Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
swamp rat
Janissary
Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Worst U.S. President Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 12:52 |
What I was trying to say is that if you compare the worst Europe has given the world as opposed to the worst America has given the world, no American President even comes close to the Evil thugs that have spewed out from the nations of Europe in the last 300 years or so. Hitler and Stalin were blood thirsty morons who killed a combined total of over 100 million people. I don't recall reading about any leader from North America that has ever even attempted that scale of mass slaughter in history.
Like I said if any American President comes close to Hilter it would be Andrew Jackson but again the scale of deaths he caused and inflected were far less than Hitler or Stalin.
I never said President Bush is a good President but I don't see where any clear minded person could compare him to Hitler due to the fact that he has yet to slaughter 40 million people.
As a matter of fact, after 9-11 under America's policy of massive retaliation laid down in the 1950s and 1960s America could have used Nuclear weapons in responce to the Sept 11th attacks. Had Bush been Hilter like he would have. (Many on the far right were in favor of using tactical Nuclear weapons in the mountian areas of Afghanistan including, Vice President Chenney.) I myself was in favor of using special operations forces and pin-point bombing. In my opinion the New York Police Dept. would have been of better use than the military. People have lost sight of the fact that what happend on 9-11 was not an act of war but a crime to be handled by law enforcement not by the military.
As far as Iraq goes we have no bussness there.
|
If we had a nuclear war all that would be left is cock roaches and Dick Clark.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
hugoestr
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 13:36 |
Originally posted by swamp rat
As a matter of fact, after 9-11 under America's policy of massive retaliation laid down in the 1950s and 1960s America could have used Nuclear weapons in responce to the Sept 11th attacks.
|
I understand your point. I just want to comment on this detail.
It was during the 1950s that the government put in place the policy of using nuclear weapons for strategic reasons only. It was during this time that the foundation for our current world policy of nuclear weapons reduction was developed. Some of these ideas were discussed as early as in the late 1940s.
Important element of this policy were already implemented by the early 1960s.
As you correctly stated in the rest of this post, there were people that wanted to use nukes as tactical weapons. Fortunately their view didn't prevail. The Soviet's announcement of possessing atomic weapons was an important factor that made the U.S. reject the tactial use policy.
I am sure that our in-house Soviet expert will fill in the details that I am leaving out, and will correct anything that i innacurate.
Nuclear policy is not my area of expertise, but I recently heard a series of radio programs that talked about this issue. My comments are based on those programs.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
swamp rat
Janissary
Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 17:22 |
As far as I am conserned no nation great or small has the right to have or use nuclear weapons.
|
If we had a nuclear war all that would be left is cock roaches and Dick Clark.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 19:22 |
Originally posted by swamp rat
If compared to the worst leaders of Europe say, Hitler Stalin or Mosilini I don't think any American president comes close to those tyrrants. Andrew Jackson was the most Hitler-like of all presidents on account of laying down the policy of mass extermanation of the native Americans in the 19th century but even he falls short of becoming a tyrrant on the scale of Europes worse.
I have seen President Bush be compared to Hitler a few times in the media, Yet Hilter slaughtered 7 million Jews and dirrectly caused the deaths of somewhere between 40 to 60 million people. Bush too falls far short.
As far as Truman, he did more for the advancement of civil rights than any president since Lincoln. A stance that almost cost him reelection in 1948.
|
As US presidents go for Genocide, I suppose LBJ's policy of mass extermination of the civil populous of Lao, killed more people in total than any president genociding Indians or Filipinos.
http://www.savannanet.com/uslegacy.htm
Edited by Paul
|
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 19:26 |
Bill Clinton.
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 19:35 |
Originally posted by Spartakus
Bill Clinton. |
out of curiosity what makes you say that Clinton is the worst?
Edited by Illuminati
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 19:41 |
I cannot think anyone else right now.He is the first idiot i've thinked.
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
swamp rat
Janissary
Joined: 19-Aug-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 21:58 |
Clinton was far from the worse! I think we could have done better in the last several years as far as presidents go. Carter was a piss poor president but then again so was Ford and Bush Sr. Nixon and Reagan were a little better like Clinton. As far as this Bush goes give me a few more years. My vote is Andrew Jackson for the worse.
|
If we had a nuclear war all that would be left is cock roaches and Dick Clark.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2005 at 23:57 |
I thought Clinton was pretty decent. I think its a shame that the
Republicans blew the whole Monica Lewinsky thing way out of proportion
to make him look like a bad president. Weird how we can impeach a
president over something like that, but yet we can't impeach Bush....
Spartakus, what is it about Clinton you didn't like? You didn't really cite any examples
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Aug-2005 at 05:16 |
No,i just do not like him.I cannot stand his face.It's stupid!![](smileys/smiley36.gif)
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
hugoestr
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Aug-2005 at 16:04 |
Originally posted by Spartakus
No,i just do not like him.I cannot stand his face.It's stupid!![](smileys/smiley36.gif) |
I felt something very similar towards him until the Monica scandal happened. Then I heard on the radio middle-age ladies saying that they wish that Clinton would play with a cigar with them, and they wouldn't tell.
Then I went to my barber, a conservative vet, and he was saying that if a young girl showed him her underpants, he didn't know what he would do ![](smileys/smiley2.gif) .
Finally, my father-in-law, who hated the man to death, read Primary Colors and kept clippings about the Monica story in it as evidence as how horrible he was. We saw the movie movie together, and at the end he turned towards us and said, smiling: "that Clinton is just human, that is all."
When you have these people falling in love with Clinton, you can't help yourself from doing the same.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Hak-Khan
Pretorian
Joined: 28-Aug-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 01-Sep-2005 at 22:04 |
all of them without JFK
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
rangerstew
Immortal Guard
Joined: 12-Sep-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 14:52 |
I would have to say Abraham Lincoln! He totally mishandled the secession of the southern states, most of which would not have left the union if he had not been elected. ![](smileys/smiley2.gif)
Actually, Im being sarcastic, but we must all realize that many consider him the greatest president, now after over 150 years of retrospect when at the time of his presidency he was hated by the people who make the most noise, yet still won a second election. Sound familiar?
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Sep-2005 at 19:02 |
I would say Truman. Many presidents have done many irrational and immoral things, but according to me the decission to throw an atomic bomb on two Japanese cities (altough they were the enemie at the time, an atomic bomb shouldn't have been used, especialy not at that moment, the war was 'over'). The victims of the bombs wern't soldiers, they were innocent people. The impact on the planet of such an event is something we'd radar 'not talk about' either. He may have done a lot af great things to make the social situation better, using an atomic bomb is something I can't possibly see as usefull. The attack on pearl harbor shouldn't have been without consequences but could't there have been a better way then this?
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Sep-2005 at 19:55 |
Im so sick of people bashing Truman. Im not going to reiterate the same damn argument I have been making throughout this thread and I dont feel its necessary to defend the tactic that killed less people than conventional bombing did anyway (people who were a support structure of a governmetn which killed far more civilians than all allied bombing campaigns over both Germany and Japan combined). Truman did what anyone with a brain would have done, and my mere existence and the survival of my family from what would have been a far more catastrophic conventional invasion fo Japan is vindication of his decisions.
This is the same president who was behind the Marshall Plan, and the desegregation of the military. He was the second greatest American president of the 20th century.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
ok ge
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Sep-2005 at 20:51 |
I cannot think of anyone worst that Bush. But I cannot think of anything that explains how did he survive a second term!!!
|
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Sep-2005 at 21:02 |
Now that I can agree with, except for Andrew Jackson, I think Bush II is the worst.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 16:48 |
Just to be fair in terms of history. Alot of very popular presidents,
such as Lincoln and Reagan were also vastly unpopular at times during
their presidency. I highly doubt George W Bush will be remembered as a
good president, but it is premature to say he is the worst we have ever
had. Wait a few years and then reflect on him. We don't yet know how
all of hs actions are going to play out in the long run. Its fair to
criticize Bush all you want, but its too early to rate him as the worst
ever. Doing so, just shows an ignorant understanding of history
Edited by Illuminati
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 18:13 |
Originally posted by Tobodai
Im so sick of people bashing Truman. Im not going to reiterate the same damn argument I have been making throughout this thread and I dont feel its necessary to defend the tactic that killed less people than conventional bombing did anyway (people who were a support structure of a governmetn which killed far more civilians than all allied bombing campaigns over both Germany and Japan combined). Truman did what anyone with a brain would have done, and my mere existence and the survival of my family from what would have been a far more catastrophic conventional invasion fo Japan is vindication of his decisions.
This is the same president who was behind the Marshall Plan, and the desegregation of the military. He was the second greatest American president of the 20th century.
|
Tobodai:
People do not read the threads, nor, evidently, do they read much history. In any event, most of their interpretations seem rather pre-judged and not open to discussion. Just my impression of the forum you understand.![](smileys/smiley7.gif)
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 18:14 |
Originally posted by Althea
I would say Truman. Many presidents have done many irrational and immoral things, but according to me the decission to throw an atomic bomb on two Japanese cities (altough they were the enemie at the time, an atomic bomb shouldn't have been used, especialy not at that moment, the war was 'over'). The victims of the bombs wern't soldiers, they were innocent people. The impact on the planet of such an event is something we'd radar 'not talk about' either. He may have done a lot af great things to make the social situation better, using an atomic bomb is something I can't possibly see as usefull. The attack on pearl harbor shouldn't have been without consequences but could't there have been a better way then this? |
No. In war, one uses the advantages one has.
The consequences of Pearl Harbor were the Pacific war.
Edited by pikeshot1600
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |