Bush, a poor manager of ................

rabel22 wrote:

CI
Do you really think that Bush started this war for our security? Or was it for his and his friends enrichment?

Well, that's what the Bush apologists use as the current justification. Are you familiar with ican?

0 Replies

CI
I don't think I am familiar with it. I looked it up on the internet but don't think I need a cesarian. Are you hinting that someone needs to evaluate my mental capacity. Those were the only references I could find to ican.

0 Replies

Here's an example of ican's post:

ican711nm
Veteran Member

Joined: 30 Jul 2003
Posts: 8265
Location: Texas
Posted: October 24th 2007, 23:50 Post: 2914108 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hamburger wrote:
ican keeps repeating :

Quote:
We must win and succeed in Iraq, because we Americans will suffer significant losses of our freedoms, if we do not win and succeed in Iraq.

i wonder what words of wisdom ican can offer the iraq veterans who spoke to admiral mullen ?

as one of them said :
Quote:
"When it becomes a burden to my family, sir, that's repulsive," said the captain, who, like his fellow officers, could not be quoted by name without granting permission.

another one said that his wife often can't find a doctor when their child gets sick .

it seems to me that if those soldiers "... must win and succeed in Iraq, because we Americans will suffer significant losses of our freedoms, if we do not win and succeed in Iraq ..." as ican says , they should expect the full and unstinting support of america .
a/t to those soldiers that kind of support is missing . surely , those defending the country should not have to worry about the small things in the lifes of their families , should they ?

if "We must win and succeed in Iraq" is of paramount importance , should it not be just as important to say : "we must support our troops and their families fully " ?
from what i keep reading , something seems to be missing .
hbg

ican wrote:
YES, because winning and succeeding in Iraq "is of paramount importance," it is just as important that "we must support our troops and their families fully" adequately.

The incompetence of the present administration in accomplishing this does not change one iota the fact that winning and succeeding in Iraq "is of paramount importance,"

Typical ican post; he talks about "success," but doesn't define what "success" he's talking about. He doesn't provide any detail of how to accomplish this "success," or how long it''ll take (the cost to US taxpayers, and US soldiers lives and their families). He also doesn't explain how we will lose our freedoms and security.

0 Replies

Sorry. I should have recognized the posters name. But he is one of the people I just scan because I disagree with most of his beliefs. Not much sense in debating with someone who refuses to acknowledge facts.

0 Replies

I see Bush following in the same footsteps of traveling more to forieign countries, because he isn't going to get anything done in the US. He'll enjoy the welcome parties and notices in the local media all over the world. He and his wife and smile for the cameras.

0 Replies

C I
He is the only one President who had enjoyed the maximum holidays in 7 years.
Now He should struggle hard to prepare a fine speech at the end of this month.

0 Replies

Rama, He has speech writers for that purpose; he's been on vacation for seven years; what makes you think he works at all? LOL

0 Replies

The less Dubyah is there at the helm,. the better off we all are. Let's be accurate here. He is NOT the only President who took the maximum time off. What makes you think Reagan wasn't on vacation most of the time, too?! Have you such a short memory? This type of part- time Presidency is not new, by any means.

0 Replies

Here is a wonderful assessment of Bush's 7 year rule

Bush's Final Year

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Wednesday, January 2, 2008; 12:38 PM

As President Bush begins his final year in office, the White House is aiming for one last major domestic legislative triumph: permanent expansion of government spy powers, including retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that assisted in warrantless surveillance.
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/

0 Replies

How George Bush's wartime administration used a magician,
Hollywood designers and
Karl Rove telling 1,001 stories to sell the invasion of Iraq.

http://mondediplo.com/2008/01/04scheherazade

0 Replies

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush
The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/12/bush200712

0 Replies

Rama, I don't think any guess of an economic recovery after Bush is realistic. The world economy has changed dramatically to the point that all the negatives created by Bush will remain for the long-term.

The US currency is losing value against all major currencies. That alone is a handicap that will require long-term cures. On top of all that, the federal deficit continues to grow at a time when American wages are stagnant, and more are losing health insurance and their homes.

As the US currency losses value, cost of energy will increase for all Americans, and add cost to our products and services.

I do not fear China's economic growth; they have bigger problems of pollution and shortage of fresh water. That'll control their future growth.
The cost of energy also increases for China, because they peg their currency with the US dollar; a big mistake on their part. They already suffer from fuel shortages; we have seen lines of trucks waiting for fuel at gas stations. They continue to build more cars that will exacerbate their fuel shortage problems.

There is no short-term solution for the damage Bush has wrought this world with his two wars, our economy, and the growing federal deficit.

The next president will not be able to scratch at the surface to repair what we have lost over the past seven years.

