Saddam killed only about hunderd of people, the Shi-ites, but Bush kills almost thousands and yet nobody says he's doing wrong. Bush sent his troops and killed thousands but he never been judge? is this fair?
2007-03-17 15:28:16 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
He was a bad boy, and that is what bad boy's get. Agree on the Bush thing. Should have been next on the gallows.
2007-03-17 15:32:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
There is a different between killing insurgents and killing your own people, who have done nothing. If Bush was killing random people on the streets of DC you would have a point.
Saddam killed a lot more than 100 people too.
2007-03-17 15:46:33 · answer #2 · answered by Curt 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Obviously you haven't a clue what is going on around the world.
Saddam had HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of innocent people MURDERED. Those that are dying by the hundreds now are being murdered by their own countrymen. Our troops are trying to kill only those that are trying to kill them. Unfortunately, sometimes innocent civilians get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Get your facts straight and you won't look as foolish as you just did.
2007-03-18 18:01:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Saddam killed tens of thousands of people you uniformed moron...plus even if he only killed 100, that is not cool. People are put to death for killing one person. Oh, and the soldiers signed up for the military. Bush did not make them.
2007-03-17 15:50:26 · answer #4 · answered by JR 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush killed no one!
Saddam killed thousands and threatened to use Weapons of Mass Destruction against us.
Why are people still trying to defend Saddam? Are you freaking kidding me?
2007-03-17 15:57:12 · answer #5 · answered by TRUE PATRIOT 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Can I kill you then is it alright with you? that would only be one person so what do say ? wouldn't that be fair ? and they dug up thousands of bodies accredited to SHussein . One would have been enough but mass murder and torture by Saddam is what helped to open the door to Bush's war crimes .
and forget itI don't believe in murder so relax it's only a valid point like food for thought .
2007-03-17 16:02:53 · answer #6 · answered by dogpatch USA 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was executed for (allegedly) 148 murders. Personally, I think he was used as a scapegoat and an example to other tinhorn dictators on the planet. Did you know that the most infamous WW 2 Japanese general was spared because his biological experiments on live humans allegedly contributed to American biological warfare doctrine? Why didn't they hang him (how many people do you imagine died because of him?)
2007-03-17 15:37:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Sadam ordered retribution murders of Iraqis. Iraq courts have the right to try and punish him. Bush has ordered no killings; military action, following Geneva conventions and taking extreme - to the point of allowing higher US casualties - care to avoid civillian deaths is perfectly legal.
2007-03-17 15:49:25 · answer #8 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Those in power now, did not want Saddam talking in any civil court case about our exact corporate involvement in the gassing of the Kurds or other activities that they are condemning him for now. Could you imagine if he had written a book about his personal experiences and what he and Rumsfield talked about when they shook hands?
2007-03-17 15:39:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
First, Bush has killed no one. Second, it was only a measly hundred? Oh, well, then, we should have just forgotten it then. Heck, it was only about a hundred that he gassed personally and how many did his sons, with daddy's OK torture and then murder? I guess only a couple of hundred, maybe a thousand. Not too many, right? Certainly not enough to execute the offender. How many does one have to kill to be executed?
2007-03-17 15:36:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
saddam lost the war
winners don't end up in a noose, only losers
life cheats, life is dirty, life is ugly, but it is better than the alternative so make the best of whatever goodness you can
2007-03-17 15:33:21 · answer #11 · answered by relaxin 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