Posted on 02/10/2010 11:14:31 AM PST by Chuckmorse
Yes George W. Bush was a great president. Not because of his domestic policy, which was only slightly less liberal than previous modern administrations in terms of growing the size and scope of the government, but because of his far sighted and revolutionary foreign policy. By liberating Iraq from Saddam Hussein and by striking a deadly blow against the Taliban in Afghanistan, George Bush set off a chain reaction in the Arab and Islamic countries, one that will inexorably propel those oppressed societies forward on a path toward democracy and modernity. Genuine progress may not become apparent this year, or even by the end of the decade, but the job that Bush started will eventually come to fruition because he was right.
If there is one positive thing that could be said at this point about President Barack Obama it is that he is continuing, at least in deed, the Bush policies in the Middle East and for this he should be commended.
George Bush will eventually go down in history as the liberator of millions of people from the brutal jackboot of Islamic dictatorship and jihadist theocracy. The peoples of the Arab and Islamic countries deserve to be free. Franklin D. Roosevelt provided the leadership that led to the liberation of Europe from Nazism and Ronald Reagan led the way in the liberation of Russia and Eastern Europe from Communism. Likewise the Bush policy was to establish human rights in a part of the world that has few. Bush was carrying out an American tradition that harkens back to the founding of the American Republic and the revolution against the British tyrant.
General Ulysses S. Grant called for "unconditional surrender" in the war against the southern insurrection and by doing so Grant set the terms of that war, contrasted the political and moral cause of the Union with that of the Confederacy, and turned the tide toward victory for the Union and the emancipation of the slaves. FDR also called for the "unconditional surrender" of the Nazis while attending a conference in Casablanca in 1942. By doing so he galvanized the moral force of the allies and sealed the fate of Hitler. Reagan led in the collapse of communism by calling the Soviet Union the "evil empire" and exhorting Mr. Gorbechev to "tear down that wall."
On the 5th anniversary of the jihadist attack on September 11, 2001, Bush addressed the nation stating "we've learned a great deal about the enemy. We have learned that they are evil and kill without mercy but not without purpose. We have learned that they form a global network of extremists who are driven by a perverted vision of Islam...a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and desposes all dissent."
Bush defined the enemy when he stated that " The war against this enemy is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century, and the calling of our generation...We face an enemy determined to bring death and suffering into our homes...If we do not defeat these enemies now, we will leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons...If we yield Iraq to men like bin Laden, our enemies will be emboldened."
"The terrorists fear freedom as much as they do our firepower. They are thrown into panic at the sight of an old man pulling the election lever, girls enrolling in schools, or families worshipping God in their own traditions. They know that given a choice, people will choose freedom over their extremist ideology. So their answer is to deny people this choice by raging against the forces of freedom and moderation. This struggle has been called a clash of civilizations. In truth, it is a struggle for civilization.
Chuck Morse is co-host, along with patrick O'Heffernan, of the radio program "The Fairness Doctrine" heard on WDIS and WNSH-Boston and is the author of "The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism" soon to be published by World Net Daily Books.
That is simply not true.
Agreed, His strategic plan was brilliant and is leading to generational change in the middle east. He will grow in stature as time goes by. In my view is the best since Reagan. Had he fought the left as well he could have better.
Yes. It may be generations before people realize just how great he was.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO, LOL. my favorite quote of his - “i abandoned free market principals to save the free market”. What i find funny is when i agree with a liberal friend on disliking Bush, it is always for completely different reasons.
W. left the nuclear infrastructure intack in Iran. That fact alone will forever keep him from being a great foreign policy president.
intack=intact
Bush’s weakness and drift on domestic and economic issues deprive him of any credible claim to greatness. On foreign policy and national security, he rates a B or B+.
Yeah, but he left American troops on both sides of Iran in a pinch hold. Israel will take care of the nuke.
Of the 44 presidents we’ve had, George W. certainly ranks in the bottom 15%. I mean, come on, the guy could barely utter a sentence without mangling it. The reason we’re on tinter hooks about Iran now is because Bush was spineless in dealing with them, this is directly his fault, and certainly the economy was in a severe downward spiral under his administration.
Absolutely, George W. Bush was one of the worst presidents in history, but compared to Obama he’s George Washington.
Bush did quite well, especially since he had to work with a Democratic Senate from 2001 through January of 2003, and then with a Democratic Congress from Jan 2007 through Jan 2009.
Tax cuts. Banning partial birth abortion (the first SCOTUS victory against Roe v Wade). Missile defenses. Offshore drilling. Faith-based Charity. Dethroning Charles Taylor in Liberia, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Expanding NATO. Legalizing private space travel. Convincing Libya to surrender all of their WMDs without bloodshed or bribes.
Bush looks better every day.
I tend to agree with you. His National Security and Foreign Policies will be long remembered and take him over the top. No one will recall education or prescription drug benefits.
No.
Like his father, much of his foreign policy was utter crap.
We should have pulled out of the Balkans for one thing. That would have forced Europe to confront and contain Albanian Islamic expansion on their own dime.
He should have left Israeli Palestinian relations to the parties involved.
When we secured Iraq he should have withdrawn our forces entirely from Saudi Arabia, leaving them to defend themselves from their neighbors thus having much less resources to cause trouble abroad.
I present you this short video as exhibit #1
2001 World Series - Yankee Stadium Game 3 "There he stood like a brick wall" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evb489N11Q4&feature=related
trying that link again....
Overall counting all 8 years, no he is several people down on my list of best Presidents - BUT, Rating him on his first 2 or 3 years I would most definitely rate him as one of the best. God Could not of given us a better man to get this country back following 9/11.
I present you this short video as exhibit #1
2001 World Series - Yankee Stadium Game 3 “There he stood like a brick wall”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evb489N11Q4&feature=related
Let’s just say that his admin kept us from another attack for 7 years and leave it at that.
Let me think about that for a second. No.
Not great. OK perhaps. Good intentions, good man.
I guess the way I gauge greatness is whether or not I would vote for him again. Today.
Reagan? In a heart beat.
Bush Jr...Not in my lifetime.
All the while his Saudi masters kept funneling money into the US for mosques, islamic “schools,” and various islamic lobbyist groups.
Just to set the record straight, Grant only called for unconditional surrender once in his early battles because he thought the opposing commander was a well known supreme a-hole. Turns out the a-hole had already abandoned his command and left one of Grant's old friends in charge. Someone who had lent Grant money when he was down and out so he could get back home. The friend was greatly offended and I doubt Grant would have used such forceful terms if he knew his friend was in charge.
However, the press loved "Unconditional Surrender" and made the label stick. Grant's main goal was to obtain quick victory and achieve reunification as soon as possible. He was actually very conciliatory toward his enemy, letting many of his prisoners go home, and refusing to have surrender ceremonies after his victories.
Good analysis and I agree. I would call him a great President because of being the strong leader we needed at the time of 911. Not all of his decisions and policies were great though, but I don’t think they have to be. Reagan was great overall. The rest of the modern Presidencies were average to poor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.