0 Replies

Most Americans have long ago now reached two conclusions about their government. First, that George W. Bush is an incompetent president with, additionally, a temperament ill-suited to the job. And second, that his grand project - the invasion of Iraq - was a major mistake.

Both these conclusions are absolutely incorrect. But only by omission. They are, in fact, quite accurate as far as they go - it's just that they don't go nearly far enough.

Bush is incompetent and Iraq is likely the greatest foreign policy blunder in two-plus centuries of American history. But to say that - and particularly to say that alone - does not truly do justice to either disaster, Bush or his war. The truth about this president and his motives for war are far, far uglier than the words 'incompetence' or 'mistake' imply.
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print/11434

0 Replies

"We're paying the price today for the overselling of globalization, the fact that those who pushed globalization in both parties were unwilling to face up to the downside risks and take actions to mitigate them," said Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist.

"It also in part is a consequence of the failure of the Bush administration to put in place adequate regulatory standards in a host of areas," Stiglitz said.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/08/business/rtrecon.php

0 Replies

Here's another case of the Bush screwups; now we've gone full circle to get back to where we should have started and ended our "war."

Anti-terror focus returns to Afghanistan, Pakistan

0 Replies

c.i. quoted :

Quote:

Anti-terror focus returns to Afghanistan, Pakistan

i hope that is not too late to re-focus .
see below from recent BBC report :

Quote:

The former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown has been negotiating terms for a new role in Afghanistan co-ordinating the international effort and its links with the Karzai government - a job locally nicknamed the "super gorilla".

He comes with experience from a similar role in Bosnia, but Afghanistan is a far larger task as he acknowledged recently, going as far as saying,
"We have lost and success is unlikely".

read complete post :
WE HAVE LOST....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i just finished reading

0 Replies

It's refreshing to hear somebody actually mouthing those words, "We have lost and success is unlikely". We all know those words will never be spoken by Bush or any of his henchmen/women.

0 Replies

i hit the submit button before i finished my entry .
trying again !
hbg

c.i. quoted :

Quote:

Anti-terror focus returns to Afghanistan, Pakistan

i hope that is not too late to re-focus .
see below from recent BBC report :

Quote:

The former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown has been negotiating terms for a new role in Afghanistan co-ordinating the international effort and its links with the Karzai government - a job locally nicknamed the "super gorilla".

He comes with experience from a similar role in Bosnia, but Afghanistan is a far larger task as he acknowledged recently, going as far as saying,
"We have lost and success is unlikely".

read complete post :
WE HAVE LOST....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i just finished reading THE CARPET WARS by christopher kremmer (see book review here) .
kremmer lived all over asia and the middle-east for 10 years and wrote the book just after the 2001 attack on NYC .
reading this book and many others on this subject of the middle-east and central asia (pakistan , india , afghanistan , the NEW republics formed after the breakup of the soviet-union ) does not give me ANY confidence that solutions can be imposed by any weatern nations - no matter what .
the solutions will have to come from the people and governments of the region . western nations can OFFER their assistance , but can not offer a solution imo .

i find it rather interesting that nations of asia and the middle-east that would seem to have some understanding of the problems - such as japan , south-korea , even india , saudi-arabia , singapore - are holding back . they seem to think that solutions will have to be local ones - that is my impression .

westerners - as nations and governments - seem to have little knowledge of what makes the people of the middle-east and asia tick . they seem to think that they have some ready made solutions that can be pulled out of a drawer like a pencil and a piece of paper - what they really need is PATIENCE - and that is hard to come by in the west imo .
hbg

0 Replies

just came acrosss the blogsite BIG THINK - see link .
the following entry makes me think even more that the west may not have it right .
the question is : can it be corrected

Quote:

Is the West Intellectually Arrogant?
Yesterday, Pakistan's President Musharraf made headlines for calling out the "intellectual arrogance" in the West, which, he said, "thinks that these developing countries are some kind of people who do not know how to govern, they do not know anything." Musharraf, of course, has been under siege both by his own people and his international allies, and it could be easy to write off his comments as an attempt to signal to the US that he is not their pauper puppet, and to his own people that he is willing to stand up to major world powers.

But maybe there is something else folded up inside Musharraf's comments that should grab our attention. Has the U.S. overstepped its bounds as the world's post-Cold War darling? Peter Beinart, an editor at The New Republic and a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, says that we've become self-conscious in our foreign policy ever since, riding a wage of confidence after WWII, we bungled Vietnam and now, it seems, Iraq. Though our over-confidence may have led to some of our more recent foreign policy disasters, Beinart thinks we still have achieved a fair amount of success.

link :
BIG THINK

0 Replies

Bush, a poor manager of ................

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know