If   there  was no Iraq,  which  country  will Bush  be  bomb?
551438
He will probably go after Iran next. I hope not but he is starting a war of words as we speak.
404038
I think the U.S. should never have entered Iraq in the first place. The only reason we are there is because Saddam tried to assassinate Bush Sr.It is simply a personal vendetta.
452206
Iraq...if you are an American.  Remember, some of their radical groups have abducted and beheaded some of our citizens.
345673
The USA,of course.\n\nThey want no one but themselves to have weapons of mass destruction.\nThey have absolutely no respect for other goverments from countries with different cultures.\nTheres no other country that  represents a bigger threat  to they world.
491700
Iran for sure because after Afghanistan and Iraq wars USA is quite tired and short of supplies and even a Friend countries
835088
No, we won't attack either of them.  We'd win a war against either country, but it would degenerate into a hell of a mess after that.  Kind of like what we're seeing in Iraq right now.
249156
No, or America might invade.
899212
It doesn't matter to me at all.\n\nWhy - Because the world hates America, always have and always will.  This hatred didn't start with Iraq or Bush (either Bush), it has always existed.
434631
I will repeat what I said to someone else:\nIt's interesting to me that the threat to the world is Bush, when a KNOWN terrorist and KNOWN terrorism-supporting nation is preparing a nuclear weapon.  Get a reality check, why don't you?
471153
I think Iran is far harder nut to crack than Iraq and it would be biggest Bush's stupidity if he try to attack the country at least now. Besides, Iran can't for now threaten anybody with its uranium-enriching level.
627334
Sounds like Iran . Planning to invade it , are you ?
895556
Aaron-iraq had nothing to do w/ 9/11. bush said that himself.\n\nwhat did they do?\nwell, 9/11, wait that wasnt true, wmds, wait that wasnt true either...(even though they did find a barn filled w/ a few hundred pounds of expolsives and ammo, but it only made the 10th page of the CT post)\n\nwell i guess you can argue oil, saddam(even though there are many worse dictators who get no attention)\n\nor that it was supposedly an easy takeover.
44495
in america's case which is to occupy and bomb countries
1177559
None of them. US can't attack any of them. I know US have the best and newest type of weapon but N.Korea have nuke bomb and if Us attack them they will fire them and US with all of it's weapon can't stop them in the air. Also Iran is a very big country and it has a lot of loyal soldiers and it will be a long and hard war with many casualty for US. I know all of them so I'm sure US leaders know these so for certain US won't attack N.Korea or Iran. Iraq was different from Iran or N.Korea because Iraq's people were against Saddam and his dictates and also Iraq didn't defense against US but with all of this facts US have a lot of problems in Iraq so it's another reason. For attacking Iran or N.Korea US need other countries help because it doesn't have enough soldier and also US need other countries to reduce global pressure on US about beginning war in the world. Another reason: N.Korea and Iran if be attacked may do anything they can't and threat the world they may explode what they can. My evidence is Iran's leader's speech which was about this subject, he said we will ruin the world if we will be attacked by another country and he threated to stop producing and transporting oil in the world.
907880
probably in iraq, but certainly not here.
413712
none if they're smart. we already pissed off the rest of the world with iraq
1024061
The truth is it is the United States of America who is the real terrorist in Iraq.  We will end up like Vietnam. On the losing end.