What will be George W. Bush's legacy?

[snipaw26]

Five, ten or twenty years down the road how will George W. Bush be remembered?

[Bipolar]

Who?

[mstad]

http://forums.webrats.com/forum34.html


I think that's where you're trying to post.

[BackdoorJesus]

moved to Edge Of The Hole - more appropriate forum for these kind of threads; we like to keep it light in Bottom of the Hole.

[Juan.Camaney]

Good move, BDJ, although we don't really moderate the BOTH, lets try and keep political discussion in here.

George W will be remembered for having liberated Iraq, put a big dent on terrorists, and restoring the nation's military.

[93crawler]

The worst President in history, an overwhelming majority of historians already think as much. I'm sure there are a plethora of scandals yet to surface--I'm sure the paper-shredder is working overtime up until January 20th.

[snipaw26]

He has managed to keep us from being reattacked after 9/11.

[93crawler]

And? Your point is? My Mom's cat could have kept us safe after 9/11. Does he deserve much, if any credit for this? Has he implemented any of the 9/11 commission's recommendations yet? Are the ports or borders safe?

[CD]

Good move, BDJ, although we don't really moderate the BOTH, lets try and keep political discussion in here.

George W will be remembered for having liberated Iraq, put a big dent on terrorists, and restoring the nation's military.
As well as borrowed more money then all previous 42 presidents combined, OK'd sending suspects overseas to be tortured and denied American Civil Liberties, and increased the size of government substantially.

HAHaha, figures you would bring your Mother's Pussy into this!!!! :bowrofl:
This isn't BOTH, JRH.

[schutzenkonig]

The worst President in history, an overwhelming majority of historians already think as much. I'm sure there are a plethora of scandals yet to surface--I'm sure the paper-shredder is working overtime up until January 20th.
Bullshit...Buchanan was. The only people who think Bush is the worst in history are those that don't know it.

If people remember what actually happened, they'll remember that Bush liberated Iraq from an oppressive ruler and was openly vilified by the media many times on warrentless ground, so much so that it is difficult to figure out what is fact and fiction.

[CD]

Bullshit...Buchanan was. The only people who think Bush is the worst in history are those that don't know it.

If people remember what actually happened, they'll remember that Bush liberated Iraq from an oppressive ruler and was openly vilified by the media many times on warrentless ground, so much so that it is difficult to figure out what is fact and fiction.
FACT: Bush took his eyes off Afghanistan to focus on Iraq. (there are oppressive rulers elsewhere too)

FACT: Bush sent prisoners to Cuba to be illegally tortured indefinitely in order to bypass the American court system's "fair and speedy trial".

FACT: Bush was on vacation more then any other US President.

[schutzenkonig]

FACT: Bush took his eyes off Afghanistan to focus on Iraq. (there are oppressive rulers elsewhere too)

FACT: Bush sent prisoners to Cuba to be illegally tortured indefinitely in order to bypass the American court system's "fair and speedy trial".

FACT: Bush was on vacation more then any other US President.

FACT: Saddam murdered his own people with chemical weapons, weapons that the left is trying to say he never had. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack as an example.

FACT: Bush can be "on vacation" while still performing duties. Those numbers included in that account have time spent at working at Camp David or the time at the ranch in TX that he still worked as President via conference calls and webinars, etc.

FACT: Those are prisoners of war, not criminals that fall under the US Code.

[ravenshrike]

And? Your point is? My Mom's cat could have kept us safe after 9/11. Does he deserve much, if any credit for this? Has he implemented any of the 9/11 commission's recommendations yet? Are the ports or borders safe?
And you came to this wonderfully logical deduction HOW exactly? Eh, forget I asked, you won't have a remotely coherent and logical answer. The president has direct control solely over the executive branch. Basically all those alphabet agencies. All budgets for things like border control and port authority funds MUST be put through congress. Seeing as any serious attempt to guard the borders and even remotely attempt to get proper port scanning would cost money there's no way congress would authorize it since that would take money away from their precious entitlement programs.

[snipaw26]

See as congress does have a lot to do with everything going on. I have to agree with ravenshrike.

