About how many people died because of Bush's lies about Iraq?

Question

what i mean is that Bush lied about the mass distraction weapons that according to him Iraq had, how many people died because of that lie?

Answer 1

Well miss puppy lover, do you think it better that we would have left Saddam in charge and him killing literally thousands of his countrymen? The Shiites in the north, we had to have fly overs for years to keep him from mass killings of his own countrymen. entire villages killed and thrown down wells so they couldn't be used again. Burial pits all over Iraq with hundreds of bodies in them. Is this what you call a fair government, why aren't you writing articles about what he did to his people?

Yes, we went in there and brought their government down, we brought them some semblance of peace, the rebels are still fighting and were fighting back, getting killed and wounded, should we just walk out? are you ready to take the blame for what's going to happen when we leave and the people will be left alone?

Are you old enough to remember what happen in Viet Nam, I was there Miss Puppy lover, where were you? I saw the death and destruction when we left, what happen in Cambodia, the "Killing fields" are you ready to take responsibility for what's going to happen when we leave those people?

Put down Bush all you want but, he went in and saved thousands of civilian lives, what have you done for your country Miss puppy lover? I gave two tours of duty in 'Nam and was wounded twice, what have you done for your country?

Answer 2

I will respond to your statement one point at a time. 1) No WMDS? Well unless you were unaware it was the USA among others that supplied Saddam WMD's when he was fighting Iran (Maybe you don't understand what a WMD is, so I'll link to a definition). Further Saddam's Iraq has used WMD's before the current war & Former US President Clinton actually stated that Iraq had these weapons during his term in office. 2) While Saddam's Iraq had no connection to 9/11 or Al Quaeda, it was known that Saddam sponsored other terrorist groups, especially in Gaza. Afterall is not the War on Terror, more then just the War on Al Quaeda? 3) I am unaware of the total costs of the war in Iraq Vs the total fiscal benefits of the war, so if there is any proof to suggest that this war is about money, evidence & not hearsay is required.

Answer 3

Have you ever stopped to think that when he first announced they had weapons of mass destruction, the United Nations refused to allow him to pursue the matter quickly. They made him wait for several months giving Saddam plenty of time to smuggle the weapons out of Iraq. But, since you're talking about deaths...research how many innocent people including innocent children died at the commands of Saddam before Bush stepped in.

Answer 4

I don't think president Bush lied at all about Saddam having WMDs. Instead I think he simply made a stupid mistake of warning him our troops were coming after him and his WMDs, thus giving him a chance to 'wash his hands' so to speak before we got there. Also, I never cease to be amused by those who use the term 'libs' as a means of trying to make it seem like they know what they are talking about. Plain and simple, those in charge of making life and death decisions for this country caused the death of hundreds of our men and women, whether Saddam had WMDs or not, for months our leaders broadcast throughout the world that we were going after them and that gave Saddam more than adequate time to get rid of them long before our troops arrived there. DUH! How stupid are our so called leaders. They should take a lesson for instance from Japan when they attacked Pearl Harbor. That's why it's called war, you don't give notice, that just gives the other side unfair advantage. If Saddam truly did have WMDs (and I truly believe he did) we could have gotten much more support from the rest of the world once we just charged into Iraq, guns ablaze and caught them with the goods. The outcome would have been much different and the damn thing would have been over and done long ago and with a much different outcome than what we are faced with now. We are stuck there with very little support, arguing amongst ourselves as to the best solution so we can leave without looking even worse than we already do and still our troops are dying every day while we look like complete idiots to the entire world. We look like a bunch of losers that made a terrible mistake wrongly accusing Saddam of having WMDs all because we gave them so much advance notice. Now we have to look for a way to justify our occupation there trying to save face with our allies. Don't get me wrong I support our troops 100% but I think it's time our leaders admit they were wrong and went about it the wrong way and caused the deaths of many innocent people. Bring our brave men and women home to their families with what measure of dignity we have left while they are still alive and lets deploy them at our borders and use the millions of dollars we are wasting there to make our country safe from within where the real problems are and let those animals keep killing each other just as they have been doing since the beginning of time. They are involved in a civil war now and we shouldn't stick our nose in it. Can you imagine if another country would have sent their army into the US to settle our civil war.

Answer 5

OOOOPS,,,,You accidentally exposed the favorite liberal weapon.Weapons of mass distraction.It doesn't matter the the Clinton administration had already approved a plan to remove Saddam.It doesn't matter that we went forward based on multiple countries' intelligence that Iraq had WMDs.It doesn't matter that while the "sanctions" weren't working and that Saddam refused to allow inspectors in for months,giving him ample time to get rid of his arsenals.And you ignore the worst WMD there was,that WAS found in Iraq,,,,SADDAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!But instead of aknowledging all those things all liberals can do is try and distract from the truth by crying Bush lied.Give me a break already.!!!

Answer 6

there is no telling of what a Saddam Hussein still in power would have done. He demonstrated what he was capable of gasing his own people and invading another smaller country. He had the infrastructure to produce weapons so it would have required continuous vigilance and the possibility that he could at one point produce them. He's good gone and now we have to deal with the whole situation in any case it's better now than later. If Hitler had been taken care in 1936 it would have been a cake walke WWII we may have a bargain in our hands and a blessing to have started dealing with the situation sooner than later. There is no way to avoid confrontation with Muslim fundamentalists bent on world expansion and disruption of the West.

Answer 7

What are mass distraction weapons??

Answer 8

we need to look at the whole picture. I use to be against the war. Till this lady told me about her son being in Iraq....

She told me this.......

Look at all the 911's this war has stopped.....

Answer 9

My freind is a B-2 Bomber pilot & I support him, Bombs on Tehran, Bombs on Tehran.

Answer 10

lets see so far we got around 7,000 dead american troops, (and around 40,000 injured, little things like missing limbs, paralyzed for life, burned to deformity) + about 120,000 reported dead iraqi civilians, figure another 200,000 that they aren't reporting, and another 50,000 that they are listing as suicides and that makes somewhere around 377,000 give or take a few.