Which current world leader - if any - is responsible for more death and destruction than George W. Bush?

Question

Keep in mind that the estimates of casualties in the Iraq war range as high as 1.2 million. Without Bush, there would have been no Iraq war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_war_casualties#Total_Iraqi_casualties

Bill Clinton and Mahatma Gandhi are not current world leaders, leaving aside your other points.

How many deaths is Kim Jong Il responsible for?

How is Osama bin Laden responsible for any of the deaths in Iraq?

Great Dan. The world's former biggest mass murderer was overthrown by the world's current biggest mass murderer.
Amazing what some neocons call progress, isn't it...

Answer 1

I seriously don't know other then Bush.

Some here only say that the war causalities can be blamed on Bush, but the rest in the aftermath can only be blamed on the insurgents.

I find that without any logic whatsoever, because if the first hadn't happened, the second wouldn't be happen now. The insurgents didn't exist in Iraq prior to our invasion and the insurgency is the direct result of our invasion.

If another country invaded our country, we'd have our own insurgency, but they would be called Minutemen.

Therefore, as far as I know, Bush is the biggest mass murderer on the planet.

Peace

Jim

.

Answer 2

So actual! No present day international chief is to blame for greater deaths than George W. Bush. this is actual. that's something that Bush supporters have a complicated time believing. a lot of them love the President and have been informed many solid issues approximately him. in case you're interior the Republican occasion and maximum all human beings helps your guy, all human beings is asserting effective issues and overlaying up the undesirable factors. despite you hear is merely the solid approximately your guy and so once you hear others criticize him, it makes you experience ill and/or indignant on the different persons for asserting what they're asserting. the nicely suited answer is particular, George W. Bush IS to blame for greater deaths and destruction than the different present day international chief! the respond is "sure!" that's a actual answer! .

Answer 3

Let's take a brief assessment:
1. All the dead of Hurricane Katrina.
2. All the those who have died because they lived in the one country that doesn't have the good sense to provide it citizens universal health care.
3. All those who die impoverished and oppressed in third world countries all around the world beneath the boot of U.S.-sponsored dictators.
4. All those who die all around the world due to the ridiculous free market fundamentalism that is the only economic policy that the U.S. government appears to believe exists.
5. All those who die in the U.S. due to the lack of any meaningful pollution and/or product safety policies.
7. All the political "suspects" who are illegally kidnapped from the U.S. and other countries by U.S. operatives to be shipped to third party nations for a lethal dose of extrajudicial torture and interrogation.
7. The noncombatant Iraqi men, women, and children who have been murdered by the reckless and blood-thirsty stratagies of the U.S. military: apparently, for many Americans, the idea of obliterating a neighborhood full of hundreds of people just to successfully hit one target is an acceptable rate of collateral loss. And, of course, dead Iraqis aren't really able to protest their condition.
8. The Pakistanis in Benazir Bhutto's homecoming procession that were murdered by agents loyal to the Pakistani government(albeit disguised as "islamic extremists"). Said government, an unpopular puppet government sponsored by the U.S., then used the attack on Bhutto to reveal its true colours by declaring martial law. And, it is this brutal dictatorship that the U.S. chose to help develop nuclear weapons twenty years ago to further destabilize the region.

Based upon the evidence then, one can only conclude: no, no other world leader currently living has managed to cause more death and destruction that Bush.

Answer 4

Saddam Hussein, but I guess he's not in the running since he's not a current world leader. And why is that, I wonder?

And the sign said, "Long-haired freaky people need not apply..."

If things are so great in the places you're wringing your hands and complaining about Bush doing something about, why not move there? I'm sure you'll fit in quite nicely with all the Bush-bashers over there.

Did you see the story today about all the Iraqis moving back into sections of Baghdad that are now safe from the Taliban? No doubt conservative propaganda, but with a twist - it was written by frustrated left-wingers.

By the way, I'm not a "neocon." I've been a conservative all my life, thank you.

By the way, I have absolutely no ill will toward you. I'm glad you have the n^ts to express have an opinion and express it. It gives us something to openly discuss, and who knows, we might just learn something from each other if we really listen.

Answer 5

And what was the death toll before we went in...the massacres and mass graves due to S.H. using poison gas...death squads...etc on people he deemed undesirable for the many years he was in power. Just like what Hitler did with the Jews- no difference except the methods used...oh..btw..

Without President George Washington and the other founding fathers- there would not have been a Revolutionary War

Without President Lincoln- There would not have been a Civil War

Without President Wilson- there wouldnt have been American involvement in WWI

Without President Roosevelt there wouldnt have been American involvement in WWII

Without President Truman there wouldnt have been American involvement in Korea

Without President Kennedy/President Johnson there wouldnt have been American involvement in Vietnam

Answer 6

I'd say Usama bin Laden. He's the leader of multi-national terrorist organization and has more influence than almost any national leader. He's responsible for a lot more than Bush, and arguably, for the same ones attributed to Bush.



Response to how Osama is responsible for the deaths in Iraq: he masterminded the 9/11 attacks that propelled Bush on his terrorist witchhunt.

Answer 7

Every serious estimate I've heard of Iraq casualties is between 100k and 200k. And most of that killing is being done by al-Quaeda and other whackos in Iraq.

So let's see. How about Darfur conflict in Sudan? The estimates I've seen is between 200k and 400k dead. Who's the bossman of Sudan?

Answer 8

First of all, the congress, not just Bush, are are responsible for the war in Iraq. Secondly, Bush isn't responsible for Iraqi's that murder eachother.

Answer 9

Well, Gandhi was responsible for about half a million killed in India after he threw out the British, so Bush is in good company. Without Gandhi, there would have been no Hindu-Muslim civil war.

Answer 10

Kim Jong Il, for starters.