Print Page | Close Window

George H. W Bush vs George W Bush

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=74669
Printed Date: February 17 2025 at 18:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: George H. W Bush vs George W Bush
Posted By: Icarium
Subject: George H. W Bush vs George W Bush
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 17:35

I am only after a Plain result so no other options,

 

I’m not American so I am only superficially interested in this, from Historical and tabloidical points of view. I have never felt their politics on may body (or I have but I have never "lived" under nether of them, of course I’m old enough to have lived through both periods (since I’m born in 86), I have lived through 5 or 6 presidents)

 

Who will in 100 years of history be remembered as the better president

 

To just quote one of my teachers "HW Bush will be remembered as one of the great presidents" 

 

But I don't know

 

to set the mood for this poll. Some poll music

 


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



Replies:
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 18:33
H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Formentera Lady
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 18:53
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

Who will in 100 years of history be remembered as the better president

I hope, neither.



Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:15
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:17
Slart hit it on the head...........Nazi lovers, not many people know that...............And the dulles boys the same, and they named an airport in the nation`s capital after a monster named dulles, I would not vote for either for anything


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:19
Both were pretty atrocious presidents, but at least one doesn't have the Patriot act and Gitmo on his record. 

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:20
Maybe everyone who drives a Volkswagen or wears Hugo Boss is a Nazi-lover too.

-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:26
^ You better brush up on your history if you doubt the Bushes and Dulles did not have big time nazi connections


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:34
Do you realize how many Jewish politicians were connected to George Bush and his cabinet? 

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:52
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

^ You better brush up on your history if you doubt the Bushes and Dulles did not have big time nazi connections


You'd better brush up on your reading skills if you saw me denying the Bushes had anything to do with Nazis.  Wink


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:52
^how many?


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:53
Let's throw one name out there: Irving Kristol. Thus evaporating any idea of a nazi connection. 

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:53
My reading skills are fine thanks


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:56
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

My reading skills are fine thanks


As is my knowledge of history, thanks.  Smile


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 19:58
and supposing someone;s ancestors were slave owners is different from knowing


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:02
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

and supposing someone;s ancestors were slave owners is different from knowing


You missed my point.

My point is, you don't judge a person for what a person's father or distant ancestor did.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:06
If you indict people for crimes their ancestors committed, you have no sense of attribution of wrongdoing and I hope to The Universe that you never appear on a jury.

HW, because at least he knew how to end a war.

More importantly, NOT Dubya because he is either an easily led simpleton or a frighteningly and apologetically immoral person. Probably bits of both given his verbal foibles and refusal to admit anything wrong about waterboarding.


-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:08
and my point is bush in the early cia days had a role in aiding Nazi war criminals, yes George Bush sr.


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:25
I am not Talking about ancestors, I am saying George Bush sr, as for georgie jr., no, he broke the anti semite tradition


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:31
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

I am not Talking about ancestors, I am saying George Bush sr, as for georgie jr., no, he broke the anti semite tradition


Congratulations, you just hit 1000 posts.

That's all I have to say.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:35

From now on I will look for the hidden meanings in your words

"Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves." actually means don't hold people accountable for their ancestors faults


Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:43
George Jr. is an incompetent drunk, his father is not




Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 20:55
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:


From now on I will look for the hidden meanings in your words

"Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves." actually means don't hold people accountable for their ancestors faults


Oooh...you should be a politician. 


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 21:00
He's more useless than the real timothy leary.

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 22:36
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:


From now on I will look for the hidden meanings in your words

"Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves." actually means don't hold people accountable for their ancestors faults


Oooh...you should be a politician. 


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 22:40
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

He's more useless than the real timothy leary.


big words from a small mind


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 23:30
  timothy seems to be currently be on a trip and so not completely with us, so I won't respond to him.

I don't see how anybody could vote for W over HW.


-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 02 2011 at 23:34
what trip is that........oh you made a funny


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 01:05
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves.


I can say for an absolute fact mine never have Approve
So I'm now gunna say terrible things about people who's ancestors have! Cool
YOU ALL ARE VERY BAD PEOPLE! HOW DARE YOUR ANCESTORS DO THAT! YOU SHOULD PAY FOR WHAT THEY DID AND FEEL BAD.

