for the Iraqis?
(and please give me something new and fresh other than that we are 'building new schools and hospitals OR NEW SEWERAGE SYSTEMS' because Bechtel has taken their gear and went the h l home, few Iraqi children are even going to school; and there are and never were any NEW schools or NEW hospitals built ANYWHERE, and the only working sewerage systems are those that are used to keep the seven-mile long Green Zone functioning. for the use of the military and big US/other foreign companies who took over Saddam's palaces soon after the invasion.)
(and please give me something new and fresh other than that our troops are fighting 'terrorists' THERE to keep them from coming here)
because before Bush pushed the big button there were NO terrorists in Iraq, and there probably aren't any there now other than those sponsored by other than Iraqis, and we are not even certain that they are 'terrorists anyway, since the Bush administration calls anyone with a gun a 'terrorist' .
2007-03-30
17:47:53
·
23 answers
·
asked by
rare2findd
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
-----
and please please don't give me any garbage about our troops handing out candy to Iraqi children, because candy isn't food and no good is being had by all of that candy anyway --- before those kids are 21 - if they live that long - they will have diabetes anyway...much less other maladies caused by the invasion.
so give me some straight serious answers or don't bother to answer.
2007-03-30
17:50:23 ·
update #1
"It stopped hundreds of thousands of people from dying due to U.N. Santions"
.....................WHAT ! !...........
You speak as if the US wasn't responsible for the killing/murder of even more hundreds of thousands of INNOCENT Iraqi civilians.
Where have you been!
2007-03-30
18:02:53 ·
update #2
I am NOT a liberal. 4,500 schools have NOT been built or remodeled in Iraq (as a matter of fact many schools were bombed or trashed by American forces when they first invaded so they SHOULD have been 'removeled); I do not depend on the "tv coverage" re this illegal war; I read news coverage from nearly a hundred sites every day; I use my OWN brain as do many others; the US government has no idea how many were killed at their hands in Iraq; I find it odd that the US can give an accurate count of the number of innocent Iraqis who are killed everyday when most are killed by bombs which leave body parts strewn all over the place; AND if you don't like the question, please, don't bother to answer.
2007-03-31
01:37:39 ·
update #3
I can't think of anything! Our bombs have killed more Iraqis than Saddam. The country is in chaos. It is now a terrorist breeding ground, when it wasn't before. Most of the world hates this country now. I could keep going, but I am tired of talking about this. In this democracy you are free to speak, petition the government, and go screw yourself. Every time you do one of the first two, there's always someone who will tell you to do the third!
2007-03-30 18:09:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by oneworld09 5
·
2⤊
7⤋
Easy there chief, we all expected more, but the reality is that the muslim hard liners are still in control of the mind of the people. The will and terror that is forced upon these people in Iraq is overwhelming by the insurgents supplied by the terrorist roots of evil.
Today on yahoo, it was reported that a muslim group in Pakistan is declaring that the government be pushed to the taliban, which was pushed out of Afghanistan. If Pakistan cannot hold their ground against these insurgents, and we lose in Iraq, the region will fall to Iran.
I think we reached many people in Iraq, but the hand that can squeeze their lives when we turn our backs is still the hand that controls their lives.
It is not because of US failure, it is because they hardly know anything else but to not cross the hand the hand that rules them.
Very unfortunate for the world.
2007-04-06 17:56:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by ringolarry 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No answer would satisfy you because your mind is already biased against anything this administration attempted. Bill Clinton and nearly ALL the democratic leadership agreed that Hussein was a threat and had to go. Yet, because the war took more than 30 days, it was a mistake. Clinton said we'd be in Bosnia for 1 year and we stayed 4. I didn't hear you anti war types belly aching then. If......and just imagine, If Sadam Hussein HAD successfully obtained a NASTY weapon AND used it, either here or against Israel. Would you same Monday morning quarterbacks then accuse Bush of not doing anything. Of course you would. That's what followers always do. The war isn't perfect. It hasn't gone the way any of us wanted it to, but ANYTIME the civilized peace loving countries of the world have a chance to eliminate an absolute MANIAC, I'm all for it, in any way we possibly can. It's just too bad we have peace at all costs "Chamberlains" to work around.
2007-04-07 02:09:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Golfer 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The B.B.C. which is no Bush fan did a poll of 5000 Iraqis. In the high 80 percent they are happy with their Government. The overwhelming majority stated that they will soon have the insurgents under control and that they want the Americans to stay until they are fully capable to handle the problems from the insurgents All the Provinces are doing fine under their elected Governments. Baghdad suffers the attacks because it is the seat of National Government and the press is based their. The Kurds made a commercial that played all across the U.S. thanking America for their freedom.
