America Betrayed President Bush
It’s almost hard to believe but Wednesday, January 20 marks exactly one year since President Bush left the White House.
During his last public ceremony as commander in chief, he was booed by thousands of Americans who simutaneously cheered for Barack Obama as he was sworn into office on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.
I seem to recall President Bush and his team often claiming that history would judge his administration more favorably over time, but is one year down the road a bit too early to begin the analysis? Apparently not.
Still, the article does raise some interesting points regarding Obama’s handling of the war in Afghanistan and how Bush handled his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are no doubt a lot of anti-war activists who would agree that Obama has done little to roll back America’s wars overseas… Ironically the hawks would probably also concur that there is little difference.
What do you think?
Related Articles |
Tom W said:
President Obama is an incompetent when it comes to military affairs and foreign policy in general. Any leader who take 90 days to respond to a subordinates request for reinforcements does not deserve to be called Commander-in-Chief. God help us.
January 21st, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Brian King said:
Agreed Tom. I think the details of his Presidency and his waffling on sending reinforcements to Afghanistan probably is offset by the fact he sent them at all. Many expected he would just abandon the effort altogether. In that sense, hawks like his pro-war stance.
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Jay said:
If Bush & the other Tories weren’t such incompetent boobs the generals wouldn’t be asking for reinforcements. They fouled things so badly, I doubt anyone can fix them.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:47 am
Mark M said:
Jay, I have to agree with you. The US misappropriated its resources for the last 5+ years in Iraq, while leaving its ‘rear’ exposed – Afghanistan.
The thought process that went on was necessary to truly understand what we can accomplish at this point in time. We not only have a deteriorated situation in Afghanistan, we have to look at the larger picture in south asia – i.e. Pakistan. That’s what we want our leaders to do… right??!
When ‘thought’ and ‘weighing the consequences’ are not valued parts of our political and diplomatic process, we are doomed as a nation.
January 23rd, 2010 at 9:36 am
Stan English said:
Does anyone remember that Mr. Bush committed treason to take this nation into Iraq in the first place? Outright deciet, obfuscation ,Etc.?
January 25th, 2010 at 1:09 am
Frank Chadwick said:
I have some strong reservations about the current policy in Afghanistan, as is clear from what I’ve written here over the last few months. That said, I stop short of saying that the President is unfit to be commander in chief because he is handling things differently than I would. To be honest, that strikes me as a bit arrogant. If there is a single lesson to be learned from the history of democracy it is that men of wisdom, intellect, and good intent can disagree over terribly important issues. I also do not think that when a field commander asks for reinforcements it is the essence of the commander in chief’s job to fire back a snappy, “Yes, sir!” Let’s try to remember who runs things in this country and whose job it is to say “Yes, sir,” to whom.
January 25th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Gerald D. Swick said:
A Jan. 26 news story about two cables sent by Karl W. Eikenberry, ambassador to Afghanistan, shed additional light on the debate about sending more troops there. Eikenberry was previously the Commander of the Combined Forces Command – Afghanistan. Let’s just say he wasn’t in agreement about the need to send more troops, so the president had one general asking for additional troops and a retired general cautioning against sending them. Yeah, I can see where that might have led to some serious review and discussion before making a decision.
The news story is at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/world/asia/26strategy.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th
January 27th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
JR Riggins said:
Stan English’s comment..?
I would think that someone who is actually commenting on this site ( you know, history) would have at least an elementary understanding of civics or at the least, what history describes as treason.
I never thought I would stumble across that kind of ignorance here.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
The Forester said:
If Bush committed treason, it was in allowing 9/11 to happen. The idea that no one could have foreseen using planes as flying bombs is ridiculous on it’s face. Then again, given his notorious lack of intellectual curiosity, he probably never learned about the Imperial Japanese use of kamikazes against our Navy in WWII, or heard about the SST that crashed into a hotel on take-off from Orly airport some years ago.
February 12th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
Kent said:
Mr Obama’s 1st priority is his presidency and popularity, not the good of this nation. I believe he waited to see what impact any decision would have politically before making any choice.
February 16th, 2010 at 6:14 pm