And George HW Bush by miles.
While I can't say I was fan of his, or agreed overall with his philosophies, he wasn't that bad a President actually, and far better than wubya.
Also, I am pretty sure he was a bit more moderate then his Presidency let on.


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 01:16
Also, I am not very familiar with it in detail...but what exactly are these Bush connections to the Nazi's?

All I know is Prescott Bush owned (or was involved with) a company that was seized under the trading with the enemy act.
Obviously what the Nazi's did were so terrible that we look at everything in retrospect...but prior to WWII didn't we just view them, along fascist Italy, as enemies and authoritarian? Fascism also had a lot of support during the 1930's.
We didn't even know the extent of their atrocities until during the war, and especially when we reached all the concentration camps.

I only say all this jazz because, being involved with a company in Nazi Germany does not make one a Nazi.
Remember, these are businessmen what won't they do to make a buck? LOL
Much as we may wish...I highly doubt Prescott Bush was a Nazi supporter.

And this is coming from one of the biggest Wubya bashers you would've ever met.



Posted By: irrelevant
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 01:39
Originally posted by aginor aginor wrote:

Who will in 100 years of history be remembered as the better president


"History we won't know, we'll all be dead" - George W. Bush. 


-------------
https://gabebuller.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - New album!
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=7385


Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 02:48
Sick... No vote.

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


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 07:27
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves.


I can say for an absolute fact mine never have Approve
So I'm now gunna say terrible things about people who's ancestors have! Cool
YOU ALL ARE VERY BAD PEOPLE! HOW DARE YOUR ANCESTORS DO THAT! YOU SHOULD PAY FOR WHAT THEY DID AND FEEL BAD.

And George HW Bush by miles.
While I can't say I was fan of his, or agreed overall with his philosophies, he wasn't that bad a President actually, and far better than wubya.
Also, I am pretty sure he was a bit more moderate then his Presidency let on.


My Mom's Dad was anti-Semitic, but not obsessively so.  I never heard him express pro holocaust views.  If any of my ancestors owned slaves, I am not aware of it.  My parents never indoctrinated us with racist views.  I married a black woman and if any of my living relatives had any problems with that I never heard it.


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 07:59
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

He's more useless than the real timothy leary.


big words from a small mind


It was only 12 pt font.


-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 08:04
ah I like to create some discussion, which I think is healthy to clare up the minds, also to compare one of the few occations where both father and son have had the same job in such a high possition is rare)

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


Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 11:04
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:



HW, because at least he knew how to end a war.

More importantly, NOT Dubya because he is either an easily led simpleton or a frighteningly and apologetically immoral person. Probably bits of both given his verbal foibles and refusal to admit anything wrong about waterboarding.


Well, one could argue that the original gulf conflict never ended.  The U.S. was lobbing missiles in there well into the Clinton years.


And who doesn't love waterboarding?






-------------
https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">
https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp


Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 11:15
Apparently, the biggest error after the first Gulf war (which was done very well) was to keep stationed troops in Saudi Arabia. That lead to a lot of resentment, and was the most important aspect that determined Bin Laden to do what he did.


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 13:59
We commit that error in every war.

Calling it an error is a little strange though since it's at best intentionally done and at worst the reason for starting the war.


-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 14:17
During one's presidency, I was younger and lived in a different country. But I fully enjoyed the benefits of the presidency of the other one. Also, for comedy purposes, nobody will ever beat the second one. 

Ah, and the whole ""Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves." actually means don't hold people accountable for their ancestors faults"is one of the top 10 idiotic sentences ever written in PA.  



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


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 14:20
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

During one's presidency, I was younger and lived in a different country. But I fully enjoyed the benefits of the presidency of the other one. Also, for comedy purposes, nobody will ever beat the second one. 

Ah, and the whole ""Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves." actually means don't hold people accountable for their ancestors faults"is one of the top 10 idiotic sentences ever written in PA.  



Thanks T.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 15:15
Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:




And who doesn't love waterboarding?





You have single handedly made me rethink my position.

By the way, how much would any of you be willing to pay to see HW and son duke it out?   How about we throw in Bar?  The twins?   Those other Bush bros? LOL

How about we put them all in a mud pit dressed as little old ladies and fight it out with purses?


-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 15:24
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:




And who doesn't love waterboarding?





You have single handedly made me rethink my position.




Singlehandedly, Slart?Shocked

Tongue LOL



-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 18:08
^




Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

But I fully enjoyed the benefits of the presidency of the other one. Also, for comedy purposes, nobody will ever beat the second one.


Never misunderestimate the power of comedy.
So, these benefits? Was one of them the ability to put food on your family?

Sadly, I think we might be in for another round of that.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6" rel="nofollow - http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6


-------------
https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">
https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 03 2011 at 19:30
Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:


So, these benefits? Was one of them the ability to put food on your family?



Come to think of it, I do remember W coming around and single-handedly putting food on my family.  Then again maybe it was just one of my bizarre dreams.  Back to this:



-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 01:51
^^It seems sarcasm without emoticons doesn't really work after all... Or was it bad sarcasm? Could be could be.

Ok, to put it like for a five year old: "I don't have a proper opinion so I decided to write some sh*t".

The final part, though, was sarcasm-free. Saying that a person sucks because his ancestors sucked just, well, sucks.

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


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 02:11
 
Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:

 
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6" rel="nofollow - http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6

Sarah Palin is never going to be president. And, as much as I hate the woman, I am willing to defend her on a few of those. She obviously just misspoke when she was talking about our North Korean allies, she spent the whole sentence before talking about North Korea and she slipped, it's incredibly unimportant. While she bombed the Katie Couric interview, she was not "unable" to name any newspapers she read, she was pissed that Katie was asking what was (in her mind) an inane question.

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 02:30
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

 
Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:

 
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6" rel="nofollow - http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6

Sarah Palin is never going to be president. And, as much as I hate the woman, I am willing to defend her on a few of those. She obviously just misspoke when she was talking about our North Korean allies, she spent the whole sentence before talking about North Korea and she slipped, it's incredibly unimportant. While she bombed the Katie Couric interview, she was not "unable" to name any newspapers she read, she was pissed that Katie was asking what was (in her mind) an inane question.


I'm not being pedantic here Henry as your post seems entirely reasonable but is misspoke a word?


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


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 03:36
http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1268442#m_en_us1268442" rel="nofollow - Oxford thinks so.  

-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 04:31
I think the history books will record G W Bush as the president whose administration toppled the Taleban in Afghanistan and deposed Saddam Hussein. In the fullness of time, he will be heralded a hero, by mainstream historians. The details of the 'war on terror' and the cost to peoples liberties may be lost or at least distorted in the mists of time.

In a world that awards an incoming president the Nobel Peace Price, just for turning up in the morning and promising 'Hope 'n' Change' , you have to realise that literally anything is possible.

-------------
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!


Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 04:49
don't  look at me I have nothing to do with that  Shocked Embarrassed, you should se how much security Oslo were under then you could nat fart without getting a gun pointed at you.

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


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 06:14
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

^^It seems sarcasm without emoticons doesn't really work after all... Or was it bad sarcasm? Could be could be.

Ok, to put it like for a five year old: "I don't have a proper opinion so I decided to write some sh*t".

The final part, though, was sarcasm-free. Saying that a person sucks because his ancestors sucked just, well, sucks.


Okay now I'm confused.  Are you addressing me?  LOL


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 07:17
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1268442#m_en_us1268442" rel="nofollow - Oxford thinks so.  


I stand corrected but I've never heard it before (it must be American in origin?)


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


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 07:22
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

I think the history books will record G W Bush as the president whose administration toppled the Taleban in Afghanistan and deposed Saddam Hussein. In the fullness of time, he will be heralded a hero, by mainstream historians. The details of the 'war on terror' and the cost to peoples liberties may be lost or at least distorted in the mists of time.

In a world that awards an incoming president the Nobel Peace Price, just for turning up in the morning and promising 'Hope 'n' Change' , you have to realise that literally anything is possible.


I agree with this. History looks favorably on Presidents that taken action, regardless of what that action is. War presidents become folklore heroes, and rights violations never appear as more than an easily justified footnote.






