Wouldn't the world be a much safer place without George Bush, and his weapons of (mass) destruction?

Question

i.e the US Military.

Mate, if you can talk to Ian Paisley, then you're my man any day of the week, mike1a. I don't know about the Iranians. They have some good looking women though!!!!!!!

Answer 1

It will be a lot safer for the terrorists!

PS - the next time your country needs help, ask the Iranians to help you!

Answer 2

No in fact it would be worse, sometimes you just have to accept that the world has changed since 9/11 a day of infamy which changed the world forever.

If you want to blame someone for the current mess don't just blame Bush and Blair, you really ought to look no further than those Muslim radicals who took it upon themselves to destroy the twin towers, wreck the pentagon and cause massive loss of Innocent life .

It could be argued that if 9/11 had never happened George Bush would not have had any reason to send troops to Afghanistan and it would have been very much more difficult to find reasons to invade Iraq.

George Bush used their actions to bring about the war on terror - the rest is history! .

Answer 3

LOL Such a usless liberal question. I am sure the world would be alot worst off if Kerry had have came to office... LOL that would have been a big let down. The U.S. Military and suporters is the only reason the world is not under control of totalitarian regimes.

Answer 4

Steven E....the brits are a smaller force but only because the british population became to frightened at the thought of gunfire and dropped in recruitment over 300 percent in one year...the United States is down to but only about 70 percent .

Answer 5

Be glad for George Bush, you don't have to like him, But if
you are Honest, you have to admit, He is keeping, the World,
in check otherwise, those Clowns who call us Infidel's, would
be running over everyone.

Answer 6

Well I'm going to tell you what most people don't seem to get -- if you stop putting in presidents in your country that are a sidekick to president Bush the 50% of us that didn't vote for that dumb@ss would stand up and salute you because we're the same 50% with our families over there fighting - you don't see his girls or any of his family out there. He can't go to war all by himself without help from countries like Australia and Britain. Instead of biotching about it start at home and put in someone who won't let him push them around. We can only do so much over here! :0) This is a universal effort not just America you know.

Answer 7

Not every weapon of mass destruction shows up on 60 minutes , some are cellestial.

Answer 8

The comments approximately Australia are loopy. They truthfully have been initially a Gun Nut united states of america and protested whilst their government wanted to take them away. besides the undeniable fact that, they have not had a mass capturing on the grounds that 1992 as a effect and the Australians (even people who protested) will now inform you they sense lots safer. as properly, no longer all weapons have been taken away; people nevertheless have searching rifles and if a bad guy or boogie guy broke into your place, you're able to nevertheless have the potential to do lots of harm with a searching rifle. My element - can we actually need each American to have get admission to to device weapons and sniper rifles? won't be able to we limit particular gun get admission to and easily make hand weapons and searching rifles available? in basic terms asserting.

Answer 9

George bush has a lot to answer for
He thinks he is the most powerfull man in the world
But my view is if he thet all the boys come home then maybe He would be the better man in the world

Answer 10

YES but will the Americans put another prat in or will mrs Clinton be a new Mrs Thatcher .The us military are only a look good mob as there are loads of them, the Great British military are smaller in size and better trained