I mean, even though the terrorists were plotting and attacking different countries AND the USA prior to 9/11, he decides to go over there and fight them on there own soil???I mean, why would he want to fight them on there own soil??? Why doesn't he just tuck tail and run like the almighty liberals? If we pull out of Iraq, millions of people will die, just like when we pulled out o Vietnam, tons of Vietnamese were slaughtered by Cambodians and there own people? Sounds like a good idea to me. Why can't republicans just stop trying to protect us from the terrorists and let them have their way?
2007-07-25 18:11:23 · 13 answers · asked by windcriesmarie 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
James, you obviously have no brain to interpret sarcasm. Don't fret, I blame it on your simpleton upbringing.
2007-07-25 18:24:12 · update #1
Mom, if we stop occupying Iraq, it will give them even MORE time and willpower to recoup, regain forces, and train. Bush has had the highest approval rating of any president(during 9/11 that is). Sad how quickly Americans forget what happened on that day. Um, Iraq is a nation, even if it is broken between different people, it's still a nation, and it STILL has citzenship.
2007-07-25 18:30:06 · update #2
HAHA, sarcasm people...sarcasm.
2007-07-25 18:32:19 · update #3
Good point.
2007-07-25 18:17:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
He isn't fighting them on their own soil. They have no soil. They are an agglomeration of people from a lot of different countries. There were very few of them in Iraq before we invaded it. It was removing Saddam Hussein that allowed them to get a foothold there. The Taliban, who were actually almost all residents of Afghanistan, are now regaining the territory they had lost since we pulled our troups to send them to Iraq. If we pull out of Iraq, thousands of people will die every year just like they are dying with us still there. And by continuing to occupy Iraq, we make the terrorists more and more popular around the world and give them a training ground from which to base their other attacks. They have a real stronghold in England. Should we invade England?
Terrorism cannot be defeated by a ground war. It can only be defeated by changing hearts and minds. Our staying in Iraq makes it easier for their propaganda to work.
If we liberals were almighty, we wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place.
As far as Bush being the Antichrist, he can't be, because the Antichrist was said to be extremely popular with everyone, and Bush's approval rating is in the basement.
2007-07-26 01:23:04 · answer #2 · answered by mommanuke 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
satans representitive on earth is not bush
satan is evil manipulative sneaky crafty
and bush is just stupid
even satan would have some reservations about using bush
what satan is trying to acheive here is firstly start creating a poweful position on earth that is above all the other powerful nations and their rulers ,once acheived a gaurdian of kith and kin will be hunted for in heavens that arent even open and
on entering for the 666th time he will find in the surrounding
fires and broken kingdoms of jericho 2souls of chaos oh yeay the hunt has yielded a two sworded duo stan laurel and oliver hardy who will shoot to earths land in a comet sent by lucifer to look after the position until he himdarkself can arrive and take control and make the unholy first appearance
that the world itself will not tolerate,and try to rid itself of such a depraved and unholy shrine of shite~its true i had a double vision and a out of head experience
2007-07-26 02:10:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
huh? luke, i am your anti-christ! mwahahahaha. um what are you talking about and or asking???
no bush is not the anti christ of biblical fame. and thank you for participating!
there is a question in there somewhere, BUT i need more specificity.
say man, if you read some a the questions here, this one could be legit too. ok you got me......BUT i'm still yo anti christ luke! now get outta here ya big lug!
and just what the heck is wrong with my simpleton upbringin'? i was raised in a haltom city, TEXAS, (everything's bigger in TEXAS), trailer park and got washed down stream in the mighty floods of 07. well i was raised by a disfunctional family of ferrits along the mighty TRINITY river there. i had to eat my sister, but i got by. in fact, it brought out my feminine side. and since then things have been better. i've become the anti christ and all that and take a lotta pride in that...yes sir...things are lookin' up! ooo the 'rastlin is on the tv, gotta go! see you luke....matthew...john......mwahahaha
2007-07-26 01:22:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush has confronted (finally) the terrorists and is trying to make them accountable for their tactics of slaughtering innocent people to further their demented ideology of hatred and domination.
You get it - why do so many Americans not get it?
2007-07-26 01:25:10 · answer #5 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You are right - if sacrificing our own resources and our own troops to save the lives of innocent Iraqis qualifies, he is HiM.
2007-07-26 01:59:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.... Clinton is.
First, he/she (Bill) speaks with a slick tongue and wins most over.
Then, he/she (Hillary) the true power behind the throne, begins to try and conquer the world.
God save us all.
2007-07-26 01:26:48 · answer #7 · answered by George 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Bush is the anti-Christ. And what's scary is that people actually VOTED for him. Not once, but TWICE!!!
2007-07-26 02:28:35 · answer #8 · answered by Jeremiah 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, bush is too dumb to be the "anti-christ.
"satan's lap-dog" is a more appropriate nickname for george w.
2007-07-26 02:11:43 · answer #9 · answered by poseur_6669 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no if you read the bible you know that the anti Christ is not from America but from a Romain Empire descent.
2007-07-26 01:18:32 · answer #10 · answered by Jeremy P 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