U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-12-2012, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,283,014 times
Reputation: 7950

Advertisements

It's going to take 30 years, maybe more, before people can have a balanced perspective on W Bush. Right now the biggest influence on our perspective & understanding of W is not W himself, but the left and it's need for a devil. They needed a devil, and W was handy.

Take the common views of the Iraq war. It would be tough to get them more wrong if we tried. There was no deep dark conspiracy or 'lies about WMD,' yet that is the prevailing view of the left, and also probably the majority of uninformed 'boobus Americanus.'

There were no 'lies about WMD' since most informed observers at the time believed that Saddam still had WMD. Even Saddam's own senior people belived it. Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, a meeting was held at Camp David with Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice, etc. all in attendance. According to then JCS chair Hugh Shelton, W Bush agreed with him (Shelton) that it was not a good idea to go to Iraq. This doesn't quite fit the left's narrative that there was some dark cabal conspiring to go to Iraq. And Cheney had been the architect of the decision not to go to Baghdad after Desert Storm. That doesn't quite fit either, does it. And last but not least, Powell did not oppose the idea of invading at some point, he just didn't like the timing of doing it after 9/11.

Most of the problems of the Iraq invasion and occupation had not to do with how and why it was decided to go to Iraq. The problems lay in the poor execution, especially w/ regard to the occupation, long after the decision was made. But the left puts all the emphasis on the play-making instead of the execution. Why? Because it comports so much better with their narrative of W Bush as devil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2012, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Missouri
30 posts, read 21,791 times
Reputation: 30
I disagree with some of the things that he did, but no I don't hate him. I find that the people who claim they hate him have no real reasons why, they just say "he was bad," when you ask them to elaborate as to why he was bad, they say "he just was."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2012, 12:37 PM
 
174 posts, read 77,464 times
Reputation: 27
I don't dislike Bush as much as I dislike the people who like him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 09:59 AM
 
Location: Michigan
12,715 posts, read 11,613,222 times
Reputation: 4140
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
There were no 'lies about WMD' since most informed observers at the time believed that Saddam still had WMD.
The lie is that WMD would've been a good reason to go to war even if he did have them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 10:38 AM
 
50,727 posts, read 26,752,776 times
Reputation: 15884
How can anyone hate someone as feckless as Dubya? That's like hating an infant.

I accept that GWB did the best he could with the capacity he has, and you can't ask for more than that in a man. I think he loves his country and the American people very deeply, and he obviously meant well IMO. He seemingly has a good heart. Bet he's a great guy at the job or at a bar. You can tell that he's smart in a street kind of way.

His presidency to me simply outlines how tragic it can be to hire a president that knows little about the world, so he goes and hires a bunch of dastardly and venal advisors with their own screwed up agendas. His presidency could have been a great one if not for that.

Not that I agree with his domestic policies, but he always appeared to have good motives. I even think he meant well on his Social Security proposal, but his advisors SURELY had less than noble motives on that issue, and I think the American people sensed that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 1,796,764 times
Reputation: 1053
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
The lie is that WMD would've been a good reason to go to war even if he did have them.

It's easy to say that now but the climate after 9/11 was different. All the intelligence the adminstration had at that time indicated that not only did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction but he was also linked with al-Qaeda in both a funding and stock-piling capacity. Obviously we now know that he didn't have them and the intelligence wasn't all true, but ultimately all any adminstration can do is act in the interest of the country with what they have at the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Michigan
12,715 posts, read 11,613,222 times
Reputation: 4140
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
It's easy to say that now but the climate after 9/11 was different. All the intelligence the adminstration had at that time indicated that not only did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction but he was also linked with al-Qaeda in both a funding and stock-piling capacity.
Rubbish. There was no such intelligence. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the ME at all knew that Baathist Iraq and al-Qaeda were enemies, not collaborators. Middle American cretins and buffoons who get their information from talk radio may have been convinced that Saddam Hussein was a "Muslim extremist" but even I knew more about the region than that--and I'm nobody particularly important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 11:06 AM
 
50,727 posts, read 26,752,776 times
Reputation: 15884
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Rubbish. There was no such intelligence. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the ME at all knew that Baathist Iraq and al-Qaeda were enemies, not collaborators. Middle American cretins and buffoons who get their information from talk radio may have been convinced that Saddam Hussein was a "Muslim extremist" but even I knew more about the region than that--and I'm nobody particularly important.
Even I was tempted at first to buy the whole thing until my dad and wife raised some major doubts in my mind. Once I let the emotion pass, and began to nurture that seed of doubt in my mind, the whole theory behind Saddam having WMD sounded more and more ridiculous. I remembering listening to Randi Rhodes at the time, and she spent an hour DESTROYING the whole theory piece by piece. That's when I knew it was a joke.

So this nonsense about "everyone believed it" is a bunch of hogwash. Plenty of folks knew better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 11:11 AM
 
32,546 posts, read 16,651,919 times
Reputation: 17499
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
I don't believe a single liberal on this thread. ALL OF YOU hate George W. Bush. ALL OF YOU are hedging because for you to say you hate George W. Bush would be an act of hypocrisy in light of all the accusations you've made towards conservatives for "hating" Barack Obama. Of course you're not going to own up to your hatred.

NONE OF YOU are that cunning, or that pursuasive. Complete hogwash.

Psychological projection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2012, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,886 posts, read 10,395,894 times
Reputation: 8050
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Even I was tempted at first to buy the whole thing until my dad and wife raised some major doubts in my mind. Once I let the emotion pass, and began to nurture that seed of doubt in my mind, the whole theory behind Saddam having WMD sounded more and more ridiculous. I remembering listening to Randi Rhodes at the time, and she spent an hour DESTROYING the whole theory piece by piece. That's when I knew it was a joke.

So this nonsense about "everyone believed it" is a bunch of hogwash. Plenty of folks knew better.
Agreed. Here in Philadelphia, although I was in high school at the time, the Anti-Iraq War movement was very strong. I don't even recall many people arguing for the war.
I won't speak on the "opinions" of our failed representatives however.

Last edited by 2e1m5a; 09-13-2012 at 11:24 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top