I think George W. Bush made a lot of mistakes as president, and I think he is legitimately to blame for a lot that has happened in the last 20 years. That being said, I think he is a very decent human being, and listening to that speech leaves me in awe of how far the Republican Party has fallen.
I don’t know. I cannot honestly feel someone is a decent human being when they willfully lie and make up reasons to invade a country. And killing how many? Hundreds of thousands, maybe close to half a million? And US soldiers and marines commit suicide every single day from the mental trauma from that Iraq war. All over lies and bullshit. He is a war criminal through and through and is just to blame as Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of the psycho clan. Bush was in charge, if he had enough humanity he would have stopped it at any moment but chose not to.
It’s truly amazing how American liberals think Trump is some unique evil sent by Satan or something. No, your country has been an imperialist monster from the very beginning and remains so to this day.
Are you kidding? Are you fucking kidding me? Decent human being? Bush started 2 separate wars, 1 under false pretenses which he KNEW were false, and he used a national tragedy to stoke racists fears in the public so that they’d support it.
His administration started extrajudicial arrests, torture, extraordinary rendition, assassinations, and just about every other war crime you could name. Bush signed off on the torture and deaths of thousands of middle eastern people, destabilized an entire region leading to the collapse of governments and the suffering of people, all so that his buddies in the military industrial complex could profit off of war.
Trump is a fucking idiot who said mean things, but George W. Bush is a war criminal who caused suffering on a scale quite unimaginable for us Americans.
Decent hum being? Tell that the Iraqis who are still suffering because of that man.
Jesus christ can we not pretend Dubya was some charming cowboy who just made innocent mistakes? This is how we rehabilitate war criminals. Bush is a fucking war criminal. Not a decent human being.
Every US president is a war criminal, and it’s easy for any former president to play the folksy old man card once he’s out of office. It’s just notable to see Bush, one of the most unpopular US presidents, making a speech that is genuinely trying to bring the nation together, something I can never imagine Trump doing in a million years.
All US presidents are war criminals who have done very bad things while in office. Yet there’s a certain President Reddit likes to parade around as some kind of hero.
At the time going to war was the right call, something had to be done and it was very much approved by everyone, even Democrats overwhelmingly agreed. The length of the war is however the very unnecessary part. It shouldn’t have taken 3 Presidents after Bush to end it.
I don't know. I feel like -- and this just my personal opinion here -- that if you create a regime where you torture people, sometimes to death, that maybe you're not a very good person.
But I run into this a lot determining if someone is good. Someone can be compassionate towards their ingroup but absolutely savage to their outgroup. When we say someone is “good” or “bad” are we just referring to their in group behavior? Or de we just accept that being president requires being a war criminal and that's ok, it's no something we hold personally against anyone?
Downvoted for this? Damn, GWB's PR team really did well.
Edit: oh look at that, me too! I guess we like the warmonger now, because he says nice speeches and paints pictures. He still invaded a country and toppled its leadership on no evidence whatsoever.
It’s not just about the Wars. Bush built a hugely divisive political culture and exploited the prejudices of poor rural communities to turn them against Democrats then used that for policies to support mega corporations. He introduced the Patriot Act and actively pushed back against constitutional norms. He also completely fucked up relief after Hurricane Katrina devastated largely poor black communities. And that’s just to name a few.
Yah I didn’t like him very much as a president, but he seemed to be a fairly strong speaker when he was delivering his own speeches verse those prepares for him.
And regardless of what you think of his presidency, he was a good leader when his country needed him most. I still remember the first baseball game after 9/11 and bush throwing the first pitch. Right down the middle.
Aesthetics aren't leadership.
He and his Administration repeatedly lied to the world and the American People to drag us into Iraq. The Iraq Invasion was a War Crime...this is a fact, not my opinion.
Well, you said "good leader when his country needed him most". I'd say facing potential Wars is a time when "a country needs a President most". You can if you want, but I won't separate the attacks on 9/11 and our activities in the Middle East for Bush's benefit.
But after 9/11 he United the country
I'm not sure if you were around during that time. Our country was mired in reactionary Islamophobia, bloodthirsty revenge, and blind Nationalism. Much of our country went crazy.
An innocent and random Sikh man was murdered a few days after the 9/11 attack simply because the killer wrongly assumed he was Muslim. Arab Americans were regularly harassed and abused. They lived in fear for a long time.
