Bush: The worst president ever?

[Foxtrot]

Unfortunately for you No Limit I actually care about our soldiers that are in the all volunteer military that have been sent to do their job. I know you dislike America and try to undermine it every chance you get and attempt to make the soldiers deaths seem pointless and try to shame their families by saying their sons death was worthless, but I think that is a just war and we are helping the people are Iraq. I would like one of you to find a list of reasons we went to war, since you think anything I pull up is BS. Find me a list of reasons Bush went to war and tell me how many you believe are true. There are more than the WMD reason, Bush simply attempted to monopolize on that because it is better to say you are going to war these days to defend your country and free the country you are invading of an oppressive dictator who has commited many atrocities and war crimes.

So with that, pull up your own list you find and let's see how unjust this war really is.

Here comes sterns list of big bad lies of Bush.

 

[CptStern]

He is my twin brother, yes biological, it isn't my choice, it is his.

you owe it to him to try to change his mind ...regret lasts a lifetime




but it's none of my business


edit: nope I'm tired of rehashing the same crap over and over again ...no one can come up with a reasonable justification for the invasion because it just doesnt exist

 

[Glirk Dient]

Your right, helping millions of people from death, torture and a horrible lifestyle is a very bad and unjust thing. Not to mention a deterrent to terrorism, setting up a democratic nation with which we can trade with and use to help restore other middle east countries. Yeah...your right, all of that is horrible.

 

[CptStern]

Your right, helping millions of people from death, torture and a horrible lifestyle is a very bad and unjust thing. Not to mention a deterrent to terrorism, setting up a democratic nation with which we can trade with and use to help restore other middle east countries. Yeah...your right, all of that is horrible.

was this helping?:

"Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it."

--60 Minutes (5/12/96)

 

[Solaris]

Your right, helping millions of people from death, torture and a horrible lifestyle is a very bad and unjust thing. Not to mention a deterrent to terrorism, setting up a democratic nation with which we can trade with and use to help restore other middle east countries. Yeah...your right, all of that is horrible.

No but bombing people children is, shoot unamred people is. Bombing homes is, tourturing people is. The Iraqi people did not want you help, the USA interfered enough by putting sadam in place. And Iraq is hardly a democracy now is it.

 

[Foxtrot]

No but bombing people children is, shoot unamred people is. Bombing homes is, tourturing people is. The Iraqi people did not want you help, the USA interfered enough by putting sadam in place. And Iraq is hardly a democracy now is it.

Wow, if I cared what you thought I would seriously comment, but this is much more entertainting, you cock head.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Bombing children....yep those bombs said "Heres a present kids!" on it. Shooting unarmed people, yeah our soldiers shoot people when they don't pose a threat, that's why at blockades they don't fire warning shots at the big truck that says Bomb on it, even though it is a threat. That's also why they weren't cheering and dancing around and knocking over staues when we entered baghdad. It also isn't a democracy, theres no free elections by the people now is there?

 

[CptStern]

Bombing children....yep those bombs said "Heres a present kids!" on it. Shooting unarmed people, yeah our soldiers shoot people when they don't pose a threat,

not always ...there's more than a few cases of murder in iraq, I can provide links if you'd like

 

[Foxtrot]

not always ...there's more than a few cases of murder in iraq, I can provide links if you'd like

And all have been taken care of IIRC.

 

[No Limit]

Unfortunately for you No Limit I actually care about our soldiers that are in the all volunteer military that have been sent to do their job. I know you dislike America and try to undermine it every chance you get and attempt to make the soldiers deaths seem pointless and try to shame their families by saying their sons death was worthless, but I think that is a just war and we are helping the people are Iraq. I would like one of you to find a list of reasons we went to war, since you think anything I pull up is BS. Find me a list of reasons Bush went to war and tell me how many you believe are true. There are more than the WMD reason, Bush simply attempted to monopolize on that because it is better to say you are going to war these days to defend your country and free the country you are invading of an oppressive dictator who has commited many atrocities and war crimes.

So with that, pull up your own list you find and let's see how unjust this war really is.

