Will politicians never learn? Why did Bush follow Lyndon Johnson's footsteps into an ill-advised war?

Question

Just as Lyndon Johnson was driven from office by public disaffection for the Vietnam War, so has the war in Iraq driven Bush's popularity down to a point where he has had to avoid major public events and instead has appeared almost exclusively with GOP party elites.

Answer 1

Lack of information given to the people who elected him. A classic case of the media being manipulated to serve the interests of those standing behind the decision to go to war. The President is just a puppet.

Answer 2

It's very unfortunate when it seems that politicians do not read their history books.

However, the reasons for Bush and Johnson entering into war were totally different. It is only in the quagmire effect that this war is comparable to Vietnam.

We entered into Vietnam in part because of the Truman doctrine, which said that we would go to war to prevent the spread of communism. Secondly, because we are allied with the French and they asked for our help. Furthermore, Kennedy, before his assassination, had already laid the foundation for Johnson to walk on... our boys were in Vietnam before he was even assassinated.

We entered into the Iraq war under the Bush Doctrine, a doctrine of pre-emption. We are the primary NATO power in this war, and were from the very beginning.

The thing that is reminiscent of Vietnam is the fact that our administration keeps sending over more boys to die when it is clear that what we're doing isn't working. Furthermore, as you mentioned, the public has turned against this war.

The reason Bush won't end it is because his administration feels that they will be seen as bigger failures for pulling out (Now, even I'm not stupid enough to think we should just pull out immediately... personally I think we should partition the government into three areas: Primarily Sunni, primarily shite, primarily Kurdish... and that we should be working TOWARDS getting our boys and girls out in the next couple of years). The Bush administration doesn't want to concede defeat. It's an understandable emotion, but as the leader of the "free world", one has to put pride aside and make decisions based on fact.

Very good questions, though. I personally do not think politicians will ever learn... they have made the same mistakes over and over again for thousands of years, and will continue to do so. The reason why is pride. Each of them are convinced that their particular situation is unique and different.

Answer 3

If one were to learn from history, the world would have been very peaceful. But, such is not the status...

Initial success goes into the mind of the politicians and they think they would be like that for ever and they get public support continuously...they forget that the public memory is short and changes according to the changing times...

Certainly war would bring down the popularity of the leaders, even though initical success may bring them some credit..As the people continue to die, then the leaders would get backlash from the people..

It is not the case only in US..It is the same case with India and elsewhere in the world....Indian leaders too never learn from the history and for their present they spoil the future of the country with their shortsighted measures....

Answer 4

LBJ did not start Viet Nam---the French did in 1945 following WWII. LBJ escalated the war, which as a mistake. Bush started the war in Iraq. Bush had the option to wait out Saddam, but he did not. Had Bush waited, Saddam would have been overthrown by now and things in the Middle East would be much different today, and 3000 Americans would still be alive, and trillions of dollars would have been saved.

Answer 5

George Bush is NOT a war criminal PERIOD! Whether or not the reasons for attacking Iraq in 2003 were valid or not, INTERNATIONAL LAW does not consider 2003 a new war, by LAW, since the Persian Gulf War was ended in a cease fire agreement and not a PEACE TREATY, technically and legally, the war was still on going without overt hostilities as long as both sides abided by the terms of the cease fire. Iraq did not abide by the terms of the cease fire therefore according to accepted INTERNATIONAL LAW, either side could resume hostilities at any time for any reason. Bush got authorization from the UN and the US Congress to resume hostilities and end the war. It is NOT an illegal war, the only people claiming it as such are those without any knowledge of US or International law. whale Esmerelda, why don't you read even ONE book on the law before you open your mouth and pretend to know what you are talking about. Your opinion is worthless in the face of facts and the law.

Answer 6

There is a big difference in the war the Democrats started, than the ones of today. Today we are fighting for freedom in our Country just as much as for those that have to live in a Country were any day could be your last. We must fight them over there or here on our own soil, which do you want?

Answer 7

Because the President doesn't always have the choice of doing what is most popular. I don't agree with the 'war', but we also don't know what he was told. And don't say "CNN said..." or "FOXNEWS said...". Let the politicians do what they feel is best.

Answer 8

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BUSH AND JOHNSON ARE VAST! JOHNSON WENT IN NEVER TO WIN! AND BUSH WAS BACKED BY 98 SENATORS WHO VOTED FOR IT AND ONLY 66 PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT! SO I WOULD SAY NO MATTER WHAT HIS RATINGS ARE THE CONCLUSION IS VERY DIFFERENT!

Answer 9

bush does not care about americain deaths like he cares about his
dog.

Answer 10

Bush has done exactly what he was told to do . by his handlers and your next president will be the same. Do you think these people are stupid?