• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Was the Bush presidency spectacularly successful?"

Collapse

  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
    Thank you Andrew Roberts for standing up to the consensual views of the liberal elite

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...was-right.html
    It's good to dispel some myths about Bush, but I won't have this:
    Similarly, the cold light of history will absolve Bush of the worst conspiracy-theory accusation: that he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. History will show that, in common with the rest of his administration, the British Government, Saddam's own generals, the French, Chinese, Israeli and Russian intelligence agencies, and of course SIS and the CIA, everyone assumed that a murderous dictator does not voluntarily destroy the WMD arsenal he has used against his own people.
    All these people can assume what they like, but there was no evidence. The British government's assessment to parliament was, as we know, "sexed up" (i.e. exaggeration and lies). The weapons inspectors themselves said there was no evidence. This was proved by events.

    If there had been evidence of WMD, invasion to dispose of them was a valid option, but otherwise not. Saddam was still, inadvertently, the west's most useful ally in the region.

    Leave a comment:


  • Clippy
    replied
    Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
    Thank you Andrew Roberts for standing up to the consensual views of the liberal elite

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...was-right.html
    Ha, ha - funniest thing I have read in ages.

    Nice one DA.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    The Iranians are very pleased with Bush as well.

    Arch-enemy CIA enemy Saddam taken out without a single Iranian life lost - and Irans influence in the region has increased tremendously.

    I read the article - best laugh Ive had for a while - I wonder what Stats he could produce to back up the following -

    As for civilians, there have been fewer Iraqis killed since the invasion than in 20 conflicts since the Second World War.

    Does the above include Vietnam ??
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 15 January 2009, 10:43.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Thank you Andrew Roberts for standing up to the consensual views of the liberal elite

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...was-right.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by Ardesco View Post
    As for Al Qaueda being effective before the so called "War on Terror", they were? How? They pretty much just released the odd video clip ranting about the Yanks before Bush started his crusade.....
    Didn't they blow up an american embassy in Africa somewhere when Clinton was president?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ardesco
    replied
    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
    Wasnt 'Al Queda 'an invention of the CIA - the name means Database in Arabic and was used to describe a CIA DB of Afghan Freedom Fighters during the Soviet occupation - sorry should I say Afghan Terrorists.

    Perfect.
    Actually it means "The Base", the American so called "Intelligence" officials managed to mis-translate "Database".....

    It is just a bunch of known Muslim terrorists lumped together into a list though, the idea that it is an organisation that is co-ordinated, and that all these people actually talk to each other is a fallacy dreamt up by American spin doctors so that they could provide the American public with an enemy that they could then go and attack and mete out some retribution for 9/11.

    As for Al Qaueda being effective before the so called "War on Terror", they were? How? They pretty much just released the odd video clip ranting about the Yanks before Bush started his crusade.....

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    9/11 was spectacular

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    911 was spectacular

    Leave a comment:


  • zara_backdog
    replied
    As spectacularly successful as the Blair Goverment only at least Blair could at least say 'spectacularly successful'.

    Leave a comment:


  • contractor79
    replied
    Originally posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Facts
    then let's cut to the chase and go back to Cain and Abel.

    Now, let's continue

    Leave a comment:


  • Bagpuss
    replied
    Originally posted by contractor79 View Post
    I don't find these questionable historical commentary helpful

    Facts

    Leave a comment:


  • contractor79
    replied
    I don't find these questionable historical commentary helpful

    Leave a comment:


  • Bagpuss
    replied
    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
    Wasnt 'Al Queda 'an invention of the CIA - the name means Database in Arabic and was used to describe a CIA DB of Afghan Freedom Fighters during the Soviet occupation - sorry should I say Afghan Terrorists.

    Perfect.
    Certainly trained in bombing techniques by the CIA. Yesterdays friend and freedom fighter tomorrows enemy and terrorist, shame it took 911 to see the IRA like that (the only positive outcome of the war on terror, forcing the IRA to give up the bombs)

    Leave a comment:


  • Sysman
    replied
    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
    From the Iranian perspective - Bush was the best ot all US Presidents.

    For some time Iran had subverted US Intelligence to launch the Iraq war , sacrificing US lifes and International prestige in the destruction of Irans sworn enemy - Saddam - by use of an Iranian double agent - Shalabi who persuaded the US that Saddam still retainted WMDs

    Iran have gained so much at every level by the Iraq War without sacrificing a single Iranian life.

    In a way the lifes of US and UK servicemen who died ultimately benefited the Iranian state.

    Youve got to hand it to them - they had the US intelligence forces dancing to their tune.

    Political brilliance by the Persians.
    The ironic thing about it all is that the Iraqis had been seen as the good guys when they were at war with Iran in the 1980s.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by contractor79 View Post
    I agree
    obama will appease but that won't bring peace
    Wasnt 'Al Queda 'an invention of the CIA - the name means Database in Arabic and was used to describe a CIA DB of Afghan Freedom Fighters during the Soviet occupation - sorry should I say Afghan Terrorists.

    Perfect.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X