9/11/2001 established "Dubya" as a leader. How?

[wolf_meister]

No doubt, there will be lots of threads about Sept 11, 2001 as the 4th anniversary approaches.
One thing I could never understand is how this attack made George "Dubya" Bush seem to be a forceful, authoritative leader. Heck not that I ever thought that, but a great many people started feeling this way.

Here, to me, are a few examples of leaders really inspiring the people in the face of adversity.
Franklin Roosevelt (1st inaugural address during the Great Depression) stated that "this great nation will endure as it has endured".
FDR in 2nd inaugural address (Great Depression still going strong) "this generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny".
Winston Churchill stated (when England was getting the Hell bombed out of it by Germany) that "We will fight in the alleyways. We will fight in the streets. We will fight until the battle is won! We will never give up!"

Yes, I am one of the more liberal, "Dubya bashing" SDMB members, but I'd still like to know what Dubya said or did that was so inspiring.

[Marley23]

I think being in charge when it all went down made him seem more authoritative. People needed the leadership at the time, and the crisis probably played more to Bush's strengths than the previous eight months, which had been kind of formless for a variety of reasons.

[GorillaMan]

Goodness knows where you picked up that mangled version of Churchill's speech:

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.

[Blalron]

Yes, I am one of the more liberal, "Dubya bashing" SDMB members, but I'd still like to know what Dubya said or did that was so inspiring.

He acted calmly and rationally by sitting and listening to The Pet Goat for several minutes. He would have politely excused himself from the room under normal circumstances, but he was afraid of terrifying the children. Nevermind the fact that thousands were dying... we can't startle any school children! Their egos are so fragile that seeing the President walk out of a room sooner than expected could cause life long trauma.

[Cervaise]

People needed the leadership at the timeThis is it. People were terrified, and it was even more terrifying to consider we had a crappy leader, so he was magically transformed into a non-crappy leader to meet people's emotional needs.

Then, of course, reality re-intruded.

[SteveG1]

So where's all the great leadership already?

[Hentor the Barbarian]

So where's all the great leadership already?Just around the corner.

[What Exit?]

I think the leadership was tied to the stupid Axis of Evil speech.
As 9/11 happened and as the next few days unrolled.
Many people felt grief and horror, but many of us also felt impotent rage, we wanted to strike out at evil, march to war, shoulder to shoulder. In my case and many of my friends cases we wanted to re-enlist. (I am now fat and have 2 small kids) I knew hackers that were determined to bring down the enemies web-sites. (They couldn't define what this meant, but they were determined)

This was an initial reaction and many bought into his axis of evil speech.
It turned me off pretty quick.

Translated: During a period of irrational hatred some people confused a militant speech with leadership.

BtW: on 9/11. Mayor Giuliani rushed to the scene to do everything possible to save lives and coordinate the rescue attempts. Our Fearless leader allowed the Secret service to order him to safety. Last I checked a CIC could overrule the secret service agents.

[Cheesesteak]

Yes, I am one of the more liberal, "Dubya bashing" SDMB members, but I'd still like to know what Dubya said or did that was so inspiring.It wasn't any one thing in particular, but he carried himself very well in the days following 9/11. His speechs were forceful and "presidential". His first pitch at the World Series in NYC was as thrilling a moment as I've ever seen a president have.

Just as a point of reference, from the dates in question our own GD (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=88554) and IMHO (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=88548) takes on his speech to Congress Sept. 20th.

Take note of the prominent Bush haters who praised him (or at least didn't slam him) that night. For the time after the event, he really did do what presidents are supposed to do, lead.

[Updike]

He acted calmly and rationally by sitting and listening to The Pet Goat for several minutes. He would have politely excused himself from the room under normal circumstances, but he was afraid of terrifying the children. Nevermind the fact that thousands were dying... we can't startle any school children! Their egos are so fragile that seeing the President walk out of a room sooner than expected could cause life long trauma.

You know, of all the criticism one could reasonably lay at President Bush's feet, the whole "Pet Goat" schtick is absolutely the lamest.

[Turek]

Face it, this thread was started in The Pit so that all the Bush-haters could come in and say "Bush is a fucking idiot, he's never done anything 'presidential', and his motorcade burns too much gas!" The OP didn't want his question answered or even debated or this would be in GD. Instead, it's posted here so it can become yet another Bush-bashing circle-jerk thread.

[Otto]

Instead, it's posted here so it can become yet another Bush-bashing circle-jerk thread.
And you apparently fell for it.

[Turek]

And you apparently fell for it.
Actually, I had more of a "don't they ever get tired of bitching about the same thing over and over" reaction.

[Marley23]

You know, of all the criticism one could reasonably lay at President Bush's feet, the whole "Pet Goat" schtick is absolutely the lamest.
Agreed. While what he did was silly, he could not have done anything that would have made a difference.

I've heard it said that emotion and expressing conviction are two of Bush's strong points, and he was able to display those in his post-attack speech.

[marshmallow]

I'm not a fan of Bush by any stretch of the imagination, but he did a very good job in the wake of the attacks by looking and sounding strong and confident. The most memorable scene to me was when he had the bullhorn and was talking to a group of firefighters at ground zero. Quite stirring.

Of course, this is all a big pony show. But it works.

[Lord Ashtar]

Had Gore been inaugurated in 2001, he would've been thought of as a "great leader" for the same reasons Bush was/is.

[wolf_meister]

Turek
Face it, this thread was started in The Pit so that all the Bush-haters could come in and say "Bush is a fucking idiot, he's never done anything 'presidential', and his motorcade burns too much gas!" The OP didn't want his question answered or even debated or this would be in GD. Instead, it's posted here so it can become yet another Bush-bashing circle-jerk thread.


Gee Turek, congratulations - you saw right through my flimsy disguise. I think I know what may have given me away - I said "Yes, I am one of the more liberal, "Dubya bashing" SDMB members".

Seriously, my intent was (and still is) an honest one. How long do you think this topic would have lasted in any forum except the Pit? I really wanted "Dopers" pouncing on this topic and saying "Hey Wolf you're wrong. What about the speech where he said ...................... " Quite often I have started threads where I have said "If you think I'm wrong, feel free to pounce".

Well Turek, here's your chance. Instead of just jumping in and "exposing" this thread for what it really is, give me an example of Dubya's inspiring behavior.

Unfortunately, I think my question has been answered.


(Incidentally, this might surprise a lot of people but I have never seen Fahrenheit 911).

[Good Egg]

What I would like to know is why Bush felt safe enough to linger in a public school, where everyone knew he was, yet had to be kept flying around secretly most of the day?

[Blalron]

You know, of all the criticism one could reasonably lay at President Bush's feet, the whole "Pet Goat" schtick is absolutely the lamest.

No. While I concede that nothing Bush could have done in those few minutes would have made a difference, Bush had no way of knowing that and I'm not going to give him the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Given the information he had at the time, I can't comprehend why he stayed in the classroom.

Sure, his advisors could have rushed him from the room if absolutely neccesary. But what if the 5 or 10 seconds it took to walk outside could have been the difference between a plane getting shot down or ramming into a building. He should have immediately understood the situation as being time critical and acted accordingly.

[elucidator]

He couldn't miss! The script is already written in the minds of the audience. You walk around, make stern and defiant pronouncements, hug a few firemen, make a few more stern and defiant pronouncements, a bit of chin jutting. The emotional storm raised by the 9/11 attacks were tailor made for a man with Bush's gift for mediocrity. CarrotTop could have done it, its almost fool proof.

Its one of our most cherished myths: that great events will raise mediocre men to heights that exceed themselves. Its a steaming load, but we fall for it every time. Its bad enough that we believed it, it gets worse because he believed it, the dull little twit honest-to-God believes that he is a Leader of Men, Elmer Fudd channeling Winston Churchill.

(Question for history buffs: biggest shitwit? Churchill/Gallipoli, Bush/Iraq?)

