Why is Ahmadinejad doing everything to circumvent a war while BushFraud is doing everything to provoke a war?

Question

PS I'm not a liberal.

I'm not in support of Ahmadinejad, but it seems like this Ahmadinejad, this supposed terrorist, seems to be the reasonable in this situation. He wants to honor the victims killed in the 9/11 black op, and speaking to the US citizens, and obviously doesn't want war with the US. And we have BushFraud, the decideer, who lied about the war in WMD in Iraq, is alligned with war profiteering, no plan to win in Iraq, doesn't support the troops (long tours of duty) and now wants to attack a sovereign nation that poses no threat to the US. Who's the terrorist extremist here?

Answer 1

Bush and Company are the aggressors and have been so right from the start... doesn't anyone else find it fishy how the "media" and the Bush czars have forgotten about Afghanistan while they continue to create reasons to invade other countries....

I have told people time and again that Iran will be invaded as Iran is on the agenda for USA... so people need to wake up and smell the coffee... we as a people... (people of the world, not just Americans)... have the power to stop these elitist a**holes if we join together and protest... but we cannot do that unless we are a big majority... and unfortunately many many people are still sleeping....

you can be sure that after Iran has been invaded, that it will not stop there..

look for these countries to be "next"

Pakistan, Syria and North Korea....

NO?? yeah people were saying the same thing when I mentioned about 8 months ago that Iran would be invaded... people with their "tin foil hat" remarks ran their mouth rampantly .... I bet those same people are the ones that are saying "lets nuke Iran"... so who needs the "tin foil hat"

wake the hell up people!! before it's too late!!

Answer 2

I'm not sure about whether they are deliberately trying to provoke civil unrest but, whether anyone likes it or not, that is exactly what we are going to get very soon if something isn't done to address the way in which the citizens of this country are being treated. I think that the banning of Geert Wilders has made many more people sit up and think about what the implications are for free speech. Tony Blair created havoc and then walked away from it, leaving Brown to face the music. Brown has continued to treat the citizens of this country in a disgraceful fashion and, like Blair, he will not be in office by the time this all kicks off. He will have left someone else to deal with it.

Answer 3

Because Bush sees Iran as some 'unfinished business'.

Unfortunately, a war with Iran will break our troops completely--causing a complete collapse of both Afghanistan and Iraq.

But you see, Bush doesn't care. He thinks we can do anything we want and get away with it.

So--seeing how we have no proof of Iran involvement in Iraq--Bushco has spun up some rather sensationalist allegations that have no basis in truth.

It's clear desperation from the Bush camp. To try and start a conflict with a country that can so easily kick our ***.

Answer 4

I don't know enough about his agenda to debate this but I do know that Bush, in general, has earned a F in foreign policies, negotiation, communication, and just in general making International friends.

If he was willing to go to the UN as most suggested prior to jumping on the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" philosophy and plowing into Iraq we really had an opening to make lots of International friends & receive genuine empathy from many countries following 911. Instead, Bush used it to make us additional international and national enemies.

Answer 5

All you have to consider is this:
Kim Jong Il was in the news constantly as a nutjob tyrrant. Now hes in negotiations. How did he become so sane that we can have treaties and negotiate. They change their minds and the news reports whatever the White House tells them.
You cant find a person on Y!answers that has had any interaction with the Iranian president aside from what they read in the news.

Answer 6

I will give you an objective opinion although I see your point and I am trying to make sense of it myself. With that said Bush has made a lot of statements about this being a holy war and supposedly Radical Islam has declared the same thing. Biblically speaking the anti-christ which is also a mystery is said to be quite the smooth talker.

Answer 7

Since they keep finding weapons made in Iran in Iraq, I will listen to what he has to say with reservation. I am hoping someone asks him about that and see if he has any credible explanation for it.

Answer 8

I don't feel very trusting of the information I receive from the media about world leaders, but I do find it quite interesting that conservatives seem to be so irate about the idea of letting a this particular one speak directly to our people. How is that we benefit from plugging our ears and assuming he's so terrible without actually having any reliable exposure to him? We should all be extremely excited about having such a mysterious and hated person actually speak directly to us, and have the opportunity to decide for ourselves whether we should believe the words that we hear directly from his mouth.

I smell bullsh*t.

Answer 9

you sure sound like a liberal. Where do you think Saddam's WMD went? Why they went to Iran! Ahmadinejad is the deciever, not Bush. We will be at war with Iran within 5 yrs. I've got a gteat name for all you ignorant Bush bashers " I ran"

Answer 10

So, you're taking the side of a holocaust denier and the guy who says that he wants to wipe the only democracy in the area off the face of the Earth, and insulting the elected leader of this Country. Are all your choices that bad?