1.)  Blown the middle east to bits with an atomic bomb.\n\n2.)  Said to the perpetrators, "Ok.... you have my attention, what do you want?"\n\n3.)  Did what Bush did and go to war.\n\n4.)  Other than above.... Explain please.\n\nAre the attacks on Iraq revenge for 9/11?\n\nI have my own view, what's yours?
124523
I would have exhibited restraint and patience, employed our intelligence agencies to track down Osama and infiltrated his camp.  I might have even established a decoy group of dissidents in hopes Osama would reach out to the group and offer support or take them under his wing.  \n\nOn the surface, I would deliberately look like I was taking a weak stance on the attack or even act as if I was unaware of who committed the attack.  Not only would this have infuriated Osama and kept him from becoming some Jihad hero, this would lull him into a false sense of security.  All the while I would be using the information I was gathering to gain knowledge of his strength, weaponry, supporters and future planned attacks.  \n\nUsing this information, I would circumvent any future attacks.\n\nAfter gaining as much information as I could, I would send a recon team from our Special Forces to his location, capture (or kill) him and his body guards, and attempt to bring him to America to face justice.\n \nAs for communicating with terrorists, I have long been against the US policy of non-communication.  How can go to a war against an enemy without having the ability to negotiate a peaceful resolution?  I firmly believe an open dialog with those groups who wish to harm America is the only way to convince them to stop attacking America and American interests overseas.\n\nAttacking Afghanistan was similar to blowing up a house to catch a rat; the house gets destroyed, but the rat simply goes to another house.\n\nNo, the attack on Iraq was not revenge; the attack on Iraq was for economic reasons and is producing the intended results.
605708
Gee somebody's been drinking their O'rielly kool-aid this morning, hey while we're playing who did what   who sold Sadamm Hussien the weapons of mass destruction that he had and shook his hand to seal the deal and oh he posed for a picture of it too.  \n    A) Donald Rumsfeld\n    B) Donald Rumsfeld\n    C) Donald Rumsfeld\n    D) all of the above
350118
Go big.  We made this mess, we have a responsibility to clean it up.  We need to stabilize that region.  Walking away will only let the chaos we've already created escalate.\n\nIt was an incredibly stupid thing to do from the outset, going into Iraq.  Bush, and the people who supported him shouldn't be still calling the shots over there, based on their track record alone.  But, for the first time since the man took office, I find myself agreeing with him on one point.  It's a mistake to leave Iraq in this mess.  The entire region will implode. \n\nHowever, it's idiotic to say that troop levels over there are sufficient, they are woefully inadequate at best.   Big--overwhelmingly big, preferably--is the only chance we have at getting control.\n\nBTW--I've voted pretty much straight Democrat in all elections, this last one included.  The need for change in our leadership is obvious and necessary, but I believe we can't afford to compound the error we made (I say 'we' because over half of this country supported the invasion of Iraq, so much so that 'we' re-elected Bush for a second term) by leaving Iraq to it's fate.  We will never see the end of violence in that region if we don't get control of it now.  If we leave, and Iraq becomes a terrorist stronghold, how long do you imagine it will be until Israel is engaged?  Anyone fancy a nuclear war in your lifetime?\n\n\nArcticchick--you seem to have forgotten that convenient intelligence failures, coverups, and deliberate circulation of misinformation have been the main attribute of  GW Bush's administration.   Your selected excerpts do a fine job of implying that, despite the fact that their support was based on erroneous information, the Democrats are to blame for the Iraq invasion.  You demonstrate how well Bush & Co.'s tactics worked--and continue to work--on the segment of America's populace who refuse to acknowledge what terrible consequences have resulted from their support of this administration.