Dislike America? Listen, I am not an idiot and I will not sit here arguing with talking points. I was born in Poland and my parents worked their ass off to get me in to this country and I would not live anywhere else.

Now the fact you are going in to the marines is up to you, fankly good for you. I have many friends, including ones that have been shot or injured, that served in Iraq. The problem is you are trying to discredit me by saying I am not going to Iraq and say I don't care about the troops. I love our troops as I love the civillians that have died in Iraq, this is why I take the Iraq debate extremely seriously with great passionl; as you don't seem to be doing. If you choose to believe a lie and wont look deep in to the issue that tells me you don't give a shit about those troops. Remember, saying Bush lied doesn't in anyway damage the reputation of our troops; Bush sent them there, they didn't ask for it. Saying the soldiers deaths are pointless is part of it; however, I like to say they are dying for a lie as they are. Who knows maybe something good will come from Iraq in 20 years; however, that has nothing to do with it. This occupation was based on delibirate misinformation, that is my point.

Now, with that said stop it with this weak spinning you are doing. You have your own personal reasons for going to the marines and I support that; however, that has absolutely nothing to do with anything I am asking you. So please, do address my simple points. I want you to refute my evidance that Bush lied and sent troops in to combat on a lie and that he didn't do everything to stop war as he promised. Anything else you throw at me about what we are doing there, what you are going to do, and how bad Saddam was is completely irrelevent as it doesn't address my question.

 

[Solaris]

Have you seen the footage taken by the cameraman, of an injured Iraqi lying on the floor, after being shot (unarmed btw). The soldier then shoots him again in the head. Heres the report

>that's why at blockades they don't fire warning shots at the big truck that says Bomb on it, even though it is a threat.

Hmm, I seem to remeber something about Soldiers shooting dead a released hostage at a check point? Source

 

[Glirk Dient]

Accidents happen, and always will. These soldiers are people, not crazy murderers. There must have been confusion because there is a lot of answering to do when civilians get killed, it is no small event.

 

[CptStern]

not accidents ....deliberate

 

[Solaris]

Yes confusion. Unarmed man lying on floor bleeding------>Shot deadin the head by marine

Yes, thats the sort of mistake that can happen to anyone, I mean he WAS ON THE FLOOR DYING! If thats not a threat I don;t know what is.

<Accidents happen, and always will

Yes when you use these sort of tatics

 

[Glirk Dient]

Those are crazy people that represent a VERY VERY small part of the war, and judging the war on the actions of a few is pretty dumb.

I think something needs to be cleared up here, Bush did not lie. He was mislead, there is a big difference. Bush was told Iraq had WMDs, not just from our intelligence but from Russian intelligence as well. WMDs also weren't the only reason for the war. Don't get me wrong either, I am not saying in any way is bush a good president, I am saying he didn't lie and he is not the worst ever. Saying he is the worst ever is going too far.

He gave Iraq more time than needed to avoid war. At the time Iraq was a serious threat and its crazy dictator was becoming more and more dangerous not only to us but the people in the country. We offered more than enough chances to help him and stop the war. He ignored all of that and put his people at risk doing so.

 

[Foxtrot]

Those are crazy people that represent a VERY VERY small part of the war, and judging the war on the actions of a few is pretty dumb.

I think something needs to be cleared up here, Bush did not lie. He was mislead, there is a big difference. Bush was told Iraq had WMDs, not just from our intelligence but from Russian intelligence as well. WMDs also weren't the only reason for the war. Don't get me wrong either, I am not saying in any way is bush a good president, I am saying he didn't lie and he is not the worst ever. Saying he is the worst ever is going too far.

Hippies need something to fight for, like maddox said

 

[CptStern]

I think something needs to be cleared up here, Bush did not lie. He was mislead, there is a big difference..

nope ...he lied ..there is NO doubt he lied


Clarke then tells Stahl of being pressured by Mr. Bush.

"The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, 'I want you to find whether Iraq did this.' Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.

"I said, 'Mr. President. We've done this before. We have been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There's no connection.'

"He came back at me and said, "Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we should come back with that answer. We wrote a report."