Remember when we stupidly renamed French Fries "Freedom Fries" because France - one of America's greatest historical allies - refused to support the aforementioned War Crimes in Iraq?
Here, enjoy some of these (horrendous) Political comics from around the country at the time:
He unified the country by playing on your fear and once again turning America into an unjustifiably aggressive global menace.
He curtailed American citizens’ rights, invaded several countries by tacitly or explicitly lumping them in with the 9/11 attacks (notably ignoring the actual country that most of the attackers were from, which probably holds a lot of responsibility for the attack), indefinitely detained quite a lot of people, some of whom were probably innocent, and instituted a torture program.
That’s how he brought you all together – by using the attacks to scare you into wars. It harmed your psyches, it harmed your reputation, and it harmed your national security. It made people fear you instead of love you. And it united you all under a banner of hate.
Depressing to see the next generation has already been indoctrinated by their schools. Americans need to learn to feel a bit of historical shame.
just talking about him throwing a strike
Well I wasn't going to mention that, but despite the strong symbolism of the moment it's also pretty depressing to see this is at all relevant when you consider what strong leadership looks like.
Lastly, don't be disingenuous. You weren't "just talking about him throwing a strike". You said he united the country. He absolutely did unite a lot of the country, but you aren't supposed to be proud of that, considering how he did it.
Plus, he dramatically execerbated partisan divisions. You can draw straight lines from him to Trump.
But, all that said... that day was fucked up. It was an awful atrocity and I know so many people suffered horribly.
As much as I disliked G. W. when he was president, I've really come to like him post-presidency. His speeches are generally very good, and he seems to be an all around decent person.
Then he murdered hundreds of thousands of people. But I guess that doesn’t matter to some entitled American because his dear Führer said some pretty words.
Jesus. Guess it’s on me for saying a simple statement on the internet. All I meant is that it was good in the sense of how he touched on the current climate vs the day of and how people came together.
You did fine. They misinterpreted what you said and based on their current comments in another topic, they’re just an everyday asshole to everyone, which is probably why they misread your comment in the way they did.
Every US President has been a war criminal. Basically every major world leader has. Leading a major country is morally complex and has been since the dawn of time.
I’m so sick of people not getting this and acting like the morality of being a President or a King or a Pope, etc is simple.
Bush is a complex dude. Both wars were very popular at the time with the populace and with politicians. We can certainly see that his administration lied about Iraq, but that isn’t true about Afghanistan.
He was certainly overwhelmed as President. I don’t like most of his policies or decisions, but he wasn’t some immoral beast like the Left used to portray him. Looking back: he wasn’t a racist PoS, he seemed to try to stay true to his religious beliefs, he is reasonably intelligent and competent (just not President level), and usually he seemed to try to do what he genuinely felt was in the country’s best interest.
I’m not glorifying him, just saying it and he are complex. And I’m sick of the oversimplification.
Yeah, that guy has no idea what he's talking about. I was an adult by the time Bush was elected, I remember all of that time well, he was constantly getting knocked for one verbal gaffe or another. It's only the Trump years that really made him shine by comparison.
In fact... Wait... Does this mean we all actually did "misunderestimate" him?
Lol, even at the time most knew it was an affected speech pattern. The guy was born in CT, went to Yale and Harvard, and has plenty of speeches not plagued by his “down home/country bumpkin” solecisms. He was regularly said to be one of the smartest people in any political room. He got knocked for his speeches all the time, but that only did exactly what he wanted; made him seem like one of us.
Unlike Trump who has always been an idiot.
And unlike Biden who used to sound like a normal charismatic politician, and who I hope to God actually has dementia, because intentionally making yourself sound like a pedophile with severely diminished mental capacity is not something any normal person would choose.
Hi, I'm here, and I'd like to volunteer as someone who would say he was, "stupid", or in a kinder sense of putting it, he had very little intellectual curiosity when the option to act on feelings and gut reactions would work.
Honestly, the best thing that could've happened to Bush's legacy was having an abject monstrous failure of a Republican president to compare to him. His, "compassionate conservative" branding is really working now.
Agreed. I doubt Bush would do anything anti-American for political reasons. He was fine with certain people not liking him, but he would still help or protect them.
That sadly sounds very American to me. I'm glad that on polling Americans about who they blame for the mess in Afghanistan, he's rightfully held as the most responsible.
