News Was George W. Bush's Response to 9/11 Justified?

[mheslep]

It might not all be because of all the international mistakes that Bush has made, but also from domestic failures. He certainly expanded the gap between the rich and the poor with his "faith based initiatives"...

What faith based initiatives did President Bush implement? I believe the answer is none.

 

[WarPhalange]

Yeah hahahaha He said he'd do it to get support from the fundies and then stabbed them in the back. Quite possibly the only thing I like about him, even if he did it for the wrong reasons, i.e. he just didn't want to be bothered with it, whereas I would have done it on purpose.

 

[Gokul43201]

What faith based initiatives did President Bush implement? I believe the answer is none.

Believe again.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/bushchurch.htm
http://www.rockinst.org/publications/religion_policy/default.aspx?id=374
http://www.jewishpublicaffairs.org/action/recent/Community-Solutions-Act-7-03-01.html
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,361521,00.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_200303/ai_n9170697

 

[WarPhalange]

Aww man, they actually got some money? :(

 

[mheslep]

What faith based initiatives did President Bush implement? I believe the answer is none.

Believe again.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/bushchurch.htm
http://www.rockinst.org/publications/religion_policy/default.aspx?id=374
http://www.jewishpublicaffairs.org/action/recent/Community-Solutions-Act-7-03-01.html
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,361521,00.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3944/is_200303/ai_n9170697

Only the first post discusses any money, only $1M, dispensed under the 'faith based initiatives' program. To stay on point: that initiative was about giving federal money to religious based institutions doing humanitarian or educational work, and not the broader umbrella issue of the division between church and state.

 

[WarPhalange]

only $1M,

You might not think that's a big sum, but my taxes went to that. What ever happened to "small government", by the way?

 

[DaveC426913]

You might not think that's a big sum, but my taxes went to that. What ever happened to "small government", by the way?

That's very nearly 0.3 cents .

 

[Gokul43201]

Only the first post discusses any money, only $1M, dispensed under the 'faith based initiatives' program.

So what? We can convert into a theocracy tomorrow with no additional taxpayer cost!

 

[russ_watters]

A nuclear first strike was effectively ruled out by the MAD policy. In fact that was the point, so by default we did agree to a no first-strike policy.

I don't agree, but ok...

Also, a full-scale nuclear war cannot be compared to the invasion of another country. And one can hardly compare the threat of 20,000 nuclear warheads to the threat from terrorism; even if Saddam had been involved in 911, which he wasn't. The scale of the two situations are many orders of magnitude apart.

I'm just trying to get people to acknowledge that the line exists.

What does this have to do with attacking the wrong country, which, if we assume that Bush isn't lying, is what we did? Whoops.

No one said anything about attacking the wrong country, so nothing. Whoops.

I'm discussing the general concept of unilateral first strike. I argued that there are times when it is the right thing to do. I agree that attacking Iraq was not the right thing to do (in hindsight only), but that doesn't have any bearing on whether we should do it if a situation presents itself where it is the right thing to do.

I'd argue that the 6 day war was another example of a unilateral first strike that was the right thing to do.

 

[mheslep]

So what? We can convert into a theocracy tomorrow with no additional taxpayer cost!

I only mentioned this to point out the flaw in Herotodus statement:

...He certainly expanded the gap between the rich and the poor with his "faith based initiatives"

since the government did not do anything of significance with the latter that could effect the former (the gap).

 

[Gokul43201]

I only mentioned this to point out the flaw in Herotodus statement

I guess I missed that. But having read it now, I can't say I follow the reasoning behind that part of hero's post.

 

[mathwonk]

anyone who still has the cojones to try to defend gw has my respect. hopeless, but admirable, at least in kind of a clueless way.

 

[WarPhalange]

anyone who still has the cojones to try to defend gw has my respect. hopeless, but admirable, at least in kind of a clueless way.

If the internet has taught me anything, it's that no matter how indefensible a given position is, you will find an army of people who's life goal is to defend it.