[Sarah Woodruff]

I've heard it said that emotion and expressing conviction are two of Bush's strong points, and he was able to display those in his post-attack speech.
Maybe that's a matter of the beholder's personal opinion. I've never gotten any particular sense of emotional sincerity and conviction from Bush. I do from Condi Rice (even though I don't agree with her politics). I did from Blair in his speech immediately after the London bombing, and I'm not a particular fan of his either. However, hearing Churchill's radio broadcast still sends shivers down my spine.

[kingpengvin]

I was home sick on Sept 11 watching the events unfold and the thing that scared me the most (And I'm not even an American) was that a huge terrorist attack occured and the entire governement of the United States, save for the Mayor of New York, disapeared for almost a day.

A true sign of leadership in time of crisis is when the leader himself can show courage by example. Churchill and the Royals remained in London during the Blitz and would walk out in the open to rally the people. It is not enough to talk tough. A Great leader has to show that they too are willing to take the risks that their people are. Anything else begins to sound like hollow platitudes after a while.

It was shamefull to watch a government scurry away when they should have stood tall. Yes they (supposedly) would have risked their lives, but that is the point.

Guilliani (sp?)did what a true leader should, he went to the scene and let's his presense be known even though there was nothing he could actually do for the situation.

[Frank]

(Question for history buffs: biggest shitwit? Churchill/Gallipoli, Bush/Iraq?)
Oh, definitely Bush. Churchill learned from his mistakes.

Bush acted all presidential and shit. As mentioned above, Gore would have done the same things, and been viewed in the same regard.

[Latro]

(Question for history buffs: biggest shitwit? Churchill/Gallipoli, Bush/Iraq?)

Come, come now, that is no comparison.

Johnny Turk he was ready, he'd primed himself well. Iraq was a walk-over.

[tdn]

Face it, this thread was started in The Pit so that all the Bush-haters could come in and say "Bush is a fucking idiot, he's never done anything 'presidential', and his motorcade burns too much gas!"
I missed the post where someone mentioned the motorcade burning too much gas. Can you link to it? Or are you just making shit up in order to defend President Cuckoobanananuts?

I remember noting on 9/11 that Bush was pretty quick to declare that we were then at war, and fearing that he was going to use that declaration to start some cuckoobanananuts invasion of a completely uninvolved nation. Glad to see I was wrong. :rolleyes:

[What Exit?]

I missed the post where someone mentioned the motorcade burning too much gas. Can you link to it? Or are you just making shit up in order to defend President Cuckoobanananuts?

I remember noting on 9/11 that Bush was pretty quick to declare that we were then at war, and fearing that he was going to use that declaration to start some cuckoobanananuts invasion of a completely uninvolved nation. Glad to see I was wrong. :rolleyes:

I didn't pick up on this until at least 9/12. I must be slow or numb, I thought my cousin was at work in the tower that day. But I did assume it would be either Iraq or Syria.

[Merijeek]

Our Fearless leader allowed the Secret service to order him to safety. Last I checked a CIC could overrule the secret service agents.

Much as I hate Dubya and hope for nothing but the worst for him, this is just stupid. A President who ignores his Secret Service bodyguards is an idiot.

Everyone has their specialty. A President should let his SS guys perform theirs.

-Joe, hoping for Pretzel Part Two

[Polycarp]

I realize it is not the conventional wisdom on this board to defend his actions, and it's clear, I think, how much I am opposed to many of GWB's most recent policies. But in my opinion, his actions were close to the precise right way to handle a crisis like 9/11.

First, remember that he was at a Florida elementary school when the news struck. I am relatively confident that it would not have made a good command center for America's response. By finishing his visit calmly, then leaving to deal with things, he set an example -- "Don't panic, but act resolutely." Whatever he might have done is subject to criticism ("he overreacted"; "he acted like that crisis was unimportant"; "he was jingoistic") but I think that set the tone for his own actions and what he called the country to: take the time to identify what happened and at whose hands, then make sure it doesn't happen again.

He never said anything with the memorability of, say, "Ask not what Al Qaeda can do to you, rather, ask what you can do to Al Qaeda." But at that critical time, at least, I approved --and approve-- of his judgment.

