Greatest US President - Page 5 - 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 02-20-2007, 05:12 PM   #61
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 05:15 PM
If there should something happen like a big clash we should get Pakistan under control as fast as possible.

However, I try to stay optimistic that Bush won't start a war with Iran, and the next government will find a way to manage the situation.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 05:14 PM   #62
Refugee
 
Snowlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,211
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Washington easily should be up there around #1. Led the army in the revolution, recognized the dangers of political parties. Understood the necessity of no more than two terms. Governed both in war and in peace well.

Reagan should be up there, but not #2 but he'd be the only one I'd put in the top 5 from the modern era.

Eisenhower was such a good president that people forget he was even around. There's a lot to say for a caretaker president. He did a lot for the parks system and developed the interstates plus his leadership in WWII should account for a lot as well as his leadership during the height of the cold war. He'd be in top five.

And what about Thomas Jefferson? One of the authors of the constitution and declaration of independence? Should be ranked.

Lincoln wasn't that great I don't think as a whole. He did one excellent thing, won the Civil War that freed the slaves. But you have to wonder, could a better president have freed the slaves without a civil war? Top 10, top 5 even; not number 1.

Kennedy. God, the people who voted for him would've voted for Jessie Ventura or Ahnold as greatest governor. Just celebrity worship. Lousy president.

Woodrow Wilson should make the top 10. Lead the country through WWI and even though he failed in his attempt, tried to prevent the framework that set up WWII. Economy was good during his term too and he had he finished his second term, he would've helmed one of the great economic period of the country.

FDR was ranked high, but history will bear him out to be a catastrophic bust, I believe. He overstayed his welcome out of sheer ego, was in charge during a large part one of the worst economic periods in history and intentionally entered a war to save his presidency. Did a good job finding the right men to lead the war effort, but that's about all.
__________________

__________________
Snowlock is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 05:59 PM   #63
The Fly
 
medmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: directing traffic on the disco floor
Posts: 256
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock
But you have to wonder, could a better president have freed the slaves without a civil war? Top 10, top 5 even; not number 1.

Lincoln isn't responsible for starting the Civil War. South Carolina seceded as soon as he became president and the other southern states followed.

Lincoln felt it was his job to preserve the union, and that's what he did. He deserves every bit of praise that he gets.



And FDR entered WWII because of Pearl Harbor; not to save his presidency.
__________________
medmo is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 06:26 PM   #64
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrPryck2U
The greatest US president hasn't even been born yet. The last 10 have sucked though.
not exactly

one was the suckee
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 06:42 PM   #65
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock

FDR was ranked high, but history will bear him out to be a catastrophic bust, I believe. He overstayed his welcome out of sheer ego, was in charge during a large part one of the worst economic periods in history and intentionally entered a war to save his presidency. Did a good job finding the right men to lead the war effort, but that's about all.
As already said, he "entered" after Pearl Harbour got attacked.

One should be happy that the USA entered the war. The world would have been worse off hadn't they saved Europe and Asia.

The economic depression was not really something you can blame one person for. It was caused by the vast speculation at the stock exchange.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 07:34 PM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
MrPryck2U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Long Island, NY, USA, Earth
Posts: 8,953
Local Time: 11:15 AM
This is going to come off as way ignorant, but here goes:
GW Bush- Do I really have to say anything? He'll be remembered as the first former coke addict to be the Prez.
Clinton-All that shit with Monica and the other skanks he banged except his wife. Plus, all them folks who knew something about something and then got whacked.
Bush-"Read my lips...". Desert Storm. Shit, even his son lasted longer in office.
Reagan-Iran Contra. Reaganomics?
Carter-Iran hostage crisis.
Ford- He was good at falling a lot.
Nixon- Watergate. Resignation.
LBJ-Kept sending troops off to die in Vietnam
JFK-Smoked weed in the White House. Banged Marylin Monroe in the White House. Cuban Missile Crisis. Died too soon.
Eisenhower- Well, maybe he was ok. He sure was ugly though.
Truman- Bombed Japan.
FDR- Knew the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor, but did nothing so the US would get pissed off and get behind the war as a result.
The three presidents before FDR didn't do much because the US was in the Depression or headed for it.
There you have it.
__________________
MrPryck2U is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 07:41 PM   #67
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega

One should be happy that the USA entered the war. The world would have been worse off hadn't they saved Europe and Asia.
Wow, I'm guessing that you weren't educated in America. That sentiment hasn't been taught here in our public schools for years.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 08:02 PM   #68
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


Wow, I'm guessing that you weren't educated in America. That sentiment hasn't been taught here in our public schools for years.
Well, I don't know about what you Americans think.
But I'm not sure if the Russians would've made it, or if they had fought the Germans back, if Americans like McCarthy would have been that happy.

One thing for sure, England wasn't making it to win the war. They even depended on the American support before America entered officially. England wasn't strong enough to fight back the Germans on it's own, and who else should help but the USA?

And in Asia Japan was taking over. Additionally they would've continued to attack America. And there is no way Japan taking American islands, attacking Pearl Harbour end eventually the West coast, and America didn't do anything.

Do you get taught that the American intervention was bad because of the thousands of deaths?
It's sad, but these thousands prevented many more millions from dying.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 08:14 PM   #69
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 09:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega


Well, I don't know about what you Americans think.
But I'm not sure if the Russians would've made it, or if they had won the Germans back, if Americans like McCarthy would have been that happy.

One thing for sure, England wasn't making it to win the war. They even depended on the American support before America entered officially. England wasn't strong enough to fight back the Germans on it's own, and who else should help but the USA?

And in Asia Japan was taking over. Additionally they would've continued to attack America. And there is no way Japan taking American islands, attacking Pearl Harbour end eventually the West coast, and America didn't do anything.

Do you get taught that the American intervention was bad because of the thousands of deaths?
It's sad, but these thousands prevented many more millions from dying.
You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, there are many that want the total demise of America. Because they couldn't take the country by force, they invaded the school systems and media. A brilliant move if you think about it. But in the end they'll need boots on the ground to achieve their goal and they don't have them.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 08:35 PM   #70
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, there are many that want the total demise of America. Because they couldn't take the country by force, they invaded the school systems and media. A brilliant move if you think about it. But in the end they'll need boots on the ground to achieve their goal and they don't have them.


what on earth are you talking about?

are you comparing someone who, say, might question the necessity of dropping the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima as equivalent to the invading Russians in "Red Dawn"?

can't we be mature enough to say, yes, it was a good thing that the US helped the Allies win WW2, but, gosh, not everything the US did either in the service of winning that war -- Japanese-American internment camps, anyone? -- nor what it has done since has been maybe slightly less than holy?

and as for INDY's humorous comment, i was in elementary school in the 1980s and i stood and pledged to the flag every morning and started off each music class with a patriotic song -- maybe "50 Nifty United States" or "Under the Umbrella of the Red, White and Blue" -- and nowhere did i hear a note of humility.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-20-2007, 09:22 PM   #71
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, there are many that want the total demise of America. Because they couldn't take the country by force, they invaded the school systems and media. A brilliant move if you think about it. But in the end they'll need boots on the ground to achieve their goal and they don't have them.
AEON!

First the greetings:

Welcome back! It's been awhile and I was getting worried that we'd lost you for good.

Second the commentary:

What the heck are you talking about? Who are "They"? Surely not "the liberals", to say such thing would be beyond disingenuous! So who then? The Communists? You gotta be kidding. . .
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 09:26 PM   #72
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 04:15 PM
Abe is the most iconic for me.
__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 09:27 PM   #73
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


Wow, I'm guessing that you weren't educated in America. That sentiment hasn't been taught here in our public schools for years.
So what sentiment IS being taught in our public schools?
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 09:46 PM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock

Lincoln wasn't that great I don't think as a whole. He did one excellent thing, won the Civil War that freed the slaves. But you have to wonder, could a better president have freed the slaves without a civil war? Top 10, top 5 even; not number 1.


FDR was ranked high, but history will bear him out to be a catastrophic bust, I believe. He overstayed his welcome out of sheer ego, was in charge during a large part one of the worst economic periods in history and intentionally entered a war to save his presidency. Did a good job finding the right men to lead the war effort, but that's about all.
These two are a little short on facts.

The only way that Lincoln "started the Civil War" to free the slaves was by being Abraham Lincoln. The South hated Lincoln and South Carolina vowed to secede if he won. The only way he could've avoided war and still won the presidency was to be someone else.

Furthermore, Lincoln more than most of his contemporaries on his side of the conflict took a much more moderate and compassionate stance towards the Southerners, as people. If anyone would have avoided war if he could have it would have been Lincoln, and if there would have been anyone that could have done a great job of healing the wounds of the war, it would have been Lincoln.

As to FDR, by the time he was elected to office, the Depression had been going on for three years already. The fact that he happened to be in charge during an economic crisis that began three years before he came into office (and was arguably worsened by the previous president's insistence on a hands-off, things-will-get-better-on-their-own approach) has no reflection on his leadership.

As to his jumping into World War II to save his presidency. He was relected in 1940. Pearl Harbor and the U.S. entrance into the war was in 1941. He didn't need to "save" his presidency. He'd already secured his third term and had no worries about another election until 1944.

It's true that FDR was eager to get involved in the conflict while the rest of the U.S. wasn't but as others have pointed out, it's a good thing we did get involved.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-20-2007, 10:08 PM   #75
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




because it's absurd to draw comparisons between Lincoln and, say, a certain republican president with abysmal approval ratings bogged down in an unpopular, unwinnable war.
It's all here, really, in the two words "unpopular" and "unwinnable."

The Civil War was unpopular in the North in the fall of 1864. But unlike our current conflict, there was no confusion--no mixed signals about why we went to war, there was no sketchy justification for "invading the South" in the way that there was for invading Iraq. The war was vital for the survival of the nation, and it had a moral authority (especially after 1863) that this war simply doesn't have. That is why history judges Lincoln well for fighting an "unpopular" war.

The Civil War was also considered "unwinnable" by some in the North in 1864. But it was not "unwinnable" in the sense that Iraq is. The war in Iraq could be won if we were at war WITH Iraq. If Iraq were our enemy, instead of our ostensible "friend" that we are "helping" then we could engage in the sort of sweeping, conventional warfare (with much higher civilian casualties which would be considered more "acceptable" under such circumstances). The kind of war we are in right now is very hard to "win." (I'd be curious to know if anyone could tell us about a historical precedent in which this type of war was won).
__________________

__________________
maycocksean 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 11:15 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