"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 10/21/11 9:19 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 10/21/11 8:56 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...


Fortunately, we didn't have an absolute dummy in the white house during
the cuban missle crisis. We did have an absolute dummy in the white
house from 2001 to January 2009. You know, the guy who started two wars
with countries not at war with us. That dummy.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I am old enough to remember well the Cuban missile crisis and watching
JFK on television announcing the blockade.
It turns out he made the right choice of his options but most historians
agree that we were never closer to WWIII.
It could have gone another way. Khrushchev also got much of what he
wanted in under reported, secret negotiations.

I think many are too quick to condemn Bush for some of his decisions and
seem to forget that forcing Saddam Hussein
from power was not without at least 6 months of international discussion
and debate in the UN. Hussein was becoming increasingly more
defiant of the resolutions imposed by the international community (UN)
following his invasion of Kuwait, firing on
aircraft patrolling the "no fly" zone, etc. I am sure there was some
pressure from other nations as well to keep him in check.

We can only speculate on what actions Hussein would have taken if he was
not confronted. If Bush had done nothing and
Hussein had become more aggressive again, internally and with neighbors,
Bush would be regarded as a dummy for not doing anything rather than
being a dummy for the action he took. Tough job, being POTUS. I surely
would never want it.

President Obama rightly deserves some credit for helping rid the world
of Gaddafi. Hussein was also a war mongering
dictator who ruled by imposing terror on Iraqi citizens who didn't
pledge their allegiance to him. So why is Bush a dummy
and Obama a hero?

The argument that Obama took a "back seat" role versus a major military
action doesn't hold up. Different situations, different
difficulties and challenges.





I was in my first year of college when the Cuban missile crisis took
place. Kennedy was smart enough to go for the blockade instead of
bombing the missile sites, which would have resulted in the deaths of a
lot of Russian personnel.

The Cuban missile problem was real. The Bush Administration lied us into
Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither of those countries was involved in 9-11.
-------------------------------------------------------------

That's your view and you have made it abundantly clear. I am not
convinced that Bush knowingly lied at the time, but
those that believe it in the Monday morning quarterbacking circles will
never consider any other thoughts or opinions.

I *do* believe that Bush came to realize later that the multi-nation
intel was faulty with regard to the WMDs (he has
admitted it) but at the time of making the decision to act, it was
considered reliable. Only later did it become a
partisan political issue with many in Congress who initially supported
Bush turning against him and condemning him.

Tough job, being POTUS ..... as our current one is learning.

It is a tough job. My feeling about Bush, based upon many of his
"decisions," is that he rarely thought things through and acted
impulsively. These are both characteristics of a personality prone to
substance abuse, which plagued him for many years.

--------------------------------------------------------

Being nowhere near an expert in linking presidential decisions with
substance abuse, I have
no idea or opinion. I judge by what the actions are, what the reasons are
and try to keep a somewhat
logical, open mind about them.