BF2S Forums DAST Chat

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Shocking wrote:

I dunno if Bush was really that terrible, he wasn't a great public speaker and was dealt an extraordinarily bad hand with everything that happened under his presidency. I guess Iraq was a major fuckup though, meh.

I dislike cheney more, definitely.

obama is shit but he-ey lets not start forgiving bush already. bush was a fucking disaster. his ideology and his politics and his personality all sucked in the major league. he's a shit human being.

Yeah, but at least he was honest. The same can't be said for the current president which imo makes him much, much worse.

how the fuck in any way can you say the neo-cons were honest? what the fuck?

uuum

uuuum

what the fuck

Uzique wrote:

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

obama is shit but he-ey lets not start forgiving bush already. bush was a fucking disaster. his ideology and his politics and his personality all sucked in the major league. he's a shit human being.

Yeah, but at least he was honest. The same can't be said for the current president which imo makes him much, much worse.

how the fuck in any way can you say the neo-cons were honest? what the fuck?

uuum

uuuum

what the fuck

They never lied about their intentions. They straight up told people they were going to fuck them up the ass. You and I both disagree with the message but at least they were upfront about it. Obama is doing this whole doubletalk bullshit "oh, we're not doing regime change but we're helping the rebels remove gaddafi". wtf?

Uzique wrote:

Shocking wrote:

I dunno if Bush was really that terrible, he wasn't a great public speaker and was dealt an extraordinarily bad hand with everything that happened under his presidency. I guess Iraq was a major fuckup though, meh.

I dislike cheney more, definitely.

obama is shit but he-ey lets not start forgiving bush already. bush was a fucking disaster. his ideology and his politics and his personality all sucked in the major league. he's a shit human being.

I can say that I disagree with many of his policies but I don't think the shit state of world affairs is necessarily his fault, unlike what many people tend to believe. Most hate him for going to Afghanistan and Iraq, with one being, I would say, a pretty obvious result of 9/11 and the other being inevitable. The precedent for the war with Iraq was already set during the Clinton years, Saddam had to go end of, the man was a ticking timebomb.

Perhaps the timing was wrong in regards to public opinion, but that's more because the collective conscience is really just dumb more than anything. It can't look ahead, would waiting for the man to start gassing kurds or try to invade Kuwait again would have been better in reasons for garnering public support? Absolutely, but it wouldn't make the war any more or less legitimate. The whole WMD blabber makes it all look terrible though.

If anything I believe who failed were the people in the pentagon and the CIA, they fucked up really bad, yet the blame is all on the President. He couldn't have influenced any of their works, or barely to the point of making a difference; the man can't personally intervene in the details of intelligence ops or military doctrines.

Bad president? Yes, I believe so - his morals and way of doing things were way out of whack, but he wasn't near as bad as people make him out to be. Definitely not the worst I would say.

11 Bravo wrote:

zeek - i dont think anyone said redeem or even hinted at it.

Newp.

How was Bush a crook? I doubt very much that he profited personally from his presidency. We already established that he wasn't a liar. So what is it Uzique? I didn't like the guy as president but he's not nearly the bogeyman you're trying to paint him as.

Well, uh, I agree. I guess I just feel the man gets so much shit while he had to deal with lots of enormous disasters through his presidency, if I look at others in recent history (say, Kennedy) I feel that the shit that happens during the presidency seems to influence public opinion more than what the actual person was like/did.

I don't know enough about american presidents throughout history to confidently pick out any that were worse than Bush though. I've only consciously experienced 3 different ones thus far, Bush ranking lowest there most definitely.

Gitmo: I'll give you that one.

Bomb civilians: really? You think Bush advocated and/or approved the targeting of civilians? Have you started your weekend snort-fest a little early?

Katrina: Look more at New Orleans and Louisiana "leadership" than Bush for blame there. At least Bush accepted some responsibility for that...unlike Nagin or Lamereaux. It's called federal law.

Re-election debacle: what debacle would that be?

Passing legislation: Presidents don't pass legislation. Congress does. And the PATRIOT Act was passed (and renewed) with bipartisan support.

So...you're onefer. GG

add economic crash, katrina (which was terribly mismanaged, yeah), Iraq and so on. I would say 9/11 was one of the most significant events in modern american history though. Look where it got us, and in turn what that's causing.

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

i never said he profited personally. i didn't say he was a mubarak (though lets not talk about official and family foreign relations with dictators and despots). i just said he wasn't a fucking good leader. a leader is meant to be a role-model and a positive example and a strong individual. bush is a dumbass that rewrote the democratic rulebook for his neo-con cabal.

Personally, I'd rather have a weak leader that does nothing...

im not saying i'd rather have a weak leader

im just saying there's 101 other types of leader i'd rather have before a dumb nationalist crackpot with 2 flies inside his cranium for a brain

9/11 was significant but it's terribly short-sighted to let bush slide because he had to deal with that

it's like forgiving hitler because he had to deal with the economic and industrial fallout of the great war

it's not quite cricket

Uzique wrote:

Jay wrote:

Uzique wrote:

i never said he profited personally. i didn't say he was a mubarak (though lets not talk about official and family foreign relations with dictators and despots). i just said he wasn't a fucking good leader. a leader is meant to be a role-model and a positive example and a strong individual. bush is a dumbass that rewrote the democratic rulebook for his neo-con cabal.

Personally, I'd rather have a weak leader that does nothing...

im not saying i'd rather have a weak leader

im just saying there's 101 other types of leader i'd rather have before a dumb nationalist crackpot with 2 flies inside his cranium for a brain

9/11 was significant but it's terribly short-sighted to let bush slide because he had to deal with that

it's like forgiving hitler because he had to deal with the economic and industrial fallout of the great war

it's not quite cricket

Comparing Bush to Hitler? Now I definitely know you've made him your personal bogeyman. Like I keep telling you, check your sources for the cause of your biases. They filter through every time you enter a conversation here regarding American politics.

my sources for my biases? i don't know what you're talking about. i read all sorts of american literature from all ends of the spectrum-- i partly have to, for my course. you always attack my biases and talk about my 'reading' activities as if i'm a little budding marxist scholar underneath some pariah professor that has been exported from america for virulently seditious opinions. i probably read more about american politics and philosophy than you do, jesus. any small minor point i make here about america is commonly 'rebuffed' by two galt strategies: a) you don't live here, you're not america, nur-nur (and im never over-stepping this mark anyway) or b) you must be at a liberal-jew uni taking socialist studies. just... no

Absolutely. He was shit. The only thing anyone has said in this thread is that there are relative levels of shit and he is not near the bottom.



Why does something like this exist? It's not because people actually wish Bush was still in office. I'd say the majority of us are happy to see him go. It's because Obama could very well go down in history as an even worse president.

If you bothered to listen to the man describe the decision-making process he went through, the last thing you would ever describe him as is "dumb." Ineloquent, sure. But not dumb.