Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Bush: oxymoron to world democracy

  1. Mar 12, 2005 #1
    History will bestow little credit to George W. Bush for the freeing of nations. World democracy does not need to be dictated by a reckless zealot - in the first place, that is what others thrive to rid from their own system. The President is hardly representative of governments ruled by the majority or other popular politics.

    If he truly desires to liberate the world's peoples, he would best be served by attending to their peaceful social and survival needs rather than fomenting questionable war. How shall he foist eventual Armageddon upon us? Discard the righteous posturing, Mr. President, and stand shoulder to shoulder with humankind.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 12, 2005 #2
    If Iraq and Afghanistan work out in the long-run, who WOULDN'T give Bush credit for that? Bush initiated the whole process, he's certainly not responsible for everything that happens, but without him you'd still have the same dictatorial rulers in those countries without any chance of Democracy.
     
  4. Mar 12, 2005 #3
    He is the dictator now, he is the modern day Napoleon, betrayer of the revolution - not as bad, but his ideals are like world communism, ideally it works, but hell you need a whole country to want, it's a difficult subject, true, but Bush is not the guy to be implimening it. I think if he had focused the money spent, (many argue wasted on iraq and afganistan, soon to be the rest of the middle east for their "good targets"), or cancelling world debt, who knows how many people would not have had to die?
     
  5. Mar 12, 2005 #4

    PerennialII

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    If only so ... the problem I've with this line of thought is that he is continuing the age old policies which led to the formation of such rulers in the first place, if there really was a reform in policies in the line of :

    rather than the same old & same old self interest supervision, then there actually might be something. Bush can't claim success for something occurring which was not his intention in the first place (i.e. eliminate hypocrisy from the equation).
     
  6. Mar 12, 2005 #5

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    First, just who are we talking about? Someone who spent their life following, pondering, and working in world affairs?

    BACKGROUND

    Education: George W. attended Andover, Yale, and later Harvard Business School (due to family name/connections). Throughout prep school and college, George W. was a mediocre student who clung to the traditions of an earlier era with boozy fraternity parties and football weekends. George W. majored in history.

    George W’s grades apparently were not good enough for admission to the University of Texas law school, which turned him down as an in-state applicant two years after he graduated from college. (Bush will not give permission for his grades to be released.)

    Business: The story of Bush's career in oil is mostly about his failure to succeed, and his personal life continued to be clouded by drinking.

    Bush did not turn his life around until the age of 40. During an interview in 1999, George W. was asked: Did you have a plan for your life after Harvard? He replied: “None whatsoever.”

    With only five years of political experience as Governor, Bush announced his candidacy for president in 1999.

    BUSH’S AGENDA – Has he ever had one? Regarding foreign policy:

    http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000128.htm

    More than half of Americans and most of the rest of the world realize this. Intellectuals write history books -- that's one good thing.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2005
  7. Mar 12, 2005 #6

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Opium production in Afghanistan is at an all time high and living conditions have improved little to none. More soldiers were killed in Iraq this Feb than last Feb. The number one reason for our problems in the middle east is our intervention in ME affairs. Bush will rightfully be thought of as King George The Tird.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2005
  8. Mar 12, 2005 #7
    You know, there's no point arguing in this, either it will work or it won't work. If you think spreading Democracy and allowing people to vote is the same as spreading Communism, that's your ideology - whatever.
     
  9. Mar 12, 2005 #8

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Waste, that kind of attitude would kill most of the threads on this forum. Bloviation rules!
     
  10. Mar 12, 2005 #9

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Insisting that we stick to reality? waste, you're not moving to the right, are you? :surprised
     
  11. Mar 12, 2005 #10
    So you would rank George W. Bush with the likes of Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Ho Chi Min, Fidel Castro and any other reckless zealot dictators who oppress their people and strip them of their rights? Seems a bit extreme to me. I think we are bring these rights to people who have never known them, people who asked us for help. I certainly wouldn't rank Bush as the Best American President, but he certainly isn't the worst as you claim him to be.

    He made a choice to fight terrorism no matter what country it hides in. Fact.
    No one else woud stand behind him. Fact
    No country thought he would actually overthrow Saddam, Liberate the Iraqi people and help them re-establish their government. Fact.
    He over threw Saddam and helped Iraq get through their 1st free election. Fact.

    These are all facts that have been presented in the media since this war began. They are common knowledge. Think what you like of him. But don't put him with those who would fight for people NOT to have what we gave the Iraqi people. Don't put Bush with the people we are fighting against.