-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 07:41
The history books already show that GW didn't topple the Taliban, failed to get Bin Laden despite his dead or alive bluster, terrorized people for political advantage, squandered a surplus to put more money into the hands of the already wealthy....

-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 07:43
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

The history books already show that GW didn't topple the Taliban, failed to get Bin Laden despite his dead or alive bluster, terrorized people for political advantage, squandered a surplus to put more money into the hands of the already wealthy....


What history book are you smoking?  Tongue


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 08:01
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

The history books already show that GW didn't topple the Taliban, failed to get Bin Laden despite his dead or alive bluster, terrorized people for political advantage, squandered a surplus to put more money into the hands of the already wealthy....


But, one hundred years from now, the historians may paint a very different picture. Bush could be portrayed broadly as someone who took a firm lead in dealing with the threat of Islamic extremism. They do say the victors of war write the history books. If indeed, America is the victor.

He did depose Saddam Hussein. The fact that this was done on the back of a pack of lies, will not stop the historians recording that this was such a significantly positive step in achieving world peace, that the 'nuances' of the situation were justified by the ends.

The Taleban is broadly not in power in Afghanistan anymore. They only have regional strongholds. Osama Bin Laden was only ever a red herring (not to mention formally a CIA asset) at the best of times. Bush just needed a crook to display on his 'Wanted' posters. America needed someone specific to blame for 9/11. A faceless rag tag band of militants hiding in caves, simply wasn't good enough.

Governments learn from their mistakes, in terms of how to manage the information their electorate sees. There are some very basic principles of psychology and sociology which govern how people behave in packs and as societies in times of crisis, in their search for leadership through the dark. It is quite possible that the Bush years will actually be recounted with some degree of warmth; once everyone who was actually alive while he was in office has died of old age...


-------------
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!


Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 08:53
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves.


In Late Antiquity / Early Middle-Ages, probably, but then I also probably have ancestors who were slaves, so I guess i'm even. Tongue


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


Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 09:09
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

The history books already show that GW didn't topple the Taliban, failed to get Bin Laden despite his dead or alive bluster, terrorized people for political advantage, squandered a surplus to put more money into the hands of the already wealthy....


But, one hundred years from now, the historians may paint a very different picture. Bush could be portrayed broadly as someone who took a firm lead in dealing with the threat of Islamic exteirremism. They do say the victors of war write the history books. If indeed, America is the victor.

The ones responsible for the islamic extremism are the Americans, the English, the French and the Israelis, so fighting it is simply cleaning their own mess

Quote
He did depose Saddam Hussein. The fact that this was done on the back of a pack of lies, will not stop the historians recording that this was such a significantly positive step in achieving world peace, that the 'nuances' of the situation were justified by the ends.


Saddam was created due to English colonialism on the area. If they really did a good job on the independen Iraqi kingdom, instead of using it as a tool to their interests (i.e. getting cheap oil), Saddam would never be the Iraqi president/prime minister.

Quote
The Taleban is broadly not in power in Afghanistan anymore. They only have regional strongholds. Osama Bin Laden was only ever a red herring (not to mention formally a CIA asset) at the best of times. Bush just needed a crook to display on his 'Wanted' posters. America needed someone specific to blame for 9/11. A faceless rag tag band of militants hiding in caves, simply wasn't good enough.


The americans and the english were both responsible for the rise of the Taleban in Afghanistan. The former for weakening an independent and powerful regional kingdom only for the sake of expanding its colonial costal areas and the latter for not supporting the Afghan royal family and the Afghan republic when they needed AND for supporting the Taleban and other terrorist groups for the sake of fighting the decaying Soviet union.
Quote
Governments learn from their mistakes, in terms of how to manage the information their electorate sees. There are some very basic principles of psychology and sociology which govern how people behave in packs and as societies in times of crisis, in their search for leadership through the dark. It is quite possible that the Bush years will actually be recounted with some degree of warmth; once everyone who was actually alive while he was in office has died of old age...


I really doubt it.


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


Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 09:31
Originally posted by CCVP CCVP wrote:




Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

The history books already show that GW didn't topple the Taliban, failed to get Bin Laden despite his dead or alive bluster, terrorized people for political advantage, squandered a surplus to put more money into the hands of the already wealthy....


