Is George Bush doing a good job fighting terrorism?

Is President Bush doing a good job of fighting terrorism?

  • Yes, he is doing what is best.

    Votes: 12 12.2%

  • Yes, but he could do more.

    Votes: 3 3.1%

  • No, he isn't doing what is best.

    Votes: 11 11.2%

  • No, in fact he's screwing things up more.

    Votes: 72 73.5%
  • Total voters
    98
ArmandV said:
Your poll numbers would be low also if you had to constantly endure the drumbeat of attacks by DemocRATS and the biased media.
Click to expand...

The Democrats? I haven't heard anything from the Democrats lately. It seems to me that they're being bullied by the Republican party. Or at least not taking a stand on what they believe in. But I mean in all honesty, look at the choices that the Bush Administration has made. Cutting taxes, the Iraq war, the handling of Katrina, etc. Sure biased media has a role in this, but the way I see it's just an absurd Administration.
 
"My fellow Armericanlanders. You might say that I am not putting any thoughts into UStian infernal issues, but I say that we must first fight the eviltude that has infestigated the Empire of evil. You know what I am talking about. Iranaq is a place that the terroristians think the can plan their evil with my/our oil and threateningly take it away from daddy. Yea , I shall smitten our enemies with fortrightousness and Godlytude.
I say if I cut taxes in Land o'freedonia, then how shall those get to work in New Yorktown? And I have never handled Katrina. Clinton got into trouble for that type of thing.
Let us pray"

You could look on the bright side. At least he isn't a smarmy git like our dear PM, Tony. I swear if Bush told Blair to leap through a burning hoop, he'll do it.
 
I think the Bush Administration is doing a horrible job handling the war in Iraq, and the presidency in general.
 
Thor said:
I think the Bush Administration is doing a horrible job handling the war in Iraq, and the presidency in general.
Click to expand...

Naturally, nothing goes 100% the way you want it. Do you really think the democrats would do a better job in Iraq (besides cutting and running)? We wouldn't have had 9/11 if Clinton and his party took more decisive action against Bin Laden following the first World Trade Center bombing. We had the embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the Cole, yet Clinton and the democrats did nothing (oh, yeah, they bombed a pharmacutical factory. La-de-da.).

Bush may not be 100% to my liking (I'm a Reaganaut), but I would rather have him at the helm than a wussy democrat.
 
Lets not stereotype people. We don't know what Kerry would have done. Do we? No, thats called assuming. Guess what? Assuming makes an ass out of you and I.
I would rather have Kerry, or Nader instead of George W. Bush.
It's not about going 100% the way I want. It's about not being a giant mess-up, like the Bush administration has been.
 
Let me just say that the Bush Administration is nothing more than a bullsh*t administration.
 
Ma Cherie said:
Let me just say that the Bush Administration is nothing more than a bullsh*t administration.
Click to expand...
Glad you said this, as there is a hidden meaning in 'Bush' namely "BUllSH*t" :p :D
 
Mitsuo Oda said:
Go ArmandV!! I'm behind ya!
Click to expand...

When someone has to resort to name-calling and "colorful metaphors" instead of backing up their position, you know they've already lost.

Bush isn't totally to my liking (I think he spends too much and hasn't vetoed anything), but when it comes down to who will actually take the fight to the enemy, then the choice is obvious. I'd rather fight them over there than here.
 
So who exactly is the enemy? The way I see, he foolishly went to war thinking there were WMD's and when none were found. But of course, since no weapons were found he had to change the reason for going to war. To make it justifiable. What is this so-called war on terrorism? Who exactly are we fighting? The insurgency is fighting us because we're in Iraq. Oh, and how about stripping away some of our rights? To protect us from terrorism? Talk about incompentence. Oh and Hurricane Katrina? I can't even defend Bush, this has to be the worst thing the Bush Administration has ever done.
 
I too am not crazy about bush. But I do have respect for anyone who takes control of the most powerful country in the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


We have to remember that not only was Bush in support of the War. But many others, including Democrats (Like John Kerry), who Voted for going to war.
So yes, Bush is to blame and has the final say, but also to blame are the Senators and the horrible intelligence that we received. In a way, I think it egged him on.

But anyway, I am only a civilian. So I have to assume that I am only getting half the truth or non at all.
 
Democrats like Kerry voted to authorize the use of military force. It is not the same as going to war. Congress did not declare war. It is clear now, that Bush had all the intelligence he needed to know that Saddam had no connection to either 9-11 or Al Qaeda, and had no WMD's of any sort.
 
sabro said:
Democrats like Kerry voted to authorize the use of military force. It is not the same as going to war. Congress did not declare war. It is clear now, that Bush had all the intelligence he needed to know that Saddam had no connection to either 9-11 or Al Qaeda, and had no WMD's of any sort.
Click to expand...


C'mon. That's like saying someone's a little bit pregnant. The Congress had the same intelligence data that Bush did.

The full story on what Saddam did or didn't have has yet to be presented.
 
Ma Cherie said:
So who exactly is the enemy? The way I see, he foolishly went to war thinking there were WMD's and when none were found. But of course, since no weapons were found he had to change the reason for going to war. To make it justifiable. What is this so-called war on terrorism? Who exactly are we fighting? The insurgency is fighting us because we're in Iraq. Oh, and how about stripping away some of our rights? To protect us from terrorism? Talk about incompentence. Oh and Hurricane Katrina? I can't even defend Bush, this has to be the worst thing the Bush Administration has ever done.
Click to expand...


Just because the WMDs weren't found does not prove they never existed. Saddam had the nerve gas, that is well-documented (he used it on the Kurds). There have been many reports that during the time the UN was debating over the resolutions, Saddam had the material sent into Syria.

Incompetence, you say? Have you been attacked since September 11, 2001? We didn't start the war on terrorism. Somebody else did on that date.

It wasn't just our intelligence that led us to believe the WMDs were there. The insurgency hasn't really been fighting us, they've been targeting civillians.

What rights have you lost? Your representative in Congress voted for the Patriot Act.

Hurricane Katrina was a screw-up from the bottom-up. The first line of responsibility is the city and state governments (check the law). They dropped the ball and it caused problems on the federal level. Granted, the feds didn't do exactly a stellar job either. But the problems with the state and local levels made the problem a lot worse.
 
Congress does not get the same intelligence data that the President does. It is clear by the CIA briefing notes that have been released that Bush had significant information that his claims were dubious and shouldn't be pushed. However, your point is still well taken. Congress does bear a share of the blame. Similarly the press does not escape unscathed.

Saddam had no al Qaeda connection, no 9-11 connection, no nuclear program, no chemical or biological weapons and posed no imminent threat to the United States.
 
Ok, coming from an Active Duty military member, Bush is definately not doing what is best, he has his own visions, rather than a wide view of what needs to be tended to. Although on the other hand, if we had gotten any other president than Bush in office during this period of time we would have witnessed more attacks on the U.S. than we did.

By him being a dumb texan starting wars with other countries and bullying others around he has diverted the attention on other areas of the world (middle east) rather than having attacks occuring on us soil.

... Now all we have to do is wait for Bush to get out of office, and have the next president rebuild the us economy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 9903 times.

Back
Top