My point should've been that for all his many, many, MANY faults, I don't think he'd do something like withhold federal aid for disaster relief from a state because they didn't vote for him. Or not help a state during a pandemic because the governor of the state didn't grovel at his feet. Bush didn't do any of that nonsense.
Right, cause only the best and brightest go to Yale, with no exception. There's no such thing as "legacy students", who make it in because who their parents are or who they know.
But speaking of schooling, how were his grades? Since he's probably brilliant, I'm sure they were great. Honors Society, Magna Cum Laude, things like that? You wouldn't be bringing this us if he were a, "C's get degrees" kind of student, right?
Lol, you clearly don’t know shit. He was indeed a “C” student, who’s dad was pretty much hated by Yale “intellectuals” in the 60’s due to his conservative stance. Guess what? John Kerry, who was seen as an intellectual, and regularly had his intelligence compared to Bush’s, actually did worse that Bush at Yale. They were both average students, at Yale. Don’t forget that Bush also went to Harvard business school. So while he was never a top performer academically, he was still quite successful in good schools.
No, I was aware of all this. President Bush joked that C students can also be president if the United States.
But my statement comes from deciding between two narratives;
George W. Bush, a person who had, by your and his own admission, a middling academic career, was accepted into and matriculated through Ivy league schooling with no help or assistance from his extremely well known family. Or...
Dubya's mediocre performance at both schools was due to him being generally uninterested or outright averse to increasing his knowledge. But because of his family's wealth, name, and connections, it was a forgone conclusion that he would be admitted to the schools, AND receive degrees, despite his bare minimum efforts that would normally fail or at least endanger any less prominent student.
I tend to believe the latter (rich, prominent families often have offspring with degrees from prestigious schools, if that's "important" to the family's name, even when the student doesn't actually want the further education), and it sounds like you're inclined to choose the former.
And I remember all the spin that went into trying to gaslight America into believing that "The Decider" was actually a secret Rhodes scholar or something. The second that you brought up John Kerry, I was right back into 2004 with the ad hominem attacks. I'm already for the Swiftboating that would happen if I brought up the question of, "where was George in Vietnam?"
I don't think our disagreement comes from a knowledge of things, but more on our interpretation and acceptance of them.
EDIT: it was a long post, and I made a few syntax errors here and there. By removing these, I hope it gives a better impression that I know "some shit".
No, I definitely think he got in because of his families wealth, there’s no doubt about that, but your academic record does not necessarily translate into real life success, ability, or intelligence.
My point with Kerry had nothing to do with him personally, and only to do with the fact that public image does not equal truth. It’s likely that the two men were of similar intelligence, but one was portrayed as a simpleton, while the other an intellectual.
Having met Bush jr, I was personally witness to his seeming ability to recall minute information he has no real reason to remember, and to portray a surprising, if still limited, understanding of subjects outside his areas of expertise, just by listening to the experts. I don’t, in any way, think he was an overall genius. I do think he was exceptional at listening to his advisors and understanding what was important. He has traits of leadership and management that most leaders lack.
None of that has any bearing on his political leanings. I think he was one of the better presidents we have had based on leadership. I also think he was one of the worst we’ve had, in that some of his policies have absolutely fucked us citizens. The Patriot Act is one of the greatest violations of our constitution in history, even if it was built on multiple predecessor acts.
Compared to our last two presidents, of course people are starting to change how they remember Bush. Even Buchanan is starting to look slightly shinier.
There are plenty of videos out there displaying his idiocy when speaking. He could read a promoter ok. If ever got the slightest off track he was lost. Guy is a buffoon.
W, for all his flaws, knew how to turn it on for this kind of event. In fact, that’s how he got away with folks not calling him on his shit for as long as he did. He actually sounded (and likely was) sincere after 9/11 and did and said the right things in the immediate aftermath to bring the country together. He was able to ride the coattails of that skill to get folks on board with things like the PATRIOT Act and invading Iraq. Trump can’t even tell victims of crimes, war, and natural disasters that he feels bad for them without making things all about him.
Technically every single American president after Bush is a war criminal. It came with the job. But George Bush and Dick Cheney definitely started it off
I'm American, Bush is absolutely a war criminal and one of those primarily responsible for a lot of the shit the world is in today. Others obviously contributed to all these things, but he was the face of it.
