How a two-term president became the quiet man of American politics - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-10-2012, 07:39 AM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,060
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
I would like to have seen any of his bashers deal with what he had to deal with, then we'll see how smart they would have been and what they would have done differently.


I can guarantee you no one other than GWB would have fabricated intelligence and used 9-11 as a means of battering an emotionally wounded populace into hesitant support for the invasion of Iraq.

Tell me, does your experience in Israel also help you understand the need to, say, torture suspects?
__________________

Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2012, 10:11 AM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
trojanchick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Feliz, CA (between Hollywood and Downtown LA)
Posts: 8,352
Local Time: 11:30 PM
I'm sorry, Bush's administration lied to the American people. The result of the lie is the deaths of thousands of people. That and he left the economy in a gigantic mess. He is near the bottom of the list.
__________________

trojanchick99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2012, 02:22 PM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,568
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
I am VERY serious......and I guess that living in Israel I can better understand and appreciate being in a state of war and the steps necessary to combat terrorism. I'm sorry that the American people don't seem to understand that terrorism can't be fought with cotton candy and lolipops (or the constitution).
I like how being opposed to the way Bush did things automatically means that means we think terrorism can be fought with "cotton candy and lolipops". 'Cause apparently it's either be nice to the terrorists (which NOBODY has ever suggested) or go to war with the country at large. There can't possibly be anything in between those two options.

Also, as noted, Israel's situations are different from the U.S.'s, so it's hard to properly compare them often. And even then, what your country's doing doesn't seem to be working very much, since you're STILL often at war with the countries that attack yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
GWB was thrust into a situation that no American president since Pearl Harbor was forced to deal with - the worst terrorist attack EVER.

I would like to have seen any of his bashers deal with what he had to deal with, then we'll see how smart they would have been and what they would have done differently.
Certainly it is easy to make comments when you're not in that situation, but I think there are two things that I know full well I definitely would have done differently if I were in his shoes.

1, I wouldn't have lied to the people about WMDs and Saddam's ties to 9/11 and diverted attention from where the terrorists actually were to wage war in a place like Iraq, both of which the Bush administration did and both of which cost us a lot of time and money that could've been better spent elsewhere.
2, I would've made sure we had a proper plan in place to get in, deal with the terrorists, hunt them, capture them, kill them if need be, and then get out, making sure beforehand we had the support of our allies and the people of the country the terrorists were in to help us along in such a quest. I would've tried to make sure that we didn't drag the war out for 10 plus years with questionable results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
GWB is underappreciated and one day history will show that he was one of the better presidents the U.S. ever had.
If you say so.
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 09:06 AM   #24
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,060
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
NY Times reporter: Bush White House didn't listen to 9/11 warnings

(CBS News) Eleven years after the 9/11 attacks, there is new information on what the George W. Bush administration knew about al-Qaeda's plans.

We learned after 9/11 that a presidential briefing paper in August 2001 was headlined "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

But Tuesday in the New York Times, investigative reporter Kurt Eichenwald says the White House received ominous warnings as early as May 2001.

CBS News spoke with Eichenwald Monday. He said, "What I've been able to see are the presidential daily briefs before August 6 of 2001. And they're horrific, and they are - our reports are 'an attack is coming,' 'there are going to be mass casualties.' The worst of them, the Pentagon, the neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, as the CIA was coming in saying, 'al-Qaeda's going to attack,' said, 'Oh, this is just a false flag operation. Bin laden is trying to take our attention off of the real threat, Iraq.' And so there are presidential daily briefs that are literally saying, 'No they're wrong, this isn't fake, it's real.'"

"CBS This Morning" co-host Norah O'Donnell said, "Then when a lot of people hear this, aren't they going to say, 'This is another example of where, not just the Bush administration, but our intelligence community dropped the ball. They failed to heed the warnings that were in a number of these (documents) that went all the way up to the president of the United States.'"

Eichenwald replied, "Actually, the counterterrorist center of the CIA did a spectacular job, and that's what really comes down. You know, in the aftermath, the White House and others said, 'Well they didn't tell us enough.' No, they told them everything they needed to know to go on a full alert and the White House didn't do it."

Eichenwald has stumbled onto a well-worn path, according to CBS News senior correspondent John Miller, former FBI deputy director and assistant director of National Intelligence, said on "CBS This Morning."

"We knew some of that," Miller said. "What he has added is the granularity of the actual memos and some of the actual words that were there in front of the White House and the National Security team. But, you know, Richard Clark, who is the national security advisor for terrorism, in his book, he said all the lights were blinking red and we were pushing this in front of Condi Rice every day and it was hard to get any priority on this. In George Tenet's book, he details the briefings they were given, so some of this we knew, and there's some of it in terms of the level of detail we didn't know."

But is al-Qaeda still a threat? Miller said the central command of al-Qaeda is "all but dead," but you "have to keep an eye on it." He explained, "It's still capable of being lethal on a small scale. What we have to worry about is not al-Qaeda central command. It's al-Qaeda-ism, which is the way they have marshaled the internet to find followers they have never met who can also do things that are lethal through this kind of inspiration."

NY Times reporter: Bush White House didn't listen to 9/11 warnings - CBS News

fuck Bush.
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 09:21 AM   #25
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Exactly.

How could he had not known? I'm sure Cheney and Rumsfeld knew damn well, yet for some reason didn't encourage Bush to do anything. After all, didn't he rely on those two for decision making?

It makes me sick that while the towers were burning and collapsing, Bush sat and read a book to schoolchildren. What was his logic in that?

I don't think Bush was some sociopath, but his brain certainly was not capable of functioning. Still isn't perhaps.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 10:41 AM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 27,428
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl View Post

It makes me sick that while the towers were burning and collapsing, Bush sat and read a book to schoolchildren. What was his logic in that?
Well I can't fault him for that. With all those kids there and you are told something like that. I don't think he kept reading a book for that long, while they were collapsing. I can't remember exactly how long it was. I think it was a brief period of time , before they got him out of there.

But I certainly do fault him for what's in that CBS News article, if that's accurate.
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 10:55 AM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 02:30 AM
OK, maybe I was ranting too much when I said that. But if an aide were to tell someone "our country is under attack", would that person stay put or get up immediately? I know he didn't read for too long, but it just doesn't make sense to me.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 11:31 AM   #28
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,060
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl
OK, maybe I was ranting too much when I said that. But if an aide were to tell someone "our country is under attack", would that person stay put or get up immediately? I know he didn't read for too long, but it just doesn't make sense to me.

It's because he was never really in charge. Tey had to go figure out what his role was going to be and what they were going to tell him, both about what had happened and what he was then supposed to do.
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 11:40 AM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 02:30 AM
I guess while we could never truly point the finger at one person over that, or agree if staying put was a wise decision.

I know there was great concern for the president that day. I remember after he left the school and Florida, no one knew of his whereabouts for deep security reasons.

Its just to have Bush read to the kids while even he didn't look like he wanted to either (I know I questioned earlier his logic, but if he was told to stay where he was, then that wasn't his decision), it just doesn't look like a very good decision to me. Whoever was in charge could've done something else. If they were concerned over alarming the kids, I can understand that. But our country was under attack and it looked as if Bush was advised to act nonchalant for the time being. It was just wrong to me.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 01:29 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,440
Local Time: 06:30 AM
I do think that hindsight on the day is 20/20. No one knew what was happening (I remember Today show commentators saying that calls were being placed to JFK and LaGuardia, to see if there was some kind of ATC problem; it wasn't until the attack on the Pentagon that it became clear). If I were advising the President, and if there was a fundamental lack of knowledge about what was happening, I would have told him to sit tight (particularly as he was in a school that was off the beaten track) until we knew something more too. 7 minutes in the long-term scheme of things is not that long; it may have been the last calm, measured response to terrorism that Bush's administration ever saw.
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 02:03 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 5,951
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Or maybe it was in this moment when he realized that they should have done more. I know it would have been near the top of my mind had I known about this information of an attack, did nothing, and now there's an attack.

I do not think he's a horrible man, but I do think he was a horrible President, and he let his staff do all the work for him.
BEAL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 02:15 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 27,428
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL
Or maybe it was in this moment when he realized that they should have done more. I know it would have been near the top of my mind had I known about this information of an attack, did nothing, and now there's an attack..
I think that's a good point, especially if this new story is true
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 02:30 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,568
Local Time: 12:30 AM
I always wondered why they had someone come into the classroom to inform him of the news. Why didn't they just poke their head in, say, "Sorry to interrupt, but we need the President for a moment" or something, call him out to the hallway, and then tell him the news? I don't know if it would've changed much in his decision-making, but at least it would've been less awkward than being told in a classroom and having to figure out a way to keep calm around the children.

Anywho, the classroom thing, damned if you do, damned if you don't, I guess, but it does still infuriate me that they had the warnings coming for months leading up to that day and didn't bother to investigate them further. This tragedy did not need to happen, and had people been doing their job, it wouldn't have.
Moonlit_Angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 02:35 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
I always wondered why they had someone come into the classroom to inform him of the news. Why didn't they just poke their head in, say, "Sorry to interrupt, but we need the President for a moment" or something, call him out to the hallway, and then tell him the news? I don't know if it would've changed much in his decision-making, but at least it would've been less awkward than being told in a classroom and having to figure out a way to keep calm around the children.
That is a good point. I think last year for the 10th anniversary, some news program interviewed those students and asked what was going through their minds that moment. They said they were a bit frightened and confused to see Bush very angry. Of course, now they know why. So yes, the decision to tell Bush in front of the children was not smart or good for anyone in that room or school.
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 05:35 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,440
Local Time: 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
This tragedy did not need to happen, and had people been doing their job, it wouldn't have.
Careful. From the NY Times article:

"Could the 9/11 attack have been stopped, had the Bush team reacted with urgency to the warnings contained in all of those daily briefs? We can’t ever know. And that may be the most agonizing reality of all."

In his book "What the Dog Saw," Malcolm Gladwell writes persuasively in his chapter on "Enron, Intelligence and the Perils of Too Much Information" about the notion that too much information actually drowns everything out. The build-up to 9/11 is, IMHO, a great example of that: so much information coming from so many different arenas that everything cancels out. (This in contrast to the build-up to the Iraq war, where too little information was conflated and inflated beyond significance.) He talks about the difference between puzzle and mystery. The defining difference: in a puzzle, you don't have enough information. In a mystery, you have too much.

It feels like this is relevant to this part of the discussion:
Quote:
If things go wrong with a puzzle, identifying the culprit is easy: it's the person who withheld information. Mysteries, though, are a lot murkier: sometimes the information we've been given is inadequate, and sometimes we aren't very smart about making sense of what we've been given, and sometimes the question itself cannot be answered. Puzzles come to satisfying conclusions. Mysteries often don't.
Anyway, his article is here:
gladwell dot com - open secrets
__________________

nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×