is Mr bush's policy to attack on Afghanistan and Iraq is right?
462334
Iraq, hell no, he's an idiot.  Afghanistan, he's got it only partly right.  The troops in Iraq should be there.  He should be hunting the real cause of 9/11, not some made up BS in Iraq.  Time to IMPEACH the A - hole!!  \n\n.45 your full of crap, inspectors were there in Iraq and told us there was no WMD's.  The UN pulled them out when hostilities were imminent.  Gee who was right? Inspectors? I think so....  But Dumya couldn't have that because it didn't fit his lies.  So start thinking for yourself and quit spouting neo con talking point BS.
1022626
Yes\n\nThe bottom line is that all countries, in this supposed civilized world, have no right to occupy/invade another country unless there is a threat.... That threat has to be proven and UN approval must be granted. This is exactly why we, and many other countries, helped Kuwait when Iraq occupied/invaded them.\n\nOne country has no right to decide on its own to suddenly go liberate another country. That is common sense in a civilized progressive world. That (and I am not trying to compare Bush to Hitler) is exactly what Germany did in WWII when HItler kept occupying one country after another. The world recognized that as wrong.\n\nAlso as far as being charged with war crimes... yes.\n\n* Bush has violated the geneva convention \n* Bush has used redension to knowingly use torture.\n* Bush is holding prisoners without allowing the Red Cross to have access to some of them and also not releasing some of their identities.\n\nSorry if some of us Americans don't want to hear that but all of that is fact and are clearly war crimes.\n\nI also believe that assassinating ppl in Iraq and killing 100,000s shoud be considered a war crime in this circumstance because Bush had no right to invade that country. He invaded on false-pretense. BUT that part is just my personal belief and I am not sure where that falls under any war crimes act.\n\nAlso Answerman, don't fall into the 'congress voted for it' trap. They want you to believe that all who voted to GIVE BUSH AUTHORITY IF NECESSARY was saying it was ok to go to war. I've seen many interviews with politicians who stated they never would have believed in 100 years that Bush was going to go into Iraq without UN approval. They got tricked into falling for his scam.\n\nPpl should learn their history: Vietnam, Korea, Bosnia were not occupations. They were either forms of containtment (that is the political term for the freeze on the spreading of communism) or humanitarian acts.
728955
The war on terror is comparable to the war on drugs.\nBoth relate to operations of the secret service departments who are the controllers of the world's drugs, and the provocateur in terms of terrorism. They actually conduct the most sensational 'terrorist' events themselves like 9/11, 7/7, Madrid train bombing, Bali bombing etc.\nSo Bush's policy is just a part of the propaganda story.\nOf course its not right by any normal moral standards, but these do not apply to politics or government.
805586
There aren't car bombs going off and US servicemen paying the ultimate sacrifice every day in Afghanistan. Bad news sells. Plus, even the liberal media knows Afghanistan was necessary, they just don't see Iraq in the same light.
156124
Afghanistan is still Afghanistan and Iraq is still Iraq. You don't have to worry about Persian Gulf, attack or no attack.\n\nFor me human beings are important. They shouldn't be killed in the name of Islam or crusade. Muslims are burning their own mosques, they should be saved.
780186
Isn't that something you should know, President Bush?
303173
Their are no WMD's lol its just Bush being a paranoid retard. The only reason we are invading iraq is for revenue, mostly oil. He is just finishing his daddy's work and invading innocent people for nothing. In fact, the al quaeda is in afghanistan and osama is in afghanistan, it has nothing to do with iraq in fact afghanistan and iraq are two completely different countries...revenue i say...impeach bush...please lol
346144
Of course.  Goodness, we have plans for invading Canada!  We have plans for invading every country in the world, as does China, Russia, etc., if they're smart.\n\nContingency plans are part of being prepared for every way things might change.  Careless leaders wait until the emergency happens.\n\nThis is why I find the whole, "President Bush had plans to invade Iraq" argument so silly.  President Clinton had plans to invade Iraq.  So did Ford, Carter, Reagen, Nixon, etc.  Like I said.  Silly to try to "blame" President Bush for something so obviously a necessary part of government.\n\nWe won't do it.  We will not invade a nation that is sovereign.  We invaded Iraq because we had a cease-fire with them after they attacked us while we were defending Kuwait.  Iraq agreed to certain terms for the cease-fire, and after a decade, they kept breaking their agreement; we invaded.\n\nBut we don't invade sovereign nations.  Iran will have to do something stupid.  We might even encourage them: "Go ahead and hit me, feel free!"\n\nIsrael is a natural source of a pre-emptive attack.  We'll see.
354119
I think that it is a well thought out plan for anti-terroisum because the extremest that want to hurt the us go to iraq and attack well trained soilders rather than u.s. civillins. soilders fight back civlians cry and would then complain about how the president and the government is not protecting them when in fact thats what the soilders in iraq are doing right now! Bush is a great president and if you dont like this country leave its as simple as that. as for the soilders we are proud of what we do and i say we because i am one and i feel like one year is nothing if you look at other wars that we have fought one year is nothing in ww2 soilders were gone for 3 or 4 years. we do whats right and all we ask for is respect. think about this if bush had done nothing about the sept 11 attacks how many other civilians would have died though other terroist attacks i would love to shake the presidents hand
805844
It has been suggested that Bush feels that way. There is no doubt that he is obsessed with his place in history – even more so than your average egomaniacal politician. It might explain his apparent lack of concern for his complete failures in Afghanistan and Iraq, for allowing Israel to choke the Palestinians to death, and for further destabilizing the already volatile Middle East. And, he does maintain that he invaded Iraq on instructions from God and he began the invasion talking about it as a crusade. The US President is a very sick puppy – and very dangerous.