Part of the reason we went into Iraq was that the intelligence agencies of a number of countries, not just the US, said there were WMDs. They were gassing their own people, they were a threat to world piece and yes the oil supplies and something needed to be done. I do think the US underestimated the help the Iraqi people would provide. Many of them didn't want to fight for their own freedom ... maybe they had no concept of freedom?

[Krasch]

See as congress does have a lot to do with everything going on. I have to agree with ravenshrike.

Part of the reason we went into Iraq was that the intelligence agencies of a number of countries, not just the US, said there were WMDs. They were gassing their own people, they were a threat to world piece and yes the oil supplies and something needed to be done. I do think the US underestimated the help the Iraqi people would provide. Many of them didn't want to fight for their own freedom ... maybe they had no concept of freedom?
EXACTLY FLIPPIN' RIGHT!

Back in the day, the head of the UN inspection team in Iraq himself said during press conferences that just because they had not found WMDs did not at all mean that Saddam didn't necessarily still have some.

Archeologists have never found the grave of Chinggis (Genghis being a mistranslation of the name) Khan but that doesn't at all mean he's not in one somewhere out there in Mongolia.

[Car Enthusiast]

even though bush did have his faults and a lot of them, people will say he was a good president in 10 years, wait and see crawler and CD

[Juan.Camaney]

People used to say the same thing about Reagen and now a days he's a freaking hero. Trust me, he will be remembered positively.

For those who think war involves kittens licking people until they die, get a grip. War is torture, and sometimes a necessary evil.

For those who think a kitten could have kept us safe after 9-11, get real. The US needs a strong military, like it or lump it. So many attempts have been stopped after 9-11 but the media won't cover it. If you don't live in a large urban area, it's hard to understand how many people actually fit into such small spaces. Try and remember all of the I <3 NYFD shirts and when everyone was a patriot. This is what people asked for. This is what we got. Now that our eyes are open to what a war actually is you want to back down? We have literaly thousands of kids out there protecting your right to sit on your ass and bash our president. It's pretty simple, really. If you are sitting here on WR, a highly offensive website to the muslim world, you probably owe it to a soldier....bonus points for reading it in english. Also, don't forget to thank GWB for not half assing it either.

[93crawler]

It's funny that since the Democrat's took over Congress in 06, Republican's are uber-quick to blame them for anything and everything that goes wrong. Didn't Republicans control all branches of government for a number of years? Why couldn't they get much accomplished during then? Don't even attempt to say it was the Democrat's fault, because they caved in to Bush anyway.

I also find it funny how some of you are voicing your support for a President with a mid twenties approval rating......the lowest in recorded history! Yeah, he's definitely going to bounce back from that :rolleyes:. Face it, Bush was, and will be a fuck up. Not one, but four disasters under his watch. Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, and the economic catastrophe. Yeah, your boy has been real good :rolleyes:.

Finally, the nation is trending left more and more, you conservatives had better get used to it. Old fucks are dying, and the baby boomer generation replacing them grew up during the JFK years, and Woodstock. As the white population in this country decreases, Democrat's will only further their gains. The days of Republican's ruining the country are numbered.

[Krasch]

It's funny that since the Democrat's took over Congress in 06, Republican's are uber-quick to blame them for anything and everything that goes wrong. Didn't Republicans control all branches of government for a number of years? Why couldn't they get much accomplished during then? Don't even attempt to say it was the Democrat's fault, because they caved in to Bush anyway.

I also find it funny how some of you are voicing your support for a President with a mid twenties approval rating......the lowest in recorded history! Yeah, he's definitely going to bounce back from that :rolleyes:. Face it, Bush was, and will be a fuck up. Not one, but four disasters under his watch. Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, and the economic catastrophe. Yeah, your boy has been real good :rolleyes:.

Finally, the nation is trending left more and more, you conservatives had better get used to it. Old fucks are dying, and the baby boomer generation replacing them grew up during the JFK years, and Woodstock. As the white population in this country decreases, Democrat's will only further their gains. The days of Republican's ruining the country are numbered.

