Bush's approval rating hits an all time low - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-08-2007, 06:10 PM   #31
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 10:03 PM
Most Americans disapprove of Bush's veto of the troop pull-out/spendng bill.

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/

Since this poll supports my position, I believe in it.
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-08-2007, 08:47 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:03 PM
Bush and Cheney are up to 39% here
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-08-2007, 11:02 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,460
Local Time: 12:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


The worst ever was 22% for Truman in 1952, but today Truman is regarded as one of the greatest Presidents ever.

Over 70% of registered Republicans support Bush. According to the latest gallup poll, 40% of Americans are against any sort of pullout from Iraq. Bush's approval rating in the latest gallup poll is 36%. The fact of the matter is, most of these often repeated criticisms of Bush were there in 2004, and Bush won that election with the first clear majority for any Presidential win since 1988. George Bush received more votes in 2004 than any President has in history. One of Bush's strongest area's of support is the military and there are Americans from every single background race and religion across this country that currently support Bush, as well as U2 fans and members of this forum.
you are beyond comprehension.

there are no words.
__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 09:31 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan


The PR problem Bush has, is his competency and the lack thereof.

Ethically, you could accuse any President of wrong-doing because that becomes the nature of the beast. Even Reagan had the Iran-Contra affair hanging around his neck, Clinton had bedroom problems, they are both the most popular Presidents since JFK.
In fact most of their harshest critics would admit a certain level of competency in both cases.

With GWB, it is transcending politcal parties and idealogical boundaries. The public perception of his competency was never strong even among those who supported him in 2000. They voted for him because of conservative, Christian values and a big electable last name, not because he ran an oil company into the ground and piloted a baseball franchise to severe medicority.

If this were an ethics number, I'd guess it'd be higher.
I don't think it's all that difficult to assess the situation (if one were a Bushie) and quickly come to the conclusion that he's still a good guy, probably meant well and just didn't have the tools (read:the ability to listen to dissenting opinions) to make a very good decision. If he's lost 15% or so of his support, I'd guess these people think something very similar. Rather than buy into the war crime argument or something.

Basically, I think for that 15% or so that is bailing, the social concerns are just outweighed by a ton of other more pressing problems.

If the SC overturns Roe in the next 20 months, he'll be seen as a revolutionary in the Republican and conservative circles. He'll take on mythic status. Otherwise, socially he's done nothing for his base or anyone else besides cut taxes for the rich. What about the history books will rewrite itself about the intelligence failures and the post war planning? It will not rewrite itself. Short of this thing turning around before 2010, it will become a debacle or it will have been turned around at the hands of someone else, who will take and be given credit.

Where would Bush fall into that mix historically?
Exactly as the history is and will be written.
Book after book, from Tenet's latest to Sheuer (sp?) to Richard Clarke, to Colin Powell speaking through his assistant Wilkinson, to Woodwards book, written from inside the Oval office.
They all say the same thing.

Some folks are waiting for a magic bullet to appear.
Bush will not be able to escape the last 4 years, period.
If democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan take hold and revolutionize the middle east, the whole thing turns around blah blah blah wine and roses etc., it will be the interventionalist foreign policy that gets the credit, dare I say, the actual neocons, the Perle and Kristol crowd who will look like geniuses, and their defense will ultimately be "had we had better leadership, we'd have saved time, money and lives" and the culprit then becomes, Bush, Cheney and Rummy. Fall guys, and if the circumstances were such, rightfully so. This administrations' goose is cooked barring a miracle in the next two years.
History is not written and decided by books written at the moment in a heated political environment, but in broad detailed analysis done decades after the events, and untainted by the political storm surrounding the events at that time.

Truman had plenty of intelligence and planning failures on his watch. History has not rewritten those failures, but instead has put them into proper context. History does not judge by the political winds of the moment or simply mistakes and failures. It considers everything, as well as the scale of what is being done and accurately compares the cost, victorys, defeats, mistakes etc, t to other moments in history. Truman left office with a 22% approval rating, but today is consider one of the greatest Presidents of all time.

The Bush administration successfully removed the Taliban from power in Afghanistan and has set up the most successful occupation and reconstruction mission in the history of Afghanistan. Despite the fact that Afghanistan is a more fractured society than Iraq in terms of ethnic diversity, has 5,000 year history of warlordism and civil war, the country is making good progress given the position it was starting from in 2001. Al Quada has been driven from Afghanistan and most violence that still occurs is from Taliban fighters hiding in the mountains just across the border in Pakistan. After nearly 6 years of occupying Afghanistan, the United States military has suffered 206 troops killed by hostile fire. At the same time during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, the Soviets had suffered 8,500 troops killed by hostile fire! These facts are often hidden or not discussed by the media and politics of today, but will be well examined by history balancing out the assessment that history will make about President Bush.

