jvj

The oft-derided President vacates his office soon. A couple of relatively positive perspectives:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/pers ... right.html

http://www.economist.com/science/displa ... extfeature

What do you think? Bear in mind that, from what I gather, Andrew Roberts (a historian) and GWB know each other on a personal level.

Edit, See below, this is an indication weeks ago that Hrimnir is a massive tool, too bad I chose to ignore the warning signs.

I know some here will blast me and disagree over this *cough* Hrimnir *cough* but thats ok, I am entitled to my opinion.

I pretty much second you on all that Sumigo.

Iraq is a disaster based on a lie. However Afghanistan I think is justifiable, but Bush should not have jumped on the same wagon in his attempt to justify Iraq. When it comes to this specifc subject I think Bush, Blair and Howard should all be trial for war crimes, as opposed to giving each other medals and pats on the back. (ow ow ow, I can feel me beating with the proverbial stick here.)

My only hope is that Obama prevails. Everyone is painting the poor man as the next messiah and so I feel he is being setup for failure, simply because no one can live up to those expectations.

edit

One of my favorite cabaretists, Volker Pispers, summed some things up quite well, if a little exaggerated, of course.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Edit: I should mention that Pispers speaks German, but the videos are very nicely subtitled in English.

I have always been inclined not to write GWB off too much, as I am often tempted to go in the opposite direction to majority opinion. That is not simply to be contrary (though I am that, too) but because I am inherently suspicious of opinions commonly held by the general public.
So, even though I had some fairly major disagreements with some of Bush's policies, I have never bought into the extremely popular idea that GWB is 'stoopid'. I think he's simply not very good at public speaking, and possibly gets fairly nervous and fumbles his lines. A lot of people in the past 8 years have seen some of these slips and subsequently jumped to the conclusion that, well, you know, he must be 'dumb'. As far as I am aware, no one accused his father of being a moron. Roberts makes his own point regarding grade-point averages, whatever they are.

I've said elsewhere that, in the main, I approve of Bush's foreign policies. I think he failed utterly at tackling the most important theatre (the Israel-Palestine thing), and this is a major blow to his 'legacy'. But I was always largely in favour of the invasion of Iraq and deposing of Saddam, and I do believe that the truth of whether it was a dreadful mistake will be decided in perhaps 20-30 years time. If the country falls into civil war, then the West has failed it; if not, and it succeeds as democracy, then I think America will have something of which to be proud, in spite of all the pain that has gone on.
Sumigo, where did you get the figure of 1.5 million Iraqi's killed? That's far higher than any number I've seen. I'd also add that whatever the number, most of those have been killed by other Iraqis or insurgents.

I would also contest the idea that Al-Qaeda (however you spell the damn thing) is laughing in the West's faces. I think they've been massively contained -touch wood- and clamped down on. Evidently things need to improve a lot in Afganistan, though.

On other fronts, I abhor Bush. The love affair with oil (not that I would connect that to Iraq), the refusal to sign the Kyoto agreement, the propagation of religious culture wars in the US, the recalcitrant stance towards Stem cell research, Katrina, the unilateral approach to diplomacy etc etc. In part that's why I included the second link, because, frankly, I'm thrilled- it's just a shame that he had to do these things as symbolic guestures.

So overall, as a non-American citizen, I neither laud nor castigate Bush. I think he had to deal with an incredibly tough time after September 11th that can be compared to very few other events in American history, but he did some things well and others badly. He's created an extensive and generous aid programme to Africa ($30bn?) and some of the poorest parts of the world, whilst being slammed as a cowboy in much of the richest.
As you guys have said, I think there are ludicrously high expectations being ladled on Obama and I oly hope it doesn't all end in tears. I think some have forgotten that, like the the rest of us, he's only human. i think there's great potential there, but only time will tell.

I don't think Bush is "stoopid" - I think he is dangerous. Ultimately I don't think he was good for the globe. As you point out however, his call to reduce the amount of feed aid to Africa and increase the amount of financial aid, was a massive step forward. So good on him for that. But without wanting to beat the old drum, I have to say, that Africa and all of the developing world, need trade more than aid...

Well, to avoid starting yet another sh*tstorm, i'm just going to say my opinion rather than line by line people's posts like i am apt to do. On that note i'd also like to mention that i didn't read any of the above posts except for OP's to avoid my "desire to respond-o-meter going off .

I don't believe Bush was a *good* president, but i also believe that he was not deserving of the rampant villification he got during his presidency. I truly believe that Bush does care about the country and truly was trying to improve things.

I find it very impressive that he was one of the few presidents who was willing to sit down and say "hey, here is where i screwed up", for example he has stated that he feels that he "over-trusted" a lot of his original advisor's and cabinet members, etc.

I truly do believe history will vindicate Bush, i can't say as much about Cheney.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2vTFesgMkzk

The diametrically opposed view to the links above! Not exactly balanced, though.

Hrimnir wrote:I truly believe that Bush does care about the country and truly was trying to improve things.

He messed up anyway. If he really cared and failed, he's either stupid or not fit for the job. If is clever and fit, he does not care. I cannot see how everything can be true at once.

At university (and I believe in any job) you are paid and/or promoted if you are successful, not if you try hard and fail. Actually, in Germany a phrase like "He always tried to fulfill his tasks at his best" in a reference actually means "He is useless. He was never able to do the job."

edit

Akerbos wrote:

Hrimnir wrote:I truly believe that Bush does care about the country and truly was trying to improve things.

He messed up anyway. If he really cared and failed, he's either stupid or not fit for the job. If is clever and fit, he does not care. I cannot see how everything can be true at once.

At university (and I believe in any job) you are paid and/or promoted if you are successful, not if you try hard and fail. Actually, in Germany a phrase like "He always tried to fulfill his tasks at his best" in a reference actually means "He is useless. He was never able to do the job."

Saying he failed is actually just false. Bush was one of the only presidents that did NOT make decision specifically based on how it will improve his approval rating. Though the decision to enter Iraq was questionable, that war hasn't been a failure. The economic situation absolutely can not be blamed on bush, that was the fault of both the democratic party, for pushing banks to give loans to high risk clients, and the republicans fault for pushing for deregulation. The combination of these two things are what caused the current financial situation. That was not bush's doing.

Whether you can see it or understand it as being the case, it is perfectly possible to have the right intentions, have a failure commence, and still be fit for the job.

I'll give you an easy example. Does the german football team score every time they kick the ball at the goal? No, as a matter of fact they fail far more than they succeed. Does that make them "stupid, and not fit for the job"?. Absolutely not. What makes you stupid and not fit for the job is a line of consistent failures.

The Bush Legacy...

"No Child left a dime!"


inappropriate and some might say wrong, but dammit it's funny!