348792
Let's face it, Bush knew a responsibility to deal with rogue nations and terrorists. Push came to shove and the goal was to deal with the problems now, not let them fester. \n\nIf he didn't pursue taking Sadam out, who violated multitudes of UN resolutions (why Bush even bothered with the UN before the attack is beyond me, for some reason he still believes the UN is an effective organization.. whatever) it would have been irresponsible. \n\nLet's not forget, it was under the previous administration that determined Regime change in Iraq was United States policy. It was Intelligence collected by not just our country, but by allies around the world that pointed to Sadam's pursuit of WMDs. It was Sadam who kicked the weapon inspectors out of Iraq leading to more distrust of his intentions. \n\nSo, considering the terrorist climate in the middle east, can we afford a terrorist state, like Sadam's Iraq, who has already tried to assassinate one of our presidents (George Sr.) to continue to exist? No, it would have been irresponsible.\n\nSo, he would have been a 'half ass' leader if he didn't address the Iraq situation promptly. Politically, he would have floated through just fine so long as Iraq didn't do, yet something else, during his administration.
190715
Haven't heard it yet, but I think Bush needs to be impeached and called to account for all the lies he's been caught in as well as his unwillingness to secure our borders after 9/11.  And now it looks like he's planning on nuking Iran.  What a war mongering, greedy idiot we have for president.  All I can say is I didn't vote for him.
342259
!.) Bush cherry picked WMD evidence\n2.) wrong about a iraq-911 connection\n3.) wrong about a iraq-al-qadea connection\n4.) slow in attacking al-qadea before 911\n5.) al-qadea is now more powerful before 911\n6.) and of course Iraq is a freakin' shitbox
120307
1- I think that the troops went to Iraq because of Israel A fared from Iraq so they Order USA government to do the job on their behave so the did 9&#92;11 (in that day no jaw get killed)\n2- The oil\n3- the weapons co. which owns by the  government ministers and etc. must get profit\n4- seller get killed who care
304321
3 Questions:\n1. How did you do it? I mean, the whole stealing the election thing? Who did you bribe?\n\n2. Did you get oil put in your bottle when feeding as a baby? Just curious, because...well, you're about as dense as concrete.\n\n3. After this term, will you please resign from politicking ever again? And will you stop financing terrorism?
358029
You are a smart cookie!  Our fiasco in Iraq has given Iran the guts they needed to challenge the US.  After seeing how we're getting our asses kicked by a ragtag bunch of jihadists, they figured it was time to kick some sand in the bully's face.  And yes, anybody who's been paying attention knows that Saddam didn't want to admit he didn't have WMDs because he didn't want to appear weak to the Iranians.  Just another example of how stupid and self-absorbed some Americans can be.  We stumble into areas of the world where we don't have the first clue what's going on.
586762
Has anyone considered the possibility that he maybe sent them elsewhere (Syria?) to embarrass the administration? And why is it so far fetched to believe he had them? He did use them before, right? He also intentionally led other nations to believe he did have them to fend off exactly what we did, getting rid of him!
318023
Did you know that George Bush has been planning to invade Iraq since he was in college. He killed several Americans cuz he wanted revenage.\n\nOf course 9/11 was planned, what better way to start a presidency and try to make himself look good.\n\nThe World Trade Center was built to handle a plane crashing into it. The only damage a plane would do is maybe take out the top two levels of the building, not the whole thing. They had planted explosives in the basement of the World Trade Center and detonated them when the planes collided with the building. If the explosives werent in the basement then the towers would not of fell to pieces with just a plane hitting it.\n\nThey removed the scrapes from the rubble, which to us would be known as evidence cuz they didnt want us knowing the real truth of what really happend. If they kept the scrapes and ran tests on the metals, you would know that something else made the towers coming crashing down.\n\nBush's father was having a meeting with the Bin Ladens down the street the same day the World Trade Center went down. Bush's family is friends with the Bin Ladens. So his excuse for blaming Osma Bin Laden was a lame excuse.\n\nIt definately was a set up. One big conspiracy.
358780
BUSH\n\n1. he cheated\n2. he lied\n3. he killed \n\nu may say that all previous presidents may have done all these..but when it comes to bush..all these were done blatantly and shamelessly!
