The Worst President?? I think not....

[hops_scout 9]

Worst President?

 

 

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war. They complain about his prosecution of it. One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S history.

Let's clear up one point: President Bush didn't start the war on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.

 

Let's look at the "worst" president and mismanagement claims.

 

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

 

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea. North Korea never attacked us.

From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,

an average of 18,333 per year.

 

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us.

 

Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

 

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent. Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

Over 2,900 lives lost on 9/11.

 

In the two years since terrorists attacked us,

President Bush has liberated two countries, Crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,

put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year.

 

Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.

 

Worst president in history? Come on!

 

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...

 

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.

 

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

 

 

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

 

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

 

Our military is GREAT! PASS IT ON.

 

[ScouterPaul 11]

What's your point? Do you know something that the rest of us don't. Was Iraq responsible for 911?

What about Nixon and Cambodia, Regan and Iran-Contra. Do you really believe that Bush has single handedly stopped any and all terrorist attacks? Is he the worst president ever? No. But has he done more damage to the constitution of the United States of America than any other President -absolutely.

[hops_scout 9]

What is YOUR point? How did he damage the constitution so badly?

 

And yes, I truly believe Iraq and Saddam had something to do with 9/11.

 

343

[CaveEagle 15]

Let's not forget that we attacked Iraq because they were in breach of UN resolutions that required THEM to prove that they had no WMD. For 12 years Iraq refused to comply with request to prove they had disarmed. I know of at least two high ranking wanted terrorists that have been captured in Iraq since the fall of Bagdad. A training camp was also found that had a Boeing 747 set up to train for highjacking scenarios.

 

If Saddam was not directly involved in the 9/11 Attacks against America, it is only because he was not asked!

 

Exactly which freedoms has Bush violated that has some of you so upset? I travel on comercial airlines nearly every week. I have flown nearly 350,000 miles since the attacks of 9/11. If it was up to me security on airliners would be even tighter.

 

What really torques me is that the same indeviduals that are whining about what our president has done, are also draging our leadership through congressional "hearings" complaining that not enough was done to prevent the WTC and Pentagon attacks.

 

I will ask again: what specifically do you have a problem with? and would you be complaining if the previous administration had proposed it?

 

May God Continue to Bless America

 

CE

[Eamonn 61]

Sorry Hops Dear Friend,

I support all of our guys in the military. I am not sure if George W. is the worst president. I am sure that he isn't the best.

Eamonn

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Roosevelt (Congress, actually, since the power of declaring war belongs to Congress, not the president, though Congress hasn't really used that power since WWII) declared war on Japan ONLY. Germany and Italy and Japan had signed the Tripartite Pact, which said that any country that declares war on any member will have war declared against it by all the Axis countries, so Germany and Italy declared war on the US. THEN the US declared war on Germany and Italy:

 

Pearl Harbor & Japanese declaration of war on US: Dec 7, 1941

US declares war on Japan: Dec 8

Germany & Italy declare war on US: Dec 11

US declares war on Germany & Italy: Dec 11, in response

 

 

[firstpusk 10]

CaveEagle, the one thing I would give Bush credit for was getting the UN inspectors back on the ground. They pretty much established what sensible people already knew. Saddam Hussein's programs were pretty much in shambles. The stockpiles of any significance were destroyed. Any informed reasonable person should not be surprised when no significant evidence of programs or stockpiles are found. This administration was lying from the start.

 

There really wasn't any significant terrorists activity in Iraq before the war. If we wanted to find active al Qaeda terrorists, Pakistan would probably be much more fruitful. They continue to harbor them and actually set them up. They also have been selling nuclear secrets to rogue regimes. Oh. That's right I forgot. They are our ally. With friends like that.

 

We shouldn't question the competence or honesty of our leadership when they lie to get us involved in an unnecessary war. This president dwelled on Iraq from day one and told the intelligence services to leave the Saudis alone. As I recall, there were no Iraqis involved in 9/11. I can't remember, were there fifteen...or was it sixteen Saudis involved in 9/11.

 

The Clinton administration had an active program to find and root out al Qaeda. The work they did prevented the millennium bombing. According to this bunch, there was no reason to even schedule a meeting dealing with terrorism until after 9/11.