Remember that you do not know what most Presidents were doing in the hours immediately after crises in the past; thanks to our expectations of immediate news, we know what Mr. Bush was. (While flying around on Air Force One is not, precisely, setting a good example, it seems a reasonable compromise between his obligation (Secret Service requirement) to keep himself safe and maintaining leadership (Air Force One does have the capacity to function as an airborne Executive Office, to a great extent).

What happened thereafter to the direction this country took is subject to intense debate (See any thread containing Bush, Rumsfeld, Iraq, Patriot Act, etc., in the title). And I cannot defend the President's actions and policies .. in fact, tend to get a little snotty to those who do. But from a relatively unbiased perspective, what he did do on Sept 11-15, 2001, is fairly close to what in my opinion would be the perfect response.

[What Exit?]

Much as I hate Dubya and hope for nothing but the worst for him, this is just stupid. A President who ignores his Secret Service bodyguards is an idiot.

Everyone has their specialty. A President should let his SS guys perform theirs.

-Joe, hoping for Pretzel Part Two

The President should have been addressing the public, not in hiding.
Secret Service will (and should) always error heavily on the side of caution.
The President needs to weigh the perceived threat to his safety vs. the need to do his job.
It is his decision in the end. This applies to every public appearance and every campaign stomp. It applies to where he vacations and where his kids go to school.
If I understand my history correctly Camp David is the preferred vacation spot for security reasons by the SS. Every President from Reagan on ignored this SS safety advise. (Proabably others before also)

But if just calling my statement stupid is easier for you, have fun.

[tdn]

Much as I can't stand President Cuckoobanananuts, and think that nearly every decision he made before and after 9/11 is astonishingly stupid, I can't blame him for Air Force One or his Pet Goat.

It's easy to sit in judgement with the benefit of hindsight, but try to remember that day. He didn't know what was going on. I didn't know what was going on. And you didn't know what was going on, either. The full extent of what was happening to us didn't fully become apparent until much later that afternoon. We were a nation perplexed. If we'd guessed that that elementary school was going to be another target, no one would question us on that guess. On that day, anything seemed horrifically possible.

[What Exit?]

Much as I can't stand President Cuckoobanananuts, and think that nearly every decision he made before and after 9/11 is astonishingly stupid, I can't blame him for Air Force One or his Pet Goat.

It's easy to sit in judgement with the benefit of hindsight, but try to remember that day. He didn't know what was going on. I didn't know what was going on. And you didn't know what was going on, either. The full extent of what was happening to us didn't fully become apparent until much later that afternoon. We were a nation perplexed. If we'd guessed that that elementary school was going to be another target, no one would question us on that guess. On that day, anything seemed horrifically possible.


On that day, I left work by 11am to give blood; I drove home and called family members to find out where my cousin was. Thankfully we finally found out she was home recovering from pneumonia. I called to ensure my Aunt made it back home ok. I watch the rest unfold as most people did. Throughout the day, I cursed Clinton for eliminating the ready fighters that may have had a shot at shooting down the 2nd jet and Bush Jr. for not reestablishing them. (With 20/20 hindsight the Reagan era Ready fighters probably could not have helped).
I could not believe throughout the day that Bush was hiding instead of doing his job. Worst case, get him to NORAD and get him on the Air. But I thought he could transmit from AF1.
My Respect for Giuliani shot up to hero worship levels and my respect for Bush has never fully recovered.
I also could not believe the Pentagon did not have Land to Air defense missiles.

Sorry for the ramble, but my reaction to Bush’s decision to run and hide was not Monday morning quarterbacking, it was flow of thoughts on that day. I even had an argument over this very issue with my brother that night. He figured the President had nothing to do anyway and I thought he needed to be on air and be presidential.
Over the next few weeks, he did step up act presidential. That was very good. The Firemen and Iron Workers at Ground Zero really appreciated his speech to them. When he went down into the sight with them, he was BTW ignoring Secret service cautions.

[tdn]

He figured the President had nothing to do anyway and I thought he needed to be on air and be presidential.
As I remember it (probably wrongly), he was on the air by noon or shortly thereafter. Anybody remember a more exact time?

