Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Bush's WORST Accomplishment in Office


ACW

Recommended Posts

It's not what he did but how he did it. His bull in a china shop approach has alienated much of the american population to the war on terror and I'm afraid that the backlash will leave us vulnerable once he is gone. If he could have gotten people on board, we could have a more sustainable policy. :doh:

Some domestic spying capability is needed. Calls to or from suspected terrorists outside the US, SHOULD be monitored. But there had to be a better way of doing it. The war in Iraq needed to be done. Otherwise we would have been dealing with a madman there for the next 50-100 years. If you thought Saddam was bad, his sons were worse. But there HAD to be a better way to explain it and follow through.

But the backlash... the failure to bring the american people along is going to cost us. If we pull out of Iraq before the government can provide it's own security, it will be a disaster for the middle east and eventually for us.

:2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jumping head-first into Iraq against the U.N.'s wishes.

Screw that. Three countries were running the UN interference. Russia, France, and Germany. They opposed us for corrupt reasons. They all had big money deals with Saddam. The UN itself was and is corrupt and incompetent. They have the power, still waiting for them to do something about Darfur. :rolleyes:

I suggest you read about the oil for food program.

Investigate the United Nations Oil-for-Food Fraud

http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/bg1748.cfm

There is mounting evidence that the United Nations Oil-for-Food program, originally conceived as a means of providing humanitarian aid to the Iraqi people, was subverted by Saddam Hussein's regime and manipulated to help prop up the Iraqi dictator. Saddam's dictatorship was able to siphon off an estimated $10 billion from the Oil-for-Food program through oil smuggling and systematic thievery, by demanding illegal payments from companies buying Iraqi oil, and through kickbacks from those selling goods to Iraq--all under the noses of U.N. bureaucrats. The members of the U.N. staff administering the program have been accused of gross incompetence, mismanagement, and possible complicity with the Iraqi regime in perpetrating the biggest scandal in U.N. history.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It's not what he did but how he did it. His bull in a china shop approach has alienated much of the american population to the war on terror and I'm afraid that the backlash will leave us vulnerable once he is gone. If he could have gotten people on board, we could have a more sustainable policy."

Absolutely correct. If you want to argue that one of his worst accomplishments is "dramatically expanding government" then I hope you rank Thomas Jefferson as the worst president in history. He campaigned entirely on promise of small government, and then did nothing but expand the powers of government past the limits of the constitution once he was elected. He was vilified for this during his terms, but is still beloved as one of the greatest minds in US History. It's all about your approach and your public persona, both of which our current president does not understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. So many choices.

In no particular order:

-The bull**** reasons for invading Iraq.

-The amount of corruption under his watch

-The tearing apart of the constitution

-Domestic spying

-When he took office, he refused to meet with the bin Laden intelligence group that Clinton had set up

-Expanding not only the government's powers, but his own

-the lack of preperation after 9/11

-the failure to respond to the warnings coming from various intelligence agencies and other countries before 9/11

I can go on and on.......

But perhaps his BIGGEST mistake is allowing the PNAC neocons into his cabinet and administration and letting them play him like a puppet from day 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the President of the United States declaring that he can listen to, and make a database of EVERY American's phone calls, and open EVERY American's mail without a warrant isn't #1 on EVERYONE'S list, we're in FAR worse shape than I ever imagined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot

His ass kissing of Vivcente Fox and leaving the borders wide open

Prosecutng two Border agents for shooting a drug dealer in the ass...on our side of the border

Not bringing the Iraqi's to their knees and telling them how things were going to be

Letting Ted Kennedy write the "No Child Not Taught the Test" bill

Harriet Miers

Not getting on TV once a month and explaining the war to the average American

Spending like a drunken sailor

THose are just off the top of my head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although his very worst mistake may very well have been his choice of secretaries and advisors. Via cronyism, loyalty pledge, corruption, and incompetence, Bush has been steered into terrible decisions and failed or struggled worse than he should have in almost every way possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His biggest failure:

A force and bribery approach to the war on terror. We have seen what 4 years of force and bribery have amounted to.

