Scared Monkeys Radio Daily Commentary – Tuesday, January 13, 2009 – America Is A Safer Place Because Of George W. Bush
- Dana points out that in spite of some missteps in office, George W. Bush still deserves the respect of a former Commander in Chief, and hopes that the good he did in office will not be overlooked.
Download and Comment at ScaredMonkeysRadio.Com
Posted January 13, 2009 by Scared Monkeys
Podcast, Politics, Scared Monkeys Radio | 23 comments
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
23 Responses to “Scared Monkeys Radio Daily Commentary – Tuesday, January 13, 2009 – America Is A Safer Place Because Of George W. Bush”
Leave a Reply
Some years back, a newspaper article circulated in the media detailing all the quotes from leading Democrats as to why yes, indeed, Saddam Hussein did have weapons of mass destruction and why yes, indeed, it was imperative to take them out.
(He certainly showed no reluctance to gas the Kurds. And ask the Kuwaitis about the kindness of his invasion and occupation.)
Of course, we won’t be hearing the media remind us of those comments, will we?
Nor will we be reminded of all the prognostications that no, we can’t fight in the desert, we can’t defeat the Iraqi army in battle, we can’t, we can’t, how dare we, we can’t….
But let’s remember: we DID defeat Saddam Hussein’s military in a quick war.
Was the aftermath of the war carried out with 100 percent success? Probably not.
COULD it have been? Would the results have been better if the Democrats had fought the war and supervised over the aftermath?
Probably not ….
Will there EVER be peace in the Middle East?
Take a look at history and make what decisions you can from that.
In my view, which probably is worth about what you’re paying to read it, the biggest mistake that the U.S. is making in its approach to the Middle East is assuming that the Arab regimes … at least, some of them … genuinely want peace.
I might be out in left field here, but I think they want to keep their populations concentrated against the “enemy” Israel.
Why? Because if there were a true peace agreement under any kind of equitable terms, then:
a. the militant groups wouldn’t have an enemy to focus on … except for the ruling regimes.
b. the population would start to question the privileged nature of the incompetent oil regimes.
c. sooner or later, those regimes would have to take definitive actions … whereas under the present situation, they can simply try to keep everyone happy and avoid doing anything that involves risk to their own positions.
Obviously this is a superficial analysis. But I suspect it’s the basic reality. If there is no ‘enemy’ Israel to face, then the incompetence of the ruling Arab regimes would be a public issue.
Am I full of beans?
You are so right Richard. Saddam was off his rocker and wanted world domination through control of mideast oil. How come nobody saw the gravity of this when he invaded Kuwait? The Saudis did. I guess you can’t praise somebody for warding off a holocaust.
Thank you President Bush for keeping us safe and thank you for trying to keep the world safe. Sorry for the liberal a-holes who do nothing but run their mouths about woulda’ shoulda’ coulda’ like they could do better.
Cambell Brown, shut the F’ up still whining about Federal response to Katrina in New Orleans. You are just showing what an idiot you are. You do not realize the magnatude of the damage the gulf coast suffered. Do you understand the logistics of rescuing 30,000 plus people? You are a disgrace and an idiot.
Richard, you are correct. It’s a basic principle that people who don’t have food, housing, medical care, jobs, the basics of life, will eventually rise up against those in power. By making Israel and the ‘infidels’ the target of their anger and hatred, the ruling regimes in the Arab world continue to amass wealth while their people suffer. Lack of education, lack of contact or honest information about the outside world and propaganda fuel the hatred and violence. I’ve never voted for anyone named Bush. But I sure don’t hate everything he’s done.
As for Katrina, I seem to recall the total ineptitude of a man named Ray Nagin in that fiasco. He said he knew he’d be reelected because he was running against two white guys. And sure enough he was. Our federal government’s job performance during and after this disaster was so disgraceful that no one focused much on the Mayor.
Keeping us safe?
Did you forget about 9/11/01 when 2800+ people died? Did you forget President Bush was President at the time?
Dana is out of his mind if he thinks Bush did anything but further destroy the sovereignty of the USA. What planet you living on Dana?
