About Bush?

Question

Why do people say get the troops out of Iraq?

Do they have a better option on what we should do?

So if we leave we tell Iraq that they win we don't care what they did to the word by Sept 11, Bali twice, London bombings.

They'll end up taking over the world and then what will we do?

Who will take over from George Bush?

Ok ok so Iraq might not of had anything to do with 9/11 sorry my mistake. I'm not from America

Answer 1

Bill Clinton was on tonight, and he supports what we are doing in Iraq. He said we cannot leave because of what happened on 9/11. But it is the radical Muslims and the Taliban we are to be worried about, not the country Iraq.

Answer 2

Why do people say get the troops out of Iraq ?
The war has gone into a protracted cycle of "no win" on all fronts -- the people will not take hold and be responsible for their own situation as long as someone is there doing it all FOR them -- the government there has proven to be unable to come to any concensus on ANYTHING -- and it has already moved THIS country's debt load into record numbers !! Add to this the fact that there is absolutely no DEFINABLE "win point" there anyway --- no absolute objective or leadership to subdue !!

Do they have a better option on what we should do?
What we have just discussed -- get the troops out of this place and fight the wars that are brought TO US -- not the ones we take to THEM !!

So if we leave we tell Iraq that they win we don't care what they did to the word by Sept 11, Bali twice, London bombings.
Where you come to placing these events at IRAQ'S door, God only knows --- Iraq and Iraqis were NOT the purpetrators of these events --- and, in no way deserve even the slightest hint of an accusation TO that effect !!!

They'll end up taking over the world and then what will we do?
Iraq has about as much chance in "taking over the world" as I do of winning every lottery in the world on the same day twenty-two times in a row !!! Hell, they can't even decide how to seat delegates in a government meeting without coming to screaming matches !!

Who will take over from George Bush?
The next "court appointed" demigod

Answer 3

Somebody better will take over for sure, Bali was done by their own crazies as was london. Bin laden is a saudi not an Iraqi. There were no Iraqis among the 19 9/11 Hijackers even George admits this. Also the distraction in Iraq has kept us from focusing on Afgahnistahn/Pakistan where we seem to think Bin Laden is no sugestion he is Iraq.

Answer 4

I'm not from america either ... and not only did Sadam have NOTHING to do with Sept 11th ,, he had nothing to to do with Bali or the London bombings ...

I am not meaning to sound rude or be rude .. BUT please can you do a lot of research on Iraq ... and how the situation developed....

BUT having made that suggestion ... While I am against the war in Iraq and am fully aware that we can not undo what has been done .... I don't think it would be morally right to just pull our troops out WITHOUT putting in place a means of peace keeping.....

Prior to our invasion ( our being the allied forces) ... Iraq was a moderate Islamic nation .. it was stable .. the stability being maintained PERHAPS by extremely questionable means ... Islamic extremists were kept at bay and under control .....

Now nobody doubts Saddam was a bad man .. but by going into Iraq we have created a void.. which is now being fought over to fill .. extremists .. now have the support of the taliban and AQ....

WE owe the innocent people of Iraq .. NOT to leave them unprotected in what will be a bloody civil war ..

for what .. there were no WMD
there was no connection to AQ
there was no connection to Sept 11th,

Answer 5

Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. Even Bush admits it.

If the terrorists are planning to take over the world they are doing it in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia because that's where the terrorists who did 9/11 were from. Not ONE of them was from Iraq. There was no Al Quaeda in Iraq before we invaded Iraq. There was never one single car-bombing or suicide bombing in Iraq until after we invaded Iraq.

You know that old joke. A guy is walking late at night when he sees another guy searching the ground under a streetlight. He asks 'What are you looking for?' The guy says "I dropped my car keys, down about three houses down the block." The first guy says "So why are you looking for them here?" The guy says "The light's better here."

That's how it is with Iraq. Bush couldn't attack his friends in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, so he invaded Iraq because he thought it would be an easier country to invade. Turned out he was wrong. Now he just can't admit he made a mistake.

Let me repeat that just once more. IRAQ HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11! EVEN PRESIDENT BUSH ADMITS THAT IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11!

Answer 6

1. Because they are dying. Do you want our soldiers to die? Is that it? Do you like seeing young soldiers and innocent civilians die? You are horrible!

2. Yes, stay out of their strife.

3. How is Iraq winning? They didn't start the war, the US did.

4. Yes, Iraq will take over the world. Idgit.

5. Hopefully someone that doesn't embarrass me every time they open their mouths.

Answer 7

We need to pull out,and let them handle their own business. It is a war that does not make sense to the average person,We also need to start protecting the borders and who is abled to come into the us,as for Iraq taking over the world I seriously doubt that will happen.

Answer 8

Whoever gets elected, from either party, won't immediately withdraw completely from Iraq.

As to who will be elected, that's hard to say right now. I suspect it could come down to a race between Hilary Clinton and Fred Thompson, although neither has a lock on the nomination right now.

Clinton won't withdraw us from Iraq for a while, if ever, and neither will Thompson. None of the strongly anti-war candidates--other than Obama--stand much of a chance of getting both the nomination and winning the election.

Your point on terror is very well taken. I agree with it. Unfortunately our enemy knows us far better than we know him.

Answer 9

If we leave Iraq now, it would be a disaster of worse proportions than we already created. Of course, it's difficult to imagine it getting much worse than it is already. (Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, a civil war rampaging, America now giving weapons to Sunni insurgents, Iran becoming more obstinate because they know we're in a pickle.)

Looking back, of course, we can see Iraq was not actually developing weapons of mass destruction, nor did it have any aspiration to take over the world. They had a strong military at one time, but certainly not enough to do any damage to anybody but its small-time neighbor Kuwait.

So, the best option would have been to not invade Iraq to begin with.

Since that's not viable, we should just plan out a strategy to leave as soon as we can and ensure their government is strong enough to stand up against a civil war... (Yeah, right.)

Answer 10

Iraq take over the world???