2006-09-20 09:58:51 · 10 answers · asked by la dolce vita 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree with both.
2006-09-20 10:02:52 · answer #1 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't know how bad you think Bush is, but I think he is really bad, that he would have been bad at any time, but is particularly bad under the circumstances that exist today. Bush only deals with things in terms of black and white, good versus evil, etc. I don't think such an approach is ever the right way to go about something. The world is much more complicated than that and being effective requires an ability to deal with nuance and complexity. Nonetheless, Bush might have fared better in dealing with the Cold War, which was more black and white, than he does in fighting the war on terrorism, which is highly complex and requires a deep understanding of history and an abilty to empathize with other cultures.
2006-09-20 10:33:08 · answer #2 · answered by bb80266 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Seems like he was elected at just the right time.
Islamic culture respects power and force (even the brutal usage of it, hence Saddam's popularity). When a Democrat is in office, the violent extremists know that there will be no real consequences for attacks against our soldiers and our civilians. (USS Cole, Beirut barracks, Khobar Towers, World Trade Center attack #1, Iran Hostage Crisis, etc) With a Republican in office, they are far more likely to face the same kind of death and destruction that the mete out to others.
With Bush in office, the Taliban is now out of power, Iran is now surrounded, Libya has given up sponsoring terrorist groups, Egypt now has two-party elections, Iraq now has more schools/water desalination plants/hospitals/female literary/personal right than ever before, Lebanon is no longer occupied by a foreign army (Syria), and Muslim radicals now attack prepared and armed military men and women in the Middle East, rather than defenseless civilians in New York.
At home, domestic unemployment is as low as economically feasible (less than 4% stimulates inflation), and there have been no attacks on US soil since 9-11-01.
But that's just my opinion.
(Now, if you wanted to complain about some of his other domestic policies, like the border, expansions in the federal budget and authority, etc, I'd be far more likely to agree with you.)
2006-09-20 10:06:58 · answer #3 · answered by Alan B 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think he is bad at all and I think we elected him at the right time. He is working for this country and not his own personal agenda. We needed a president with honor, integrity and a back bone. We have one now.
2006-09-20 10:02:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
What other idiot would sent loyal neoconservatives with no experience to Iraq to manage rebuilding instead of sending qualified experts?
2006-09-20 10:05:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
he's worse than we think.
there is no right time for George W Bush.
2006-09-20 10:02:03 · answer #6 · answered by Thoughts Like Mine 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Who believes he was "elected"
2006-09-20 10:28:18 · answer #7 · answered by fireandice 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Yes 2. doesn't matter, anytime is bad.
2006-09-20 10:02:46 · answer #8 · answered by edubya 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both.
2006-09-20 10:00:47 · answer #9 · answered by brian2412 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think he is pretty fricken' sweet. No, there was no better time for him.
Dang, bad ratings here i come!
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
2006-09-20 10:02:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