On Iraq, history will of course look at the reason for the war, Saddam Husseins regimes behavior and capabilities. It will examine the history of his time in power, not just the events of 2003. The largest use of WMD by any leader in history, 4 unprovoked invasions and attacks on other countries, coming close to siezing or sabotaging the majority of the planets energy supply, as well as maintaining one of the largest military forces in the world with WMD capabiliites.

Saddam spent 12 years playing games with UN inspectors, pretending to comply with disarmament and then blocking efforts to verify this and finally kicking out all UN inspectors in total violation of the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement. It was never incumbent upon the United States or any other member state of the UN to prove that Saddam had WMD, it was incumbent upon Saddam to verifiably disarm of all WMD and related programs and he failed to do so. Thousands of stocks of WMD remained unaccounted for according to UN insepectors. Intelligence before the 1991 war showed that Saddam was 8 years away from getting a nuclear weapon. Afterwards it was found he was only 6 months away. In 2003, specific intelligence in regards to Iraqi WMD proved to be inaccurate. What this simply shows is that "intelligence" cannot accurately tell whether a country does or does not have certain types of WMD/programs and that uncooperative regimes like Saddam's would have to be removed if the ultimate goal is to insure the regime is completely disarmed and will never again be able to rearm with such weapons. Ironically, the "failure of intelligence" in this case is actually a justification for regime removal since the peaceful means of containing Saddam and insuring disarmament are obviously inadequate, at least in this case. Just as important, the inability to maintain a full proof sanctions and embargo on such a country will insure that any sort of containment/disarmament regime will fail. Sanctions and the weapons embargo started to crumble in the year 2000.


The planning failures for the post occupation phase in the summer of 2003 do not change the fact that the scale of what was being done is enormous and would entail heavy cost, even if the perfect plan was being executed from day 1. Nation Building/Counter insurgency tasks involve enormous difficulties and require extensive amounts of time in order to be successful, even without hostile elements within the country trying to sabotage the effort. History will note this and will assess Iraq on the basis of past nationbuilding/counterinsurgency efforts in other country's. While Afghanistan has been comparatively vastly more successful in several area's, it does not change the fact that Iraq has made amazing progress as well, despite the difficult circumstances. Afghanistan tends to be more of the exception and Iraq the rule in terms of the cost of successfully completely such nationbuilding/counterinsurgency efforts.

While the time it will take to successfully complete the effort in both Iraq and Afghanistan will last long beyond the Bush administrations time in office, the most important actions and events will have occured while Bush was in office. The next President will either pre-maturely withdraw from Iraq creating a potential disaster and new security threats for the United States, or they will enherit and become the caretaker of Bush administration policy in Iraq and will see the nationbuilding/counterinsurgency task started and implemented by Bush to its completion, for which Bush will get most of the credit for considering the most difficult time in such a long operation is always at the start, not at the end.

As for the books that have been written about the war, Tenets in several ways actually defends administration policy. Woodwards books have been discredited in many ways going all the way back to the one he wrote about the Bush Sr. administration. Both Tenet and Powell have gone on record as saying that certain events and things said in Woodwards book are simply inaccurate. Colin Powell does not speak through his assistent, he speaks for himself. Colin Powell has clearly stated that when it came to the question of the use of force against Saddam's Iraq, he agreed with the President, that it was not tolerable for Saddam to remain in violation of 17 UN Security Council resolutions and that he was right there with the President on the use of military force to remove Saddam from power. He stated this clearly on the Barbra Walters special he went on in either 2004 or 2005.

Once again, the books written in the political heat of the moment do not decide history. In addition, Presidents get the credit or the blame for policies. Provided the next administration does not withdraw pre-maturely from the course set by Bush, the operation in Iraq will succeed and Bush will get most of the credit given that nationbuilding/counterinsurgency operations are always more difficult in the early years than towards the end of the operation.

The Bush administrations "goose" is no more cooked than Trumans administration. Just look at the cost of the Truman administrations intelligence failures in the Korean war. Again, history does not rewrite such failures, it puts them into proper context. It considers everything, as well as the scale of what is being done and accurately compares the cost, victories, defeats, mistakes, benefits to other relevent moments in history to arrive at an accurate assessment of the topic or issue. Provided the United States does not withdraw prematurely from Iraq, it will succeed in rebuilding the country. In that case history will indeed be on Bush's side. But even in the case of a pre-mature withdrawal by the next administration, history will likely still be with Bush. The threat Saddam posed to the region and the world is obvious given Saddam history and capabilities as well as the close proximity of much of the planets energy reserves to Saddam's Iraq, plus the need to stabilize and build Iraq after his removal given Iraq's location in the Gulf will be easily recognized as well. Despite the mistakes in the occupation phase early on, on both the issues of removing Saddam, and rebuilding Iraq, overall Bush did the right thing.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 01:21 PM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Despite the mistakes in the occupation phase early on, on both the issues of removing Saddam, and rebuilding Iraq, overall Bush did the right thing.