[Hentor the Barbarian]

It is incorrect to say that there is nothing Bush could have done if he had gotten up instead of reading The Pet Goat. I will agree that it is not particularly likely that he would have hit on the right thing that he could have said, but we will never know, because he sat there like a deer in the headlights.

Approximately 20 minutes elapsed between the time he was told of the second plane striking the tower (and remember, he was already aware that there was something going on even before he entered the building) and the terrorists taking control of the final plane.

If he had gotten up and issued an order that all other crews in the air should prepare themselves, it is possible that some lives on United 93 could have been saved. Apparently the FAA felt that it was up to the individual airlines to give warnings to their crews. If the commander in chief had issued his own warning, the FAA might have gotten off their asses and done what they should have done in the first place.

[What Exit?]

As I remember it (probably wrongly), he was on the air by noon or shortly thereafter. Anybody remember a more exact time?

I was laying on a Blood Bank couch with CNN on and blood pumping out of my arm. I did not see the Pres that early in the day. I recall late afternoon or early evening. Didn't Cheney actually appear before Bush?
I recall someone official explaining the precautions they were taking with President & VP and others.

I am going strictly by memory and I know I could be wrong.

[tdn]

I was laying on a Blood Bank couch with CNN on and blood pumping out of my arm. I did not see the Pres that early in the day. I recall late afternoon or early evening. Didn't Cheney actually appear before Bush?
I recall someone official explaining the precautions they were taking with President & VP and others.

I am going strictly by memory and I know I could be wrong.
In this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=86513) thread, Esprix put it at 1:07.

[Frank]

This wikipedia timeline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks_timeline_for_the_day_of_the_attacks) puts it at just after 1 pm eastern.

[Frank]

This wikipedia timeline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks_timeline_for_the_day_of_the_attacks) puts it at just after 1 pm eastern.
Should have refreshed the thread - tdn already nailed it.

[What Exit?]

In this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=86513) thread, Esprix put it at 1:07.

Ok, that was the very brief address. Nothing but a few lines, the hop again. The "long" address was in the Evening
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=1600766&postcount=19
20:30 EDT, Dubya delivers his official address to the nation. It lasts for all of 4 minutes.

Strangely enough, your post. LOL. It sounds like you were even a little surprised by the length.

[tdn]

Strangely enough, your post. LOL. It sounds like you were even a little surprised by the length.
Yes, but he was on the air long before his official address. A good 7 hours before. And you couldn't really blame him for wanting to make his official address at any time other than 8pm. People are normally home by that time.

He took 4 hours to make his initial announcement. That's not an unreasonable amount of time, considering that no one knew what the hell was going on. It's a little disturbing that his first words about it were ones of vengeance, but let's face it, we were all thinking the same thing at the time. I was ready to nuke all of Afghanistan, myself.

[av8rmike]

I missed the post where someone mentioned the motorcade burning too much gas. Can you link to it? Or are you just making shit up in order to defend President Cuckoobanananuts?
This one. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=331717)

So, are we really going to hash out the old "why didn't the President shoot first and ask questions later" debate?

And, since it needs to be said, "I'm Cuckoo for Banana Nuts!"

[What Exit?]

Yes, but he was on the air long before his official address. A good 7 hours before...snip...

I don't count his few sentences at 1pm as an address to the public. I still think he did wrong by us that day. He recovered in the following weeks.
He did well with Afghanistan. He had other nations & UN aboard for it.
I obviously have a large problem with his handling of Iraq.
I hate him as a President for his environmental policies.

[tdn]

This one. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=331717)
But Turek mentioned that people were complaining of Bush's gas use in this thread. It's a little disingenuous to post a link to a different thread where almost no one complained about the gas use in the first place.

[tdn]

I don't count his few sentences at 1pm as an address to the public.
Well, no. It wasn't an address. He was saving that for when a) he had more information, and b) when his address would reach more people.

If you were president on that day, what would you have done?

[What Exit?]