Hurricane Katrina - Blaming GWB for this one is really stretching it. One, it's a natural disaster that no one has any control over. And two, yes FEMA f**ked up on Bush's watch, but it's not like GWB runs FEMA, works for FEMA, or has anything to do with FEMA besides it being a government organization. Would you also blame a shareholder at McDonalds if some kid gets your order wrong? Or maybe the kid himeself or perhaps his boss for not training him well enough.

9/11 -Bush was barely President when it happened and at the time, hadn't done much of anything in office. It likely would have happened regardless of who was in office, why are we blaming GWB for something the radical Islamists did?

The economic collapse -Most good economists will point out that the seeds of this one started decades ago, long before GWB, and it would have happened anyway. It was just a matter of exactly when the shoe dropped. It's not like the President sets monetary or fiscal policy, the Fed Chairman and Secretary of the Treasury do that. For most of Bush's terms in office, the Fed Chairman was Alan Greenspan, and he dates back in that job to the Reagan era. Bush had pretty much squat to do with this one, yet you want to blame him?

Iraq - Now THIS one, you MIGHT have a leg to stand on. But there are some issues. The UN inspectors before the war believed Saddam might have weapons of mass destruction,. and you had three separate countries' intelligence services providing equivocal intel that Saddam was working on WMDs. Faced with conflicting intel from many sources, with even the UN boys not ruling out the WMDs, a lot of reasonable people might very well have come up with the same conclusion and made the case for war. And once commited and into it, it's a lot harder to extricate yourself as opposed to not getting in there in the first place..

As for the country leaning increasingly left, I wouldn't be too sure of that lest you be counting barnyard fowl still in the egg. Yes, Barrack had a huge win. But it WAS against an opponent/party with a currently VERY unpopular President at the helm as well as a poorly run campaign. Abe Lincoln himself would likely have lost this year as a Republican. That doesn't mean the country has suddenly turned Democrat. Barrack got just over 50% of the popular vote and many people were likely voting Bush out, not Barrack in per se.

Now if Obama had pulled off a victory against say, the incumbent Vice-President of a very popular sitting President like someone we all know did in 2000 then you would have a better case for a shift in voter idealogy. (And yes it was clearly a Bush victory despite the crap in Florida. One, a FULL recount of Florida votes would have extended Bush's lead there, not changed the result. And two, as the VP under the beloved Clinton, Gore SHOULD have by all rights wiped the floor with Bush. The fact that it was even close meant a victory for Bush.)

I'm not at all saying that Bush is the best thing since sliced toast, he certainly isn't. But if the people can and have formed a love-in for Richard Nixon these days, even Bush will find history much kinder to him in 20 years time than now, even if he has to die first before you se a major shift in his "legacy".

[ravenshrike]

See as congress does have a lot to do with everything going on. I have to agree with ravenshrike.

Part of the reason we went into Iraq was that the intelligence agencies of a number of countries, not just the US, said there were WMDs. They were gassing their own people, they were a threat to world piece and yes the oil supplies and something needed to be done. I do think the US underestimated the help the Iraqi people would provide. Many of them didn't want to fight for their own freedom ... maybe they had no concept of freedom?


Interestingly the reason the CIA fumbled so very badly(assuming they fumbled at all, there were indicators to the contrary, but the only way to pursue those indicators would have been to declare war on Syria as well.) was because that idiot Clinton thought SigInt could do everything HumInt could and so effectively gutted the CIA's HumInt program.

[Greven359]

I think in the next 5 to 10 years, he will continued to be hated, but the further we get away from his terms in office, the more favorable history will look at him. I believe that his low approval rating (which is TWICE that of Congress) is due to him being willing to make choices that are unpopular but needed.

[Juan.Camaney]

As far as the economy, isn't George really restoring it to how the democrats gave it to him?

Weren't the dikes in Katrina (ths one I know for sure cuz I worked for USACE) messed up way before and it was an engineering disaster waiting to happen?

Don't Iraqis have a surplus economy, a better way of life and thankfull for having Psodom out?

and everyone and their mother's praised the way George handled 9-11, in fact his aprproval raitings were sky high at around that point.

