Do any of you think that our President is about as guilty for war crimes as Hussein, or Hitler.?

Can you describe the differences in their thoughts on war?

22 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    No, not even close.

    The difference in Hilter, Saddam, and George Bush is clearer than the air we breathe.

    Hilter wanted to take over the world at any cost, even to his own people, out of jealousy of the Jews, and their intelligence, they having power over German economy, due to their ability to make profit, owning stores, and the like.

    Saddam Hussein, wanted to control the middle east, thinking he was God, and anyone who disagreed with his thinking was WIPED OUT! Remember the first Gulf War? I need say no more about him, assuming you do know what happened in that war. I hope you do.

    George Bush, went after the bad guys, never giving free reign to abuse, rape, or hurt Iraqi citizen's. He ordered our good soldier's to FREE the oppressed Iraqi's, and help them to set up a democratic nation, just as they wanted.

    The differences are so simple, and easy to see, if one isn't blinded by hatred. Reason with your mind, what makes sense, and what doesn't, what is true, and what is a lie? It is so simple! Jesus Christ said, "The simplicity of the word, will confound the wise". Maybe you should listen to him?

  • 1 decade ago

    Absolutely not! Hitler, Stalin and Hussein were all directly responsible in either calling directly for the specific crimes, or were in the know about the actions taken. Similiar to how WJC ordered the assasination of Vincent Foster except on a much GRANDER scale! I doubt the GB ever had an inkling that some misguided US troops might have committed a crime-let alone a war crime.LOL

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes and no. I do not like Bush at all, and I think he is guilty of many things, but he did not act alone. He is basically just a puppet...an evil puppet, but a puppet just the same. He is evil because he actually likes doing the bidding of those evil unmentionable people who really run things all over the world, and have been working for a long time to take over everything, and create a new world order that they completely control. This is no joke, people!

  • 1 decade ago

    Well when you consider that Bush didn't gas thousands of Americans, nor did he kill Millions because of their religion, maybe he isn't as bad as Hitler or Hussein.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I believe that Hussein and Hitler had a higher IQ than GWB. . .

    Therefore, no comparison possible.

    We are taught to feel compassion for the less capable. . .

  • 1 decade ago

    Bush approved the 9/11 false flag attack. He then attacked two countries that had nothing to do with 9/11. He is identical to Hitler (who approved the Reischtag false flag attack) and Bush is far a worse killer than Saddam. There is no difference in their war thoughts except that Saddam only went to war when he knew he would win (Kuwait). Hitler and Bush had to learn the hard way that it isn't nice to go killing people...

  • 1 decade ago

    I SIMPLY WILL NOT ATTEMPT TO ANSWER SUCH AN IDIOTIC QUESTION!!!!!! BUT I WILL SAY THAT FOR YOU TO PUT THE LIKES OF OUR PRESIDENT IN WITH THAT GROUP MAKES YOU UNWORTHY OF BEING AN AMERICAN.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think I understand, you have no freinds so you don't have anybody to spend New Years with and so you're gonna take you outrage on the goverment. Wouldn't be the first time a liberal has a temper tantrum on here! Happy New Year to ya anyways.

  • 1 decade ago

    Invasion of Iraq was an unprovoked attack, an act of aggression. you think about it and perhaps you can understand those rumblings. Even if you disreguard the "torture thing"

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No No No your logic is nauseating and over used here, He made lousy decisions no doubt but played no part in killing anyone!

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.