While Bush and the neocons will bragg that we are winning the war and killing a lot of bad guys they have not achieved any 1 of the following 3 conditions that decide wars:

1. Completely eliminating your enemy - (not even close)

2. Destroying the enemy's ability to wage war - (not even close)

3. Completely taking away the enemy's will to fight - (not even close)

Can anyone say with a straight face that we have achieved any of those objectives? For those that say give it more time I will give you 50 years and none of these objectives are likely to be accomplished without addressing the other equally important aspects of the war.

The other aspects of this war like education, policy-diplomacy and public relations have not been addressed. General Patreus says that America cannot kill or capture our way to victory in this war on terror.

Their are other battles to be fought if we want to win and Bush has not come close to engaging the enemy on those battlefields.

That is Bush's biggest failure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im trying to figure out which extreme position is dumber, Cav's or Sarge's. :doh:

Sarge: I'll just say that I'm glad you are not president. :doh:

Cav: Al Qaeda will never be eliminated completely at least not in our lifetime. it's impossible. Nor can we destroy all of their capability to wage war. As for taking away their will to fight. OMG does this one kill me... YOU WANT TO CUT AND RUN FROM IRAQ! YOU are the one posting defeatist propaganda for americans! YOU are their best friend when it come to their will to fight!

And maybe you missed this...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...id=opinionsbox1

It's way too soon to call Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda spiritual outcasts among Arab Muslims, but they have in fact sustained enormous damage throughout the region because of Iraq. The lack of holy-warrior manpower coming from the Muslim Brotherhood is surely, in part, a reflection of this discomfort with al-Qaeda's violence, the complexity of Iraqi politics and America's not entirely negative role inside the country. If bin Ladenism is now on the decline -- and it may well be among Arabs -- then Iraq has played an essential part in battering the movement's spiritual appeal.

Iraq could still fall apart (and if an American president starts withdrawing troops haphazardly, it probably will). The country's descent into chaos and renewed sectarian strife would likely reenergize Islamic extremism. But it is certainly not too soon to suggest that Iraq could well become America's decisive victory over Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and all those Muslims who believe that God has sanctified violence against the United States.

Reuel Marc Gerecht is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a former case officer for the CIA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im trying to figure out which extreme position is dumber, Cav's or Sarge's. :doh:

Sarge: I'll just say that I'm glad you are not president. :doh:

Cav: Al Qaeda will never be eliminated completely at least not in our lifetime. it's impossible. Nor can we destroy all of their capability to wage war. As for taking away their will to fight. OMG does this one kill me... YOU WANT TO CUT AND RUN FROM IRAQ! YOU are the one posting defeatist propaganda for americans! YOU are their best friend when it come to their will to fight!

And maybe you missed this...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...id=opinionsbox1

Ladies and Gentlemen the post above is a clear example of why the war on terror is stuck on stupid.

Mad Mike would like to stay in Iraq in an attempt to kill and capture his way into victory which General Patreus has already said we cannot do no matter how long we stay. When people use rhetoric like Cut and Run and defeatist it is clear that they are spouting political talking points instead of addressing what needs to happen in order to win the war.

Here are the Victory Conditions as set forth by Bush.....have we met any of them?

1. Eliminate the enemy

2. Destroy the enemy's capability to wage war

3. Destroy the enemy's will to fight

Mad Mike knows that despite many successes we have not met any of the conditions above that win wars. Why is Mad Mike Wrong? He is wrong because he believes we can bomb and kill Al Qaida out of existence. The fact is we are going to have to use the other weapons in the arsenal of democracy along with the measured use of force to win the war. Those weapons include but are not limited to:

1. Policy - Diplomacy (bush failed here)

2. Use of force

3. Education - Public Relations (all presidents failed here)

4. Law Enforcement

Make no mistake I want to win the WAR on Terror but like General Patreus I understand that we cannot win this war with force alone. Until the neocons and party line dolts figure out that diplomacy and education are neither defeatist nor cut and run then we will have a never ending war under their control.

I guess Mad Mike forgets that even the great Ronald Reagan sat across from the leader of the evil empire and engaged in diplomacy. Who knew that diplomacy would become a bad word under Bush (43). Bush 41 used it to great success in D-Sheld/Storm and built a coalition that even included muslims.

We are going to win this war, but I believe it is going to require new leadership and new ideas to do it. Bush could have been a lot further along in this war if Bush took some lessons from his father and military history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shocked I havent heard this one yet, but:

Diverting our resources from Pakistan and letting Osama bin Laden hide out for years while we fight a war that has nothing to do with 9-11.