[joerockhead]

It is kinda funny, that back in 2006, the economy was showing signs of instability, and yet the Stock Market was at an all time high.

In 2005, GWB asked Republican Congress to investigate the loan industry, and ensure they where being fair and working smartly. They Blew him off.
After the Democrats took control, GWB once again asked Congress (now Democrat controlled) to review the loan industry. They too refused.
The President could do no more in this regard, as he does not control that area. (Anyone with intelligence would know that).

AS for Katrina, GWB did not insist hard enough for the people in the area to leave, and he did not have a shovel in hand to help properly build the dykes. It has to be his fault.
And since the roads where cluttered with abandoned cars, FEMA had a little trouble getting to N.O.

Most people acknowledge that the Government is at fault, not just eh democrats, but the republicans. Only a few ignorant people blame one party.

As for Democratic Control, we see where this is going to go already, the DEMS want to bail out the Big3 no matter what. And the New kids coming up, want socialism so they can get free shit vice working and earning it.

That will truly be the demise of the USA. Not the Republicans.

Well, it was fun and I enjoyed being free for over 40 years of my life. In 10 years, we will be Little Russia, with all the Obama lovers singing his songs and praising him, the USA will become the UUSA. :ugh:

[Krasch]

It is kinda funny, that back in 2006, the economy was showing signs of instability, and yet the Stock Market was at an all time high.

In 2005, GWB asked Republican Congress to investigate the loan industry, and ensure they where being fair and working smartly. They Blew him off.
After the Democrats took control, GWB once again asked Congress (now Democrat controlled) to review the loan industry. They too refused.
The President could do no more in this regard, as he does not control that area. (Anyone with intelligence would know that).

AS for Katrina, GWB did not insist hard enough for the people in the area to leave, and he did not have a shovel in hand to help properly build the dykes. It has to be his fault.
And since the roads where cluttered with abandoned cars, FEMA had a little trouble getting to N.O.

Most people acknowledge that the Government is at fault, not just eh democrats, but the republicans. Only a few ignorant people blame one party.

As for Democratic Control, we see where this is going to go already, the DEMS want to bail out the Big3 no matter what. And the New kids coming up, want socialism so they can get free shit vice working and earning it.

That will truly be the demise of the USA. Not the Republicans.

Well, it was fun and I enjoyed being free for over 40 years of my life. In 10 years, we will be Little Russia, with all the Obama lovers singing his songs and praising him, the USA will become the UUSA. :ugh:
TRue enough, although I'm not sure GWB should HAVE to insist that people in the area evacuate for their own safety. After all, it's not like the people were unaccustomed to what large hurricanes can do, they knew it was coming, and they knew the city was below sea level for cripes sake. Common sense alone should tell you it isn't smart to rely on some paltry levies to keep you safe in that situation.

And yeah the new kids do want socialism and geting free stuff, because this modern "don't spark, don't discipline yer kids" generation has by and large never made sure these kids learn what "no" is, and that you can't have everything you want all the time. These kids have a grossly inflated sense of self-entilement that older generations got weaned out of at an early age.

[93crawler]

It is kinda funny, that back in 2006, the economy was showing signs of instability, and yet the Stock Market was at an all time high.

In 2005, GWB asked Republican Congress to investigate the loan industry, and ensure they where being fair and working smartly. They Blew him off.
After the Democrats took control, GWB once again asked Congress (now Democrat controlled) to review the loan industry. They too refused.
The President could do no more in this regard, as he does not control that area. (Anyone with intelligence would know that).

AS for Katrina, GWB did not insist hard enough for the people in the area to leave, and he did not have a shovel in hand to help properly build the dykes. It has to be his fault.
And since the roads where cluttered with abandoned cars, FEMA had a little trouble getting to N.O.

Most people acknowledge that the Government is at fault, not just eh democrats, but the republicans. Only a few ignorant people blame one party.

As for Democratic Control, we see where this is going to go already, the DEMS want to bail out the Big3 no matter what. And the New kids coming up, want socialism so they can get free shit vice working and earning it.