Addition: U.N. stats put the amount killed in Iraq at 53000 not millions. Give your source of hundreds of thousands being killed and not YouTube . A legitimate source
2007-03-30 17:59:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by ohbrother 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
To tell you the truth, I could tell you loads and loads of information and factual evidence of the good we have done in Iraq, but honestly, I see you as a liberal who has bought into all this media garbage that is spat out each and every single day. The media hasn't reported on a single thing that has gone good for the Iraquis whatsoever which is just what they want. If they reported on something good that happened, that means that oops, we were wrong. The liberals and the media are invested in defeat and as such will report only one side of the story.
They won't tell us how the majority of Baghdad is now secure. They won't let us know how the Iraqui people enjoy having our presence there and beg for us not to leave. They won;t report on how the police and military units of Iraq are now working with the US military seeking out the terrorists that ARE in Iraq. They didn't bat an eye when Saddam Hussein, a viscious, lying, murderous tyrant finally received what he deserved for his crimes against his nation and against humanity.
Speak to any of the soldiers in Iraq and you will clearly see that we are there for a valid reason and need to be there. Now sure the media can find a few bad apples who will say otherwise, but only a few compared to the thousands that are there testifying and sacrificing their lives for a casue that they believe in speaks so much louder than the bias of the liberal media.
The amount of Iraqui and American deaths has decreased very very dramatically since the troop surge, but the media is careful to keep their mouths shut about that.
But like I said before, I don't expect you to hear a word I'm saying because that is the nature of you far left nuts out there. You'll believe anything anyone says as long as they have a camera and are against George W. Bush. As for me, I'd rather continue doing my own research rather than listen to liberal garbage spouting off lies, hypocrisy, and conspiracy theories.
I support the troops and by supporting our troops, I do not want them to lose a war and come home too early. You, my friend, like it or not, have found yourself in the minority. The majority of Americans, despite what you hear on tv, do not want to lose a war and be considered losers.
2007-03-30 18:20:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Clark Kent 2
·
4⤊
2⤋
How about the exact number of schools built or remodeled.
4,500
According to the 650,000 supposed Iraqi deaths from this war, 445 people in Iraq should have died today.
Did you hear about that in the news? Did the news tell you that 445 people died today? Has the news ever reported that high a figure, let alone every day for the past 4 years?
Obviously 445 people in Iraq weren't killed today.
2007-03-30 18:48:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
I think that eliminating a hostile regime in the middle of an Islamic terrorist breeding ground, (that is the Middle East), was the main accomplishment. I felt like it was an off target war in the beginning, but we did get rid of a maverick who was a brutal dictator, who was defying UN resolutions, who was firing at UN patrol jets and would have undoubtedly facilitated or assisted in further attacks against the US. Now, Iraq, (like Afghanistan), at least has a government that we can trust in the war against radical Islam, and there are plenty of radicals in Iraq now. The entire middle east is a festering wound, after 9-11 the president made a difficult pro-active decision to take the bull by the horns, he had overwhelming support from the house & the senate for both fronts, virtually every world intelligence agency believed Saddam had WMDs, Saddam was ACTING like he had them. So it is easy to point to the hardships we have encountered & the mistakes we have made, but the fact is, radical Islam has been at war with us for almost 30 years now, and there is clearly no diplomatic solution.
2007-03-30 18:29:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by heavysarcasm 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
I'm only in the mood for one tonight:
Saddam Hussein and his million-man army (once the 3rd largest army in the world) will never exist again in my lifetime, and Iraq will never possess nuclear weapons in my lifetime.
Iraq will never again threaten Saudi Arabia or Kuwait in my lifetime, ensuring one less obstacle to the free-flow of oil from the Gulf.
And, until we become energy independent, there is nothing more valuable to the United States than middle east oil.
BTW: That said (and you may check my bio for verification) I think energy independence needs to be our TOP national goal, so that we can let the middle east destroy itself and quit caring, and dying, for that oil.
Without the free flow of middle east oil, we would be paying, roughly, $9 per gallon for gas. But wait! There's more! Just about EVERY conceivable product you can name has petroleum in it's content. And every item you buy at the grocery store is transported (you guessed it) using petroleum products.
Oil matters, like nothing else, and we will continue to go to war more frequently as it runs out, until we become energy independent.
2007-03-30 18:04:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
0⤋
Hmmm why don't you look up how many people Saddam killed before he was removed from power. It ought to be enough to make any liberal mind pop.
2007-04-06 14:15:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by z1 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Lives have been saved.
It stopped hundreds of thousands of people from dying due to U.N. Santions.
Even by the year 2000, a half of million children died. The real numbers of Saddam related deaths are even higher since Iraq was not attacked until three years later.
Liberal English newspaper in the year 2000:
"Half a million children have died in Iraq since UN sanctions were imposed - most enthusiastically by Britain and the US. Three UN officials have resigned in despair. Meanwhile, bombing of Iraq continues almost daily. John Pilger investigates " http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
2007-03-30 17:51:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by a bush family member 7
·
5⤊
5⤋