TDN
I think we need to agree to disagree on Dubya's reactions on that day.
I know I am in the minority on my view, but to me he really was running and hiding that day for way to long and should have cancelled the school event first thing.

[What Exit?]

Well, no. It wasn't an address. He was saving that for when a) he had more information, and b) when his address would reach more people.

If you were president on that day, what would you have done?


What would I have done. I would have scrambled every available fighter.
I would have immediately and temporarily put out orders to escort all remaining jets in air back to nearest airport they could land at.
I would have addressed the people and said I do not know what, but then I will never be president nor would I want to be.

Rudy updated us hourly from early on. Pataki did the same. I expected more from the Executive branch.

[Lute Skywatcher]

Just a note for those in the DC area who want to avoid the 4th Anniversary stuff. I believe Ziegfeld's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziegfeld's) is having one of their drag pageants that day.

[tdn]

What would I have done. I would have scrambled every available fighter.
I would have immediately and temporarily put out orders to escort all remaining jets in air back to nearest airport they could land at.
I would have addressed the people and said I do not know what, but then I will never be president nor would I want to be.
I believe that fighters were already scrambled. And I think the logistics of escorting every single plane in the air at the time would have been pretty much impossible.

Not to defend Bush, but if I were president I wouldn't have done much different, other than panicking a whole lot more.

[Merijeek]

But if just calling my statement stupid is easier for you, have fun.

Now you're just being bitchy.

A professional knows what they're doing. A President, typically, is a layman compared to all the people around him at their very own specialties.

The Secret Service knows security. Did he ignore their expertise? It doesn't look like it. Dubya didn't pretend to know better than them.

The CIA knows intelligence. Did he ignore their expertise? Yup. Dubya pretended to know better then.

I agree with you that after the attacks were over having him run and cower was cowardly - but that's what I'd expect from the likes of him and Cheney.

But at the time of the attacks? That's a moment of Immediate Danger* - and the SS should, rightly, be calling the shots regarding where the President goes.

-Joe

*ID to me meaning a few hours, tops

[What Exit?]

I believe that fighters were already scrambled. And I think the logistics of escorting every single plane in the air at the time would have been pretty much impossible.

Not to defend Bush, but if I were president I wouldn't have done much different, other than panicking a whole lot more.

I completely agree with your last statement, I would have been panicking a whole lot more also.

As to the First, it took a long time to scramble the fighters, I don't know if this was Dubya's fault or just Air Force not being prepared.

[tdn]

As to the First, it took a long time to scramble the fighters, I don't know if this was Dubya's fault or just Air Force not being prepared.
If someone can check my facts here, I'd appreciate it. I admit to ignorance on this.

But I thought I heard that fighter jets were in the air pretty quickly, but they couldn't get to where they had to be fast enough. And I'm sure there was a good window of lost opportunity where they had no idea what was going on. At the time it was inconceivable that terrorists would use planes in that way.

[Knorf]

I remember feeling incredibly inspired by Giuliani and incredibly disappointed by Bush. He stayed away, out of touch with the American people, for too long, and when he did speak, to me he sounded confused, incoherent, and veangeful. He made a lot of angry, defiant noise, instead of finding depths within himself (which I now think he utterly lacks) to also bring solace and confidence to the American people.

"Forceful, decisive leader." Bah. A dog barking is comparably "forceful and decisive."

I didn't expect much from him at Sept. 11, but I had hoped for more. In vain.

[Bookkeeper]

I have no dog in this race, as he isn't my president, but my take on Bush's reaction to 9/11 is that here was a man used to relying on his advisors to tell him how to react and what to do for anything important, and, absent said advisors, he didn't know what he should do and finally seized on the Secret Service demands as a rope in a storm.