Clarke continued, "It was a serious look. We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.' "


source

 

[Glirk Dient]

Alright...so now we will base all of our judgements on Stahl who was speculating? Great, perhaps if we throw salt in the air and look at how it lands we will get a more accurate answer.

In any case they gave the president a document that said Iraq did it, what is he supposed to say when intelligence hands him that? He will believe it, it is their job to make sure they get this kind of info correct.

 

[CptStern]

did you read it? it's not stahl's words but rather Richard Clarke's ...former anti-terrorism advisor for Bush

In any case they gave the president a document that said Iraq did it, what is he supposed to say when intelligence hands him that? He will believe it, it is their job to make sure they get this kind of info correct.

why the hell do I post anything? wtf! could you at least pretend to read my link?

"We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.' "

 

[No Limit]

Those are crazy people that represent a VERY VERY small part of the war, and judging the war on the actions of a few is pretty dumb.

I think something needs to be cleared up here, Bush did not lie. He was mislead, there is a big difference. Bush was told Iraq had WMDs, not just from our intelligence but from Russian intelligence as well. WMDs also weren't the only reason for the war. Don't get me wrong either, I am not saying in any way is bush a good president, I am saying he didn't lie and he is not the worst ever. Saying he is the worst ever is going too far.

He gave Iraq more time than needed to avoid war. At the time Iraq was a serious threat and its crazy dictator was becoming more and more dangerous not only to us but the people in the country. We offered more than enough chances to help him and stop the war. He ignored all of that and put his people at risk doing so.

OKay, you completely ignored everything that has been said; repeated what you heard from Bill O'Reilly and we are back at square 1. Read the following posts about how Bush lied and then refute that. Saying bad intelligence is a myth as the following evidance shows:

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82262&page=6&pp=15

Let me ask you this, did you actually read the Downing Street Minutes yet? Remember, these are official, authentic, documents showing a transcript that went on in high levels of the government. What did you think of that document?

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442239&postcount=100

But those were the brits, I am sad to say you just repeated a very weak Republican talking point. If there is nothing in this memo why won't Bush reply to the following letter signed by 88 members of the house:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_demo...memoltr5505.pdf

Bush said he will not reply to the letter as there is no need. BULLSHIT!

Now you say this was the british, well duh! Americans would be much smarter in not getting something like this leaked. The fact it is British has nothing to do with it. It states that Bush was set on attacking Iraq, that he would be briefed on everything they talked about in August (which he was) and he would fix intelligence around policy.

It is also clear to me you didn't read the memo or you didn't pay any attention to what you read. Yes, there was intelligence but that intelligence was weak as the memo states. The memo also states an attack based on that intelligence wouldn't be justified since other countries such as Iran and NK had much greater capability to produce WMDs. So please reread the memo and respond:

http://downingstreetmemo.com/images/memotext.pdf

The bottom line is Bush lied when he said he would do everything he could to avoid war and he misled the entire country to go into war. I knew this a long time ago as many did; but you republicans don't want to see the light no matter how much evidance there is. So once again this is a HUGE peice of evidance added to the past evidance (such as Clark testemony) so please address it a little better than "it was the brits so it doesnt matter". Kerry is going to put this on the Senate floor on Monday so you guys will have to work overtime this weekend to come up with better talking points than that.

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442507&postcount=102

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442523&postcount=103

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1443897&postcount=105

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1444125&postcount=107

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1447348&postcount=116

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448484&postcount=124

I posted over 3 powerful examples and many other key facts of how Bush and his administration mislead the country in to war and they did consciously. one of these is a powerful, authentic summary of a meeting that took place in Great Britian which included Blair and many key British intelligence officials that agreed intelligence would have to be fixed to support Bush policy of invading Iraq. I am still waiting for you to refute any of this evidance; saying something about Clinton isn't valid (especially when I already addressed that) and you will have to do much better than that. If you can't that means you know Bush mislead the world, caused over 1,600 of our soldiers and thousands more of innocent civillians to die; but because of your blind partisan support you could careless. But I guess thats fine, no one in your family died so why should you care?