    It cost lives, blood. No one ever said freedom came without a price. To think otherwise is naive.The Military Personel that said good-bye to their families, some for the very last time, went to fight to give other people what Americans have. They died for that cause. Freedom is purchased with sweat, tears, and blood of those who will fight. There are some who don't agree with the war, but they went anyway because its their job. War is a possibility and they knew it when they signed up.

    Would you fight for your freedom the way these people fought for theirs?
     
  12. Mar 14, 2005 #11
    Bush gives the Americans democracy, but then inflicts their opinions upon the rest of the world, hence depriving them of their democracy.
     
  13. Mar 14, 2005 #12
    I would hardly call it inflicting since Iraq asked us to come and overthrow Hussein.
     
  14. Mar 14, 2005 #13
    Miss Kitty,

    I never called "W" a dictator - if he were, the majority of Americans would not stand to have him in office. I call him a reckless zealot for his zeal to start a war in Iraq for questionable intentions, and for his fealty first to his religion before the good of all Americans and all of the world's faiths. The U. S. is not a Christian nation - nor is the Bible its Constitution. Separation between church and state begins at the White House.

    I did not say that "W" is the worst president of all. How does he intend to bring freedom to those Africans who crave it? Oh yes, Nigeria has oil! Even if our nation eventually prospers under him (as long as you aren't on Medicaid), the greatest credit goes to the many industrious Americans that thrive despite the policy of pettiness at the top.

    Personally, I think my president has improved as of late, but remains to be judged by his people for his worldview, and for his actions on the economy overall. Don't romanticize with "Facts" which are political or actually undecided as to their eventual outcome. I wish America, along with all peoples, the best opportunities. Whether George W. Bush can communicate multilaterally toward that goal remains moot.

    My Dad fought at Pearl Harbor, Midway and in other Pacific battles of WWII. I would be scared as hell to go into those conflicts. From your description of the Iraq war, I would guess that you neither signed up for it, nor have plans to, nor know anyone of its casualties. At least Roosevelt joined WWII with an obvious mission, not the scattered intelligence of Bush. (I do believe that the war and occupation in Afghanistan was and is necessary, primarily because it was the foremost training ground for anti-American terrorism. Invading Iraq seems either random or willful in comparison.)
     
  15. Mar 14, 2005 #14
    You have no idea how close to the war I am right now. If I was old enough to go fight for the Iraqi people and get them the freedom they deserve, bet your ass I'd sign up.

    You didn't answer my question: would you or would you not be willing to fight and die for your freedom?
     
  16. Mar 14, 2005 #15
    I've been moving to the right for quite a while now - ever since I stopped believing in Communism when I was 13 or 14.
     
  17. Mar 14, 2005 #16

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Aside from differing opinions on some things felt to be fact, such as being asked/invited to help Iraq (there's a reason the war in Iraq is referred to as an invasion/occupation) many do not feel we are fighting this war for our freedom. There was no "clear and present" danger from Iraq--they were not attacking the U.S. or even threatening to do so, and were being closely monitored, etc. In fact, many feel this kind of intervention may be more detrimental to U.S. security, and it is hoped this is not precedence for more wars with other countries.
     
  18. Mar 14, 2005 #17
    The last thing I want is another war. I dislike war just as much as the next person. Because there's just more fear of "ok, I hope my loved ones don't come home in boxes and I get a visit from some man in uniform". I'm not saying this war was the brightest thing to do, but it was what Bush felt needed to be done at the time.
     
  19. Mar 14, 2005 #18
    Before I go any further with my participation in this thread, I would like to Publically Apologize to anyone I may have offended with my first post. It was not in anyway ment to be an attack in any way on Loren. I'm sorry if I have managed to offend or hurt someone. I feel very strongly about the war, I agree with it, but there are many things about it that I do NOT agree with. I think my opinions of the war may have be expressed in a less than elequaint manner. My apologies to everyone.
     
  20. Mar 14, 2005 #19

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You have the right to express your opinion just like anyone else. When people debate topics on forums such as PF, it is understood by everyone that there will be differing opinions, and hopefully no one will take things personally. You certainly have never offended me. :smile:
     
  21. Mar 15, 2005 #20

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Hard not to move to the right when you're that far left. I wonder how many people grow up believing in communism at one time or another. I don't recall ever believing that it could work for an entire nation, but I always dreamed as a teenager of starting up a commune with friends of mine, on which we would divide labor according to individual skill, and live off of the land with no need for money or outside assistance. We even found some fairly cheap land down in Santa Barbara county. If only . . .
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2005
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Bush: oxymoron to world democracy
  1. Bush's changing world (Replies: 2)

Loading...