Just look at that Batman = Bush article. There are people who seriously believe that.

 

[DaveC426913]

If the internet has taught me anything, it's that no matter how indefensible a given position is, you will find an army of people who's life goal is to defend it.

One of the army: http://xkcd.com/386/

 

[WarPhalange]

No, not even that. You can make any kind of baseless argument you want, set up a message board for it, and you'll find idiots just flooding into help your cause.

 

[WheelsRCool]

anyone who still has the cojones to try to defend gw has my respect. hopeless, but admirable, at least in kind of a clueless way.

<---- still defends George Bush (not that I agree with him in everything he's done, but every President has made mistakes).

 

[WarPhalange]

George Bush's biggest mistake was not forcing his wife to abort their son, George W. Bush.

 

[mheslep]

George Bush's biggest mistake was not forcing his wife to abort their son, George W. Bush.

Then you could help give the answer to the OP over on this thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=241143"
Or any other opposition politician for that matter.

 

[Gokul43201]

Yes, any other politician responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the dislocation of millions, the complete corruption of the nation's institution of justice and the disregard of the nation's most valued source of individual rights and laws.

 

[WarPhalange]

Then you could help give the answer to the OP over on this thread:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=241143"
Or any other opposition politician for that matter.

Ahem, I'm the first responder to that thread.

 

[mheslep]

Yes, any other politician responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the dislocation of millions, the complete corruption of the nation's institution of justice and the disregard of the nation's most valued source of individual rights and laws.

No, any, period. Hate and vitriol are not so easily contained.

 

[Mental Gridlock]

Israel's attack on the Isirak reactor complex in Iraq in the early 80s was the right thing to do. If Iran continues to violate the NPT and a few years down the road gets close to having a nuclear bomb, taking it out will be the right thing to do.

How is Iran in violation of the nuclear NPT?

Nevertheless, the United States violates the NPT.. So a foreign power demolishing the United State's nuclear facilities would be the right thing to do, right?!?

 

[Mental Gridlock]

What would you have done if you were the president of the U.S. during 9/11?

For starters, I wouldn't sit there picking my nose and doing nothing for ten minutes after being informed of a national security crisis in which terrorist attacks were unfolding in real time.

 

[Mental Gridlock]

Whatever you want to say about oil, Saddam killed hundreds of thousands in horrendous atrocities.

The United States killed hundreds of thousands in horrendous atrocities.

 

[russ_watters]

How is Iran in violation of the nuclear NPT?

See the recent thread on the subject: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=247063

Nevertheless, the United States violates the NPT.. So a foreign power demolishing the United State's nuclear facilities would be the right thing to do, right?!?

Lol, you don't know why Iran would be in violation, but you know the US is? Clearly, you don't know what the NPT says. Here's the Wik on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

No, the US is not in violation. And btw, these aren't laypersons' opinions. The UN body tasked to police it (the IAEA) continuously reports on Iran's status (it's all in the thread).

 

[russ_watters]

The United States killed hundreds of thousands in horrendous atrocities.

What is your point?

 

[WarPhalange]

We went after the guy for things we are guilty of as well. Hypocritical, you know?

 

[OrbitalPower]

The United States killed hundreds of thousands in horrendous atrocities.

This is inaccurate. the US has killed MILLIONS in its horrendous atrocities. Vietnam, about 3 million. About 2-3 million alone ended up being murdered or starved to death in the brutal "third world" wars of Ronald Reagan alone, through his support of dictators like Ríos Montt and so on.

The number is between 10 to 20 million killed.

Certainly, the US has caused more damages in areas such as Indochina than Saddam ever caused in the Middle East, so it's a bit hypocritical to be over there for "human rights concerns," it's Hitler's claims of the out of control Polish.

 

[Evo]

This is so off topic there is no hope.

So, we're blaming George W Bush for Vietnam now? Or did people forget what the thread title was?