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448498&postcount=126

Stern posted this link in that post:

http://www.alternet.org/story/16274

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448701&postcount=136

So please read up on the topic, read the evidance that was posted and try agian. Since you seem to listen to O'Reilly as he would say "When you make a claim sir you will need to back it up. Otherwise I will not respond".

Bush lied, he mislead the country, he was set on attacking Iraq, and that is what the evidance shows; it has nothing to do with the CIA being totally incompetent. If the whole the intelligence defense was true someone would have been fired over it; instead everyone that invented this intelligence was promoted.

 

[CptStern]

OKay, you completely ignored everything that has been said; repeated what you heard from Bill O'Reilly and we are back at square 1. Read the following posts about how Bush lied and then refute that. Saying bad intelligence is a myth as the following evidance shows:

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82262&page=6&pp=15



http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442239&postcount=100



http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442507&postcount=102

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1442523&postcount=103

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1443897&postcount=105

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1444125&postcount=107

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1447348&postcount=116

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448484&postcount=124



http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448498&postcount=126

Stern posted this link in that post:

http://www.alternet.org/story/16274

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1448701&postcount=136

So please read up on the topic, read the evidance that was posted and try agian. Since you seem to listen to O'Reilly as he would say "When you make a claim sir you will need to back it up. Otherwise I will not respond".

Bush lied, he mislead the country, he was set on attacking Iraq, and that is what the evidance shows; it has nothing to do with the CIA being totally incompetent. If the whole the intelligence defense was true someone would have been fired over it; instead everyone that invented this intelligence was promoted.

/me bookmarks post :E

 

[No Limit]

* CptStern bookmarks post :E

Wow, I think that is the first time anyone ever bookmarked my post

:cheers:

 

[CptStern]

well I have bookmarked some of the links you've provided

 

[Glirk Dient]

Actually, I don't watch TV or read new sites. I sure don't listen to O'Rielly for that matter.

I mostly get my politics from forums like these and arguing in RL, so my O'Rielly doses tend to be none.

I see what your saying and a lot of it makes sense. Neither of us will convince the other about bush. I dont care for him, I do and have thought before it started that Iraq needed to be invaded and freed like this. I didn't care much the reasons he went to war, but Iraq needed our help. Bush may have lied his ass off almost as bad as clinton, but that doesn't matter, Iraq needed help and that is what I am trying to prove to you all.

Besides...a lot of the proof you have is simply speculation which can't be used as evidence.

 

[iyfyoufhl]

Iraq needed to be invaded and freed like this. I didn't care much the reasons he went to war, but Iraq needed our help. Bush may have lied his ass off almost as bad as clinton, but that doesn't matter, Iraq needed help and that is what I am trying to prove to you all.

Besides...a lot of the proof you have is simply speculation which can't be used as evidence.

yes, Iraq defenetly needed help, but we could've done it the other way, without such a huge loss of life, both american and iraqi

 

[No Limit]

Actually, I don't watch TV or read new sites. I sure don't listen to O'Rielly for that matter.

I mostly get my politics from forums like these and arguing in RL, so my O'Rielly doses tend to be none.

I see what your saying and a lot of it makes sense. Neither of us will convince the other about bush. I dont care for him, I do and have thought before it started that Iraq needed to be invaded and freed like this. I didn't care much the reasons he went to war, but Iraq needed our help. Bush may have lied his ass off almost as bad as clinton, but that doesn't matter, Iraq needed help and that is what I am trying to prove to you all.

Besides...a lot of the proof you have is simply speculation which can't be used as evidence.

This is the type of talk that dumbs this country. What is not convincing about what I posted? You say in one sentence that Bush might have lied and in another you are not convinced. And again, I would love to argue about Clinton but leave that for another thread. I need you republicans to admit he lied his ass off (an impeachable offense); that's all I want to get from this topic. It seems that the right wing spin machine has completely programmed minds like yours so to get the truth out you need to take it step by step sloooowly. Nothing I posted is speculation, it is all well documented based on facts, past statements by the administration and on leaked memos and minutes that are 100% authentic.

