But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.I think George Bush was good for 9/11. I think he lead and handled 9/11 very well. As much as some people hated him or whatever... I still think most felt that George W was a capable leader that would keep America safe. He gave a lot of people a healthy dose of patriotism/nationalism that was needed.
If we had to go to a WW3 I would choose GWB over Obama without a slight hesitation. He's more competent in that area and doesn't give off the weakness I believe Obama can give.
I don't think GWB, like a lot of conspiracy people think, was a devious man. There are so many gears in the works everywhere and WW3 is on the doorstep every other day... that the public rarely ever knows about.
I did not like his domestic policies which includes no child left behind, and overspending in many areas. No economic solutions were preemptively imposed, just to be pushed back for another president to deal with.
So I think he was good and bad....
Are you kidding me? Approximately 5000 of our troops died in Iraq NEEDLESSLY because of President Bush. Bush's tax cuts, his war in Iraq and his Medicare Part "D" added significantly to the Debt. At the end of his presidency the country was losing 800K jobs a month.But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.
If we had to go to a WW3 I would choose GWB over Obama without a slight hesitation. He's more competent in that area and doesn't give off the weakness I believe Obama can give.
Bush brought stability to Iraq with the US and Coalition governments in place to prevent what we see there now. Bush also knew that the war on terrorists would take many years but Obama foolishly assumed that once Iraq was "stable", it would always remain that way.Are you kidding me? Approximately 5000 of our troops died in Iraq NEEDLESSLY because of President Bush. Bush's tax cuts, his war in Iraq and his Medicare Part "D" added significantly to the Debt. At the end of his presidency the country was losing 800K jobs a month. As for him being a good leader... He let Osama bin Laden escape at Tora Bora, Afghanistan.
But George W Bush was not only better for 9/11. In all the points he was a great president.
What do you think about the whole presidency of George W. Bush?
Bush brought stability to Iraq with the US and Coalition governments in place to prevent what we see there now. Bush also knew that the war on terrorists would take many years but Obama foolishly assumed that once Iraq was "stable", it would always remain that way.
As Bush said, Osama was not all that important apart from the symbolism. With OBL gone do you now see less terrorism in the world?
The US debt has achieved unmanageable heights since Barrack Obama came into office and with nothing to show for it. No one can look to anything he has done with those trillions of dollars borrowed and spent since he came into office. He has no positives anywhere.
The debate now is not whether Obama is the worst leader in American history but whether he has been the worst leader in any western democracy anywhere.
War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush
War vets miss commander in chief George W. Bush - The Washington Post
I bet they miss their legs more.
I bet they miss their legs more.
George W. Bush:
1) Allowed the greatest terrorist attack in the US which lost thousands of Americans' lives.
2) Took an economy that was generating a surplus revenue and after tax cuts and deregulation managed to create the worst economic crisis of the last half century which we're still recovering from.
3) Started two wars which killed tens of thousands and wasted countless amounts of treasure and resources.
George W. Bush:
1) Allowed the greatest terrorist attack in the US which lost thousands of Americans' lives.
President Bush just continued with President Clinton's failed anti terrorist policies.
But Bush didn't spend eight years blaming those failed policies on Clinton that Al Qaeda wasn't a national security issue but a law enforcement issue. Or Clinton's Attorney General Janet Reno's "wall" that didn't allow intelligence agencies and law enforcement to share information with each other that prevented the dots being connected.
President Bush just continued with President Clinton's failed anti terrorist policies.
But Bush didn't spend eight years blaming those failed policies on Clinton that Al Qaeda wasn't a national security issue but a law enforcement issue. Or Clinton's Attorney General Janet Reno's "wall" that didn't allow intelligence agencies and law enforcement to share information with each other that prevented the dots being connected.
Not to mention Clinton deliberately declining to take out bin Laden when he had the chance.
If only he did that there would have been no 911. Bush decided that Saddam Hussien was more important than Bin Laden and chose to ignore all the warnings about an attack from Alqueada. Clinton told Bush to watch out for Bin Laden and Bush ignored him. That is the sad truth.
Bush brought INSTABILITY to the entire Middle East with his ill advised invasion of Iraq and the installing of a Shia Iranian sympathizer as leader of Iraq. It has caused the rise of Sunni terrorists seeking to restore the balance between the sects.
Every President every day are briefed every morning except maybe Obama of a possible terrorist attack on America. 99.99% it never pans out.
It was political correctness that allowed the Clinton State Department to issue visas to the Al Qaeda terrorist and it was political correctness that allowed the eleven terrorist to board the three aircraft on the morning of 9-11-01.
9/11 warnings: not a surprise attack nor intelligence "failure""I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."
-- Condoleeza Rice May 16 2002 Press Conference:
"The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning."
-- CIA Intelligence Report for President Bush, July 2001
Indeed, the administration's level of inaction was so negligent that senior intelligence officials actually considered resigning, so as not to be in a position of responsibility when the attack took place:
"Officials at the Counterterrorism Center of the C.I.A. grew apoplectic. On July 9, at a meeting of the counterterrorism group, one official suggested that the staff put in for a transfer so that somebody else would be responsible when the attack took place, two people who were there told me in interviews. The suggestion was batted down, they said, because there would be no time to train anyone else."
For a long time, the administration successfully covered up this series of events, by employing the clever strategy of revealing a small and ultimately misleading part of the truth: In April 2004, it declassified a single daily briefing, that featured the startling headline "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," but on closer examination did not contain much in the way of specifics regarding the attack, which took place just 35 days after the memo's printing.
Releasing this single briefing was deeply misleading, because it gave the impression that the administration had been given just one rather vague warning about the impending attack, rather than a series of much more concrete briefings, which ought to have put the government on high alert. The shocking truth, if Eichenwald is correct, is that the Bush administration was told enough in advance about the nature and timing of the 9/11 attacks that it could quite possibly have stopped them, but, for whatever reason, President Bush and his advisers chose to ignore those warnings. (According to Eichenwald, some White House neocons believed, "Bin Laden was merely pretending to be planning an attack to distract the administration from Saddam Hussein, whom the neoconservatives saw as a greater threat.")
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?