[The Antiist]

Bush made his main mistakes during his first term. He failed to anticipate the attacks of 9/11, he started an unnecessary war (Iraq, that is), he provoked a lot of countries unnecessarily (Iran, North Korea) and tried to divide the world into two: those who oppose and those who support terrorism. Moreover, he failed to protect the rights he was supposedly fighting for by starting wars in the Middle East, by neglecting the privacy of the American people (wiretapping) and neglecting the legal rights of terrorist suspects (Guantanamo Bay). He furthermore opposed gay marriage. The deficit is also a very important point. The tax cuts he proposed were very misplaced and a blind following of populist ideology, thereby failing raise enough revenue and cutting down the middle class (a sign of economic distress in any case). The economic crisis, just like 9/11 and Katrina isn't to be blamed on him, but then again he failed to do the right thing every time he was bearing responsibility.

He did better on his second term, especially in terms of diplomacy and became the most travelled president in history for it, but the tone of his presidency was already set. Already in 2006 he was proclaimed a lame duck by the media and he lost legitimacy. Only with the Iraq surge did he somewhat improve his record. Whether the war in Aghanistan was a good idea remains to be seen.

[Fasces]

Following bad policy of your predecessors is no excuse. You're elected to lead, not follow. Bush was forced to deal with an unfortunate set of occurrences, but his failure to deal with them is his own fault and no one else can be blamed.

[guzzipat]

The attack on Iraq was a lot more than just a bad decision. It was both in concept and action, one of the worst strategic decisions in military history.

In concept, because it had no rellevance whatsoever to any action against terrorists attacks on the USA. It also allowed the real enemy, the Taliban, who helped to train and protect terrorists, off the hook. It allowed a beaten enemy to regroup and recover. To come very close to losing in Afghanistan because of an attack on Iraq that had no real strategic significance was at best stupid. I am glad that Obama has seen this and will attempt to correct it, I just hope it isn't too late.

In action the Bush administration were totally incompetant in refusing to plan for the occupation. The assumptions that any country would welcome invasion and occupation were ridiculous. The decision to disband all national security agencies was a catastrophic mistake that cost thousands of lives.

If Bush had set out from the outset to recruit for Bin Laden and increase the influence of Iran, he couldn't have done better. All this was a product of an administration that was ignorant on foreign policy and had little or no idea of the political realities outside of the USA. The rejection of sound advice from other countries and the stupid rectionary "with us or against us" attitudes, fractured and dispelled an enormous reservior of good will towards America world wide after 9-11. If Bush set out to destroy alliances and lose the "war on terror" he has done fine.

It takes a special kind of fool to fuck up on such agrand scale, the judgement on domestic issues is for Americans to make, but the international verdict was in a long time ago.
This in no way excuses my country for following Bush, Blair has paid the price for that, forced out of office and a hated figure. Another few years of Bush and the UK would have demanded that their Prime minister put distance between us and America. Obama has a lot of work to do rebuilding alliances, fortunately he seems to be aware of it. The great majority of people across the world will be glad that Bush is now history, and damn bad history at that.

[Paradigm]

I think Bush's problem is that he surrounds himself with inherently untrustworthy people, and once he makes up his mind, he doesn't like to hear dissenting opinions. I think Dick Cheney has pretty much been the power behind the throne for the past 8 years. Regarding 9/11, I think it might have been preventable, but Bush wasn't bright enough to know what to do, and the neocons in his cabinet had everything to gain from letting it happen. Regarding Katrina, I think he could've appointed someone better to FEMA(bad cabinet appointments seem to have been a pattern with Bush). Regarding the economic crisis, I can't place all the blame on Bush. He was simply continuing an ideology that's been prevalent for the past 28 years. Yes, Fannie and Freddie were the Democrats' baby, but a deregulated Wall Street also played a major role.

But I think the most prominent characteristic of the Bush administration is not so much the individual clusterfucks that happened under their watch, but a consistent pattern of arrogance, corruption, secrecy, and unaccountability.

[The American Lion]

I believe Bush just had bad luck.

He came in office with a recession. Then then eight months later 19 highjackers deceided to use our planes as weapons. Then he had to invade Afghanistan. Then due to some bad intel, he invades Iraq. The occupation started badly. Then Katrina hit. Gas prices go back. America returned into a recession.

Sounds like a bit of bad luck.

[Ombrageux]

That is not lack of luck TAL. 9/11 was the best thing Bush could hope for, for his approvals, for bringing international support to the USA, for creating the politics of fear that made his foreign policy possible. The Iraq War was not started on 'bad intel'. WMDs were a justification, but all knew full well that Saddam's nuclear program was not well-developed, and that chemical/biological weapons were not of the sort that constituted an existential (or wipe-out-city) threat to the US. Bush did not base the war on bad intel, he knew Iraq was not a credible threat, he based the justification for war on bad intel. It was his selling strategy that suffered.

[Arthur2sheds_Jackson]

9/11 wasn't Bush's fault, and I don't think he can be blamed for not stopping it.

Bush did absolutely fuck all to stop 9/11.

[Rojik of the Arctic]

I think the main problem with Bush was that he came across as a simpleton during the media sound bites, and he did himself no favours by some of the people he surrounded himself with. History will be a little kinder to him than current public opinion but he wasn't the best choice for the top job.

[starman2003]

I think history will be, if anything, harsher on him. I doubt the US effort in Iraq will have a better longterm outcome than its misadventure in Vietnam. Bush was an absolute idiot. After 9/11 he let neocons talk him into the dopey misadventure. I can see going after bin laden, but Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. The neocons exploited shrub's brainlessness to push an agenda primarily intended to bolster Israeli security, not ours.

[LAz]

He went into iraq, something totally unrelated to 9.11.

He is completely incompetent.. I mean, there are books and those calendars for each that they you tear off, that quote him, and the quotes are stupid things that a half literate person would say... that there is bush!

Like all US presidents, he supports suburbia. Fail. Epic fail.

Heck, this idiot's approval ratings were the lowest of any president in his first year in office... then the planned 9/11 happened.