Who are the two Bush cabinet members who said Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein days after taking office.?
84443
All of them, to their wives.
347298
That's what they'd like to do, alright. Bush is almost certainly the worst president since Nixon, but he's *their* worst president since Nixon.
369795
Here's what I think...\n\nBush > Saddam > Laden > Chimp. \n\n(In intelligence)\n\nHere's my reasoning\n\n\n1. Bush goes in first because he is the president of the USA. You have to be smart to be a president. If you deny this, you are a Bush basher who has no facts and are simply an idiot(Not talking to anyone specifically).\n\n2. Saddam goes next because he strategically went into power as a dictator. Smart.\n\n3. Osama is third because he heads a large terrorist organization and hasn't been found yet.\n\n4. The chimp comes last because, if you're not stupid, you'd know that a chimp is a lesser evolutionary stage of man. Therefore, it is not as smart. \n\n\nOf course, I know the answer you are looking for is that the chimp is the smartest. But I'm not going to say that because it's blatantly incorrect.
1036081
Colin Powell or Condi Rice.
1062127
Impeach Bush & Cheney
516673
Sitting pres\n\nGW Bush, the moron, idiot, killer and liar.
1077522
I approve of a ban on George W. Bush.   This guy was a waste of a sperm and egg.  Shame on Barbera and George Sr.
151456
I'd have to agree with the person that said George W. Bush and Osama Bin Laden, although with me it's clearly George W. Bush.  What Bush has done over the last 5 years is no better that what Bin Laden has done.  In a land of democracy, he has decided to invade other countries for his own benefit and not the benefit of the American people.  Basically, the phrase "for the people, by the people" does not exist in W's world, more like "for W (and Cheney, Rice, etc.), by W (and Cheney, etc.).
923226
see, you're slightly incorrect here....\n\nBush 2 (and for the record, sequals are always worse), didnt learn squat from anything ever, especially foreign history, but all the ppl around him like cheney and rove did learn something, they learned what happens after a war, and they realized how you can manipulate the masses during a war, and in doing so, you can profit from it financially. \n\nbush and his buddies just looked for the quickest way to do what they wanted, how they wanted, and didnt care about anything else. they're not even pretending to care about our country. their regime is the most thinly veiled corruption ever. dont get me wrong, Saddam was a tyrant, but there are worse, and more dangerous out there, why didnt we go after them?
1075448
1. George W. Bush.  He is evil, despicable and incompetent, has forsworn his oath of office by declaring that the law does not apply to him, and is a war criminal along with Dick Cheney for starting the Iraq war under false pretenses.\n\n2. Karl Rove.  He is why Bush is in office.  He is a war criminal because he helped launch the Iraq war to get Bush re-elected.\n\n3. Alberto Gonzales.  He is helping Bush, Cheney and the Republican Party transform the United States into a totalitarian, plutocratic oligarchy.  He is also a war criminal thanks to his memo concerning the Geneva Convention.\n\nThey are the enemy.  So is anyone who supports them.  These are evil people who must be stopped now.  Luckily the Constitution and laws are still in effect and can be used against them, as Tom DeLay found out.\n\nMay God bless America by destroying terrorists and all other conservatives.\n\n[I also agree that Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy is hateful.]
928100
The CIA and the NIS were instructed by the Bush Administration to find evidence to confirm Saddam had Nuclear and Biological weapons Programs actively in use. The CIA and NIS new from the outset that they would find it impossible to do this, because they had no intelligence what-so- ever to give to the Bush administration who were demanding  proof. They managed, between them to supply Bush & Cheney a report that was`nt worth the paper it was printed on. These agencies said at the time, and have continued to admit, to this day. Saddam had NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. NONE !! The US and the UK went to war for NOTHING, It takes ONE BULLET TO ASSASINATE A TYRANT, NOT 650 000 DEAD PEOPLE. IT IS AN ILLEGAL WAR, pure and simple. If anyone would care to argue the point with me I`ll open up my e.mail for discussion, and supply ANY evidence they wish to examine.\nAnd don`t give me any crap about violating UN sanctions, they were devised specifically to entrap the Hussein regime, thus ensuring he had absolutly no choice but to violate them. \nI believe that now the US and UK have tested the water, as it were. They have set a precedent where by, you don`t actually need a viable excuse for invading another country and killing it`s people, they have devised their own set of rules. Astonishing and terrifying and truly barbaric.
850254
Gees, I could have sworn it was Bush who stood on the Kuwaitt Border telling the Iraqi's to overthrow their government! And we gave Saddam the gas!\n\nWonder what would happen in the US if we tried to overthrow the government and how many would be killed! But that's ok! Right?\n\nWe didn't say a damn thing when he used it on Iran, in fact we effectively kept the UN from sanctioning him by using our veto powers!\n\nIt's ok for us! Just no one else!
822121
Someone ask the dictator to explain himself?  Of course not, they would have been ushered from the White House as quickly as possible.  It's very clear, from all reports, that Bush doesn't listen to anyone who doesn't kiss his butt and just accept everything he has to say.  Colin Powell ring any bells?  I fully agree with what this question seems to suggest.  Bush 41 should have finished Hussein when he had the chance, and Bush 43 should have set aside his obsession with Iraq and finished the job in Afghanistan.  Now, thanks to him, the terrorists are now in Iraq in droves.  Self-fulfilling prophecy?  I suppose so, he claimed connection between Hussein and 9/11 before the evidence forced him to admit there was no connection.  Now he can talk about the terrorists being in Iraq all he pleases, we blew the country wide open and gave them very safe passage inside.  Good job again Bush.
627050
America will have no more of the Bush's. Their reign is over. America wants to impeach the one we have now as it is. George Bush and his family have lost all if any credibility. Too many lies...
1134962
Which George Bush are you referring to? It would be definitely if his Dad had removed Saddam in 1991. It would be if Clinton had taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance. As it is we wasted about 10 years letting terrorists and their supporters think they could long as the country they were living in didn't invade someone else they would have a place of support.\n\nIraq isn't Polaroid you don't make a change that drastic and get results in 60 seconds. Who do you think would be better causing trouble, Saddam or Zarqawi? \n\nLife in Iraq will be better. It should be better now-- but you have idiots over there making loud noises and killing people and I'm not talking about US troops. Why are the terrorists causing so much chaos? Because if they don't they have no power and lose all influence. It's not their religion, they aren't religious.
223239
The war was based on a lie.  So we got rid of Saddam.  Does this mean we have to overthrow every other dictator who abuses his own people too?  I think not.  There are some angry, angry people here who, like their Republican leaders, hate to hear the truth.  Listen to the bonehead who thinks all liberals should be shot and be afraid.  This is the kind of person who avidly supports the brain-dead George Bush and all he stands for.  Given the chance, these nuts will destroy our country.  God help us.
1106049
Nobody deserves to die.\nThe difference between George W. Bush Jr. and Saddam is that Bush represents the majority of a people, while Saddam Hussein only represented himself.