I could be wrong, but I think that if we would have found Weapons of Mass Destruction in great quanities in Iraq, George Bush's approval ratings would be well over 50% right now.
Even with the quaqmire in Iraq, the deficit spending, mishandling of Hurricane Katrina, etc. Of all the words of paper and pen the saddest words are these....if only there had been WMDs in Iraq.
2007-02-02 00:05:51 · 25 answers · asked by Count Acumen 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
All you people that say we found WMDs but the "liberal media" won't report it, crack me up ! LOL
2007-02-02 00:22:57 · update #1
Great question.
I think you are right that it would have improved his approval ratings a little bit. But it's hard to say how much. They have made such a mess of Iraq by making so many obvious mistakes it is hard to believe finding WMDs would make a huge difference. I'm thinking that some of the people who voted for him and who now regret it would still support him though.
On the other hand, given that so many of his supporters FALSELY believe that WMDs WERE found, maybe it wouldn't make much difference. If you watch Fox Noise, then you are probably a Republican, and you probably believe the lies.
2007-02-02 00:26:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Some WERE found.
My theory is that it's not the WMDs, it's the fact that we are there at all.
Before the war, there had been predictions that Saddam would use WMDs and kill 10,000 of our troops the first week.
If Iraq had been brimming with WMDs and they had been used, Bush would have been criticized for "causing" the destruction.
And if the war and insurgency had ended two years ago, no one would be talking about the lack of WMDs today.
Good question!
2007-02-02 00:19:44 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I am so sick of this "Bush Lied" crap, take a quick look at what the liberals like Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, Nancy Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller, Joe Biden, John Edwards, Even Bayh, Harry Reid, and Madeleine Albright. For Liberals to try to rewrite the history books and portray themselves as being against the war is CRIMINAL! If Bush Lied than so did every leader of the Democrat Party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE
At least George Bush as the intestinal fortitude to do what he thinks is right and stand by that decision unlike the gutless liberals who change positions depending on which way the wind is blowing.
2007-02-02 00:29:22 · answer #3 · answered by crazyhorse19682003 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
We DID find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but the mainstream liberal media doesn't want you to hear about it because it doesn't fit into their Bush-bashing "We're fighting an unjust/illegal war" agenda. Ask the members of the U.S. Armed Forces who have actually BEEN to Iraq and have actually SEEN them with their own eyes. The stockpiles that were found are much larger than any U.S. news source will tell you, but we didn't find as many as we thought we would. We know Saddam used them against the Kurds in the north, and we have strong evidence that suggests he destroyed a lot of them before the Coalition forces invaded five years ago. There is also a strong suspicion that Saddam sold or moved some of his WMDs to other Arab countries with anti-American sentiments (like Syria or Yemen) but we don't have any solid proof of that.
2007-02-02 00:17:43 · answer #4 · answered by sarge927 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
There are too many countries with WMDs so Bush would have eliminated a small portion of the threat to America. North Korea is a bigger threat. Bush did the same thing his old man did, go to war and screw up the economy. He's Bush lite.
2007-02-02 00:13:48 · answer #5 · answered by Debra D 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Bush was hated by the left from the moment he ran for the nomination. He was insulted and smeared constantly from that day forward. So believing that the Democrats would feel anything but hatred towards him based on anything he did is not a realistic expectation. The Dems make up stuff just so they can hate him more.
So, the 500 artillery shells / bombs filled with Sarin gas are not WMD? Who knew?These were supposed to have been destroyed, per the UN. I.e. one of the violations of the UN Resolutions.
What I find amusing is how people like you pretzel logic to tell us how shells filled with nerve gas are not WMD because we previously knew they existed. It's like telling your wife that screwing your old girlfriend is not adultery because she previously knew it happened prior to marriage.
2007-02-02 00:52:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Moot point. The man went in without any real plan of action or thought. Now we are in a quagmire and he would like to throw in more of our brightest and our best. There is scuttlebutt about reinstating the draft. No, I really don't think find the WMD would help.
2007-02-02 00:13:48 · answer #7 · answered by Joyce M 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I disagree, I think that domestic issues are far more important then the war in Iraq as far as priority's. This war was unnecessary even if they had found WMD's in Iraq. We had Saddam pretty well pined in and under control even if he felt different.
2007-02-02 00:16:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, he lied when he ran for office in 2000 as the uniter, not divider. He wants division, whether abortion, gay rights, WMD, or any other topic he is the WEDGE!!!!!
2007-02-02 00:24:02 · answer #9 · answered by Isabel F 1 · 5⤊ 0⤋
No. That man is still a fool who understands nothing. Many never forgave him for stealing his first election in 2000. I can not support a president who is trying to turn the US into a police state.
Lets get habeas corpus re instated too, while we are at it.
2007-02-02 00:16:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