English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

WOW

2007-01-20 09:28:19 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

www.geocities.com/paulbequi/index.html
www.cedhmor.org/unamosmexico

2007-01-20 09:38:43 · update #1

Bush's comment that "I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense" is followed by his State of the Union address quote that "America is addicted to oil" and by his comment on Hurricane Katrina to high school students in New Orleans: "I take full responsibility for the federal government's response."
USA has lost more than 3,000 soldiers, 21,285 young soldiers wounded, more than 50,000 civilians death, the country of Iraq destroyed, Near East now with out stability, USA with a deficit with more than 400 billion dollars and spending une million dollars each 4 minutes in the war of Iraq. Also he said "God wanted me to be President of USA"

2007-01-20 11:03:05 · update #2

16 answers

Nancy Pelosi, especially about 7 days each month.

2007-01-20 09:36:36 · answer #1 · answered by americanmalearlington 4 · 1 1

well, mr. hertre, maybe you should be president and show the world how much better you are at it. please.

this is such a pathetic question. here's an idea, let's try and run down our leader. trash him and make him look real bad. hey, let's even compare him to an extremist who thinks that all of america is the devil and needs to be destroyed. that will make our country appear united and strong. that will certainly give a good image to the terrorists around the world........

you're a sad man.

there is nothing wrong with any of the quotes you have listed from bush. obviously god wanted him to be pres, or else he wouldn't be. remember, your precious kerry conceded.

the soldiers knew what they were signing up for. that is their job, and they do. it is very unfortunate how many people have died and been wounded due to this war. but, nothing is ever nice about war. whatever the reason the war started, it needed to be done. the iraqis needed to be freed. what world do you live in where you think that things are worse in iraq now, then before the war. hmmm, yeah, i guess suppressing the iraqis is better. yeah, let's be sure women, children, families, random people are being killed for no other reason than saddam wanting them to be. to compare our president to osama is absolutely absurd. you really need to start re-evaluating your facts, and try to find a cure for your liberal disease.

2007-01-28 06:51:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anu Y. 2 · 0 0

Bush may as well be Osama bin Laden's ally. Al Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center towers because they wanted to bankrupt America. Bush's response was to turn around and waste half a trillion dollars of American Tax Payers' money, generating a record deficit that will take decades to pay down. Bin Laden couldn't have done that much damage to our economy if he had an entire army of suicide pilots!

2007-01-28 05:22:02 · answer #3 · answered by Dennis H 4 · 0 0

Bush if you think about it keeping troops over there this long has killed more of are Americans then Osama Bin Laden has. It's horrible to like that the person we voted for is such a dangerous man.

2007-01-26 02:19:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

thrilling opinion. that is mine. The similarities of both are that Bush and Bin laden are both figureheads of quite efficient factions. the transformations are ideological in that G.W. feels that he's doing the right component (spreading democracy) and Bin laden's camp feels that they are protecting their sacred faith/way of existence from western infidels. After WWII the U.S. has exceptionally a lot followed a "police-the-international" coverage and correctly what do you assume after Dec. 7, 1941? If we do not attempt to quash the probability there then we are able to ultimately wrestle the conflict right here and that i do not imagine each and all of us needs that~! difficulty is everybody thinks of on the spot gratification (triumphing) and that isn't any longer how wars artwork. If the U.S. pulls out now i imagine all of us recognize who will fill the political vaccuum after the newborn Iraqi gov't is sacked by technique of the insurgents! i in my opinion imagine that Bush is listening to some ******* morons and notwithstanding a stability of pwr is struck now with the Senate i am going to in user-friendly words wish that the compromise can help you Iraq, help administration the note "terrorism" and keep our troops and the international 1/2-assed secure from animosity of islam.

2016-12-02 19:29:09 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Bush

2007-01-20 14:04:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

That this country has a tremendous drug problem , has never been more apparent as in some of these questions and answers . If you don't think bin Laden and his followers , beheading innocent people and torturing others with countless acts of terrorism is dangerous - something is powerfully wrong with your thinking cap !

2007-01-20 13:26:45 · answer #7 · answered by missmayzie 7 · 1 0

Bush a danger to the world

2007-01-20 12:14:56 · answer #8 · answered by monis 2 · 1 1

I would like to answer that question with a question. Who had jet liners flown into very tall builbings, killing 3,000 + innocent people just starting their day's work ? Was it Osama bin Laden, or President Bush ? There is my answer.

2007-01-20 09:42:06 · answer #9 · answered by The Count 7 · 1 1

Definitely Bush. He used the "war on terror" for a personal vendetta.

2007-01-27 11:18:02 · answer #10 · answered by truefreedom21 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers