My concern is that the same justification that the President used to convince the Congress that war in Iraq was a good idea to fund and subsequently go into, may be the same justification that another ocuntry might have to dethrone our President. Saddam's actions were only different from those our President has done because he actually killed citizens outright. Other than that, warrantless-wiretaps, war for profit, and a plethora of other things make the administrations very similar. The issue I have is that the way things have been done, any other world leader may consider this as a serious terrorist act and place America on the list to defeat in the "war on terror". Sometimes I wake up with panic attacks and sometimes when I watch the news I am bothered by how uncaring the news seems about the facts of the situation. War is an ugly business, we all know, but with Bush, it seems like a game or a way to make money, more than a moral imperative.
2007-10-10
09:52:48
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Mr Rothwyn
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
The sad part is that many of you think this question is irrational. A few years ago, warrantless wire tapping would have been unheard of. Cheney working with the Saudi Arabian company that the 9/11 hi-jackers worked for would have been unheard of. A plethora of other things would have been irrational but guess what, after 3 trillion dollars spent on the "war on terror" yet 9/11 heroes can't even breathe properly without expensive medicine they have to pay for themselves, what are you considering more irrational? My question, or the fact that you haven't thought of these things, or worse, you don't care about your fellow American?
2007-10-12
05:08:26 ·
update #1