Does Goerge Bush rank right up there with Hitler as a great military leader?

Question

Both Bush and Hitler had wars that were going well, Bush in afganistan, and Hitler on the western front. Then both of them made the mistake of attaking a neutral country. Hitler attacked the USSR and this is one of the main reasons he lost WWII, Bush attacked Iraq and Al Qaeda recovers it's strength... So Hitler had his two Fronts and Bush has his two wars, Maybe Bush is a fan, or maybe he;s just too dumb to realize learning history can help us today.

Well stevey If If you could read, or get someone to read the question to you, you might see what I'm saying. Go back to the comic book section, son.

umm was the USSR actively in the war? Were they fighting? that's pretty neutral to me. at least you didn't try and tell me Iraq was neutral...

Answer 1

Before he attacked the USSR, Hitler had annexed, seized, or conquered Austria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Norway, Holland, Luxembourg, Belgium, and most of Poland and France. Bush deposed the Taliban and the Baathists, but never consolidated his gains in either Afghanistan or Iraq long enough to ensure "victory" as we defined it before Bush turned the word into an Orwellian "doublespeak" term. I wouldn't say they are comparable as military leaders.

Answer 2

I would partially agree with you. Both were/are certainly arrogant. There was plenty of military history prior to WWII that Hitler ignored. The main difference is that Hitler, being a dictator, had more time. If by chance, the War on Terror is surrendered as lost, Bush will get the reprieve of not being in charge at the time. Hitler did not have this luxury.

Answer 3

you will be able to desire to verify very lots greater earlier you opt for Hitler replaced right into a robust chief. there is a lot greater to it than the popular you examine. once you learn the persecution of the Jews, you may desire to keep in mind that the Jews controlled the banks and as a result, the $. it incredibly is often bearing directly to the money. and albeit Hitler replaced into incredibly slightly nutty. while he despatched his troops into Russian and had them harm each thing of their course, they had no retreat accessible. that incredibly helped while they have been being fought on yet another front by ability of the Allies. If he hadn't theory his troops could desire to exist on not something, we'd all be speaking German suitable now. He wasn't that great. The Nazis did undesirable issues to human beings and wholesale slaughtered thousands and thousands of human beings. . .Jews, Gypsies, Russian squaddies and absolutely everyone that have been given of their way. They dealt with those prisoners previous atrocious...it incredibly is dazzling that one man or woman can try this to a diverse. You for sure have not incredibly looked into what befell. it incredibly is all documented. earlier you're making statements such as you have, you will be able to desire to income greater. once you attempt to comprehend, you will locate out you are able to not even image what befell to those prisoners. they does not have died besides and it had not something to do with start administration. earlier you're making statements, you will be able to desire to income lots greater.

Answer 4

Ummm, the USSR wasn't neutral during any part of WWII, they were allied with Nazi Germany until Hitler decided to stab them in back. Open a history book!

EDIT: You called them a neutral country, when in fact they were very active while allied with Germany. In Nov. 1939 the USSR invaded Finland, and they lost some territory to the Soviets. Also in Sept. 1939, the USSR invaded the Baltic states; Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia. They were defeated and annexed into the Soviet Union by August of 1940.

Answer 5

Yet another person comparing our President to Hitler.... tasty and full of class!

BTW... How is a dictatorship run country, seeking WMD's and threatening other countries with action neutral?

Answer 6

If you think about both of them they both failed because of one common factor! They both didn't take the advise of their Military Generals!

Answer 7

Yup, Hillary is far more evil than Bush. I think they're both idiots; but I now count you one in the same....

Answer 8

as a liberal extremist, when you use Bill Clinton as a leader of the nation and value the "legacy" he left us as americans its easy to see how your priorities are dyslexic.


- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

The problem is, when you look at what you use for a benchmark in the light of day, its very clear your issues range beyond bush to find what represents quality in a president.

Answer 9

afghanistan...successful? yeah right! maybe i would agree with you if we captured bin laden, but we haven't.

Answer 10

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

Every American should watch this.