SM, Why not blog about the efforts of the slimeball, Roman Polanski, to get the authorities to dismiss the charges against him and allow him to return to the USA a free man. I think it is a crime that this man would have attorneys argue how HE has been persecuted. This man should be extradicted to face charges for raping a 13 year old. Why not blog on this topic?
Safer? How is it that we are “safer” because of GWB yet the experts say “The United States can expect a terrorist attack using nuclear or more likely biological weapons before 2013″.
If Bush has “made us safer”, how is it that we can expect a biological or nuclear attack by 2013?
“Our margin of safety is shrinking, not growing” reports the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Proliferation and Terrorism in December 2008.
And this isn’t the first report. In 2007 the GAO found that the military was understaffed and unprepared for chemical or biological attacks.
“Most Army units tasked with providing chemical and biological defense support are not adequately staffed, equipped, or trained to perform their missions.”
I could go on and on…
Doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve respect for being POTUS, doesn’t mean he hasn’t done some really good things. But Bush has not kept us safe, nor made us safer than we were.
He has left us unprepared.
YoYo….You still at it I see. Yes, we are aware that Bush was President on 9/11/01 (he had been in office 8 months) but he is not the one responsible for the terrorist attacks (or are you part of the conspiracy theory nuts?) How many times in the past 7 years have we been attacked? Which btw if Clinton had done his job we would not have been so vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Refresh your memory, he was in office when the terrorist were planning the attacks right under his nose. These attacks were not planned in the 8 months Bush was in office this took time to plan. You may not like Mr. Bush but you can not honestly believe that he is responsible for what happened that day, if you do then you are an idiot. I know it is difficult for you liberals to comprehend but everything is not Bush’s fault. That’s all I’ve heard from you idiot liberals is “it’s Bush’s fault”. You sound like a broken record. Doesn’t speak highly of your intelligence when that’s the best you can come up with.
Have a nice day
Speaking of “not the brightest”…Michelle, do you understand what the word “safer” means?
I guess only a right wing evangelical extremist such as yourself would give Bush a total pass on the worst attack in US history that killed 3,000 people on his watch, especially since the 9/11 Commission concluded that 6 of the 10 major missed opportunities to prevent 9/11 occurred under Bush’s watch.
According to you, Michelle, we’re just supposed to give him a mulligan on that.
Michelle – Bush did not keep us “safe”, as evidenced on Sept 11, 2001.
Speaking of a broken record Michelle, I know it’s hard for rightwing evangelicals to comprehend but not everything bad during the Bush years was Clinton’s fault.
Have a nice day as well.
As a matter of fact I do understand what “safer” means and as I stated we have not been attacked during the past 7 years under Bush’s watch. He was not responsible for 9/11.
Sure he made some mistakes…but I sure don’t think Clinton would have handled things any better, I think he would have rolled over and cried like the pansy he is. It’s so easy for you pinheads to sit here and criticize what happened on that and what he did or did not do but you wouldn’t even come close to knowing how to handle his job. You liberals think you are so smart but you never have any solutions about what you would do differently, just a bunch of hot air.
You tell me how by him being in office only 8 months that he could possibly have predicted this would happen and have a plan to prevent it? You can’t, you can only criticize.
How do you think your Chosen One would handle it Mr. Smartypants
I think GWBush did the right thing when he invaded Irak and Afganistan but he and his cabinet (a.w. Rumsfeld) and Dick Cheney got the strategy totally wrong which has cost WAY too many lifes and WAY too much money.
And GW clearly saw the financial crisis (which btw could happen because already Ronald Reagan lifted restrictions on some financial acts) much too late.
Yoyo- shut the hell up. Re-read Richard’s post and GET OFF OF IT, ALREADY!
AS IF these Countries haven’t been at war for hundreds of years! That’s all GWB’s fault too, I suppose?
Terrorisim has also been a real threat for many, many years…think back to the first car bomb in the basement of the WTC years ago! USS Cole? It was only a matter of time until they hit the US on our soil- it just happened to be under Bush’s watch.
