Bush - Bad for the Country

[Cedars]

Why didn't Bush Sr. do the job the first time??

and like the US is so much better. :confused:

We funded and empowered Saddam Hussein during the Iraq/Iran war.

 

It was a complicated arrangement with the middle east powers that allowed us to even begin to push Saddam out of Kuwait. The deal that was agreed to was to put Saddam back on his side of the line in the sand and pull out. We achieved the goal set with the entire region/world and we held to our side of the bargain. It was as much a diplomatic effort and trust building effort as it was a war against Saddam. We would not be in Iraq now if Saddam had held to his end of the cease fire/end of the war agreement he had signed. And Saddam would still be in power there.

 

One thing that bothers me in all the after effects of this Persian Gulf 1 is the manipulation and downright violations of the agreements by other countries during the santion period, France, Germany and Russia come to mind. The protests against the santions under the flag of 'Babys are dying in Iraq', when there were plenty of methods for Saddam to feed his people, and this whole time Saddam is syphoning most of the money to support his ego. Why isnt the world willing to put the blame where it belongs, with Saddam himself as the reason why these things occured in Iraq?

 

It seems that we should have found Bin Laden first...

That was the real Target!

Then we all got sidetracked and misled with this Iraq thing.

 

People tend to forget Osama, when you war with another country..

Its biased Media and sneaky politics.

 

I dont think we have forgotten so much as the sneaky bastard is being protected by many. We have a hell of a time busting up gangs in our own country. But I do agree with you that we should have finished the job in Afghanistan before launching another strike in the middle east.

 

 

Exactly. The war in Iraq has nothing to do with Bin Laden.

It has to do with Oil, and strategic positioning for Iran. B)

Where are the results? of 3 years and Hundreds of Billions of Dollars? And thousands if not millions of lives.

We are not the Global Police! and We go after Saddam, but there are leaders just like him that we don't go after.

 

I agree that strategic positioning was a primary motivation. Not just for Iran, but for the whole middle east. I can see the logic of that choice because of the potential for the people to unite for the most part, the foundation already in place of power/energy processing, communications, education, etc. I am not convinced the oil there was a primary motivation other than it would be there to supply other countries demands and lessen the load/competition for other american interests/investments in other oil nations.

 

And Bin Laden is plenty smart and has enough support to be in Pakistan or somewhere else. (Gee, we helped and trained Him Too!)

 

I have found no compelling evidence that we helped train bin laden. The association between the mujadeen and the USA is indirect. Its like saying the crips and bloods of LA had direct contact with Pablo Escobar.

[C1ay]

The War on Terror is intractable. Just like the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs.

So. We don't have a choice to quit. The other side will keep attacking until we do what they want. Are you ready to install an Al-Qaeda government and sharia law? The radical muslims that are the terrorists of the world want all infidels dead. Our choice is to die fighting for what we believe or die laying there while they slaughter us. Do you really prefer to just lie there?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And a Republican Congress that has passed so many of Bush's Bills.

Yeah, He didn't get to be President without support.

 

Bush Policies are looking worse and worse as time goes on friend.

So, they've passed many of his bills, they did not pass all of his budget. You're still trying to blame Bush for the actions of Congress and he IS NOT responsible for Congress, the people are. BTW, he did not get to be President because of Congress or their support for him.

 

He has good and bad policies as all Presidents do. At least he makes the decisions that need to be made without worrying what the people will think of him. That is his job.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Considering WE gave Saddam what he had; and Bush's Staff was created by Bush himself! (Don't forget Dick Cheney who has been there for a long time! Oh, and James Baker, Oh, and...)

 

Please explain that one Clay

Is that your way of claiming that we gave him all those Russian and French arms? We did not give him all that he had. We contributed to his efforts against Iran but he certainly had many more connections than the U.S.

 

Try to look at the big picture and not just the pieces you want to see. Bush has made his share of blunders but you cannot blame everything on him just because you are too blind to see any blame elsewhere. There is plenty to go around. There wouldn't have even been a need to look for Bin Laden if Clinton had accepted the efforts made to turn Bin Laden over to us.

[C1ay]

That's NOT the case that was pushed in public at the time. Dick Cheney, in particular, linked Osama and Saddam in speeches over and over again, even when it was reported that no proof of a functional relationship existed.

That was not the reason pushed for the Iraq war resolution passed by Congress nor was it the reasons pushed by Powell to the UN. Cheney clained that there was some type of a relationship between Saddam and Hussein, which has been proven BTW, but it was not pushed as a reason to attack Iraq.

 

Bush and his people took their eye off the real enemy, the extreme Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists, as personified by Osama and his fellow Al-Qaida murderers, to pursue regime change in Iraq.

No they didn't. They tried to fight two wars on two fronts at the same time.

 

As has been pointed out by others, there were (and still are) other brutal dictators out there. This administration seems to be very selective about which genocides they punish and which ones they don't, IMO.

No others that we had a signed cease fire agreement with that they have violated. Feel free to name them if I am mistaken though.

