Good enough reason for me to blog my thoughts on the Bush presidency. The common common man's attempt to summarise at random.
Is Bush the only, son of the father, also a President ? I don't know, but if this is the only father and son to have achieved this, the most powerful office in the world, then its time the US lawmakers pass a bill in 2009 that legislates, no two members of the same family can qualify to be nominated for running for this office. It will discourage, sorry disallow, whole families, in the future, running for presidency............we don't want present ladder climbers like m/s Hillary and not so distant ones like some junior Kennedy, or a junior Nixon, from running for the Pres' office!! Its undemocratic (!) because it reduces the chances of a common common person like Joe from trying his luck!
When Bush won the second time, the world was told it's the middle evangelical America that gave him the winning vote. Where are they this time?
I recollect there was some serious recounting done in Florida, vote cards were held up to more light for scrutiny of the punch marks, and with some luck Bush got past his rival to get elected the second time.
Historians will muse this single event as the turning point for the US, not as bad as the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, but certainly not far behind.
(this 9/11 is a benchmark a little off the right mark ..........should be 9/11/2001. By the tenth generation, kids are going to ask their father which year 9/11 took place in, and it will look pretty bad if they draw a blank as far as the year it happened in............"son, I think it happened in 2001, maybe 2002..........I'll check my Google Search, just give me a minute......."
I don't want to go along, all the way, with the poor rating Bush is getting..........the latest poll result shows 80% of people are not going to miss him.
Rather, lets concede Bush inherited some problems and more, some ways of looking at the world, not just from his predecessors, but from American foreign policy benchmarks. "If Saddam Hussien is a bad guy, and he was a bad guy no doubt, then he is bound to have a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. Lets find them!"
How naive Americans are can be gauged from this, the stockpile of weapons. Now that none were found, American Intelligence Services are held responsible and Bush ruefully admits his fault..............look my dear Americans in general and Mr Bush , what is the guarantee the whole, or part of some of this, is not buried in the vast expanse of dessert that stretches for endless mile after mile in the Middle East; and desserts don't allow border posts in most of the very inhospitable sections, so it would be easy to bury the whole mess in some stretch of dessert that is part of Syria or Kurdistan sector of Iraq or even the Iranian side of the border, (God forbid), and buried not with any aim to dig it out for use in the future, but buried to get rid of all evidence and make the Americans look foolish and make Bush run for cover............besides, the intention was to lose this stockpile forever because, nothing buried in the dessert can ever be recovered, what with the massive shifts of sand that go on in any sand dessert! Never underestimate the ancient and wily
Orientals!
No Bin Laden, for the same reasons........the Middle East and Central Asia are huge huge expanse of dessert, inhospitable country, rugged mountains, paths and routes that are only known to the locals, like the Bushmen of the Kahalari desserts. What is the guarantee he is not in the vast desserts and steppes of Central Asia?
And, in that part of the world, very ancient, very much a world of hospitality to their own, and others, I wont be surprised if Bin Laden, recognised or not, is, firstly, a welcome guest in the "tent" he seeks hospitality in, an old tradition in the Middle East.
And, how should Bush have predicted that getting rid of Saddam, giving Iraqis their freedom, would unleash this terrible war of terrorism where the poor Iraqis face daily acts of terror. Good ole Bush calculated the war would end with entering Baghdad..........how on earth can he or anybody else have predicted this very complicated turn of events.
Actually, I will always find it hard to figure out Bush's real intentions to topple Saddam, but a good thing nevertheless, the worst of his kind, the Americans have done the Middle East a good turn getting rid of this ruthless inhuman and diabolical dictator.
So why is Bush so unpopular............lets first put this away, that people, with far more media focus than ever before, are, at the end of the day, people.........with the "lets do what the rest of us are doing"- impulsive, and handicapped with the lack of full information on any event taking place in the world.........blame the media for this.
I feel Bush leaves more unpopular, not because of his handling of the Iraq war or Katrina, or the economy, he has to take his share of blame for these, but MORE BECAUSE HE HAD THIS HABIT OF TALKING AT PEOPLE, NOT TALKING TO THEM, never seen to use sincere body language that might have shown him as a person trying to cope with a hard job, rather always cocky, self opinionated, over confident and at more times "I am right, i can't be wrong."
I hope Obama does not fall in this .....this(?).....this cesspool........."power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
No comments:
Post a Comment