2006-10-09 13:19:33 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Thats like asking, Whats better to have, Ebola or AIDS?
2006-10-09 13:20:49 · answer #1 · answered by Phil S 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Bush the father. While I'll never understand why he did not finish the job with Saddam when Iraq was on its knees and the international community would not have batted an eye, I have the feel that he is a real statesman with a grasp of what it takes to really rule a country, and a world power at that.
The son seems to believe that being in power is just an excuse to help all his friends get more money and power for themselves and to inflict his personal notions on people who never asked for any such things and to just throw his weight around and show the whole world what an important moron he is.
2006-10-09 20:33:25 · answer #2 · answered by Svartalf 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
While Bush 41 was smart enough not to go to Baghdad, he was the mastermind of the terrible Iran/Contra mess that involved Team Bush selling U.S. missiles to the iranian terrorists who were torturing to death American hostages so that Team Bush could then give money to the Contras in violation of the Boland Amendment. In addition, Bush 41 spoke of The New World Order, looked very unhappy the day the wall fell, and has been implicated by President Rafsanjani in keeping American Hostages held until after the election.
I think they are both basically cut from the same evil cloth.
They are the bush crime family.
2006-10-09 20:23:16 · answer #3 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
the father,, he had a better foreign policy,, although when Prince Bandahr, mentioned S. Korea he said,, "why should I care about Korea",, the Prince reminded him that the US had 47,000 troops there, in the North,, then there was that Iran Contra Affair, of the father,,, George W. Bush has fiscally and morally bankrupt this country
2006-10-09 20:34:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush 1 was smart enough to get out of office after one term..
2006-10-09 20:21:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Well, I was too young to remember Bush Sr. and since history is written by the victors, I'm going with him. And to the first guy, I'd rather have AIDS than Ebola.
2006-10-09 20:27:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
and dont forget Bush the Holy ghost..... hon.... they are equally scary and evil.... so better??? which is better.. being hit over the head with a baseball bat or having needles shoved under your fingernails??? They are equally painful and torturous, kind of like the Bush family..
2006-10-09 20:22:38 · answer #7 · answered by hippiemommy 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Neither one. They are both members of THIS secret and evil group that has been in control of everything for far too long!...
http://www.rense.com/general58/suspre.htm
2006-10-10 11:35:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the son is a better president, since more factors are being considered. i believe the son did a better job in diplomatic solutions
2006-10-09 20:25:25 · answer #9 · answered by blueredhorse 1 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Neither one of them really. But I would say that Bush Jr has far less brains
2006-10-09 20:22:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