The Bush Legacy

Started by Vinny Valentine2 pages

The Bush Legacy

Let's discuss George Bush Jr's Legacy to the United States.

Worst President in History? Lead astray by his fathers cabinet members he appointed? Iraq good vs bad.... His 8 years of presidency, view and discuss it as you see fit!

vincent

I think he has acted fairly robustly in recent days however he will be remembered for starting the War on Terror.

Some people will like him, others won't.

Worst President in history?

No.

I'll remember him for taking a horrible act (9/11) that brought the entire country together and instead of doing something good with it, he proceeded to wipe his ass with it.

Thank you, Mr. George Walker Bush.

Well, do you want the opinion of a fellow canadian, or you perceive our opinion on Bush? 😂

I believe history will record Bush as an idiot. he will be the laughing stock of presidents. his legacy? he will be remembered for going to war with Iraq to avenge the WTC attacks carried out by Al Queda who was supported by the Afghanistan government (Taliban). Went to war with the wrong country. After the war was over, Hussein dethroned and executed........leaving Americans in Iraq to serve as human sheilds between the Sunni and Shi'ite civil war......a rivalry that has been going on for a thousand years.

that is all his presidancy has brought to the table. that and his lack of knowledge of even the basics of the English language. he will be remembered as the bafoon.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Worst President in history?

No.

So who would you put in that position?

He is the worst President in history. When we had Clinton, we had a surplus in the economy...now there's a deficit, thanks a lot, *******.

Is that baiting?

"I think how I handled the Iraq situation, will be my legacy." -- George W. Bush

Originally posted by Devil King
So who would you put in that position?

Many on the Right will tell you it was Jimmy "Mr. Peanut" Carter.

Originally posted by Robtard
Many on the Right will tell you it was Jimmy "Mr. Peanut" Carter.
Why? Something about an energy crisis?

Originally posted by Robtard
Many on the Right will tell you it was Jimmy "Mr. Peanut" Carter.

And many on the left would tell you Richard Nixon. Neither of those are truthful.

Originally posted by Devil King
And many on the left would tell you Richard Nixon. Neither of those are truthful.
Richard Nixon was a bad pres, not because of watergate, but vietnam and bad social policies.

Nixon ended the war in Vietnam.

Originally posted by Devil King
Nixon ended the war in Vietnam.
The war ended April 30, 1975.

Nixon resigned August 9, 1974.

Bush did a good job with 9/11 and invading Afghanistan. He put foot to ass after we were attacked and didnt try to "appease" the terrorists or say "well we need to look at what we did wrong to anger these people".

Originally posted by KidRock
Bush did a good job with 9/11 and invading Afghanistan. He put foot to ass after we were attacked and didnt try to "appease" the terrorists or say "well we need to look at what we did wrong to anger these people".

If that's the truth, then why:

A) Osama Bin Laden still on the loose?
B) Al-Qaeda still operating in Afghanistan?

Originally posted by KidRock
Bush did a good job with 9/11 and invading Afghanistan. He put foot to ass after we were attacked and didnt try to "appease" the terrorists or say "well we need to look at what we did wrong to anger these people".
Had he done his job prior 9/11, or rather, had his VP not told them to stand down on the day, it wouldn't've happened.

Also, Afghanistan is ridiculous. how long does it take to shoot a few people in caves? Then again, there are a lot of civilians to get through.

Is that the benchmark for a good president now? That he didn't appease our enemies who killed thousands of innocents? No president is going to appease enemies after they attack us.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Also, Afghanistan is ridiculous. how long does it take to shoot a few people in caves? Then again, there are a lot of civilians to get through.

??

British commanders are now coming out and saying that the Taliban are unbeatable, and that military force is not a valid option in Afghanistan, ie: NATO has to start diplomatic talks with the Taliban or face defeat, or at the very least, a bloody stalemate. There have also been analysis from day one that have concluded that NATO will not be able to kill its way to victory in Afghanistan

unless you are in favor of a full out invasion of NW Pakistan, which would have its own huge problems, winning in Afghanistan will be an intensely difficult task.

Not that I agree with NATO strategy there, its just that EXACT mindset that made America vulnerable to Jihadi terror in the first place.

"bunch of towel heads in caves, what can they do?"