And I don't mean to sound like a dick but this kind of crap needs to stop. You can't have it both ways and I am sick of people accepting lies to defend their partisan ideology.

 

[Foxtrot]

This is the type of talk that dumbs this country. What is not convincing about what I posted? You say in one sentence that Bush might have lied and in another you are not convinced. And again, I would love to argue about Clinton but leave that for another thread. I need you republicans to admit he lied his ass off (an impeachable offense); that's all I want to get from this topic. It seems that the right wing spin machine has completely programmed minds like yours so to get the truth out you need to take it step by step sloooowly.

And I don't mean to sound like a dick but this kind of crap needs to stop. You can't have it both ways and I am sick of people accepting lies to defend their partisan ideology.

I am sick of people accepting lies to defend their partisan idealogy too, don't think you are above him because you believe in a lie.

 

[Solaris]

Wow, if I cared what you thought I would seriously comment, but this is much more entertainting, you cock head.

WTF is this? Just noticed it, if you dont care what other people think don't join in a debate. You say you would seriously comment but this is more entertainment. I don't belive you, I don't think you can agrue against this so are resulting to childish remarks.

you cock head.

How mature. Also ..MODERATOR!!!!!

Stern and nolimit well done, youve both put up an excellant argument, it seems none can actually counter this stuff, and for that I bow my hat to you.

Wp all gg gg.

 

[iyfyoufhl]

don't think you are above him because you believe in a lie.

doesn't make sense to me? did you mean to say "don't believe in a lie"?

 

[No Limit]

I am sick of people accepting lies to defend their partisan idealogy too, don't think you are above him because you believe in a lie.

I am not going to waste time with statements like that. If you want to refute any of the evidance Stern and I posted feel free, otherwise I'm just going to ignore it. I want any supporter of Bush to refute this evidance or admit he lied; otherwise we know a great deal about your character.

If you have any lies I believe that you want to post in a new thread feel free, don't waste my time making an ass of yourself trying to turn the topic in to something else.

 

[Foxtrot]

WTF is this? Just noticed it, if you dont care what other people think don't join in a debate. You say you would seriously comment but this is more entertainment. I don't belive you, I don't think you can agrue against this so are resulting to childish remarks.


How mature. Also ..MODERATOR!!!!!

Stern and nolimit well done, youve both put up an excellant argument, it seems none can actually counter this stuff, and for that I bow my hat to you.

Wp all gg gg.

If you were wondering what "this" is, it is your post.

I am not going to waste time with statements like that. If you want to refute any of the evidance Stern and I posted feel free, otherwise I'm just going to ignore it. I want any supporter of Bush to refute this evidance or admit he lied; otherwise we know a great deal about your character.

If you have any lies I believe that you want to post in a new thread feel free, don't waste my time making an ass of yourself.

Oh, well if you want a Bush supported look elsewhere.

 

[Solaris]

Yes it is. What a fantastic argument. You win.

 

[Foxtrot]

No but bombing people children is, shoot unamred people is. Bombing homes is, tourturing people is. The Iraqi people did not want you help, the USA interfered enough by putting sadam in place. And Iraq is hardly a democracy now is it.

Refer back to the last two pages please.

Bombing children....yep those bombs said "Heres a present kids!" on it. Shooting unarmed people, yeah our soldiers shoot people when they don't pose a threat, that's why at blockades they don't fire warning shots at the big truck that says Bomb on it, even though it is a threat. That's also why they weren't cheering and dancing around and knocking over staues when we entered baghdad. It also isn't a democracy, theres no free elections by the people now is there?

 

[Solaris]

Have you seen the footage taken by the cameraman, of an injured Iraqi lying on the floor, after being shot (unarmed btw). The soldier then shoots him again in the head. Heres the report

>that's why at blockades they don't fire warning shots at the big truck that says Bomb on it, even though it is a threat.

Hmm, I seem to remeber something about Soldiers shooting dead a released hostage at a check point? Source

There, I already had.

 

[Foxtrot]

There, I already had.