That will truly be the demise of the USA. Not the Republicans.

Well, it was fun and I enjoyed being free for over 40 years of my life. In 10 years, we will be Little Russia, with all the Obama lovers singing his songs and praising him, the USA will become the UUSA. :ugh:
I honestly don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously? For the record, I didn't in any way state that any of the above disasters were Bush's fault. What I did say is that they occurred under his watch, and regardless of how much you conservatives love Bush, he has fucked up a staggering number of things.

Excuse me while I go rehearse for choir practice, all of us sheep are going down to the Civic center to sing "praise Obama, oh Lord praise Obama" :rolleyes:. After this, we're holding a rally where we demand free everything, while not working for any of it :rolleyes:. Then we're going to go have a tofu party, and talk about hippie things, and smoke a lot of weed :rolleyes:. If I'm not being facetious enough, let me know, I'll try harder.

[snipaw26]

Plus the government can't send in the FEMA or troops until the Governor asks for help and the Governor of Louisiana delayed asking for help.

[joerockhead]

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously? For the record, I didn't in any way state that any of the above disasters were Bush's fault. What I did say is that they occurred under his watch, and regardless of how much you conservatives love Bush, he has fucked up a staggering number of things.

Excuse me while I go rehearse for choir practice, all of us sheep are going down to the Civic center to sing "praise Obama, oh Lord praise Obama" :rolleyes:. After this, we're holding a rally where we demand free everything, while not working for any of it :rolleyes:. Then we're going to go have a tofu party, and talk about hippie things, and smoke a lot of weed :rolleyes:. If I'm not being facetious enough, let me know, I'll try harder.



You forgot to add "Train my Mommy's kitty, so he can defend the USA".

:mstad:

[yellowfish]

He has managed to keep us from being reattacked after 9/11.

well seriously i think the taliban planned this
1 attack
after this attack you use fear
constant warnings a bigger one is coming
once everyone is paranoid they will spend all thier money keeping up security
essentualy bankrupting your country
its the art of war
winning without fighting
its simple

sorry i think you have been duped into beliving you are in danger
when you are scared you listen to "big brother"
you feel ok with the idea of giving up some of your freedoms

:jimi:

[snipaw26]

Well he's done a good job of keeping us safe. I am glad I haven't lost any more relatives because of what President Bush has done.

[Krasch]

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously? For the record, I didn't in any way state that any of the above disasters were Bush's fault. What I did say is that they occurred under his watch, and regardless of how much you conservatives love Bush, he has fucked up a staggering number of things.

Excuse me while I go rehearse for choir practice, all of us sheep are going down to the Civic center to sing "praise Obama, oh Lord praise Obama" :rolleyes:. After this, we're holding a rally where we demand free everything, while not working for any of it :rolleyes:. Then we're going to go have a tofu party, and talk about hippie things, and smoke a lot of weed :rolleyes:. If I'm not being facetious enough, let me know, I'll try harder.
You wrote, "Not one, but four disasters under his watch. Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, and the economic catastrophe. Yeah, your boy has been real good."

That's a pretty clear implication that he was responsible, even if you didn't intend it to be so. If he's not responsible then there's no good reason to mention them at all while you're in the middle of criticizing the job he's done.

Bush has done far from a stellar job, but I've little doubt history will look beyond events that happened to coincide with his presidency when deciding his legacy.

[Krasch]

TRue enough, although I'm not sure GWB should HAVE to insist that people in the area evacuate for their own safety. After all, it's not like the people were unaccustomed to what large hurricanes can do, they knew it was coming, and they knew the city was below sea level for cripes sake. Common sense alone should tell you it isn't smart to rely on some paltry levies to keep you safe in that situation.

And yeah the new kids do want socialism and geting free stuff, because this modern "don't spank, don't discipline yer kids" generation has by and large never made sure these kids learn what "no" is, and that you can't have everything you want all the time. These kids have a grossly inflated sense of self-entilement that older generations got weaned out of at an early age.
I meant spank not spark in that original post.... damn typos...