554327
In light of Bush's insistence that we should stay the course it seems plausible that the USA also conducted sectarian bombings to drum up domestic support for a bogus 'war'.\n\nSaddam understood what some cannot  - that  democracy is almost impossible to achieve in 'tribal' nations.  Military rule is the most effective.  Something that Bush, as commander in chief,  should have known. \n\nI think he deliberated went in to cause civil strive but not a full blown war as a distraction from and justification of his true intent - control of the oil fields.  \n\nThen he tried to control the escalation of discord and with the cooperation of the media hide it from the American public. \n\nNow we know but we still don't grasp the full extent of what this man did to the Middle East and more importantly -  world stability.\n\nAnd no, I'm not paranoid - I'm analyzing.
396191
Coulda, shoulda, woulda. What IS your point???\n \nI have been disgusted with many people in our country lately. It deeply saddens me how our country has so divided itself by way of rumors, party bickering, and accusations of all sorts about world affairs. It is just best to listen to President Bush very carefully and listen so well that you are not judging him as he talks. He is a strong leader with an immense global crisis, but not because of his own doing. If we had never invaded Iraq, do you really think that America would be free of hostile global politics. Do you think if we had a different, maybe Democratic president the past 4 years, that terrorists would just be hanging out in the Middle East playing cowboy and Indian in their little harmless terrorist training camps?
561293
1.  I'm sick of the Bush administration violating laws because they think that they are above them.\n\n2.  I still am saddened about the two american soldiers, but I do not want to be reminded of their horrible deaths every day.  And I'm sure their families do not want to turn on the TV and have to hear about them being tortured to death.  \n\n3.  I'm angry that our anger has NO influence on what the administration does or anything else for that matter.  \n\n4.  Yes.
317705
I've been to ground zero.  It happened.  Whether Osama, Israel, or the US was  responsible ---is all guesswork at this point.   The US has defiantly staged events like this in the past to justify a war---The sinking of the Maine, Gulf of Tonkin, etc...  But 9/11?   We saw Osama admit it in the videos.  I wouldn't want to think that our country is so evil we could ever do this, although in my heart I know there is a chance we could have.
15953
I'm going to have to quote Sherasi here (you wrapped this up perfectly): Personally, I neither hate or love President Bush. He has been an adequate president doing nothing outstanding or terrible in either direction.  (Now here's my part).  As for the WMD's it is possible that they haven't been found.  However, and I don't think I'm speaking alone when I say this, given the tone of the Administration, the UN speech by Colin Powel and George Bush's own firey speeches, I was under the impression that the WMD posed a clear and present danger to us our or our friends in Europe (them being closer, it would be easier to get a missle there).  Therefore, even though I wasn't an avid war supporter, I did expect there to be some sort of major find (again, just because of the tone).  After these years, though it is possible that they are well hidden, the United States has sent top experts of our own (so the crack towards the UN in an earlier answer was pointless), along with spy planes, ground-penetrating radar and computer logistics simulations that could track the likely path of any movement.  I believe the weapons did exist, at one time, but were destroyed or moved.  The fact that the supposed weapons haven't been found then should NOT be seen as a 'victory' for Democrats or a 'defeat' to Republicans.  It should, if we go on the premise that Bush was telling the truh, be a cause of great alarm:  Where are these weapons? Could enemies be plotting against us right now?  It is very sad (and alarming) how even something as overtly destructive as biotoxins suddenly becomes political in this toxic political atmosphere.  And to address you additional comment, if the weapons are one day found, I would hope that the 'Bush haters' say "It looks like we made a mistake".  However, you and I and everyone here knows d*mn well that we're not that forgiving in America, and that - unfortunately - is the reason many foreign policy blunders (and that's aimed at all Presidents, not just Bush) go not only unapologized for, but are compensated by compoundingly disastrous steps.