Carter says Bush's presidency 'worst in history'

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by Azure

A bit early to say something like this?

In about 10 years we will fully see the effect Bush had on the Middle East. Perhaps 30 years from now.

Fully agreed. I understand why, but the myopic view people have of the time they in which they live really bothers me.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

Fully agreed. I understand why, but the myopic view people have of the time they in which they live really bothers me.

In that case, I sure hope you weren't one the people on here who crucified Jean Chretien and Paul Martin. They should also get a 30 year grace period.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Nothing spells the end of 'happy fun time' like under priced illegal arms exports.

Yep, Reagan's downfall.

One of the reasons I'm not a 'gushing Reagan fan'...guess you missed that part.

That's ok though...deflect the point.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

Fully agreed. I understand why, but the myopic view people have of the time they in which they live really bothers me.

Kind of got tongue tied getting that one out, eh. I hope thirty years from now we won't be paying for Bush's idiocy but it doesn't look good. Right now more people hate the west than before Bush started his shenanigans without considering the people who have lost their lives because of Bush. I can't think of a bigger disaster in my life, even the Viet Nam war didn't have the ramifications the Iraq war will have.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Yep, Reagan's downfall.

One of the reasons I'm not a 'gushing Reagan fan'...guess you missed that part.

That's ok though...deflect the point.

I'm not deflecting anything, just point out that your assertion that Iran feared some sort of reagan presidency is false.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'm not deflecting anything, just point out that your assertion that Iran feared some sort of reagan presidency is false.

How does what you posted accomplish that?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

How does what you posted accomplish that?

By pointing out the logical fallacy of fearing reprisals from a government for holding some of their citizens hostage...while they actively try to sell you arms.

If that doesn't make sense though, you can always fall back on scary no-nonsense ronnie. I'm sure that's why the hostages were released.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

By pointing out the logical fallacy of fearing reprisals from a government for holding some of their citizens hostage...while they actively try to sell you arms.

If that doesn't make sense though, you can always fall back on scary no-nonsense ronnie. I'm sure that's why the hostages were released.

So the Reagan administration was actively trying to arm the hostage takers for the 12 hours they were in power and the hostages were still imprisoned?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

So the Reagan administration was actively trying to arm the hostage takers for the 12 hours they were in power and the hostages were still imprisoned?

Ya.

Go read christopher hitchen's june and july articles in the nation. Reagan officials were actively negotiating with Iraninan parties to keep the hostages secure until after the election.

If you don't believe me, and you don't, read up on it yourself. Christopher Hitchens wrote about it pretty extensively in The Nation in 1987, I think the articles were called 'Minority Reports' or something? It's been years since I read them, and i'm not going to bother googling them for you.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Didn't ask you to do anything for me.

I guess I'm failing to see how a person who is not in office, and by your account, not even elected yet has the ability to export arms.

Whatever.

My original point remains...Carter was weak through that entire situation.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Didn't ask you to do anything for me.

I guess I'm failing to see how a person who is not in office, and by your account, not even elected yet has the ability to export arms.

Whatever.

My original point remains...Carter was weak through that entire situation.

I'm not defending carter, he's part of the reason the US is in the mess it's in right now, but to say Reagan got the hostages released because his administration wasn't weak isn't a simplification, it's simply wrong.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

In that case, I sure hope you weren't one the people on here who crucified Jean Chretien and Paul Martin. They should also get a 30 year grace period.

Who said anything about crucifying? I don't think Bush is a good President...his mistakes FAR outweigh his successes.

But, as far as the Middle East goes...you will not see the full effects of what Bush did right now. Wait 10 years...then you might.

We are seeing the effect Jean Chretien had on the Canadian Military. Very much so.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Who said anything about crucifying? I don't think Bush is a good President...his mistakes FAR outweigh his successes.

But, as far as the Middle East goes...you will not see the full effects of what Bush did right now. Wait 10 years...then you might.

We are seeing the effect Jean Chretien had on the Canadian Military. Very much so.

