George W. Bush makes a point of mentioning to his critics that history will judge his actions as the right decisions, stating:
"The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq[...]"
How do you think history will judge George W. Bush's presidency?
"The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq[...]"
How do you think history will judge George W. Bush's presidency?
Bush fails to mention that thought and planning into rebuilding both Germany and Japan started close to 5 years before the end of the war. There was more importantly concrete plan in place, there was a group of people tasked with doing this. You know how long the special group for rebuilding Iraq got? 3 months. They still came up with a good plan. That was simply thrown out.
I wouldn't mind the war, if they actually gave Iraqis something back to build around. Instead we have Baghdad in tatters and in the center of it a walled, secure Emerald palace with water, electricity and power. A clear symbol of American domination and power.
What I'll remember is that he waited too long to try and implement some good policies. If he had tried to pass them while he had a supportive Republican majority in congress he could have done some good for our country domestically speaking. Instead he has to beat his ideas against a political brick wall with Nancy Pelosi being the largest obstacle.
By far his biggest demerits will be pushing the war on terror and helping create a half trillion dollar deficit in an already bloated federal shopping spree.
One thing that I think everyone should keep in mind is how much crap that has happened during his presidency. 9/11, The sub-prime mortgage crisis, economic recession, congress declaring war, a repeat of the 1970 energy crisis. All in all not ideal conditions for any presidency.
If he had answered the terrorist attacks the correct way, by going full force against bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, I think he could have avoided most of those less-than-ideal conditions. He would have told the world that we were against the individuals who attacked us, and not starting a War on Terror in general. The world knows we can't stop everybody we hate all at once. And history shows the catastrophy that a two-front war yields.
If we had not invaded Iraq on the premise of a War on Terror, we would not have created more instability in the region and in the world, so the global market would not have seized the way it did. Higher gas prices are a direct result of our invasion and occupation, and in our attitude toward people like Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
If we had not invaded and occupied Iraq, and decided to speak to people we dislike, maybe we'd have bin Laden in the Hague right now. Or in a coffin. And the Taliban would not be resurgent in Afghanistan. Everybody says they want the troops to come home, but that won't happen, even if they leave Iraq. If they're shipped out of Iraq, it will only be to send them back to the place they should have been all along--Afghanistan.
So I understand Bush has had some trials occur during his Presidency, but most of them have occurred because he shot himself in the foot.
If Bush is going to be remembered more fondly in later times. For what for exactly?
Do we restore checks and balances?
Do we restore the rule of law?
Do we restore our Constitutionally protected rights?
Do we stop our politicians from using fear to manipulate the populace?
Do we stop endorsing torture?
The history is already written on Iraq as far as Bush's role -- it was ill conceived, it was sold to the American people on a lie, it was poorly planned and poorly managed. If it turns out that someday Iraq and the rest of the middle east thanks us for what we've done, it'll be a happy accident, not a validation of what's been done.
He used fear for political advantage consistently; so consistently it's now the punchline for jokes. Same with violations of checks and balances. Same with torture.
The only question left is whether Bush will be remembered as the President who destroyed everything the country was founded on, or merely the one who almost did so.
George W. Bush was president during the September 11th Terrorist attacks. And he'll be remembers for how it was handled. History has a way of minimalizing the flaws of it's leaders, and the former presidents of the United States are no exception.
BTW, not EVERYTHING I mentioned was him or his administrations fault. He didn't send us to war, congress did. Despite the popular conspiracy theories he was not behind September 11th. He also didn't start or set into motion the Sub-prime mortgage crisis. Nor the subsequent fuel crisis or world wide economic recession. I'm sorry he's just not that powerful.
Easy to blame, sure. But come on if you seriously think he could have foreseen or planned what the consequences of his actions mixed with world events would have been, fine. I for one don't give him that much credit.
He's made education even worse, I hope he's remembered for that. It'd be awesome to have some sort of educational revolution in the States.. One can dream.
On 9/11- did not act like a leader. Was confused, shell shocked in a classroom, instead of immediately addressing etc. Popped up at different locations with poorly written speeches.
Post 9/11- did not listen to advice of both consvervative and liberal legal advice as to how to handle dealing with Al Qaeda in an effective manner.
Was totally over run by the V.P. and Neo-conseravative ideologues that saw 9/11 as their ideal laboratory to test their ideas of Democracy through force- eventually invade Iraq in order to spread democracy
Post9/11- Squandered the compassion of a very sympathetic world, spat in their face and said we will do things OUR way. Probably his biggest mistake of all- a war on terror would require the collective ideas of all of our close allies. Therefore "go it alone" was just plain stupid and impulsive.
He ended up with the following allies: Britain (but not the people), Vanuatu, Georgia, Romania, Poland.... hmmm
Completely bungled capturing the highest value Al Qaeda cadres, took recources away, and shifted focus on Iraq
Went to Iraq, despite overwelming intelligence pointing out that this would be a very very risky move.
Went anyway, and had no preparations for post-war, or marshall law, or counterinsurgency. Surge FINALLY was adopted, but after country was ruined by civil war. He was advised over and over to go with 3-400,000 troops.
Again, he could not assert himself and Rumsfeld walked all over him.
Fieth, Woo, Cheney and other sinister characters appealed to Bush's cruel (134 deathpen cases in Texas) side in order to extract information. Instead of listening to those with years of interrogation experience he prefered to "take the gloves off" too prove a point instead of winning a war of ideologies. Because of Torture, Extraordinary Rendition, and the imprisonment of 1000s of innocent villagers subjected to the worst aspects of American culture- heavy metal, sleazy sex, humiliation- America lost its moral compass in the eyes of other countries. This is the America that organized and held together the Nuremburg Trials. Nazis, accused of far worse crimes than blowing up planes - such as the death of 30,million plus civilians, cutting out peices of brains of twins to see what would happen, forcing sex changes to see what would happen, gassing Jews as a Final Solution etc. One of the greatest defeats, and battles won during WWII was the right of the accused war criminals to face their accusers. Somehow we find that a motley group of somewhat half assed Arab terrorists merit far greater measures???WTF?
So, with no clout, no economic or energy visions, no moral authority, no authority whatsoever -here is what the next president will have to fix:
Dealing with a now Powerful Russia. Powerful Iran. American ridiculed by such people as (and this is embarrassing) President Chavez.... Basically, no one had any respect for him. Putin took him for a ride ("I saw his soul") KGB agents dont have souls...
People may not have liked Truman, or Lincoln, or Nixon for that matter, but they all had at least some degree of respect- even Nixon. Despite Watergate, many admire Nixon despite his being a bit crazy. Bush has none. No Respect, not a good prospect for historical significance.