Did George & Cheney make some mistakes regarding WMD? Yes. Are they human, yes? War sucks. REMEMBER—the cost of our Freedom here is not really free.
I also thank GWB for no other attacks occuring for the rest of his incumbency, something myself and my family does not take for granted.
History will be the judge on the legacy of GWB. Say what you will, Yoyo but don’t expect everyone to agree with your ignorance. It’s true—you sit around and whine and complain and yak and yak and hurl insults at everything! Care to tell us when was the last time you volunteered any of your time to the needy or underpriviledged? You’re just another bleeding heart liberal that loves to whine but sit on his/her ass and do nothing about it.
Don’t blame GWB for everything that went wrong. Already Obama knows what he is walking in to and has even admitted that there is no way in the Woeld he is going to be able to fix everything during his tenure. Get real.
Show some respect to George & Laura Bush and be thankful for those Men & Women who fight for the freedom you take for granted every single day.
bravo to sm for pointing this out!!! it was refreshing to have a man in the white house who cared more about keeping the country safe than winning a popularity contest. i’m completely fed up with journalists who want to leave out the most important accomplishment of our time. choosing instead to spoon feed the left their whiny drivel. ingested by those who wish to judge before they know just how many attacks were thwarted.
Had Bill Clinton been in office on 9/11 instead of Bush … does any sane person think it would have mattered? As usual, some people (aka Yoyo) want someone who can wave a magic wand and make things go away.
Billy Bob Clinton spent years slashing our CIA capabilities. He
decimated our military capabilities by cutting resources. Now
he has a library that will be outfitted with his history rewritten.
Bill wants to be remembered in a good light. ‘Libraries’ aren’t
Please pass the collection plate to foreign contributors.
YOYO: as secretary of state who do you think Hillary is going to confide in first ? it will be Bill Clinton. they have their own agenda as does your president elect. he has shown us this by the team of previous political crooks he has assembled.
the United States is in for a bad ride with these people in charge.
Honestly, I don’t feel very safe in the USA but I don’t think it has much if anything to do with who is the President. We have a lot of people who hate us in the world and they don’t even know my name…There have been vicious wars since the first rocks were thrown and those will probably be the last weapons when everthing else is blown away.
Richard – First, where do I get the inflated sense of self-importance you have that would posses you to have your name highlighted in blue even though you have no website?
Second – maybe, just maybe, people did not vote for John McCain because…oh I don’t know…they wanted a return to realism and prudence in foreign policy/temperament/truce in the culture war/different approach to war against islamist terror/upgrade infrastructure/didn’t want christian fundamentalism and morality to become “policy”/didn’t want a President Palin. The list could go on forever.
But keep thinking that the only reason anyone voted for Obama was because of a magic wand and keep highlighting your name in “blue” as a reminder of your megalomania. There can be no other reason to have your name in “blue” and not point to a website other than delusions of grandeur.
As Willy Wonka said: Good day sir.
# yoyo muffintop on January 14th, 2009 11:48 am
“Richard – First, where … no website?”
Yoyo, do you have a degree in psychology? Or do YOU think of yourself as a bit too important?
George blew it!! The worst EVER!!!!!!! George Sr. funded SADAM at one time! Richard, or who ever, look around , look at the bottom line. Look at the ecomomy,look at the defecit. Get your head out of the sand. Be glad he is a lame duck. Thank George W. for Obama,he [George] got him elected. The people had enough. WAKE UP!!
#22- Ayfit. Think you still missed the point of the post. Bush screwed up. He listened to Cheney too much, never liked that arrogant Ahole.
All the article was trying to point out was that there were some good things Bush accomplished during his 8 years.
Yes, the Nation has had enough of EVERYTHING. By Obama’s own admission (and according to all the experts) the State of ALL of our Nation’s affairs is so bad and in such disarray—no matter who is in Office- they will not realistically be able to fix everything in 4 short years. Maybe make a dent in some things in 8, but 4 years—forget about it. It took Clinton 2 terms to turn around the economy- so don’t go hailing Obama as the Nation’s savior just yet.