But, one hundred years from now, the historians may paint a very different picture. Bush could be portrayed broadly as someone who took a firm lead in dealing with the threat of Islamic exteirremism. They do say the victors of war write the history books. If indeed, America is the victor.
The ones responsible for the islamic extremism are the Americans, the English, the French and the Israelis, so fighting it is simply cleaning their own mess
Quote He did depose Saddam Hussein. The fact that this was done on the back of a pack of lies, will not stop the historians recording that this was such a significantly positive step in achieving world peace, that the 'nuances' of the situation were justified by the ends.
Saddam was created due to English colonialism on the area. If they really did a good job on the independen Iraqi kingdom, instead of using it as a tool to their interests (i.e. getting cheap oil), Saddam would never be the Iraqi president/prime minister.
Quote The Taleban is broadly not in power in Afghanistan anymore. They only have regional strongholds. Osama Bin Laden was only ever a red herring (not to mention formally a CIA asset) at the best of times. Bush just needed a crook to display on his 'Wanted' posters. America needed someone specific to blame for 9/11. A faceless rag tag band of militants hiding in caves, simply wasn't good enough.
The americans and the english were both responsible for the rise of the Taleban in Afghanistan. The former for weakening an independent and powerful regional kingdom only for the sake of expanding its colonial costal areas and the latter for not supporting the Afghan royal family and the Afghan republic when they needed AND for supporting the Taleban and other terrorist groups for the sake of fighting the decaying Soviet union.
Quote Governments learn from their mistakes, in terms of how to manage the information their electorate sees. There are some very basic principles of psychology and sociology which govern how people behave in packs and as societies in times of crisis, in their search for leadership through the dark. It is quite possible that the Bush years will actually be recounted with some degree of warmth; once everyone who was actually alive while he was in office has died of old age...
I really doubt it.


I'm not disagreeing with anything you say, and I know full well the history of the Taleban and the CIA trained Mujahadin that became Al Queada. Although all this information is in the public domain, it's never discussed openly in the mainstream, and for that reason these realities are unlikely to become part of the historical folklore of the 'war on terror'



-------------
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 09:32
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:


Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

^^It seems sarcasm without emoticons doesn't really work after all... Or was it bad sarcasm? Could be could be.

Ok, to put it like for a five year old: "I don't have a proper opinion so I decided to write some sh*t".

The final part, though, was sarcasm-free. Saying that a person sucks because his ancestors sucked just, well, sucks.
Okay now I'm confused.  Are you addressing me?  LOL
Oh no. I was addressing one two posts above mine where it was said that I preferred W because of the benefits of his presidency to me, askig if he actually put food on my table. I just commented on my first post. The second part though was straight. The guy who said we have to be hold accountable for what our ancestors did is actually, factually, slightly confused, to put it nicely.

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


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 14:24
^Perhaps when you get done getting the brown off your nose you could show me the post where I said a person should be held accountable for the actions of their ancestors....I stand by the fact george sr. was a nazi sympathizer, bigot and anti semite


Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 14:55
Some of the British royal family were Nazi sympathisers back in the day. I'm inclined to think Prince Philip probably still is.



-------------
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 15:27
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

^Perhaps when you get done getting the brown off your nose you could show me the post where I said a person should be held accountable for the actions of their ancestors....I stand by the fact george sr. was a nazi sympathizer, bigot and anti semite


Why not criticize him for all the horrible things he did rather than speculating about his thoughts and motives?


-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 04 2011 at 19:01
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

But, one hundred years from now, the historians may paint a very different picture.

100 years from now historians will be some kind of strangely weird mutated freaks.  I believe they will look like this:



-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 05:18
^ One does not have to be a strangely weird mutated freak to look like this. Saddam Hussein would have looked quite the same if he had to hide for just a few more months.

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


Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 09:26
Originally posted by timothy leary timothy leary wrote:

^Perhaps when you get done getting the brown off your nose you could show me the post where I said a person should be held accountable for the actions of their ancestors....I stand by the fact george sr. was a nazi sympathizer, bigot and anti semite
 
Bill Clinton idiolized a violent segregationist and Woodrow Wilson was a white supremicist. 
What's your point?
What do the sins of the father have to do with the son/grandson?
 
