President George W. Retard will go down in history as the man who started an expensive and futile war.
2007-06-30 14:03:11 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Emphatically no! There are quite a few horrible dictators in the world and Bush has absolutely no interest in taking them down and bringing democracy to their countries.
If, however, the Iraqi legislators sign the pending Oil Bill (the Hydrocarbon Law) then I suppose Bush and his favored multinational oil companies will think that it was all well worth it.
2007-06-30 14:20:32 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Things are worse for the Iraqi people and it looks like we'll leave before it gets better. By leaving Iraq in a lawless state, it will turn into a terrorist haven. Just like when the UN left Somalia in the 90s. The only difference is in the 90s the Republicans were saying that we needed to pull troops out because it wasn't worth it and the Democrates said that would be a mistake because the country would end up harboring terrorists. Now the Democrates are calling to leave Iraq and the Republicans are saying it would be a mistake.
Just goes to show it doesn't matter who you vote for.
2007-06-30 21:17:42 · answer #2 · answered by Minnesota Fats 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
and the next president will also go down as the man who started an expensive and futile war...what is your point????
2007-06-30 21:09:49 · answer #3 · answered by LAVADOG 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was an idiot, but his removal wasn't worth the loss of life that has resulted. He wasn't really harming anybody but his own people. Saddam stayed in his borders after he got his butt-whipped in Gulf War I. This war is a complete waste of dollars and life. They also dragged the UK into it.
2007-06-30 21:19:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes it was, and by the way, you are an idiot. This war could have been won long ago but no one could have predicted the insanity of thee 5th column in this country. The press and the Democrats care only about making the USA look bad. Abu Graib was blown way out of proportion.
Now we need to go into Syria and Iran and we can, the left is just rabid in its efforts to make the war look bad.
The terrorists know all they must do is set off a bomb everyday and it is instantly reported as breaking news.
A bomb going off in a Muslim country, wow that's something new.
All wars are expensive, no war is futile.
2007-06-30 21:14:39 · answer #5 · answered by Kinpatsu 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
That question will be answered a few decades down the line - despite what most who haven't the faintest idea of history currently think.
2007-06-30 21:06:56 · answer #6 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It isn't about if sadam or Iraq. I believe it truly is about fighting terrorism in their house instead of inside our borders. It is sad to see our G.I.'s killed and wounded in Iraq but the civilian casualties that would occur inside our borders would be much greater in numbers if it weren't for the war in Iraq. Also sadam was a sick madman, one less is one less! So I guess sadam was worth it!.........kudos to me!
2007-06-30 21:15:26 · answer #7 · answered by spfenolio 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Fortunately he is more concerned with National Security than a "legacy" or getting votes, unlike some of the candidates to replace him.
2007-06-30 21:08:35 · answer #8 · answered by John T 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
he will also go down as the guy who let the guy who let bin laden get away and pursued saddam - the guy who had nothing to do with 9/11.
2007-06-30 21:08:26 · answer #9 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Will you Bush supporters ever come to realize he does not give a crap about you?
2007-06-30 21:13:48 · answer #10 · answered by patriotwww 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