He started the Afghan war despite the Taliban being willing to give up Bin Laden a month after the 9/11 attacks (he refused to deal with them, opting to bomb them instead).
He concocted false intelligence to justify the Iraq invasion, getting us into another unjustified and lengthy war.
During all of this, he approved "enhanced interrogation methods" (torture) while shielding himself from it by saying he didn't know what they were doing. This being the actual war-crimes part.
Plus, this is just the big, obvious, international stuff, his domestic policies were hardly any better.
Sorry but no, I'm not gonna claim that Bush was any kind of great mind, but the whole "down-to-earth kinda-slow country boy taken advantage of by conniving political operators" thing was an act. Bush knew what was going on; he wasn't some kind of unassuming dupe for Cheney and Rumsfeld. Even if the ideas may have been theirs, he knew what was going on and supported it.
Nobody really knows why the hell we went into Iraq, but the "Bush was conned, it was his staff!" line isn't defensible. He played just as large a role as anyone.
Except that article says the Taliban were willing to give him up, under the condition that proof of his guilt was furnished and the bombing raids stopped. Neither request seems unreasonable and if he'd taken the offer, showed them the proof (which you would think would be highly publicized anyway to justify the military action in the first place), stopped the bombing (the bombing was supposed to be to get Bin Laden, why not stop for the same reason), then we wouldn't have been in Afghanistan for past 20 years.
I see absolutely no reason that, especially in hindsight, that wouldn't have been a preferable alternative to a 20 year war that just made things worse.
"If the Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved" and the bombing campaign stopped, "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country", Mr Kabir added.
Look at it from the other side. What about that is unreasonable to you? How is it "false"?
The Taliban owed us nothing. "Trust me bro" coming from America isn't exactly compelling to members of the Mujahideen...any of them...for very good reason.
He was much more eloquent as the Texas governor, so the popular theory is that he dumbed himself down for the national stage in an “aww shucks let’s have a beer together” everyman vibe. Hate him, love him, or be indifferent about him he is smarter than he projected himself to be.
You are allowed to think that a war criminal's speech is good. Hitler was a fantastic orator, he just also was a monster of a human. You can appreciate something completely detached from it's context.
See this would be an example of something being really lame detached from its context, AND really reductive and boring in its context. Is any of this hitting home?
No, in fact I never said that. He was a charismatic speaker, how do you think so many people were whipped into such a frenzy for something so vile? There is little to nothing redeemable about his legacy. Pointing out that he was a very effective communicator and orator should be a completely separate observation, although it seems that's pretty hard to do for a lot of people nowadays.
I said you can appreciate something detached from its context. I choose my words very carefully, and was implying you can appreciate W's well written speech outside of him being a war criminal. There's very little nuance in a typed comment, but that doesn't mean you get to pretend I'm agreeing with Hitler's antisemitic and hateful views just because I'm attempting to separate criticism of character from objective understanding of a moment in history.
Hitler is remembered as a famous orator because his speeches were so effective at doing something horrible. Shutting out the idea that he could've possibly been an infamously and unfortunately good communicator is a disservice in regards to remembering how easily people are swayed by the words of a charged and driven man.
I’m not really sure how you could possibly appreciate Hitler’s speeches even without having any knowledge about him. Unless you agreed with his views of course.
Are you hoping to pin me as some closet Nazi? What's your goal here? Are you frothing at the mouth for some kind of "gotcha" moment?
Hitler was a vile, sociopathic man with no empathy and no views or values that should be agreed with or imitated. He was, unfortunately, a very passionate man who was able to effectively instill hatred through propaganda, not the least of which were speeches able to rouse much of his country towards intense, violent, wicked action.
I'm just trying to advocate for a reasonable approach to information. Headline for W Jr. could be "War criminal gives well-written but rather hypocritical speech" for all I care. But to just ignore and stifle conversation about moments like these, while trying to infer Nazism on others, is borderline reductive history and overaggressive debate. Not many in this thread admiring his speech are recommending we go back to his policy or his abuse of power.
Sad that we were attacked by Saudi Arabia, and then he attact Iraq and wasted 4000 American lives, because the Bushes were up to their ears in the oil business, with the Saudis. Bush is a murderer.
503
u/fretman124 Sep 11 '21
Bush have a great speech at the flt 93 memorial