[MrEfrisk]

He will be remembered for bringing the budget deficit to billions of dollars and for being the worst president in US history

[shiiboi]

Ultimately, future historians will consider Bush's legacy in the context of whatever happens during that next decade that was set in motion by Bush's actions. i.e., does the Iraq war lead to more or less stability in the middle east.

Personally, I believe that W will never escape being tied to the economic meltdown, much as Nixon will always be remembered mostly for the watergate scandal.

But here's what W believes:
Bush wants history to see him as a liberator of millions
Nov 28 02:53 PM US/Eastern
George W. Bush hopes history will see him as a president who liberated millions of Iraqis and Afghans, who worked towards peace and who never sold his soul for political ends.

"I'd like to be a president (known) as somebody who liberated 50 million people and helped achieve peace," Bush said in excerpts of a recent interview released by the White House Friday.

"I would like to be a person remembered as a person who, first and foremost, did not sell his soul in order to accommodate the political process. I came to Washington with a set of values, and I'm leaving with the same set of values."

He also said he wanted to be seen as a president who helped individuals, "that rallied people to serve their neighbor; that led an effort to help relieve HIV/AIDS and malaria on places like the continent of Africa; that helped elderly people get prescription drugs and Medicare as a part of the basic package."

Bush added that every day during his eight-year presidency he had consulted the Bible and drawn comfort from his faith.

"I would advise politicians, however, to be careful about faith in the public arena," the US leader said in the interview with his sister Doro Bush Koch recorded as part of an oral history program known as Storycorps.

As his second term in office draws to an end, Bush joked he would miss some of the trappings that come with the presidency such as trips on Air Force One, never being stuck in a traffic jam, and the president's residence at Camp David.

But he said he was glad to be stepping back into the shadows.

"Frankly, I'm not going to miss the limelight all that much. It's been a fabulous experience to be the president ... But it will be nice to see the Klieg lights shift somewhere else."

The interview, which Bush recorded with First Lady Laura Bush, will be stored in the library of Congress and a museum devoted to the Bush presidency.

[ronnym]

I would like to think he will be remembered in a positive light. Because of the way the media portrayed the war, it was very unpopular. He knew what was right and didn't care about political pressure, opinions of the uninformed or biased, or what his legacy would be (something that the egotistical Clinton obsessed about).

The only thing that may hurt his legacy is the liberal media and the liberals that write (or rewrite) the history books.

My hope is that Obama will bring about another Reagan (just like Carter did).

[ddoubleez]

See as congress does have a lot to do with everything going on. I have to agree with ravenshrike.

Part of the reason we went into Iraq was that the intelligence agencies of a number of countries, not just the US, said there were WMDs. They were gassing their own people, they were a threat to world piece and yes the oil supplies and something needed to be done. I do think the US underestimated the help the Iraqi people would provide. Many of them didn't want to fight for their own freedom ... maybe they had no concept of freedom?


Wrong we knew that the letter about yellow cake from Niger was a fake and the CIA even ordered it removed from a speech...

In early October 2002, George Tenet called Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley to ask him to remove reference to the Niger uranium from a speech Bush was to give in Cincinnati on October 7. This was followed up by a memo asking Hadley to remove another, similar line. Another memo was sent to the White House expressing the CIA's view that the Niger claims were false; this memo was given to both Hadley and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

In his January 2003 State of the Union speech, U.S. President George W. Bush said, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."[2] This single sentence, known now as the infamous "Sixteen Words,"[3] would become a crucial justification of the administration's decision to conduct an invasion of Iraq less than three months later.

The administration later conceded that evidence in support of the claim was inconclusive and stated, "These sixteen words should never have been included." The administration attributed the error to the CIA.[4] In mid-2003, the U.S. government declassified the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, which contained a dissenting opinion published by the U.S. Department of State stating that the intelligence connecting Niger to Saddam Hussein was "highly suspect," primarily because State Department's intelligence agency analysts did not believe that Niger would be likely to engage in such a transaction due to a French consortium which maintained close control over the Nigerien uranium industry.



And we did not underestimate the help from the Iraqi people we stopped it, and even refused to set up martial law to protect them, effectively allowing them to dismantle their own country.........

