2007-05-12 10:09:30 · 15 answers · asked by the d 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No, he was not. He should have continued concentrating on obliterating Al Queda in Afghanistan. Instead he attacked a country that by his own admission, had nothing to do with 9/11. Now Al Queda is in Iraq too and we just have more area to cover in dealing with them.
2007-05-12 10:13:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 4⤋
First off, why did G Bush not just send out a assassin? I mean he has torture chambers in other countires. So what is the point of trying to follow guide lines when your not. So that we will look good in the eyes of everybody else? Now look at this country, great on the inside but dam we look like crap now. Can I get a BIG TY George Bush..... Just add below this with a TY.
2007-05-12 11:05:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have a few American friends that went to Iraq, that are unfortunately passed away. Tell the guy above if he is all humanitarian, why doesn't he care about the violence going on in Africa? Or, the fact that our own friends, cousins, and neighbors are dying over there for this rediculous war of choice. It was not necessary, or justified.
2007-05-12 10:29:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes, no doubt about it. Why do people still ask this. I don't think it was a good idea but it was justified.
I see that some people here clearly don't know what they are talking about. Number one Sadaam kept breaking the cease fire signed after the Gulf War. Number 2, it was believed internationally that he had WMDs. Conventional wisdom says that really wasn't true but he managed to kill millions of Iraquis with some type of weapons. All in all totally justified. Had the President asked me I would have advised against just because I could see this mess coming.
2007-05-12 10:14:29 · answer #4 · answered by Brian 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Yes. I have a friend from Iraq, he has a daughter who got caught in some of the gas Saddam used on his own people.
My friend and his daughter thinks Bush was justified.
2007-05-12 10:25:54 · answer #5 · answered by G3 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Hell no.
No WMD
No connection to Al queda
No link to 9/11 terrorists
Saddam had let the weapons inspectors in, Bush kicked 'em out.
No yellow cake.
Just a bunch of fabrications and Lies,
2007-05-12 10:34:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Amazingly, yes and no. Yes, the intel available lead us to believe our worse fears, and when presented to Congress, they agreed as well. And no. It wasn't necessarily the job of the U.S. to be one of the only ones to uphold the U.N.'s cease fire agreement. It should have been up to the U.N., but those members with voting privilege were fraught with corruption. Someone had to stand up and be counted. If you stand for everything, you don't really stand for anything. And if you don't stand for anything, then you have no room to complain.
2007-05-12 10:17:56 · answer #7 · answered by Doc 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes....
2007-05-12 10:53:55 · answer #8 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. It's a war based on lies.
2007-05-12 10:22:53 · answer #9 · answered by Dash 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Joke question huh???
2007-05-12 10:25:29 · answer #10 · answered by Gypsy Gal 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