It disturbs me that people ascribe malicious intent to GWB. I mean, when people voted twice, he was elected. Most of the people who voted were quite aware that he wasn't a thinker-philosopher, or even a particularly wise man. He was elected twice. Did he win Florida by counting the people who voted in the western half of the state? Yes, I believe he did. But those voters are Floridians too. I don't know what the voter turnout on military bases, or in towns surrounding military bases is. They probably vote republican, in large numbers because the Democrats want to weaken the role of the military, and shift some of the funding toward social programs.
I don't think GWB had much intent to mislead. I believe he was using information that was provided to him to form his decisions on toppling the Saddam Hussein regime. Further, I believe we will have to deal with Iran at some point. We may not have to deal with Iran, China may deal with Iran. If that happens, I don't think that we will have much of a role in geopolitics.
Would you be okay with having a greatly reduced standard of living?
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 27
In the case of Presidents, the motivations are usually pretty obvious. We see a pattern of behavior and we see who benefits and who suffers and we interpret those outcomes as the intended outcomes (usually).
In the case of Bush, we see the rich benefitting and the poor suffering. We see huge deficits and thousands of people die. The natural human conclusion is that these were Bush's objectives. Personally, I don't think Bush has evil intent. I think that in his own point of view, he is doing the morally right thing and taking the best advice he can get.
But the results of Bush's actions remind one of the Bible passage that says something like "by their fruits shall ye know them."
I don't think Bush is worse than any other president that we have had. Example: Bush gets blamed for favoring the rich and not helping the poor, but which president cut back on the welfare rolls, it wasn't Bush, it was Clinton. Aren't the ones on welfare considered poor?
I don't like the fact that Clinton went ( supposedly to save money) and closed alot of military bases and basically cut back military spending. Reagan , was right in building a Star Wars Defense.
Its not that Republicans want war, they want our country protected. Bush had the same intelligence that everyone else had. Even Gore and President Clinton all agreed that Saddam was a threat and had these weapons. Even Hilly and Kerry voted for this war.
Bush has had his name tarnished every since Gore didnt win the elections. I think the Dem's are sore losers and have tried their best to sling mud at him. The only mistake that I have seen is why, we didnt stay in Afghanistan and pursue Bin Laden. Under Bush the economy is stronger, so I say, give the man credit and let it rest.
He knew exactly what was going on - Dubya and his bodies are evil and I would not want to be them looking in the mirror every morning.
Bush had a personal vendetta against Saddam and he had the intelligence cooked to fit his intent to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/11/1047144969140.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml
Saddam even called him out pre-invasion to a mano-a-mano. Dubya knew Saddam would have him eating sand so he turned him down...the chicken hawk that he is.
Malicious is much too kind an adjective for Bush Junior.
Second the poor have actually benefitted more under Bush than Clinton, but don't let the facts get in the way of your rants Dems.
I believe Bush provided several opportunities for Saddam to leave the country peacefully, but he chose not to take those exits, so we commenced with regime change.
The doubting Thomases want for things to be different. They might have some difficulties when it comes to rationally thinking about how life will be different with Iran dominating the region.
A resurgent Russia may soon dominate the region.
Barbara Bush: Things Working Out 'Very Well' for Poor Evacuees from New Orleans
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them."
/a>
Poor people are better off????????
Because more have died for lack of insurance????????
Because more are in prison????????
Because more are dying in Iraq??????????????
What nerve...he was telling Saddam to get out of his' own country. He had no right to do that. This war was a war of aggression against a nation that posed no threat to us:
"Associate United States Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal. In his report to the State Department, Justice Jackson wrote: "No political or economic situation can justify" the crime of aggression. He also said: "If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us."
...
Bush's war on Iraq is a war of aggression. "Aggression is the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this definition," according to General Assembly Resolution 3314, passed in the wake of Vietnam.
The only two situations where the UN Charter permits the use of armed force against another state is in self-defense, or when authorized by the Security Council. Iraq had not invaded the U.S., or any other country, Iraq did not constitute an imminent threat to any country, and the Security Council never sanctioned Bush's war. Bush and the officials in his administration are committing the crime of aggression.
...the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing . . . to initiate a war of aggression . . . is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110904A.shtml
Thesis 1
If the invasion of Iraq by the US was a violation of the UN Charter
AND the UN Charter is a legally binding document
(under both US and International law)
Then the current US military involvement in Iraq is an Illegal War.
Thesis 2
If the US invasion and ongoing occupation of Iraq is an Illegal War,
Then the architects of that invasion
(including but not limited to President Bush and Vice President Cheney)
are War Criminals. Furthermore, US troops actively participating in the occupation of Iraq are (perhaps unwitting) War Criminals.
On the poor:
More Americans Below Poverty Line
David Teather in New York
Friday August 27, 2004
The Guardian
The number of Americans living in poverty grew for the third successive year during 2003, swelling to almost 36 million people.
The figures will be unwelcome news for President George Bush, struggling to convince voters ahead of November elections that he has the economy back on track.
According to the annual Census Bureau report, another 1.3 million Americans slid into poverty during the year, taking the total to 35.9 million, around 12.5% of the population. That was up from 34.5 million (12.1%) in 2002.
Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry seized on the numbers as evidence that the Bush administration's economic policies had failed.
During Mr Bush's years in the White House 4.3 million people have fallen into poverty and 5.2 million have lost their health insurance. "Under George Bush's watch, America's families are falling further behind," Mr Kerry said.
The growth in poverty was most marked among children. There were 12.9 million living in poverty last year, some 17.6% of the under-18 population. That was an increase of 800,000 from 2002.
Around 24.4% of African-Americans are living below the poverty line, the highest incidence among racial groups.
The number of people without health insurance grew by about 1.4m people last year. Nearly 45m people are without health coverage, around 15.6% of the population.
And,
From the American Journal of Preventive Medicine:
Since 2000, Americans have been getting poorer, and national rates of severe poverty have climbed sharply, according to a study published in the October issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. The researchers reported that the growth in the poverty rate is due largely to a rise in severe poverty and that "moderate" poverty has grown little.
The percentage of Americans living in severe poverty--earning less than half of the poverty threshold--grew by 20% between 2000 and 2004, and the proportion in higher income tiers fell. The researchers reported that the number of Americans living in severe poverty increased by 3.6 million between 2000 and 2004.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/50785.php
Yes, the appeasement is over...Russia and China are drawing the line in the sand.
Will he possibly be brought up on war crimes? Probably not.
Could he have prevented some of the suffering that the folks in New Orleans felt? Possibly, but there are issues with moving in the army/national guard.
Will this serve as a lesson for the future leaders? Again, probably.
A lot of Americans were conned into voting for GWB. I did not. I think it was the smirk that got me. I knew early on that this man would lead us to war, and I was right.
http://ohioelection2004.com/evidence.htm
"... it is imperative that we examine any and all factors that may have led to
voting irregularities and any failure of votes to be properly counted."
Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio
Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff, Jan. 2005.
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html