[q]The Iraq war, which for years has drawn militants from around the world, is beginning to export fighters and the tactics they have honed in the insurgency to neighboring countries and beyond, according to American, European and Middle Eastern government officials and interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.

Some of the fighters appear to be leaving as part of the waves of Iraqi refugees crossing borders that government officials acknowledge they struggle to control. But others are dispatched from Iraq for specific missions. In the Jordanian airport plot, the authorities said they believed that the bomb maker flew from Baghdad to prepare the explosives for Mr. Darsi.

Estimating the number of fighters leaving Iraq is at least as difficult as it has been to count foreign militants joining the insurgency. But early signs of an exodus are clear, and officials in the United States and the Middle East say the potential for veterans of the insurgency to spread far beyond Iraq is significant.

Maj. Gen. Achraf Rifi, general director of the Internal Security Forces in Lebanon, said in a recent interview that "if any country says it is safe from this, they are putting their heads in the sand."[/q]



it's very simple. we are less safe. Americans in Iraq have motivated a generation of jihadists, and will continue to do so. democracy in the Middle East is now synonymous with death, destruction, incompetence, and torture. we are training them over there so they can come kill us over here (or in London, or in Paris, or in Berlin, or in Casablanca). we train them as soliders by day, and they become insurgents at night. a newly radicalized, American-trained, American-funded group of jihadists are coming. get ready.

overall, Bush has destroyed nearly everything in his path.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 01:28 PM   #36
The Fly
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 42
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
[i]


it's very simple. we are less safe. Americans in Iraq have motivated a generation of jihadists, and will continue to do so. democracy in the Middle East is now synonymous with death, destruction, incompetence, and torture. we are training them over there so they can come kill us over here (or in London, or in Paris, or in Berlin, or in Casablanca). we train them as soliders by day, and they become insurgents at night. a newly radicalized, American-trained, American-funded group of jihadists are coming. get ready.

overall, Bush has destroyed nearly everything in his path. [/B]
i gotta agree with alot of that. these are holy wars we cannot control and are seeming to instigate more of.
__________________
cliffdive is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 01:59 PM   #37
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 10:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
a newly radicalized, American-trained, American-funded group of jihadists are coming. get ready.

They won't be the first ones the US has trained and funded.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 02:56 PM   #38
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


They won't be the first ones the US has trained and funded.



but it might be the first time we've trained and funded them to kill us.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 04:32 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




[q]The Iraq war, which for years has drawn militants from around the world, is beginning to export fighters and the tactics they have honed in the insurgency to neighboring countries and beyond, according to American, European and Middle Eastern government officials and interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.

Some of the fighters appear to be leaving as part of the waves of Iraqi refugees crossing borders that government officials acknowledge they struggle to control. But others are dispatched from Iraq for specific missions. In the Jordanian airport plot, the authorities said they believed that the bomb maker flew from Baghdad to prepare the explosives for Mr. Darsi.

Estimating the number of fighters leaving Iraq is at least as difficult as it has been to count foreign militants joining the insurgency. But early signs of an exodus are clear, and officials in the United States and the Middle East say the potential for veterans of the insurgency to spread far beyond Iraq is significant.

Maj. Gen. Achraf Rifi, general director of the Internal Security Forces in Lebanon, said in a recent interview that "if any country says it is safe from this, they are putting their heads in the sand."[/q]



it's very simple. we are less safe. Americans in Iraq have motivated a generation of jihadists, and will continue to do so. democracy in the Middle East is now synonymous with death, destruction, incompetence, and torture. we are training them over there so they can come kill us over here (or in London, or in Paris, or in Berlin, or in Casablanca). we train them as soliders by day, and they become insurgents at night. a newly radicalized, American-trained, American-funded group of jihadists are coming. get ready.

overall, Bush has destroyed nearly everything in his path.
American trained and funded
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 04:34 PM   #40
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
American trained and funded


the Iraqi "army."
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 04:36 PM   #41
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:03 PM
I fail to see how the Iraqi army is jihadist any more than the Egyptian or Syrian armies are jihadist.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 04:46 PM   #42
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I fail to see how the Iraqi army is jihadist any more than the Egyptian or Syrian armies are jihadist.


iraqi soldier by day, Sunni jihadist/Shiite militiaman by night.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 04:48 PM   #43
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 11:03 PM
like a switch hitter?
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 05:21 PM   #44
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
like a switch hitter?


or a super hero.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-29-2007, 05:22 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 11:03 PM
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com