 

There are now far more foreign terrorists in Iraq than there were before the war. That's an irony that seems to elude Bush.

It's not eluding him at all. Bush would love to bring all of the troops home tomorrow. Our continued presence in Iraq is killing his popularity but he knows, if we pull out now Iraq will become another Afghanistan with a terrorist run government. That seems to be what the war protesters want though :confused:

 

This congress will never impeach Bush

Feel free to list the "high crimes and misdemeanors" you think they could actually convict him of. You can't impeach a President for bad decisions or just being unpopular. You have to convict him of committing crimes. In the House there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: by charges made on the floor on the responsibility of a Member or Delegate; by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually referred to a committee for examination; by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to a committee; by a message from the President; by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State or territory or from a grand jury; or from facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House. Don't you think any of the competent lawyers involved in Congress would have at least initiated an investigation by committee at this point if there was something they thought he could be proven guilty of?

[Michaelangelica]

Does Bush have a drinking problem?

[TheBigDog]

Does Bush have a drinking problem?

Only if he drinks. He has not been drinking. Have you heard otherwise?

 

Bill

[C1ay]

Does Bush have a drinking problem?

It is rumored that he had one as a young man. Then again, I know of quite a few young men that were avid drinkers....

[Amtekoth]

That was not the reason pushed for the Iraq war resolution passed by Congress nor was it the reasons pushed by Powell to the UN. Cheney clained that there was some type of a relationship between Saddam and Hussein, which has been proven BTW, but it was not pushed as a reason to attack Iraq.

 

Of course it was. Don't even try to rewrite that one. "WMD" and "9/11" were uttered EVERY DAY for months as excuses to go to war. The official resolution was centered on the legal basis for going to war, which was Saddam's failure to comply. But it was sold to the US public as WMD and 9/11. Rummy, Dick and Condi used that imagery daily to drum up support, which they got. Powell showed the images of the "biowarfare trailers", even though the Pentagon's own team on the ground said that's not what they were. Those experts were overruled by their higher ups who had an agenda. And the Republicans in congress have sat on the analysis of how the intel, right and wrong, was used to sell the war.

 

No they didn't. They tried to fight two wars on two fronts at the same time.

They took away soldiers and support and sent them to Iraq WAY too early. The REAL war on terror was being waged in Afganistan and was supported by most of this country (myself included) and the world. This administration keeps calling their invasion of Iraq the war on terror. It is duplicitous and intentionally so.

 

No others that we had a signed cease fire agreement with that they have violated. Feel free to name them if I am mistaken though.

 

Don't get me wrong. Saddam was evil and deserved to be taken down. I'd have been MUCH happier if the Israelis had put a bullet in his head years ago. But the argument was that he had to taken down NOW, before we all paid a terrible price. The UN inspections, the No-Fly zones and the restrictions on his money were effective at curbing his ability to put his ambitions into fruition. Were they perfect? No. But he was much more interested in palaces than Plutonium. He'd rattle his scabbard, but it didn't have a sword in it. Other dictators are MUCH more dangerous (North Korea) to us. Other democracies are more dangerous to us (Iran). Other world powers are more dangerous to us (China). All of them have ignored treaties and agreements in order to pursue policies that directly threaten us and our interests.

 

Feel free to list the "high crimes and misdemeanors" you think they could actually convict him of... Don't you think any of the competent lawyers involved in Congress would have at least initiated an investigation by committee at this point if there was something they thought he could be proven guilty of?

 

I think he misled the country to get us into a war. Could that be proven? Not easily, granted, and that will get tougher with the administration's moves to keep everything they do secret. They've been reclassifying old documents and keeping new ones secret. They have been punishing leakers that expose their (possibly) illegal activities while leaking information themselves that they want out there for political gain, a huge double-standard. Leakers can genuinely damage this country. But sometimes they expose the truth, and that is something this administration cannot abide.

[TheBigDog]

Lets spin this another way, on our Thief-in-Chief

Why the petty name calling. Has he stolen something?

 

Bill

[TheBigDog]

The 2000 election??

You really need to bone up on the facts on that Rac.

 

Bill

[C1ay]

But Bush has more bad policies than good. Which makes him a Bad president.

Look at his public approval. :hyper:

Popularity does not make someone a good President. He could send everyone in the country a check and he would be popular even though he bankrupted the country. Public approval is not a good Presidential indicator.

[TheBigDog]

Yeah, I forgot the dimpled Chads and Enron Lawyers that helped seal the deal...:hihi:

It was a while ago, so yeah, I do need to "bone up." perhaps you could jog our memories.

Bush has quite a few Enron connections I believe. :)

Guilty by association, at least...

 

Please defend the man then.

 

What are the Good Policies?? I don't see any good changes in

1) - Social Security Reform

2) - Health Care and costs

3) - Environment

4) - International Affairs :lol:

5) - The huge Deficit!

6) - ANYTHING??