1124657
wrong as wrong can be, every death that has happened over there since the day of our invasion, has to blamed on bush.  he should be tried as a war crimminal in iraq.
206547
Absolutely.\n\nBush has the courage of his convictions to do what he believes is right. No matter what a President does, half the country will agree and half the country will disagree.\n\nBush has achieved much toward homeland security.\n\n* He created the Department of Homeland Security bringing many security agencies under one roof with improved cooperation and sharing of intelligence.\n* He has kept the fight overseas keeping tens of thousands of terrorists concentrating on anything but fighting on American soil.\n* He has decimated al Qaeda. Yes, they are still around but they are not pulling off plots like two World Trade Center attacks, plots on the Pope, the Bojinka plot, etc. Most senior leaders have been killed or captured.\n* He has kept American free from terror attacks for the last 4 1/2 years. You sleep well at night because you are not worried about terror attacks happening frequently here.\n\nWhile one may not agree with George Bush or his policies, one NEVER needs guess where he stands on any given position of national importance or security. He states his position, and his actions back that position up.\n\nQ: What did Al Gore and John Kerry say they would have done?\nA: Consult with the United Nations.
933320
What you stated is something that I have repeated on this forum countless times, and yet these plain facts seem to bounce off the heads of Bush supporters the way bullets bounce off of Superman. They are oblivious to the fact Bush’s so called “War on Terror” does not truly address the progenitors of terror; namely Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Saudi Arabia provides much of the financing and ideological foundation for Islamic terror groups like Al Qaeda, and Pakistan offers the theological and military training grounds (think Madrassas) and it was in that country that the Taliban was born, and it is in Pakistan’s Western border region where many top Al Qaeda and Taliban officials are being harbored. \n\nBush’s closest action to ending Islamic terror was attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan, and rooting out some Al Qaeda terror cells that existed in that region. But this was a futile effort, since he has diverted most of our military resources to Iraq, thus leaving Al Qaeda and the Taliban free to regroup and rebuild their infrastructures. \n\nThe truth of the matter is George Bush’s war isn’t a “War on Terror” as much as it is a war to divert your attention from the failure of their “War on Terror”.
327797
Not at all.\n\nIn Afghanistan, the Taliban is actually making a bit of a comeback this month.  Most of the country is under the control of warlords with just a small portion around Kabul that is actually controlled by the American forces and the Afghani government that they installed.  The rest of the country is pure chaos.  (Kabul isn't much better).\n\nIn Iraq, the "coaltion" forces have done a pretty good job of securing the single square mile in central Bagdad known as the Green Zone, and now most of the road to the airport is reasonable secure as well.  Unfortunately, they have "secured" the Green Zone by shooting anybody who tries to enter, so that's maybe not a great example of "controlling the situation".\n\nSadly, neither country is even close to being secure, despite the lies that come out of Washington.  Does the term "lipstick on a pig" mean anything to you?  This particular pig has been run over, disembowled, set on fire and sexually assaulted.  But my! doesn't that lipstick look pretty!
1171313
I can't believe some of the responses you're getting, dude! \n\nThere are some replies above this one that think attacking Iraq was necessary. First - I am all in favor of the post-9/11 response to Afghanistan, specifically, the Taliban that helped Osama. Unfortunately, Osama was originally trained by the CIA to cause terror vs. the USSR back in the day, but we'll forget that for now.\n\nDoesn't anyone recall when Bush paraded his whole team out and they were certain they knew where the WMDs were, etc. etc.? Did Saddam need to be stopped? Well, yeh, but he (and the whole country) was contained and crippled. There were humanitarian organizations calling for blockades to be lifted, it was crushing the country.\n\nI honestly don't know why people aren't more outraged about it. I think racism and crusade nostalgia play into it. I think they just don't care. It sets an example in a somewhat positive way, that is, it shows other nations that the USA is irrational, therefore, stay away. Unfortunately, I think acting firmly rational and strong can have the same effect. \n\nOh, yeah. I guess people are ok with attacking Iraq because it helped bring down oil prices. \n\nWhoops.
1024143
In the past we would be attacked (i.e. 1st World Trade Center attack, Marine barracks in Beirut, Blackhawk downing in Somalia, Embassy attacks, etc.) and our response has been little to non-existent. On 911 we were attacked and this President has done something. It was a very tough decision but he made it. The path has become rough, many who supported him have changed their minds and no longer support him, but he has stayed the course. I do believe both the president and the troops deserve my support. They are doing what has not been done for a long time. Fighting the enemy, if you believe we should have gone to war with Iraq or not Al Queda is in Iraq today, and our men and women are fighting them. Al Queda attacked the USA and I agree with the president that we should hunt them down, wherever they may be.
776751
I'm afraid some people only understand military might.\nhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_061110174646\n\nBush knows it and tried to handle terrorists in the right way. Hard to say how the Left will respond, but we're stuck with them.