English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

what achievements, domestic and foreign, bolster your claim to this individual's greatness?

2007-08-20 04:31:15 · 14 answers · asked by Just another Y!A liar. 7 in Arts & Humanities History

14 answers

Harry Truman dropped nuclear bombs on hundreds of thousands of men women and children in two Japanese cities.That was the worst war crime ever perpetrated by any U.S President.Nothing excuses the awfulness of that crime.

2007-08-20 04:52:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 5

First, with this sort of question (along with "best" and "worst" valuations) it is wise not to even consider the current or most recent person to hold the office, because we all have too much partisan bias and not enough historical perspective... or evidence of whether their policies actually worked.

That said, I believe the clear answer is Ronald Reagan, who:

a) played a huge role in the ending of the Cold War (no, not single-handedly, but I don't see it happening without him)

b) rebuilt American international strength (after a period in which Communist regimes had been taking hold in many parts of the world)

c) turned around an economy in the doldrums (high inflation, high unemployment and very high marginal tax rates all cut). In fact, since the recession early in his first term there have only been two brief economic downturns (nationally that is) in the past 25 years

d) communicated clearly and winsomely, encouraging optimism about the efforts above through his OWN optimism, and to effectively "sell" his policies (use of the "bully pulpit", often able to 'go over the head of Congress' directly to the American people)

2007-08-21 22:57:31 · answer #2 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 1

This is a tough one to answer because everyone holds their own concept of greatness. Based on my own preferences, I kept going backwards in time, farther than I had expected.

I suppose the award would have to go to FDR. He presided over the worst economic crisis this nation has ever faced: the Great Depression. He also guided the country through most of the largest war in history: World War II.

I'll grant to his critics that the New Deal had many flaws, but I must give him an "A" for effort. He did keep this country going when it could easily have come apart, as facist and communist parties were gaining strength as a result of the Depression and this country could have gone as violent as Europe did. Just my opinion.

Yes, FDR had his flaws, but the fact that he kept the whole "ship of state" together for those horrible years is more than most could have handled effectively.

2007-08-20 13:42:44 · answer #3 · answered by Bookworm 4 · 6 0

John Kennedy.
I live in Germany and everyone I know remembers his famous: "Ich bin ein Berliner". He was not only intelligent, but possessed an intellectual sophistication no American president, with perhaps the exceptions of FDR and W. Wilson, has had, before or after.
He was consistant in his policies, recognized his mistakes publicly and apologized for them, was a magnificent orator, knew how to connect across race, gender, class and nationality.
He avoided a major world conflict during the Missile Crisis by seeking an agreement with the Soviets; wanted to prevent the war in Vietnam for becoming what it did under Johnson, and, if he had lived a full term (perhaps a second), he would have been responsible for dealing with the Civil Rights Bill.

2007-08-20 14:28:37 · answer #4 · answered by Letizia 6 · 2 2

Probably there are no great ones, but only presidents that have done more good things than bad things.

As time passes by, and when we start looking at things on retrospective, usually the good things start weighing more than the bad ones, and that president's regime starts to become "idealized". I think once the generation that lived under that administrations passes away, and all we have are written records, then the historians start weaving the "greatness" or "not so great" perspective for posterity.

It also has to do with the administrations succeeding one that was relatively good, for example, President GW Bush's administration has made many people look back at Bill Clinton's administration with a sense of nostalgia, but it doesn't mean the latter was great, at the time, he made mistakes like the others, but we perceive him as a good one in comparison.

2007-08-20 12:19:36 · answer #5 · answered by J Kibler 2 · 1 2

Kennedy, for making promises and actually attempting to keep them.

The Bay of Pigs Invasion - Disaster, I will admit

Cuban Missile Crisis - We avoided the war that would have destroyed us

The Berlin Wall - At his speech he blatantly said to the world, "Democracy has its flaws, but at least we don't have to wall our people inside." He also said that if anyone wanted to see the divide between democracy and communism, peace and war, prosperity and despair - come to the wall.

American Civil Rights Movement - Huge. Huge. Huge.

His death brought another a mourning much like what would have been held for King Arthur, which is a comparison I've seen many times.

His brother also might have been great, but we never had the chance to find out because he was assasinated as well.

2007-08-20 13:36:35 · answer #6 · answered by sakira_starwolf 6 · 1 2

Let's take into consideration the B-29 raids over the Japanese mainland. Until US forces could land there, they had to somehow take the war to the Japanese. Air power was the only way, and those bomber raids killed more people and destroyed much more infrastructure than both bombs. No bombs meant either an invasion or blockade to induce surrender, and neither of those alternatives were a guarantee.

Richard Nixon, despite his "tarnished" reputation, opened the door with the Chinese, and used this new friendship (and China's influence) to end the Vietnam war.

2007-08-20 13:44:41 · answer #7 · answered by phil5775 3 · 2 2

Why do you say "was"? What about GWB, protector of Iraq and New Orleans...?

But seriously, Nixon would be a good choice. He ended the Vietnam War, and opened relations with China. He also acted for the good of the country in resigning (rather than waiting to be impeached), and before that, in refusing to contest Kennedy's election results.

2007-08-22 03:25:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

IMHO, it is a tossup between Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. They were both honest men. They both came from humble backgrounds and were more in touch with the working man. Truman's "The buck stops here" sign was a good indication of his integrity. He was responsible for the two-term limit on the presidency. Too bad he didn't extend it to Congress. Eisenhower was (as far as I know) the only president to reduce the national debt.

That was back in the days when Americans still believed in the greatest good for the greatest number of people and not for the lunatic group which screamed the loudest.
We still believed in "What's good for General Motors is good for America" instead of globalization or a North American Union.
We still believed in a honest day's work for an honest day's pay, we still believed in God, and we still believed in family values.

2007-08-20 11:49:38 · answer #9 · answered by oldsalt 7 · 3 3

The fact that people are lauding Harry Truman should amaze me, but it doesn't. Truman 'agonized' over the dropping of the bomb to be sure, but he still made the decision, which makes him no better than Japan attacking Pearl Harbor! Hypocrisy is rampant in this country. Honorable warfare does not dictate murdering women and children, regardless of the desire to refrain from sending 'Americans' into battle. Nor is there 'considerable evidence' that it saved more Japanese lives than would have been lost. That is absurd.

2007-08-20 12:30:56 · answer #10 · answered by pampersguy1 5 · 2 4

Harry S. Truman was the last great American president, fashioned from the same mold as Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln. He had the intelligence of Jefferson, the home-spun qualities of Jackson, and the integrity of Lincoln. He had the courage to drop the A-bomb in order to end the war and save American GIs' lives, although he struggled with a Congress that fought him every inch of the way. He did not meet Marilyn Monroe or Monica Lewinsky in back rooms; he did not cover-up a arms-for-hostages deal; he did not botch a Cuban invasion or a hotel break-in. He was not as dumb as a box of hair (current Bush) or quick to invade (Bush I). He did not ignore an AIDS crisis (Reagan). He got up every morning for a brisk walk at 6am with reporters trying in vain to keep up, worked hard and for long hours, had a plaque on his desk saying "The buck stops here," and went home to his wife and ate watermelon and had seed-spitting contests in the White House. At one point, he made me want to grow up to be President but not anymore. Not after Watergate, Iran-Contra, Whitewatergate, Monicagate, Win-the-war gate and several other scandals in between. He ranks up there with Washington and Lincoln

2007-08-20 11:46:08 · answer #11 · answered by actormyk 6 · 5 4

fedest.com, questions and answers