I can't think of any Bush successes other than making his buddies lots of money.

Why do you have to wait ten years to figure out you're being rogered.

Chretien had his failings, but he put Canada on a good economic footing by cutting national debt.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

There are some out there who feel the reagan presidency in particular, but US policy towards the soviet union in general, prolonged the soviet union by as much as 15 - 20 years.

I've never heard a single political scientist or analyst state that Reagan prolonged the Cold War.

The guy, in part, sped up the collapse of the USSR because of his tough and uncompromising stance against Gorbachev and the Soviets.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by peter12

I've never heard a single political scientist or analyst state that Reagan prolonged the Cold War.

The guy, in part, sped up the collapse of the USSR because of his tough and uncompromising stance against Gorbachev and the Soviets.

glasnost and perestroika did far more damage to the soviet union than Reagan could ever manage to do.

How did Reagan really speed up the process?

Maybe you could make the case about sponsering resistance in Afganistan, but the Soviet Union wasn't matching US military expenitures anyways. They had essentially backed out of the arms race when Reagan ramped it up again.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

glasnost and perestroika did far more damage to the soviet union than Reagan could ever manage to do.

How did Reagan really speed up the process?

Maybe you could make the case about sponsering resistance in Afganistan, but the Soviet Union wasn't matching US military expenitures anyways. They had essentially backed out of the arms race when Reagan ramped it up again.

Glasnost and Perestroika were definitely utilized by the Reagan Administration to make inroads against the Soviet Union.

The release of political prisoners, for example.

As well, the increased expenditure on first delivery subs and cruise missiles. The Soviets saw no alternative but to attempt to match spending. It ended up destroying them.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I can't think of any Bush successes other than making his buddies lots of money.

Why do you have to wait ten years to figure out you're being rogered.

Chretien had his failings, but he put Canada on a good economic footing by cutting national debt.

Maybe you should think a bit harder.

Like Chretien, Bush had his failings too....they're just a bit more obvious and have a more significant impact on the world.

I don't understand what you mean by 'rogered.' You have no idea how Afghanistan will turn out, how Iraq will turn out 10-30 years from now. That is WHY I said it is a bit early to say he is the worst 'ever.'

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Azure

Maybe you should think a bit harder.

Like Chretien, Bush had his failings too....they're just a bit more obvious and have a more significant impact on the world.

I don't understand what you mean by 'rogered.' You have no idea how Afghanistan will turn out, how Iraq will turn out 10-30 years from now. That is WHY I said it is a bit early to say he is the worst 'ever.'

things have progressively gotten worse in the states and other parts of the world each year that Bush has been president. if things improve in Afghanistan and Iraq in 20 years, he will have played no part in it

[Azure]

And if Iraq and Afghanistan both become successful, free, democratic countries...who are we going to say started the process?

If you thought that Iraq and Afghanistan should have been perfect by now, you were as ignorant as the Bush administration.

I still can't figure out how things have gotten 'worse' in Afghanistan.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

The guy, in part, sped up the collapse of the USSR because of his tough and uncompromising stance against Gorbachev and the Soviets.

The mythical Ronald Reagan. Gotta love how he gets the credit for the fall of the Soviet Union, something that was started 40 years prior, and contributed to by each and every diplomat and policy maker since WWII. Reagan only did one thing right, and that was spend money like a drunken sailor, forcing the Russians to attempt to keep up. Beyod that, Reagan really was in the right place at the right time and was able to take credit of the work of many others. Frankly, the Soviet Union was on their last legs when they went into Afghanistan. They we finally bled dry during that engagement and went home without a penny in their pockets.

Ironically, the United States is facing the same type of problems that the Soviets faced. The military is in disarray, the debt load has increased to incredible numbers, and the dispartity between the working class and the elites has never been greater. What works in the United States favor is it has an incredible economic engine that could possibly comeback to life with the right push here and there. I doubt you'll see the Uited States fail, and disintegrate like the USSR, but the parallels are interesting to observe. It seems that the "mujahideen" learned their lessons well.