You must recognize that the Secret Service's number 1 priority in any crisis such as this is keeping the President safe. Letting him actually run the country is a distant second. A President who doesn't understand this and overrule the SS when warranted is not a leader. (Not that our present PM is any shakes in the Churchill replacement contest :rolleyes: )

[Bob Scene]

Bush's longer-term response to the attacks was masterful and truly established him as a leader of the highest quality. As you will remember, Bush immediately launched a full-scale congressional investigation into what happened that day, and the intelligence failures that allowed it to happen. Heads ROLLED at the intelligence agencies that knew that there were Al Qaeda terrorists in this country and failed to act, and the INS immediately tightened controls on the entry of suspected terrorists into the country. Thanks to Bush's leadership, the intelligence apparatus in this country was immediately overhauled and a new framework was put into place that allowed for the integration of intelligence from different sources into a comprehensive terrorist-fighting network. This is just what any intelligent taxpayer would expect, and Bush excelled at the task.

Huh? What's that you say? You're telling me that the above is a delusional hallucination? You're saying that Bush dragged his feet on a congressional investigation of 9/11? Do you really mean to say that heads NEVER rolled at the intelligence agencies for their negligence in allowing 9/11 to happen? FBI agents that warned of the impending attacks were ignored and Bush didn't immediately fire everybody involved? And, what? You're saying that the response to 9/11 was so ineffective that six months AFTER the attacks the INS issued student visas to two of the hijackers to allow them to go to pilot school?! You're trying to tell me that four years later, the intelligence system in this country STILL hasn't sufficiently adapted to what happened that day?

Well, let me tell you something, Mr. I HATE AMERICA Liberal naysayer:

CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB!

[Stoid]

Bob, baby, where have you been all my life?

[kingpengvin]

Well, let me tell you something, Mr. I HATE AMERICA Liberal naysayer:

CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB!


I don't hate America and The Liberal party just plain sucks... Those bastards robbed the country and are and will get away with it. You did use the Capital L so I'm supposing you are refering to the Liberal paty of Canada.

[dropzone]

At the time it was inconceivable that terrorists would use planes in that way.Inconceivable? Inconceivable?!?!? The CIA knew TWO FULL YEARS BEFORE 9/11 that it was one of Al Queda's plans! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/18/attack/main509488.shtml

[Marley23]

At the time it was inconceivable that terrorists would use planes in that way.
You keep using that word...

[wolf_meister]

Bob Scene
Interesting posting you made there. Sure, the USA's intelligence-gathering abilities have not been improved over the last 4 years but don't forget (unless you live in Massachusetts), that gay couple down the street from you can't get married.
And that makes the world sleep a little safer each night. :rolleyes:

[New Iskander]

Franklin Roosevelt (1st inaugural address during the Great Depression) stated that "this great nation will endure as it has endured".Did someone just say, "Stay the course!"

FDR in 2nd inaugural address (Great Depression still going strong) "this generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny".Yawn.

Winston Churchill stated (when England was getting the Hell bombed out of it by Germany) that "We will fight in the alleyways. We will fight in the streets. We will fight until the battle is won! We will never give up!"
"I will fight in front of Paris, I will fight in Paris, I will fight behind Paris"? Clemenceau (1914)
On June 10, 1940 the French Premier, Paul Reynaud,... said that the French would fight in front of Paris; would fight behind Paris; would close themselves in one of their provinces to fight and if driven out of it would establish themselves in North Africa to continue the fight, and if necessary, in French possessions in America.
On 4 June 1940, after Dunkirk, Churchill gave his famous speech "We shall fight on the beaches...." As the House of Commons cheered, what did Churchill whisper in an aside to a colleague? "...and we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles, because that’s bloody well all we’ve got."

[elucidator]

....You did use the Capital L so I'm supposing you are refering to the Liberal paty of Canada.

Canada's got politics? Who knew?

[rjung]

Inconceivable? Inconceivable?!?!? The CIA knew TWO FULL YEARS BEFORE 9/11 that it was one of Al Queda's plans! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/18/attack/main509488.shtml
I also believe that Bush and Rice attended a political summit in Italy a few months before 9/11/2001, and security precautions include anti-aircraft missiles to thwart attempts to ram airliners into the meeting site.

[wolf_meister]

New Iskander
You mentioned 1 quote from Dubya Bush "Stay the course". Did he say that on Sept 12, 2001? I think it was a year or 2 after that wasn't it?