 

 

:hyper:

The state of Florida was erroniously called for Al Gore while the polls were still open in the panhandle, a traditionally 60% republican demographic. There are estimates that as many as 10,000 voters did not go to the polls in thee panhandle after hearing that the state was already decided. This little fact always disappears with the Florida conspiracy theories. After the polls had closed, at 2:30 in the morning, when the vast majority of the precints had reported the state was called for Bush. The margin continued to narrow as the votes were counted, but in the end, by every count, and every recount, and every unofficial recount by new organizations the results remained the same. Bush won. Get over it.

 

Bush has failed to get the Social Security Reform that he is seeking. This rests upon his leadership, and the other leadership of the Republican party for not being able to act as a party.

 

I belive the largest Medicare reform in history was passed. Something about prescription drug coverage.

 

Bush is an environmentalist. He is downright green. If you actually studied the man you would realize that. Actions speak louder than words. Check out the design of his house. And hunters are responsible for more conservation of natural environment than any other environmental group. Bush is a hunter.

 

The path we have taken since 9/11 is some of the most difficult decision making any President has had to make. His highest priority is insuring that such attacks do not hit Americans again. And he is taking an agenda of action to get that done. Is every decision a great one? No. But he is 100% consistant in the war effort, and history will judge him well for it (I believe).

 

The deficit is the responsibility of the Congress. It always has been. Federal revenues have grown year over year since Bush has been President. They have grown faster than inflation. The economy is booming. President Bush could exercise some veto power, but he has been non-confrontational with the congress in a trade off for absolute support for the war effort. Sad that he needs to play politics with both parties that way to get them to honor the promises that they all shared.

 

Positive? The tax cuts have helped to spur the economy. It is good and strong right now. Education has been an area of success overall. There are examples of failures, as there are in any system, but on a whole the "No Child Left Behind" has done more good than harm. And we are less vulnerable to terroist attacks now than we were previously.

 

The biggest beef I have with President Bush is on immigration.

 

Bill

[TheBigDog]

"Oh, we should lock all Drug offenders away" - OK, find that quote attributed to Rush Limbaugh. Go ahead and look.

 

Bill

[Racoon]

"Oh, we should lock all Drug offenders away" - OK, find that quote attributed to Rush Limbaugh. Go ahead and look.

 

Bill

 

He has said as much many times Those aren't his exact words...I paraphrased

I quoted it to emphasize the BS that he usually says.

C'mon BigDog. :hyper:

 

Rush Limbaugh - Hippocrite! Drug addled MFu who got caught with his pants down. :)

 

You are ducking the other questions BigDog. :hihi:

I may not be as wise as you and Clay, due to age, But do not think me naive.

Politics is a hobby.

I write my Congresswomen! :lol:

[TheBigDog]

He has said as much many times Those aren't his exact words...I paraphrased

I quoted it to emphasize the BS that he usually says.

C'mon BigDog. :hyper:

 

Rush Limbaugh - Hippocrite! Drug addled MFu who got caught with his pants down. :hihi:

 

You are ducking the other questions BigDog. :hihi:

I may not be as wise as you and Clay, due to age, But do not think me naive.

What am I ducking? I answered every question! I am going to continue to think of you as naive. It is preferable to the alternatives. ;) :) :eek: :lol:

 

Bill :lol:

[GAHD]

So. We don't have a choice to quit. The other side will keep attacking until we do what they want. Are you ready to install an Al-Qaeda government and sharia law? The radical muslims that are the terrorists of the world want all infidels dead. Our choice is to die fighting for what we believe or die laying there while they slaughter us. Do you really prefer to just lie there?

That right there has a name, it's called paranoia.

 

 

Still waiting on those "good policies".....

[Erasmus00]

I think you will find this practice is very old, only the blame seems new.

This in response to the way scientists have been handled under Bush admin.

 

I disagree. The current administration has done a few very unprecedented things. Other then senior government climate scientists having handlers (which is a very new phenomena for the US.) consider the US's new relation with the world health organization.

 

Normally, when the world health organization wants a specialist to work on a committee, etc, they normally invite the scientist personally. The goverment recently decided that when dealing with the US, the WHO will supply a list of the types of specialists they need and the goverment will tell them which scientists they get. The WHO refused, and after negotiation, our scientists are treated by the WHO along the same lines as specialists from China.

 

Also consider the accusations from EPA scientists of report censoring, which is new.

 

I don't mind if the goverment ignores scientific advice, this has always been happening. However, I think that the attempts to control scientific information are new, and a very wrong direction.

-Will

[CraigD]

Federal revenues have grown year over year since Bush has been President.

This claim is factually untrue.

As reported by the US Office of Management and budget, total federal receipts by year are:

Year $ billion

2000 2,025.2

2001 1,991.0

2002 1,853.2

2003 1,782.3

2004 1,880.1

2005 2,153.9

 

Adjusting for inflation using the US Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics’s Consumer Price Index, these receipts are:

Year 2000 $ billion

2000 2,025.2

2001 1,933.0

2002 1,781.9

2003 1,665.7

2004 1,709.2

2005 1,906.1

 

This Heritage Foundation graph appears to present this data accurately in graphical form.