Wow! Do you have to ask? At the moment of now...yes, definitely. Carrot Top would've done a better job at the White House. 'nuff said...
Is Bush the worst U.S. president ever?
- Thread starter Avro
- Start date
Interesting point Walter. Colpy has assurred us that in terms of death/genocide/pogroms etc. in so far as the massive slaughter of South and Central Americans by the Spanish and various other nations killing natives and anyone in their way while expanding their imperial authority...that the "times" provides a mitigating factor.....
Before we (western nations at least) became "enlightened" and recognized mass-murder for what it is...that the actions of ancient conquering nations should be put into a perspective that provides greater lattitude because after-all, primitive times yield primitive solutions...so to speak...
Are you suggesting that the slaughters that occurred under FDR and Lincoln were product of this same barbarism? What kind of numbers can you provide that can help us assess the "cut-off-point" where for example "X" numbers of deaths can be reasonably attributable to barbaric primitivism and thus excused....while an "enlightened" society eschews a similar primitivism that relishes the demonstration of military might and as many deaths as can be "acheived".... Perhaps a ratio between the ordinance expended and the "numbers" can give us an indication....
George Bush and "America" wring their hands and beat their chests when figures coming out of the massacres going on around the world like Rwanda or Darfur or ...well pick a place...but the "urgent necessity" for American military action...in these "enlightened" times isn't the same thing....
Practicing regime-change through embargo and blockades, arming factions within other nations and the results of the "numbers" of deaths occurring as result of these actions is nicely omitted isn't it?
When your nation rallies to the "cowboy" and lionizes the gangster...when your people are unwilling and unable to bring resolution to racism and hide behind "god"-beliefs as rationale for hatred and disenfranchisement....when your children are carrying guns into schools and killing classmates and your political system is rife with hypocrisy and corruption...are these the hallmarks of a people that have escaped the barbarism and primitivism of the times whenFDR's and Lincoln's massacres were witnessed?
George Bush is more guilty..... Just ask Colpy.
Lincoln was in power when about 1,000,000 soldiers and civilians died as a result of the Civil War. FDR sent between 300,000 and 500,00 (depends on the source) American soldiers to die on the battlefields of WWII. W has a long way to go to match these numbers.
i just want to say that after 9-11 every American wanted to attack the terrorists, George Bush did what he as a Christian and as an American thought was right and attacked terrorism at its source and the people gave up, they changed their minds, they wanted to quit before it was over, George Bush didnt change, the people did
Funny how all the terrorists who where responsible for 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia..but Dubya was never that good on geography.
Yes, but Sadam Hussein was harboring terrorists and he had the capacity to create weapons of mass destruction. So we went in and got rid of him and are now in the process of rebuilding the country, yet everyone wants to pull out our troops. Why? if we pull out now everything we did and all the people who died will have died in vain. Iraq will erupt into a full-blown civil war and many more people will be killed, and eventually a new dictator will take over and we will have to take him out again
My , my, now Saddam only had the "CAPACITY" to produce WMD? (so does my ex-wife, har har) A few years ago the YANKS said he had them and that was justification enough for invasion...how the stories change..
And speaking of all those "who died in vain"...they died because America needs oil and a few million lives are worth nothing to keep up their standard of gluttony.
george bush is responsible for all who have died in Iraq. saddam husein was not harbouring terrorists, there were no bin laden followers in iraq till after the u.s. arrived.
they are not rebuilding the country they are destroying it, just ask the people who live
there who haven't had basic utilities in years. A new dictator took over 5 yrs ago, he is
the u.s. president.
all the people who died in iraq, died in vain, and will continue to do so till the u.s.
leave, then whatever happens, happens, and the u.s. government will still be to blame.
saddam hussein was a tyrant, and george bush is a tyrant, they both caused much harm
in different ways to the people of iraq. It's a dirty rottin shame.
Give me a break, Bush is in a league of his own when it comes to negative/hostile public opinion.
Eric Margolis on Spitzer
"First, the White House refused to release an exhaustive Pentagon review of 600,000 Iraqi documents that found no evidence that Saddam Hussein had any links with al-Qaida.
This al-Qaida connection was the second big lie propagated by the Bush White House to justify invading Iraq. So successfully was it spread by the administration and tame media, that on the eve of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, 80% of Americans blamed Saddam for 9/11."
Thanks for your perspective McCaulley. Please let us know who you'll be voting for....
Do you poop red white and blue? If George finished his job, Dubya wouldn't have got so confused on his way to find Ali Babba.
Woof!
If you are referring to Afghanistan, that is true, (doesn't have anything to do with christian though, it's just human), BUT when referring to Iraq it is a completely different
story, they have nothing to do with each other Bush quit in afghanistan, before it was over, went into iraq, a criminal act, failed and destroyed that country, and somewhere along the way realized that afghanistan is becoming
worse than it was before, now they are building up in that country again, 'a buffoon trying to make serious decisions,
when he wasn't capable'.
Okay, well thank you for your opinions, by the way if i was old enough to vote i would vote for John McCain but im only fifteen so i wont be voting in the upcoming election but thanks for asking. I do belive that even if we cannot win in Iraq we should still stay there and not pull out beccuse our presence in the country is preventing a full-blown civil war that would result in many more deaths and so i believe we should stay in Iraq until their security forces are strong enough to control the country on their own. Also, how can Bush be the worst president in history when other presidents have sent more men to their deaths and the sole argument you are making is that Bush is the worst because of all the deaths under his presidency?
When George Bush took over the Whitehouse what was the condition of the treasury? When George Bush took over thd Whitehouse what was the unemployment rate?
Under the Presidency of George Bush have more families lost their homes their 401Ks and their investments/pensions etc. etc. or is there another president you can name that has achieved greater impact on the average citizen?
Please tell us what American invaision under which presidency was undertaken on the basis of lies and hypcrisy.
When you to get to vote I sincerely hope you have better choices than the ones America is faced with today.
Thank you for hoping for an easier choice for me but i must tell you the major reason i like George Bush is his position on abortion. He si pro-life and this is why i am now trying to defend him. I believe in life for unborn babies because they are humans and that is why i still like George Bush
Because he unilaterally attacked Iraq, without the u.s. being attacked at all by Iraq.
He hasn't a clue what goes on in the world of women's health. Whatever he says in public is a charade. He's pro-life in office (for the unborn at least) but I don't think he personally gives a rat's butt.
He has tried to pass legislation that would completely stop abortion and did pass some that ended partial-birth abortion and i believe that this is the morally right thing to do
Yeah, that is a tough one, cause republicans will say they are pro-life, cause they are
suppose to, but wonder how many have other thoughts behind closed doors, and I'm
sure there are many democrats who are pro life, even though the party believes in
freedom of choice for women, which is also the stand I take.
It is a personal choice for everyone.
Have enjoyed your presence on this board, please come back again, you are very
mature for 15, and we appreciate your opinions.