gokusucks

The United States managed to remove a brutal dictator from power and is turning Iraq into a sovreign state, which cannot be said of it pre-2003. There have been elections, a decrease in insurgent violence, and more reliance on Iraqi forces to continue the battle. Iraq has not been a failure.

__________________
http://tinyurl.com/yslm43

Click the link. It's the right thing to do.

Fred

That'd be fucking spectacular if that were true, but you forget the fact that we don't get to decide upon foreign affairs. They never asked us for help, and they never once came to us saying they wanted to be democratized personally by us. Plus, I wouldn't believe too much about what you hear about insurgent violence, I'd put an arm on it being a lack of reporting instead of a lack of killing.

__________________

gokusucks

You're not serious are you? How would the people of Iraq have asked us for help? They were brutalized and oppressed for years by a dictator who made full use of rape, torture, and execution en masse, and they couldn't go to the government or the police for help. A sovereign state is definated as a state that serves the interests of its people, and once they fail to do so (as Iraq failed its citizens), other countries have an obligation to intercede. Unless of course, you believe that staying out of Rwanda was also the right thing.

__________________
http://tinyurl.com/yslm43

Click the link. It's the right thing to do.

Fred

Then why is it that when we come to aid them they respond by burning our flag and bombing us in the street? You talk about other countries coming in to save Iraq, which I do believe is a duty, but why must it always be the United States? That isn't the point I'm trying to make anyway, my point is it wasn't our place to stay there and reconstitute the country.

P.S. Between Rwanda and Iraq, there is no comparison. The circumstances in both cases are totally different.

__________________

gokusucks

It doesn't have to be and it shouldn't always be. However, most of the rest of the world refuses to help, and US allies who do rarely take the initiative to do things themselves.

The majority of the population of Iraq have been oppressed their whole lives, and have no idea where to start. They need help them get moving.

Although it was admittedly a poor choice of words on my part, I still feel a comparison is somewhat apt. In one case, Americans decided to ignore what was going on, and it led to the US being scrutinized for failing to act. Now that they do act, they are also receiving criticism. It is a tough situation.

__________________
http://tinyurl.com/yslm43

Click the link. It's the right thing to do.

Hero

He was faced with a bad situation and handled it poorly, although like gokusucks mentioned, it could benefit other countries in the future.

As far as the worst? He's down there, but honestly I'd say Buchanan was the worst.

__________________


Top 5 Manga:

1. Dragon Ball
2. One Piece
3. Hunter x Hunter
4. Vagabond
5. Hikaru No Go

Dragon Ball/Z Power Levels

gokusucks

I'd have to give that honor to the infamous Warren G. Harding. The legendary Teapot Dome, four other officials indicted on corruption charges, and the fact that the president needed to be given additional powers by congress in order to get him to do anything.

__________________
http://tinyurl.com/yslm43

Click the link. It's the right thing to do.

Metallic Rilldo

Normally I don't get myself involved with politics, but I have something to add. Although Bush raised the debt in our contry over the roof, he did keep us out of harms way(minus 9/11). He always maneged to keep us from getting blown away by terroistes and bombs. So is he the worst, no, but he could be a little better.

Deep Thought

Every president has been able to "protect us", to an extent, so that's really nothing special.

Besides, 9/11 counts, in my view. :/

__________________

Dupe of USSJed

IF 911 was indeed planned by George Bush, would you consider him the worst president?

__________________

Powerful Android #16

I dont think he was the worst. At least he had people who found Sadam. I suppose.

__________________

I am a peace loving Android, I would do no harm to innocent people since Violence is never the answer.

Ivan

He didn't "have people." He announced an invasion on Iraq, and eventually there were enough soldiers over there to get Hussein on the run and he was found in one of those spider holes.

Hurray, he found one bad guy that he had no reason to go after at the time, and has probably hurt our country more than it has helped it.

Separate_From_Society

There was never going to be any terrorist attack on America. We are not over there to "protect America's freedoms." If anyone actually believes that Al Quaeda or whoever would've invaded the US, they're insane. And they certainly were not deterred by Bush's awe inspiring resolve, charisma, or tactics.

__________________

A man said to the universe: "Sir, I exist!"
"However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me a sense of obligation."

Dupe of USSJed

Lol. That makes a grain of sense. Why would they just attack America like that? Sure plenty of people hate America now, but nowhere near as many had a problem with them back then, I wonder what triggered the attack?

__________________

Ivan

America wasn't the only country to be attacked, and there were some thwarted attack attempts that came after 9/11 if I remember correctly.

Namely shoe bomb chit.