[ddoubleez]

You wrote, "Not one, but four disasters under his watch. Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, and the economic catastrophe. Yeah, your boy has been real good."

That's a pretty clear implication that he was responsible, even if you didn't intend it to be so. If he's not responsible then there's no good reason to mention them at all while you're in the middle of criticizing the job he's done.

Bush has done far from a stellar job, but I've little doubt history will look beyond events that happened to coincide with his presidency when deciding his legacy.


His response to all of these crisis would call his integraty into question....

h8umoDbzdlo

ZUD4MG7kw44

yizJK3_Hi6o&feature=related

And the economic catastrophe came from bush deregulation in 2002.... People do not argue this...

[Krasch]

His response to all of these crisis would call his integraty into question....

And the economic catastrophe came from bush deregulation in 2002.... People do not argue this...
Umm, if they're in the field of finances and economics yes they do. Uninformed left wingers don't argue it.

Certainly deregulation was a major factor, but so were the Clintonian desire to see every American able to get their own home whether the people in question remotely qualified for one or not, and more importantly Alan Greenspan's driving of US economic and fiscal policy dating back to before Bush Sr. were also large factors.

Ridiculously low interest rates alone would not have created this crisis, otherwise Canada would be in the same exact boat as the US. It was so called "ninja" mortgages that really drove events to where they are.

And as for the whole yellow cake from Niger thing. No we didn 't KNOW it was fake at the time. Your own quote states "The administration later conceded that evidence in support of the claim was inconclusive".

Sorry to burst your Bush-hating bubble, but if we knew it was a fake, that would in fact be conclusive evidence that the claim was negative. Inconclusive means we didn't know for sure one way or the other, a common situation in the intelligence game, and the President took the available intel and formulated an opinion. Turns out it was the wrong conclusion in the end, but he wouldn't have known that when he made it. Hindsight is always 20/20, and always easier for the armchair critics out there to make than when it's them making the same decisions.

[kawligia]

My hope is that Obama will bring about another Reagan (just like Carter did).

Vote Bobby Jindal in 2012!

[ddoubleez]

Umm, if they're in the field of finances and economics yes they do. Uninformed left wingers don't argue it.

Certainly deregulation was a major factor, but so were the Clintonian desire to see every American able to get their own home whether the people in question remotely qualified for one or not, and more importantly Alan Greenspan's driving of US economic and fiscal policy dating back to before Bush Sr. were also large factors.

Ridiculously low interest rates alone would not have created this crisis, otherwise Canada would be in the same exact boat as the US. It was so called "ninja" mortgages that really drove events to where they are.

And as for the whole yellow cake from Niger thing. No we didn 't KNOW it was fake at the time. Your own quote states "The administration later conceded that evidence in support of the claim was inconclusive".

Sorry to burst your Bush-hating bubble, but if we knew it was a fake, that would in fact be conclusive evidence that the claim was negative. Inconclusive means we didn't know for sure one way or the other, a common situation in the intelligence game, and the President took the available intel and formulated an opinion. Turns out it was the wrong conclusion in the end, but he wouldn't have known that when he made it. Hindsight is always 20/20, and always easier for the armchair critics out there to make than when it's them making the same decisions.

In late 2002, the Bush administration was soliciting support for the war in Iraq. To back up its claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, the administration referred to intelligence from Italy, Britain, and France detailing interactions between Saddam Hussein and the governments of Niger, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Specifically, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director George Tenet and United States Secretary of State Colin Powell both cited attempts by Saddam Hussein to obtain uranium from Niger in their September testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. At that time, the UK government also publicly reported an attempted purchase from an unnamed African country. In December, the United States Department of State issued a fact sheet listing the alleged Niger yellowcake affair in a report entitled "Illustrative Examples of Omissions From the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council."[1]


[edit] Initial doubts
The classified documents detailing an Iraqi approach to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger were considered dubious by some analysts in U.S. intelligence, according to news accounts. By early 2002, investigations by both the CIA and the State Department had found the documents to be inaccurate. Days before the Iraq invasion, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voiced serious doubt on the authenticity of the documents to the U.N. Security Council, judging them counterfeit.