And then he replied that those incidents represent a VERY VERY small minority. You have to remember, these soldiers are people just like us.

 

[Solaris]

Yes, the problem goes all the way to the top.
And you say thoose number represent a VERY small minority.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

That small minority caused so many deaths then. My problem is with the Military as a whole, thoose soldiers should never have been allowed to do that, some where along the line the system failed, and the consequences of this is what I am angry about.

Im going to bed now so ...............

 

[Glirk Dient]

This is the type of talk that dumbs this country. What is not convincing about what I posted? You say in one sentence that Bush might have lied and in another you are not convinced. And again, I would love to argue about Clinton but leave that for another thread. I need you republicans to admit he lied his ass off (an impeachable offense); that's all I want to get from this topic. It seems that the right wing spin machine has completely programmed minds like yours so to get the truth out you need to take it step by step sloooowly. Nothing I posted is speculation, it is all well documented based on facts, past statements by the administration and on leaked memos and minutes that are 100% authentic.

And I don't mean to sound like a dick but this kind of crap needs to stop. You can't have it both ways and I am sick of people accepting lies to defend their partisan ideology.

Let me put those 2 sentences together for you then. "Bush may have lied, bu I do not think he did."

What isn't convincing about your evidence or what you posted is it is all based off of people guessing what bush did or some guy that got fired and is now releasing top secret information(if it were true...that is a crime).

I nee numbers and quotes from the people themselves, not sites that say we believe bush did this and that is why he lied.

The downing street memo is too debatable to use as evidence. It doesn't seem to fit anywhere in the timeline of events and is therefore thought of as a fake. On top of that why go to the U.N. if you decided to use military action before going to the U.N.? The memo doesn't hold up as credible evidence.

1) It was written by a third party
2) The word fix has several meaning
3) The third party does not attribute the word fix to a direct quote from either Bush or Blair
4) Why has none of the people that seem so concerned regarding the memo asked the person that wrote it what it means
5) Regime change in Iraq has been "Official US POLICY Since 1998).

Iraq's WMDs are much like the OJ Trial, we have all the evidence we need but people claim this and that and soon the jury acquits. We have plenty of evidence for Iraq having WMDs. They have the means, resources, technology and time. They keep moving them around. Heck they have labs with everything needed to make them quickly, all set up and designed for specifically that, but alas it isn't a hardcore WMD is it? Nearby countries who are far too obsolete have WMDs, where did they get those?

Bush didn't lie, lying is a very serious offense and I see no impeachment or investigation by officials going on. Give it up, lying is just a word you are using to try and make his being mislead look worse. Aside from that there we plenty of other good reasons to go to war other than WMDS. The civialian death toll is anywhere from 20-25k...thats WAY under how many died from sadam. Yes we took out a lot of stuff during the war which is all being rebuilt and we are helping them much much more than that.

 

[Foxtrot]

Yes, the problem goes all the way to the top.
And you say thoose number represent a VERY small minority.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

That small minority caused so many deaths then. My problem is with the Military as a whole, thoose soldiers should never have been allowed to do that, some where along the line the system failed, and the consequences of this is what I am angry about.

Im going to bed now so ...............

That was not all US soldiers, some could have been from bombs, and a large percentage are probably from terrorist bombings.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Yes, the problem goes all the way to the top.
And you say thoose number represent a VERY small minority.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

That small minority caused so many deaths then. My problem is with the Military as a whole, thoose soldiers should never have been allowed to do that, some where along the line the system failed, and the consequences of this is what I am angry about.

Im going to bed now so ...............

You have accidents and deliberate mixed up. A huge percent of those deaths were all accidents, just about every single one in fact. Very very few were deliberate which is a very serious crime. Murder is more serious in the states, people are murdered a whole lot more than by soldiers in Iraq. Are you going to say the united states is a failure because of that? Well if you say the military is a failure because of that well the U.S. is worse, so think things through and realize a few deliberate deaths were not commanded by Bush or anyone higher up, those people were crazy.

 

[iyfyoufhl]

those people were crazy.

what people? iraqis?