 

We have stripped troops from the fight in Afganistan where there still is al Qaeda. Taken forces out of Korea, where there is a much more substantial threat including nuclear weapons. Speaking of nuclear weapons - was this the president that said he didn't care about nuclear non-proliferation early in his term.

 

I don't know about worst president in the history of the US...but anybody would be better than him now.

[Bob White 20]

We live in such a large and diverse society how can you ever expect to answer this question? Every political action or decision effects different people in different ways, so everyone is going to have a different set of criteria to base their decision on. Heck you probably can't get 50 people to agree on the best ice cream let alone the best or worst President.

 

In addition, the responsibility and demands on a President are seldom of their choosing. I dare say that I doubt any of us on this board are capable of making the kinds of decisions needed to lead a major world power.

 

I have never elected a politician with the expectation that I will agree with every decision they make. I also know that many of the things blamed on the president would be better aimed at others, it's just that the President is a more interesting target.

[ScouterPaul 11]

Let's start with his stripping American citizens of their rights afforded to them under the Bill of Rights.

[Bob White 20]

Checks and balances Paul. We have have a legal system and process to defend ourselves against that sort of thing, as I understand it for a few who may have been affected in the way you say that process is already in motion. That is what is designed to do is it not? I know a few hundred people (which is about all any of us know) adn none of them have nmade any such claim, or have mention any of the hundreds they know making such claim.

 

I have faith in the ability of our sytem to right those wrongs in nearly every instences. If you are looking for perfection then you have chosen the wrong planet to live on.

 

[Zahnada 11]

"I know of at least two high ranking wanted terrorists that have been captured in Iraq since the fall of Bagdad. A training camp was also found that had a Boeing 747 set up to train for highjacking scenarios."

 

Let's not forget how many terrorists have been captured in the United States during the last 2.5 years. And the terrorists involved with September 11 learned to fly in America. If having terrorists in a country is a criteria for invasion, we'll have to attack Oregon and Florida too.

 

There still is no firm evidence that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. The terrorists weren't Iraqi. The training didn't occur in Iraq. Osama doesn't need Saddam's money. There's no clear connection between the two except for a mutual hatred of the United States.

[ScouterPaul 11]

Bob

I understand and fully endorse checks and balances. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the current administration does not believe in them. What we have now is not checks and balances. Bush can detain any U.S. Citizen, strip them of all their rights and detain them for as long as he wishes. These people do not have access to a lawyer, they do not have to be told why they are detained, they get no hearing in front of a Judge and they can not tell anyone that they have been detained once they have been relaeased. Whether it is only one person or several hundred is a moot point. Every U.S. citizen is guaranteed certain rights under the constitution. Bush has chosen to ignore these protections.

 

In answer to an earlier poster I would be against these actions regardless of their political party.

[frankj 10]

He's not the best, nor is he the worst. Bob W is right, each president faces different issues, they can't be graded as if they've all takes a the same test. firstpusk says the Clinton admin "prevented the millenium bombing." If he is referring to the guy nabbed coming into Washington State from Canada -- the Clinton admin had nothing to do with that. Give credit where it is due: a Customs Agent who thought something looked fishy.

[firstpusk 10]

"He's not the best, nor is he the worst. Bob W is right, each president faces different issues, they can't be graded as if they've all takes a the same test."

 

Yes, each president faces a different test. But if this guy and his national security staff was told before he took office that terrorism was the big threat. He and his folks knew better. They dismantled or ignored everything the Clinton administration had put in place...until 9/11.

 

"firstpusk says the Clinton admin "prevented the millenium bombing." If he is referring to the guy nabbed coming into Washington State from Canada -- the Clinton admin had nothing to do with that. Give credit where it is due: a Customs Agent who thought something looked fishy."

 

Yes, a Customs Agent was responsible for the arrest and kudos to him for suspecting something was wrong. If you think the Clinton administration had nothing to do with it you have been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh or the like. There was an alert on that border as a result of a tip from Jordanian officials. This is exactly the kind of intelligence we are less likely to get because the manner in which this administration has abused relationships with friends all over the world. Bush may not be the worst, but anybody would be better.

[CaveEagle 15]

FrankJ is exactly correct. It due to a sharp-eyed customs agent the terrorist threat in Washington State was stopped. It was the Clinton Administration that let out legal system hanlde the prosecution of the first WTC bombing back in the early 90's. The 9/11/01 attack was clearly a follow up attack to the first one.

 

CE