citizens but I don't hear any of you Bush bashers complaining about this. Your agenda and your mindset is warped to say the least and everybody knows it with half a brain in their head.
2007-01-16 14:33:48 · answer #4 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
1) Bush hasn't committed any war crimes.
2) I don't know where people get these inflated casualty numbers.
3) Almost all civilian casualties in Iraq have been inflicted by other Arabs.
4) Any civilian causalities inflicted by Americans were either accidents or were inflicted by service personnel acting contrary to orders.
2007-01-16 14:23:51 · answer #5 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
What I am not clear on is why Bush let bin Laden waltz out of Tora Bora? Not even a scratch. Wasn't Bush going to get bin Laden "dead or alive" for killing of 3K Americans? Almost as Bush doesn't care about those dead Americans (of course, he likes to use them for election purposes). Yet the dittoheads keep in line and support him while going over the cliff. How sad.....
2007-01-16 14:20:27 · answer #6 · answered by expose_neocons 3 · 3⤊ 5⤋
They won't hang Bush for his atrocities against the human-race. God has that one covered.
And let's see the secret service stop HIM.
Oh, and Michael... do they send you a secret service merit badge for every name you phone in? Hey, comrade?
2007-01-16 14:37:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
I'm not going to lie
I gave you thumbs down for being the 8 millionth guy to ask this in the last 7 days
2007-01-16 14:24:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 4⤋
Libs can never get the numbers right. And no because President Bush Did Not Kill anyone.
2007-01-16 14:27:45 · answer #9 · answered by Madness_75 2 · 3⤊ 5⤋
No because he has not killed or committed any crimes.
2007-01-16 14:38:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