English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

-He could get away from all his problems at home: immigration, Scooter Libby pardon, & anti-war people.

-He would be able to directly command his troops.

-The Iraqi people love him.

- He could personally see if the US is winning or losing the war.

-And every terrorist in the world who isn't already in Iraq would go there to try and get Bush which would make it much easier for US troops to kill them & thus win the war on terror.

2007-06-06 13:34:59 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

17 answers

Sure! Isn't Bush always saying how much safer the world is now after all he has done? Let him go there & see for himself how it is for all the troops he has sent over there! It might not look so much like his idea's are the best way to go if he actually had to be in the middle of it all!

2007-06-06 13:42:29 · answer #1 · answered by Sherrie L 5 · 5 0

I think that he is to afraid that he would get shot "accidental" by one of our troops who would much rather be home.

He is needed here to push and prod the Senate into getting his immigration bill through.
His claims of enforcement in the future just doesn't work anymore. The Senators that he is leaning on to change their minds are cowards and aren't worthy to belong to the Senate. They will vote for him when he is there but not if he isn't there. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when he gets them behind closed doors and scares the hell out of them. I wonder what he has on them that will make them change their minds..

The only reason that the Iraqi people could love him would be that he is giving them our tax dollars which aren't there to spend. The US is a debtor nation. Every dollar that he throws into the Iraq war is just getting us deeper in Debt. How long until we file for bankruptcy ?

Bush is the real terrorist.

2007-06-14 13:37:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This all could be an incredible thought . . . IF this replaced into approximately *prevailing* the conflict. right this is a information flash . . . it is not! the reason of persevering with this conflict is precisely the comparable as beginning this conflict . . . so the wealthy can get richer. The inventory marketplace loves a conflict financial gadget. Legacy? the top-high quality human beings do no longer provide a rattling approximately their u . s .. they are internationalists, who experience that *patriots* are the perfect patsies.

2016-10-07 00:38:06 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

What "green zone"? Maybe the DU "depleted uranium" zone.

Hiroshima To Iraq - 61 Years Of Uranium Wars
A Suicidal, Genocidal, Omnicidal Course
http://www.rense.com/general76/hiro.htm

The conduct of secret nuclear wars since 1991, through the use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States and Great Britain with their allies, has taken place in the Middle East, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan2 and Lebanon.3 It has been carried out for the express purpose of destroying the public health and mutilating the genetic future of vast populations in oil rich and/or pipeline regions.

Carpet and grid bombing with depleted uranium weaponry in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan has guaranteed permanent radioactive terrain contamination. The recent discovery that U.S. depleted uranium bombs dropped by Israel on Lebanon in 2006 contained enriched uranium4,5 suggests covert testing of fourth generation nuclear weapons.

The United States and its allies are fully aware that this weaponry violates the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the 1925 Geneva Poison Gas Protocol.6 It meets the definition of WMD in the U.S. Code7 in two out of three categories. And its use violates U.S. military law.8 since the U.S. is a signatory to The Hague and Geneva Conventions.

The blueprint for depleted uranium radioactive poison gas weaponry dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets was contained in a declassified memorandum9 dated Oct. 30, 1943. It was addressed to Gen. Leslie Groves, who was head of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. effort to build atomic bombs in World War II.

The recommendation for development of depleted uranium as kinetic energy penetrators was never mentioned in the Groves memo. It was specifically for depopulation.

The Groves memo makes it clear that in 1943, U.S. scientists recommended using radioactive poison gas weapons in order to contaminate the air, water, soil, food, environment and the blood of exposed populations. The long-term contamination is permanent, since uranium-238 has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, making contaminated areas uninhabitable for eternity.

For populations that must continue to live in contaminated areas, the long-term effects are lingering illnesses and mutilation of their DNA. Widespread depleted uranium contamination of DNA in populations results in the potential mutilation of future generations. Mutations induced in the DNA of a single egg or sperm which form a fertilized egg are expressed and repeated in every cell of the developing organism, and defects are passed on to all future generations11.

Not only are U.S. and allied soldiers exposed and civilian populations genocidally targeted, but the depleted uranium pollution is now global.12,13 In reality, we are all Gulf War veterans.

2007-06-13 20:44:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

maybe we should send him over there and get another president of the united states since he loves to help out iraq instead of us over here in the U.S. where we have problems of our own.

2007-06-06 13:41:42 · answer #5 · answered by Pamela O 1 · 4 1

Sorry. I still totally support the President but this is really funny and I can't help but laugh a little bit.

2007-06-06 13:42:46 · answer #6 · answered by Michael A 6 · 0 3

I think it is a great idea. I don't think that he should do it to get away from his* problems though. the reason for this is that they are not solely his* problems. They are our* problems.

2007-06-06 13:38:19 · answer #7 · answered by TG79 5 · 3 1

How about OUTSIDE the Green Zone?
This would be more fitting.

2007-06-06 13:37:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7 1

WOW!!!!Best idea I've heard in years....I will personally buy his ticket. Good for you on this one.

2007-06-06 13:48:06 · answer #9 · answered by Debra H 7 · 3 0

No kidding. That really make sense.

2007-06-06 13:54:30 · answer #10 · answered by CyberSom 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers