Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He lost not only because of the economy but instead of keeping his promise of no new taxes he signed the bill to raise them. Now the press are praising him, but during his term they hated him, called him a coward and a lot of other negative comments about him.
He isn’t a coward and was a good loving family man who served his country with honor and I believe if he kept his promise about not raising taxes those who were angry with him wouldn’t have voted for Perot.
He did the responible thing and broke the "Read My Lips" pledge and his own party bailed on him, punishing him in the '92 election for it. As a result, the economy - and our families - did not suffer as much as we could have and it may have laid the groundwork for a good economy in the '90s.
But I doubt that will be remembered in 100 years. It has already been forgotten by most who lived through it, aside from the mocking of him and the Dana Carvey impressions.
From a purely historical perspective, how will George H.W. Bush be remembered? While he was relatively influential in terms of foreign policy, domestically his presidency wasn't particularly notable.
I feel he is sort of a modern day James K. Polk. More consequential and important than most one-term presidents, but in 100-150 years the average American won't know much about him, save for perhaps being the "other George Bush"-the father of the more consequential and two-term 43rd president.
Rest in peace and Godspeed, Mr. President.
No principles as a policy maker (read my lips no new taxes ) and Gulf War 1 war fabrication, Panama was ugly.
Out if touch Connecticut blue-blood in the Oil Business.
It wasn't 'diplomatic reasoning', it was simply a matter of objectives. The Gulf War was fought to restore Kuwaiti sovereignty. That was achieved. It was then far cheaper to contain the Ba'athist regime than to take it down and replace it. This was demonstrated in unmistakable terms a dozen years later. It was also understood that removing Saddam Hussein from power would disastrously destabilize the Middle East. This, too, was demonstrated when regime change was undertaken.
History is not going to conclude that one of Bush's failures was not letting mission creep turn a clearly-defined war into some completely unnecessary fiasco. And nothing that occurred post-1991 made regime change any more worth the cost. Those who asserted otherwise have had every last one of their excuses for that assertion shown to be false.
Did you live through 1992? Because the fact that Bush didn't march on Baghdad had precisely zero to do with the failure of his reelection bid.
No historian and no history book is ever going to claim that Bush didn't get a second term because he declined to topple Saddam Hussein.
I do not speak for the majority of people back in 1992 but Bush's failure to knock out Saddam was the main reason I did not vote for him in 1992.
You see I voted for the first time for Bush in 1988. And after the invasion of Kuwait, I remember him and the administration describing Saddam as an evil dictator who started two wars with his neighbors, his massacres of the Kurds and Shia, that his Ba'ath party was some kind of neo-fascist party and of his use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians.
All this and when you have him on the ropes and you let him stay in power? Young Americans and other allies died and Kuwait was ravaged and yet you let their murderer stay in power - because you made some diplomatic deals with who --- the United Nations or the Saudis?!?
This may sound overblown to you but I was pretty young and idealistic back in 1992 and his letting Saddam stay in power was a major disappointment to me.
I do not speak for the majority of people back in 1992 but Bush's failure to knock out Saddam was the main reason I did not vote for him in 1992.
You see I voted for the first time for Bush in 1988. And after the invasion of Kuwait, I remember him and the administration describing Saddam as an evil dictator who started two wars with his neighbors, his massacres of the Kurds and Shia, that his Ba'ath party was some kind of neo-fascist party and of his use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians.
The UN Security Council had authorized member states to use military power to enforce its resolutions demanding an Iraqi withdrawal from occupied Kuwait. There was no authorization to invade Iraq. The U.S. would have become the aggressor.
Even U.S. allies in Europe (U.K., France), Canada, and Australia allies were adamantly opposed to extending the war to Baghdad. The U.S. would have had to do it alone.
I am not opposed to unilateral action; however, IF the U.S. is going to act unilaterally it better be ready to lose large amounts of blood and treasure.
The last and most important argument against removing Saddam is the disaster that became of post-war Iraq. If we break it, then it is up to us to fix it.
How will George H.W. Bush be remembered?
He and his son will disappear into the historical ether, along with Gerald Ford.
We all disappear into the historical ether. Even Marcus Aurelius said so.
Still, it's more the Bush family - finance, oil, real estate -, arguably the most powerful in US history to date, starting with Senator Prescott Bush, and there is a non-negligible probability that the current Texas Land Commissioner could one day be president of the United States, for an unprecedented three generations occupying that highest office.
If that were to happen, they would certainly stand out in the annals of US history for at least another century or two, maybe longer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
