How many of you don't believe Bush is also a terrorist?

Question

He has caused more death than any person in the last 50 years. Maybe he should be in jail?

Answer 1

Of course bush is a terrorist.

"Terrorism is the war of the poor. WAR is the terrorism of the rich."
--Peter Ustinov

Answer 2

"He has caused more deaths..."

Is this what our Liberal schools are teaching?

Look up Pol Pot, Cambodia.
No one is sure how many Saddam killed.
China has had some nasty purges in the last 20 years.
If Bush was a true terrorist, dictator, tyrant, you and many others in these chat rooms would have long since been hauled away in the dark of night, never to be seen again, perhaps to be buried in a swamp, the desert, or dropped into a wood chipper.

You use these words to label someone but your knowledge of what these words mean is so pathetic they destroy your own argument and flag you as a spoiled little loser who can't get over being beat. You believe your ideas are so brilliant and true that the whole world should ooh and aah at every sound you make. The fact is, everyone is getting tired of listening to you negativism, hate and infantile whining. Not the traits of better leadership. Better get real or get use to losing.

Answer 3

More tyrant than terrorist (defined by today's standards)
I think we should get rid of the evil that is Dick Cheney first. Impeachment is imminent for him. Then when Bush's term is over, charge him with war crimes and deceit.

Answer 4

If He Is I Say Lets Hang Him Like Saddam. Hell Even If He Isnt I Say Lets Still Hang Him He's Already Screwed Up America Whats Taking Him Gonna Do Worse For It. He's Just Like Hitler.

Answer 5

By the FBI's own definition, Bush is, in fact, a terrorist:

"Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives". - US Federal Bureau of Investigation

Answer 6

He is the biggest threat to world peace and on a online poll, he was voted the "World's #1 Terrorist".

Anyone who would kill 3,000 of their own citizens so they could start a world tour of threats, terror and mass murder should be considered a terrorist.

Watch "9/11 In Plane Site":

http://www.911inplanesite.com

Answer 7

"I have been writing on terrorism for 25 years, ever since the Reagan administration came in 1981 and declared that the leading focus of its foreign policy was going to be a war on terror. A war against state directed terrorism which they called the plague of the modern world because of their barbarism and so on. That was the centre of their foreign policy and ever since I have been writing about terrorism.

But what I write causes extreme anger for the very simple reason that I use the U.S. government's official definition of terrorism from the official U.S. code of laws. If you use that definition, it follows very quickly that the U.S. is the leading terrorist state and a major sponsor of terrorism and since that conclusion is unacceptable, it arouses furious anger. But the problem lies in the unwillingness to recognize that your own terrorism is terrorism. This is not just true of the United States, it's true quite generally. Terrorism is something that they do to us. In both cases, it's terrorism and we have to get over that if we're serious about the question" Noam Chomsky
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15416.htm

I also recommend this article, the journalist from mars: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Chomsky/Journalist_Mars.html

"The continued expenditure of more than $300 billion for the military every year has absolutely no effect on the danger of terrorism. If we want real security, we will have to change our posture in the world - to stop being an intervening military power and to stop dominating the economies of other countries. According to a 1997 Defense Science Board report, "Historical data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States."
"During the Vietnam War, far more civilians died than military personnel. The same was true in the Korean War. Most Americans have no idea what we did in Korea, but Korea was really a preview of Vietnam, particularly in the use of napalm and the bombing of villages, which contributed to more than 2 million people dying, most of them civilians.
War is now largely a war against people who are not combatants.
p81
General Curtis LeMay about the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam War
"We're going to bomb them back into the stone Ages."
p82
The claim that smart bombs and technology now enable pinpoint bombing is very much a fraud. They discovered after the Gulf War that 93 percent of the bombs turned out not to be so-called smart bombs and the "smart" bombs often missed their targets. Overall, 70 percent of our bombs missed their targets.
p84
The concealment of what we're doing to the population in Afghanistan is essential. Most people ... make a kind of common sense calculation, a moral calculation. And if they knew that we were killing large numbers of people, and displacing hundreds of thousands of people from their homes, they would not take such a benign view of the Afghan war. | They would not simply go along with their government. So, it becomes very important for the government to conceal the human effects of our bombing. And if you conceal that from the American population, then it's possible to understand why people would think we are not doing much harm."
"General Colin Powell Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff during the Gulf War, when asked about the number of Iraqis killed
"It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in."
"f civilians in fact become victims again and again, and it's predictable that they will, can that be called an accident? If the deaths of civilians are inevitable in bombing, it is not an accident. The people prosecuting this war are committing murder. They are engaging in terrorism."
Howard Zinn. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/Terrorism_War_Zinn.html

Answer 8

Maybe him and the Congress that voted for the war? maybe Hillary should be in a nice orange jumpsuit? Get a clue...buy one if you have to.

Answer 9

Get real. I hate these Bush bashing questions. No one in America is more concerned with the protection of America than George W. Bush. If people have to die for me to be safe, oh well. Last time I checked we were defeding ourselves. Radical Muslims are holding a gun to our head. If they all need to die so my family can be safe, so be it.

Answer 10

Sorry. I'm against the war in Iraq as much as anyone, but I aint buying that stinky crapola. Bin Laden has caused all the death and destruction. Bush is only one of his tools.

Answer 11

OMG, what an insane statement! What backs up this question of yours anyway? The loss of soldiers in Iraq?....damn, that was YOUR Congress who voted for that! Get your freaking facts straight!