We went to Afghanistan and freed the populace from the evil, backward, intolerant, women-beating Taliban. Now, girls can attend school. Are you against that?
We went to Iraq and freed the populace from the brutal tyranny of Saddam "The Butcher of Baghdad" who, through his attacks on Iran, Kuwait, and his own people mean he is caused the deaths of approximately one million Muslims. We also got rid of his two sick, evil, twisted, clinically psychopathic sons. Are you against that?
Our soldiers have helped build 3,000 schools in Iraq, and dug sewers so the people can live healthy lives, often for the first time in their lives. Are you against that?
We went to Iraq and ensured that the Kurds would never again be attacked. Now they are a prosperous are in Iraq, and a staunch U.S. supporter. Are you against that?
Saddam drained the largest marshland in the country to drive out the people there who opposed him. We are restoring that marshland. Are you against our desire to promote good ecology?
Saddam was just raping the country of all its resources to build more and more palaces for himself and his extended family. Now, all Iraqis can share in their country's wealth. Are you against that?
Your negativism would result in nothing positive ever getting accomplished. It's easy to be blithely cynical, but cynicism is a zero sum game. Think about that.
2007-02-05 15:43:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you out of your ideas ken s? I actually have lived in Utah all my existence, and transforming into up i ought to leap off my roof right into a snowdrift and not in any respect get damage. i'm speaking snowdrifts over 5 feet intense and floods each and every spring. it is been nicely over a decade for the reason that we've seen that type of snow. i ought to say that it is getting hotter. it truly is ordinary to really construct a snowman the following now, now to not coach dig snow tunnels interior the front backyard. international warming is a undeniable actuality which could be visually seen once you stay in an section like Utah. Oh, and as for something else, certain our united states of america is going to hell in a hand-basket. merely examine over the "Patriot Act" and also you'll merely about see Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson spinning of their graves.
2016-11-02 10:55:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Republicans wanted to go there to remove the only man alive (at the time) to have used chemical weapons. He was the most dangerous person alive, and had the 4th most powerful military.
If we were to wipe out the middle east, it would be against everything the republicans stand for (to themselves).
2007-02-05 15:25:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doggzilla 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
if we turn the worlds largest oil reserve area into a nuclear wasteland, we will not be able to get the oil for about 50,000 years. plus we will have a nuclear cloud circling the planet contaminating everything it comes into contact with.
2007-02-05 15:29:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, there are other good people in the middle east, and they dont need to suffer for this war.
2007-02-05 15:23:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
He wouldn't do that. Poppy, Jim Bakker, and Uncle Dick are making too much money on Saudi Arabia.
2007-02-05 15:23:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by nicewknd 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because they like oil fields and poppy fields.
And yes, there are innocent victims to all of this gluttony.
2007-02-05 15:26:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by no worries 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
no, we glass it, then we break through the glass and get the oil.
Why the hell would we make it a dust bowl? do you know anything about weapons?
2007-02-05 15:23:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Very rarely is the easy way out,
the right way.
2007-02-05 15:25:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by kyle.keyes 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
because no one likes dust especially on there bowls
2007-02-05 15:25:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by aaron f 1
·
0⤊
0⤋