Okay, my opinion here:
Bush is responsible for the death of thousands in Iraq. Why? Because the war was totally unnecessary. WMDs or no WMDs, you cannot attack a country that did not attack or even threaten to attack you. Attacking a country for not obeying resolutions is sort of like shooting your spouse for reading an adult magazine because you think she or he may cheat on you in the future. No pre-emptive attacks can be justified. Well... they can be, as long as you are searching deeply for the justification in your head. You will find it, no matter how ludicrous or far-fetched. I believe this is called paranoia. You've got to be kidding me if you think a country with the largest military and most sophisticated weaponry in the world is scared of a meager third-rate country's arsenal. Of course there is a possibility that terrorists could get a hold of them, but you just cannot start a war due to a possibilty of what may or may not happen in the future. You could argue that eliminating these weapons will add to our national security. But at the cost of stepping all over another country? No, that is unacceptable. We want our president to defend our country, but not at the cost of making the rest of the world more miserable. You may say I'm not looking at the bigger picture of making the world a safer place. Let's take a look at it. Is this war good for humanity? Is there any chance of it slowing down or stopping the cycle of violence that has plagued us throughout all of human existence? Highly unlikely. All this does is reinforce the idea that violence is an acceptable means of solving disputes. We should not wait for Saddam or other violent leaders to stop, but be the shining example of what the world could be like. That said, war is needed sometimes. But face it, if war were truly necessary there would be no need for debate -- it would be VERY CLEAR.
Furthermore, is this benifiting the Iraqis? Now that the "murderous regime" is nearly gone, is there something better? Apparently in addition to the many Iraqi lives lost, there is now an unstable, lawless nation with a major humanitarian crisis on its hands. This is directly as a result of the war. Bush made a bad situation worse. Iraqis are now cut off from the most basic necessities. Iraq is now an even more dangerous and miserable place to live. Will it stay that way? Maybe, maybe not. I will keep up with the news and would love to be PROVED WRONG about all of this. However, by that point we probably won't even care about Iraq anymore. It will go the way of Afghanistan -- the 'forgotten war.'
Bush is directly and indirectly responsible for the loss of life and decreased quality of life in Iraq. How infuriated am I? I think Bush should be forced to adopt the young boy whose arms were blasted off. Lastly, the assetts of Bush, Cheney and others should be seized and used for the rebuilding of Iraq. :|
Bush is responsible for the death of thousands in Iraq. Why? Because the war was totally unnecessary. WMDs or no WMDs, you cannot attack a country that did not attack or even threaten to attack you. Attacking a country for not obeying resolutions is sort of like shooting your spouse for reading an adult magazine because you think she or he may cheat on you in the future. No pre-emptive attacks can be justified. Well... they can be, as long as you are searching deeply for the justification in your head. You will find it, no matter how ludicrous or far-fetched. I believe this is called paranoia. You've got to be kidding me if you think a country with the largest military and most sophisticated weaponry in the world is scared of a meager third-rate country's arsenal. Of course there is a possibility that terrorists could get a hold of them, but you just cannot start a war due to a possibilty of what may or may not happen in the future. You could argue that eliminating these weapons will add to our national security. But at the cost of stepping all over another country? No, that is unacceptable. We want our president to defend our country, but not at the cost of making the rest of the world more miserable. You may say I'm not looking at the bigger picture of making the world a safer place. Let's take a look at it. Is this war good for humanity? Is there any chance of it slowing down or stopping the cycle of violence that has plagued us throughout all of human existence? Highly unlikely. All this does is reinforce the idea that violence is an acceptable means of solving disputes. We should not wait for Saddam or other violent leaders to stop, but be the shining example of what the world could be like. That said, war is needed sometimes. But face it, if war were truly necessary there would be no need for debate -- it would be VERY CLEAR.
Furthermore, is this benifiting the Iraqis? Now that the "murderous regime" is nearly gone, is there something better? Apparently in addition to the many Iraqi lives lost, there is now an unstable, lawless nation with a major humanitarian crisis on its hands. This is directly as a result of the war. Bush made a bad situation worse. Iraqis are now cut off from the most basic necessities. Iraq is now an even more dangerous and miserable place to live. Will it stay that way? Maybe, maybe not. I will keep up with the news and would love to be PROVED WRONG about all of this. However, by that point we probably won't even care about Iraq anymore. It will go the way of Afghanistan -- the 'forgotten war.'
Bush is directly and indirectly responsible for the loss of life and decreased quality of life in Iraq. How infuriated am I? I think Bush should be forced to adopt the young boy whose arms were blasted off. Lastly, the assetts of Bush, Cheney and others should be seized and used for the rebuilding of Iraq. :|
Also paulj2 gives you even more. I can't believe how many people hate Bush so much and they never protest Saddam. Bush has never done any of those horrific things listed above, yet they hate Bush more than Saddam. 
Facebook
Twitter