This blunder has also had a lot of effect in neighboring Pakistan where the taliban and al qaeda have been able to flourish b/c they were never taken care of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the Victory Conditions as set forth by Bush.....have we met any of them?

1. Eliminate the enemy

2. Destroy the enemy's capability to wage war

3. Destroy the enemy's will to fight

Not only do you not have a CLUE what I believe needs to be done in Iraq. But you don't have a clue.

Now I've already busted you for making crap up in another thread. You cut an run in that one already. Now Show me where Bush outlined the above as his victory conditions. Actual quotes, not your moronic interpretations. Because every damn thread you comment in, you do this. You make wild claims that you cant back up. You have nothing but lies to back up your idiotic positions.

GO AHEAD AND PROVE ME WRONG. SHOW ME THE QUOTES BY BUSH OR STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw that. Three countries were running the UN interference. Russia, France, and Germany. They opposed us for corrupt reasons. They all had big money deals with Saddam. The UN itself was and is corrupt and incompetent. They have the power, still waiting for them to do something about Darfur. :rolleyes:

I suggest you read about the oil for food program.

Investigate the United Nations Oil-for-Food Fraud

http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/bg1748.cfm

Right, because the war effort has turned out so well, made us safer and stopped Osama Bin Laden in his tracks..... :jerk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Cav. Here ONCE AGAIN, you are proven to be wrong, if not a complete liar.

You said:

Mad Mike would like to stay in Iraq in an attempt to kill and capture his way into victory which General Patreus has already said we cannot do no matter how long we stay.

Not only have I never made such a statement. Patreus is ON RECORD as believing we should stay in Iraq and that victory is possible.

General Patreus on Iraq:

Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq

General David H. Petraeus

Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq

10-11 September 2007

http://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM43_general_petraeus_testimony_10_september2007.pdf

In describing the recommendations I have made, I should note again that, like Ambassador Crocker, I believe Iraq’s problems will require a long-term effort. There are no easy answers or quick solutions. And though we both believe this effort can succeed, it will take time. Our assessments underscore, in fact, the importance of recognizing that a premature drawdown of our forces would likely have devastating consequences.

That assessment is supported by the findings of a 16 August Defense Intelligence Agency report on the implications of a rapid withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. Summarizing it in an unclassified fashion, it concludes that a rapid withdrawal would result in the further release of the strong centrifugal forces in Iraq and produce a number of dangerous results, including a high risk of disintegration of the Iraqi Security Forces; rapid deterioration of local security initiatives; Al Qaeda-Iraq regaining lost ground and freedom of maneuver; a marked increase in violence and further ethno-sectarian displacement and refugee flows; alliances of convenience by Iraqi groups with internal and external forces to gain advantages over their rivals; and exacerbation of already challenging regional dynamics, especially with respect to Iran.

Lieutenant General Odierno and I share this assessment and believe that the best way to secure our national interests and avoid an unfavorable outcome in Iraq is to continue to focus our operations on securing the Iraqi people while targeting terrorist groups and militia extremists and, as quickly as conditions are met, transitioning security tasks to Iraqi elements.

______________________________

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0713/p25s01-woiq.html?page=2

"If we pull out there will be greatly increased sectarian violence, humanitarian concerns.... You don't know what could happen in terms of dangerous conflicts, what could happen along the Kurdish/Shiite/Sunni fault lines, or how [iraq's] neighbors will react."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/25/AR2007082500991.html

But the real test came over a lunch with Gen. David H. Petraeus, who used charts and a laser pointer to show how security conditions were gradually improving -- evidence, he argued, that the troop increase is doing some good.

Still, the U.S. commander cautioned, it could take another decade before real stability is at hand.

But it wasn't just Republicans who came away impressed after visiting Iraq. Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) announced that he will no longer support a timetable for withdrawal, warning of a "potentially catastrophic effect" on the region.
Schakowsky said she asked U.S. officials about the consequences of withdrawal, and she conceded that "they painted a very dire picture." She looked again through her notebook for a Petraeus quote. "He said: 'If you don't like the humanitarian crisis, the refugees and the internally displaced people, you can't draw down. If you are concerned about these people, the humanitarian crisis, you should be for our staying here.' "

It must suck to be so completely owned by your own words coming back to bite you. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...