And to answer the poll question: both were awful.  Presidents need to be judged in terms of the Constitutional authority they are granted.  A good President acts as a steward of the Constitution and no President has done that for ages.  Hell, Coolidge might have been the last.


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


Time always wins.


Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 14:44
^This was a poll and I made my choice and nowhere did I say anything about holding people accountable for father's sins, my point was George bush Sr. was a anti semite and probably more, I don't really care if you think I had no point, of course, as you stated, we would have to go back a long time to find a half decent president, including the present one who won a nobel peace prize for who knows what reason.


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 14:50
The commanding general of an army occupying and bombing foreign countries doesn't deserve a prize for peace?  

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 14:52
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

The commanding general of an army occupying and bombing foreign countries doesn't deserve a prize for peace?  

Yes, he not only promised hope but in addition to that, change.


Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 14:57
Originally posted by Padraic Padraic wrote:

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

The commanding general of an army occupying and bombing foreign countries doesn't deserve a prize for peace?  

Yes, he not only promised hope but in addition to that, change.


Clearly. Campaign promises of hope and change clearly are necessary and sufficient conditions for peace.


-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 15:20
No they aren't. You still need the multi-pop-artist song.

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


Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: January 05 2011 at 20:02
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

No they aren't. You still need the multi-pop-artist song.
 
 
We are ProgArchives, we are the children.....


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


Time always wins.


Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: January 06 2011 at 01:52
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

H.W. was more honorable, and I use that word very reluctantly.  They are descendants from Nazi lovers.
http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.rense.com/general42/bshnazi.htm


Bet one of your ancestors owned slaves.


I can say for an absolute fact mine never have Approve
So I'm now gunna say terrible things about people who's ancestors have! Cool
YOU ALL ARE VERY BAD PEOPLE! HOW DARE YOUR ANCESTORS DO THAT! YOU SHOULD PAY FOR WHAT THEY DID AND FEEL BAD.

And George HW Bush by miles.
While I can't say I was fan of his, or agreed overall with his philosophies, he wasn't that bad a President actually, and far better than wubya.
Also, I am pretty sure he was a bit more moderate then his Presidency let on.


My Mom's Dad was anti-Semitic, but not obsessively so.  I never heard him express pro holocaust views.  If any of my ancestors owned slaves, I am not aware of it.  My parents never indoctrinated us with racist views.  I married a black woman and if any of my living relatives had any problems with that I never heard it.


Well, of all the people to take that too seriously you were the last I expected.
And my ancestors came to the US from Italy and Ukraine, all poor and uneducated.
Gunna take a wild guess and say no slave owning lol




Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 06 2011 at 15:11
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

 
Originally posted by Tapfret Tapfret wrote:

 
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6" rel="nofollow - http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-sarah-palin-quotes.htm?PS=224%3A6

Sarah Palin is never going to be president. And, as much as I hate the woman, I am willing to defend her on a few of those. She obviously just misspoke when she was talking about our North Korean allies, she spent the whole sentence before talking about North Korea and she slipped, it's incredibly unimportant. While she bombed the Katie Couric interview, she was not "unable" to name any newspapers she read, she was pissed that Katie was asking what was (in her mind) an inane question.


When you are humble and eloquent, most are willing to overlook missteps of articulation. But this is a shrill, inflammatory, divisive leviathan that lives on a media illuminated plane of logical fallacy rarely seen since the McCarthy era. There is little defensible about her. Though, I suppose a little music can make us forget anything.







-------------
https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">
https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp


Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: January 06 2011 at 18:56
I like Sarah Palin much better with the sound track.  She needs it with her whenever she opens he mouth.  And no, I still will never vote for her.  It actually is a little creepy now that I think about it.


Kate Bush Big smile  I didn't like either of those Georges. I do like the cheerfully insane Georges though.

And now for something completely different:



-------------
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...



Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: January 06 2011 at 19:57
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

I like Sarah Palin much better with the sound track.  She needs it with her whenever she opens he mouth.  And no, I still will never vote for her.  It actually is a little creepy now that I think about it.
She's not aiming for people who think.  She speaks to Fox viewers and Teabaggers.


-------------
Trust me. I know what I'm doing.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk