Back on his optimistic second Inauguration Day, President Bush might have predicted that his two terms would be remembered for fighting terrorism, reforming Social Security, cutting taxes and aiding economic growth. More than a year later, the American people are ordering things quite differently, according to a new USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll: 64 percent said Bush will be most remembered for Iraq, and not in a good way — 60 percent said it’s going badly.
On the legacy question, Iraq bested the war on terror (18 percent), the Katrina response (10 percent), his U.S. Supreme Court appointments (5 percent) and tax cuts (2 percent). But who knows? The second term isn’t even half over. Maybe once we’re out of Iraq, that war will be weigh less on American minds, and move lower on the legacy scale.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- george on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- parkay on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
31 Comments
Or, once we try to invade Iran and have our Army cut to pieces in the field, Iraq will look better by comparison.
Who actually believes we will be out of Iraq by the time the shrub is done? This is a mess the next administration will have to deal with.A lot will depend on who you ask. If you ask republican about Bill Clinton, they can’t get past Monica and the Ovall office bj. If you ask democrats, they mention a booming, peactime economy, trying to help minorities into the middle class. A president who actually caught and jailed or executed terrorists guilty of homeland attacks.
Remember the words of Winston Churchill: “History will remember us kindly. As we are the ones that are writing it.”.
I often wonder how those that lived through a period would see the event in a different view then one reading it in a history book? I have actually thought of writing what happens down to pass to my decendants. I it would be different then G.W. would have them believe.
Forget 9/11? Yeah, Rhonda, it’s all too clear that you and many of your liberal brethren have already.
Joe:Ridiculous. Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. This simple fact is the root of the problem. Figure out a better way to apologize for your boy.
Joe,Forget Osama bin Laden? Seems that you and your ilk have.
Actually Iraq does have everything to do with 9/11. Because that incident lead to the Iraq invasion.
But Bush will always be known for the Iraq war and having the reputation of being more stupid than Quayle.
He is not going to fair well in his legacy. Lets see if the Republicans can do it better in 08, because they will most likely take the Presidency again.
Bush will go down in history along side of his fellow Texan – both known for failed war policies.
How about a Constitutional Amendment prohibiting Texans from ever being president again?
Ben! If you let Texas secced and be their own country they would go for it in a heartbeat.
That way you can be sure that no more Texans will ever be President of the USA. ;)
And, after Bush tried so hard to make Iraq the centerpiece of his WOT, guess the spin masters can’t win em all!
And Bill Clintons will be Monica
Bush’s overall approval measure stands at 33%, the lowest rating of his presidency. Bush’s job performance mark is now about the same as the ratings for Democratic and Republican congressional leaders (34% and 32%, respectively), which showed no improvement in spite of public approval of the congressional response to the ports deal.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=2...
No Rom. Most Americans consider Monica to be irrelevant. I suppose those who have never sinned in their lives might be consumed by it but not the rest of us.
I don’t think GW gives a flying fig about polls, his poularity, his numbers…He has a deep and abiding faith thatGod has told him what to do, and, in the end, everything will come out according to God’s plan, and “history” will, in the end, judge his actions as, well, “inspired”. Yeah, right.
6 years later and Rom is still obsessing about Clinton.Poor guy….
Well with folks like ‘ol Rom bush’s legacy will be “Clinton did it” Everything bad bush leaves behind will be Bill Clinton’s fault.
Four years after 9/11…We got Saddam, but no Bin Laden.Just a lot of good soldiers up in heaven.This is how we carry on?
Maybe someday, you too will have sex, Rom.
Then you can stop obssessing about the other people who do . . .
1. If humans can alter behavior in ways to slow or mitigate against catastrophic global warming, and
2. If a tipping point in time exists past which humans cannot influence global warming, and
3. If a sitting US president insists that America has a moral duty to LEAD THE WORLD in spreading American values throughout the world, and
4. If that president nevertheless fails to act in a timely manner, then
5. That president will find his mellow harshed by history.
This *may* describe President Bush.
JoeYour false statement – -Actually Iraq does have everything to do with 9/11. Because that incident lead to the Iraq invasion.
You are very wrong, 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. Bushytail wanted to aveng his daddy and the Industrial defence complex’s push, is what put us in Iraq.Again, 9/11 had NOTHING to do with Iraq ! ! !
GARY HART
US Army in jeopardy in IraqBy Gary Hart
| March 11, 2006
IN 1812, Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia and, after success at the battle of Borodino, marched on and occupied Moscow. Napoleon and his generals took over the palaces of the court princes and great houses of the mighty boyars.
Sadly for Napoleon, the Russians had different plans for their nation. Within days after abandoning their city to the French army, they torched their own palaces, homes, enterprises, and cathedrals. They burned Moscow down around Napoleon. Denied his last great triumph, the disappointed emperor abandoned Moscow and started home. Along the way, he lost the world’s most powerful army.
Recently one of Islamic Shi’ites’ most revered sites, the golden mosque in Baghdad, was destroyed by sectarian enemies. By this act and the reprisals that followed, Iraq moved a substantial step closer to civil war. Though a remote, but real, possibility, an Iraqi civil war could cost the United States its army.
Hopefully, leaders are planning for this possibility. If sectarian violence escalates further, US troops must be withdrawn from patrol and confined to their barracks and garrisons. Mass transport must be mustered for rapid withdrawal of those troops from volatile cities in the explosive central region of Iraq. Intensive diplomatic efforts must be focused on preventing an Iraqi civil war from spreading to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria. Such a potential could make the greater Middle East a tinder box for years, if not decades, to come.
But the first concern must be the safety of US forces. It is strange to contemplate the possibility that the greatest army in world history could be slaughtered in a Middle East conflagration. But prudent commanders have no choice but to plan for this danger.
In greatest danger are the units in the Sunni central region cities. They are in real jeopardy if tens of thousands of angry Sunni and Shi’ite citizens, supported by their sectarian militias, surround and then overrun those units before they can be withdrawn.
The United States lost one war not too long ago in Vietnam. Conditions are taking shape that could result in the same outcome in Iraq. Not to plan now for this apocalyptic possibility would be tantamount to criminal neglect on the part of our political and military leadership.
A major part of the dilemma we have created is the result of failure to know the history and complex culture of Iraq. As we refused to learn from the French experience in Indochina, we also failed to learn from the British experience in Iraq. We are on the cusp of religion and antique hatred overtaking whatever latent instincts toward democracy we may have relied on or tried to instill. We face the reemergence of 11th-century Assassins and 17th-century ethnic fundamentalism arising to replace a century of ideology — imperialism, fascism, and communism.
The character of warfare and violence is being transformed. The warfare of the future is not World War II, or even Korea or Vietnam. It is Mogadishu and Fallujah — low-intensity conflict among tribes, clans, and gangs. We are not prepared for that kind of warfare.
The United States is in danger of finding combat forces trapped in a civil war that they cannot prevent, control, or win.
America’s army is in danger, and that danger is possibly just around the corner.
Gary Hart, a former US senator, lives in Kittredge, Colo.
Serial murderer is the best way to describe Bush
CNN “U.S. military launches what it terms the largest air assault in Iraq since 2003 invasion, targeting insurgents north of Baghdad.”
Oh yeah sure, just murder everybody in Iraq, then claim victory.
What, no “terrorists” you stupid jerk.
Ben, Texas is a territory of Mexico we get to tax.
Bush has a plan to get Iraq off the front pages. Invade Iran.
Politicians used to campaign, now, after lessons from Ariel Sharon, Bush has been shown how many votes murdering children in the “Great War On Terrorism” will frighten poor Evangelicals from the punishment they deserve and vote.
“Terrorist” is such a stupid word that Bush doesn’t dare say the air-strike is against “Terrorists” but “insurgents.”
Talk about leaving Iraq, he’ll switch back to “The “terrorists will have won.”
And to think American soldiers are dying over this Zionist/ PNAC/neoconservative/ concocted nonsense.
Interesting view found on the web. With the mentality of Bush/Cheney this is not only possible but martial law also.
Iranophobia
by Paul Craig Robertshttp://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts155.html
If you were President George W. Bush with all available US troops tied downby the Iraqi resistance, and you were unable to control Iraq or politicaldevelopments in the country, would you also start a war with Iran?
Yes, you would.
Bush’s determination to spread Middle East conflict by striking at Iran doesnot make sense.
First of all, Bush lacks the troops to do the job. If the US military cannotsuccessfully occupy Iraq, there is no way that the US can occupy Iran, acountry approximately three times the size in area and population.
Second, Iran can respond to a conventional air attack with missiles targetedon American ships and bases, and on oil facilities located throughout theMiddle East.
Third, Iran has human assets, including the Shia majority population inIraq, that it can activate to cause chaos throughout the Middle East.
Fourth, polls of US troops in Iraq indicate that a vast majority do notbelieve in their mission and wish to be withdrawn. Unlike the yellow ribbonfolks at home, the troops are unlikely to be enthusiastic about beingtrapped in an Iranian quagmire in addition to the Iraqi quagmire.
Fifth, Bush’s polls are down to 34 percent, with a majority of Americansbelieving that Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a mistake.
If you were being whipped in one fight, would you start a second fight witha bigger and stronger person?
That’s what Bush is doing.
Opinion polls indicate that the Bush regime has succeeded in its plan tomake Americans fear Iran as the greatest threat America faces.
The Bush regime has created a major dispute with Iran over that country’snuclear energy program and then blocked every effort to bring the dispute toa peaceful end.
In order to gain a pretext for attacking Iran, the Bush regime is usingbribery and coercion in its effort to have Iran referred to the UN SecurityCouncil for sanctions.
In recent statements President Bush and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeldblamed Iran for the Iraqi resistance, claiming that the roadside bombs usedby the resistance are being supplied by Iran.
It is obvious that Bush intends to attack Iran and that he will use everymeans to bring war about.
Yet, Bush has no conventional means of waging war with Iran. Hisbloodthirsty neoconservatives have prepared plans for nuking Iran. However,an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran would leave the US, already regarded asa pariah nation, totally isolated.
Readers, whose thinking runs ahead of that of most of us, tell me thatanother 9/11 event will prepare the ground for a nuclear attack on Iran.Some readers say that Bush, or Israel as in Israel’s highly provocativeattack on the Jericho jail and kidnapping of prisoners with Americancomplicity, will provoke a second attack on the US. Others say that Bush orthe neoconservatives working with some “black opts” group will orchestratethe attack.
One of the more extraordinary suggestions is that a low yield, perhapstactical, nuclear weapon will be exploded some distance out from a US port.Death and destruction will be minimized, but fear and hysteria will bemaximized. Americans will be told that the ship bearing the weapon wasdiscovered and intercepted just in time, thanks to Bush’s illegal spyingprogram, and that Iran is to blame. A more powerful wave of fear and outragewill again bind the American people to Bush, and the US media will notreport the rest of the world’s doubts of the explanation.
Reads like a Michael Crichton plot, doesn’t it?
Fantasy? Let’s hope so.
Restore the republic,Darren
http://www.lp.org/
“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from the government.”
–Thomas Paine ‘The Rights of Man’ c.1792
Did I just read “Forget 9-11″?? Did I read that correctly?? No one should ever, ever, EVER put those words together. I don’t care what your point is, do not EVER say “Forget 9-11″. You can bash Bush all you want, but do not EVER forget about 9-11.
No one will ever forget 911 Brian. First off just because they won’t.
But mostly no one will ever forget 911 because bush has made it a talking point, a distraction, a justification, a vindication for just about everything he does whether it has anthing to do with 911 or not.
When the ratings get too low, release the documents:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1734490&page=1
Yeah kansassam, and if the poll numbers drop more, we can expect to see another video of ossama’s greatest hits. That ought to bring the country back in line for war daddy.
I’m beginning to think that Iraq is just a giant “staging area” so we can roll directly into Iran, guns blazing.. :(