FYI the state of the union speach was in 2003.....

[Krasch]

Actually as I recall a more accurate statement would be "By early 2002, investigations by both the CIA and the State Department had concluded the documents to be inaccurate."

You may not appreciate that many times in the Intelligence business, many items come across one's desk that cannot be independently verified at the time, if ever. You may have only the one source of information available to you.

You may want to reread the first paragraph you posted there. They had reports from Italy, Britain and France. In late 2002, the Administration is drumming up support, and then it says in December (presumably December of 2002) the State Department issued their fact sheet.

OK...

Then why would they issue a fact sheet IF in early 2002 they had already proven the documents inaccurate? Answer: They hadn't proven it at all.

Apparently Italy, the UK and France still were believing the documents. The UK DID publicly report that alleged purchase in late 2002.

So again it boils down to conflicting intelligence data, and Bush making a conclusion based on the available facts at the time, which in 20/20 hindsight tuned out to be erroneous. Well that kind of thing happens all the time when you have incomplete information to work with, as is so frequently the case in Intelligence.

BTW, you might not want to rely on simply cutting and pasting from Wikipedia when trying to prove a point...

[ddoubleez]

Actually as I recall a more accurate statement would be "By early 2002, investigations by both the CIA and the State Department had concluded the documents to be inaccurate."

You may not appreciate that many times in the Intelligence business, many items come across one's desk that cannot be independently verified at the time, if ever. You may have only the one source of information available to you.

You may want to reread the first paragraph you posted there. They had reports from Italy, Britain and France. In late 2002, the Administration is drumming up support, and then it says in December (presumably December of 2002) the State Department issued their fact sheet.

OK...

Then why would they issue a fact sheet IF in early 2002 they had already proven the documents inaccurate? Answer: They hadn't proven it at all.

Apparently Italy, the UK and France still were believing the documents. The UK DID publicly report that alleged purchase in late 2002.

So again it boils down to conflicting intelligence data, and Bush making a conclusion based on the available facts at the time, which in 20/20 hindsight tuned out to be erroneous. Well that kind of thing happens all the time when you have incomplete information to work with, as is so frequently the case in Intelligence.

BTW, you might not want to rely on simply cutting and pasting from Wikipedia when trying to prove a point...


The IAEA found the doucments to be forgery very quickly, after researching the signatures of individuals that had not been in position in Niger for over a decade. The date on the document did not match the day of the week listed.. If you think that our intellegence did not pick up on this, you are very wrong... In 2002, the fbi ordered the reference out of a speech, and when asked how it was allowed back into the state of the union, Rice said she did not know.....

[Krasch]

The IAEA found the doucments to be forgery very quickly, after researching the signatures of individuals that had not been in position in Niger for over a decade. The date on the document did not match the day of the week listed.. If you think that our intellegence did not pick up on this, you are very wrong... In 2002, the fbi ordered the reference out of a speech, and when asked how it was allowed back into the state of the union, Rice said she did not know.....
And again you ignore the reality that at least three foreign intelligence services DID apparently believe they were accurate even in late 2002.

So again I say there was conflicting intelligence analysis, which there was, and Bush made a judgement call that turned out in 20/20 hindsight to be erroneous.

People make mistakes all the time.

Hell, the intelligence weenies were projecting a long drawn out air war in the first Gulf War due to the large size and reported quality of Iraq's air force (reported at the time as I recall to be the fourth largest in the world or some such). Of course we all know that turned out to be complete fiction as what air forces the Coalition DID engage ended up quickly running away with virtually no Coalition losses.

People make mistakes trying to make sense of intelligence data all the time. So what's your point?

If it's that Bush made a mistake, then you're beating a dead horse.

Even Bush admits errors were made at this point.

He's not the first president to pull a boner out of his hat, and he won't be the last, in any political party. History will, in the end, tend to focus on the positives of Bush's presidency rather than the all-too-human errors, the same as it does with all presidents.

[ronnym]

Vote Bobby Jindal in 2012!

Bobby Jindal is on my radar screen.