You also put a "yawn" after the FDR quote about a "rendezvous with destiny".

In 70 years I wonder if people are going to be quoting - "stay the course".
What an inspiring bit of eloquence.

[Marley23]

Did someone just say, "Stay the course!"
Yeah, it's not the way you say something that makes it inspirational, it's how it parses. :rolleyes:

The last quote shows Churchill had a sense of humor... I say that's another point for him.

[wring]

Canada's got politics? Who knew?yea, there was an industrial leak at the border w/Washington. oops and all that.

[BobLibDem]

I detest Bush as much as anyone, but criticizing him for My Pet Goat is over the top. I mean, the guy picks up a book for the first time in forever, and he wanted to see how it ended. Give him a break.

Staying on Air Force One isn't an issue for me. There isn't much that he could do at the White House than he couldn't on Air Force One.

His leadership was no more effective then than it is today. People just needed to rally around something and he was available.

[tdn]

Inconceivable? Inconceivable?!?!? The CIA knew TWO FULL YEARS BEFORE 9/11 that it was one of Al Queda's plans!
If that's true, then yeah, shocking that we weren't more prepared for it. One must wonder if Bush and the CIA actually believed it might really happen. But I'll stop defending President Looneytunes now.

[Annie-Xmas]

BtW: on 9/11. Mayor Giuliani rushed to the scene to do everything possible to save lives and coordinate the rescue attempts. Our Fearless leader allowed the Secret service to order him to safety. Last I checked a CIC could overrule the secret service agents.

Giuliani spent the next day (9/12) calling the heads of every New York City institution and asking them "How soon are we getting back to business?" (and, I'm proud to add, Broadway was first in line, re-opening on Thursday 9/13). His top priority was getting the City back to normal.

I'm not sure what Bush was doing that week. He did read a book to schoolchildren, take a long plane ride, hide in an underground bunker, and make a grandstand appearance at Ground Zero on Sunday, but that's all I remember.

[tdn]

On 4 June 1940, after Dunkirk, Churchill gave his famous speech "We shall fight on the beaches...." As the House of Commons cheered, what did Churchill whisper in an aside to a colleague? "...and we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles, because that’s bloody well all we’ve got."
Do you have a cite for this? I asked about this very thing over at snopes, and it had pretty well been debunked. I'm pretty sure it never happened, but not 100% sure. If you've got more information I'd be interested in looking it over.

[Frank]

On 4 June 1940, after Dunkirk, Churchill gave his famous speech "We shall fight on the beaches...." As the House of Commons cheered, what did Churchill whisper in an aside to a colleague? "...and we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles, because that’s bloody well all we’ve got."
Plus, you don't fight anyone with the butt end, it's the top end that has the handle. Churchill, as a long established veteran of cabinet level infighting, would surely have known that.

[tdn]

One thing about the Churchill quote: It has been said that it was announced over an Eastern European radio station. My girlfriend's ex-husband's father claims to have been there when it happened. Neat trick, as he was actually in a concentration camp at the time.

[New Iskander]

Do you have a cite for this? I asked about this very thing over at snopes, and it had pretty well been debunked. I'm pretty sure it never happened, but not 100% sure. If you've got more information I'd be interested in looking it over.Cite (http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=397)
Search keywords: "beer", "bottle" or "butt " (with a space at the end).

I think it's a historical anecdote, always superior to real history.

[New Iskander]

Plus, you don't fight anyone with the butt end, it's the top end that has the handle. Churchill, as a long established veteran of cabinet level infighting, would surely have known that.I'm no barfight veteran, but seems logical to hold the bottle by the neck and point the butt at the adversary. Better yet, break off the to make jagged edge, like Lancaster vs. Borgnine for picking on Sinatra just before Pearl Harbor ("From here to eternity"?).

Main point is, without that purported aside, "We shall fight.." speechifying was apparently commonplace at the time and only seems striking after 65 years passed.

[Frank]

Better yet, break off the to make jagged edge, like Lancaster vs. Borgnine for picking on Sinatra just before Pearl Harbor ("From here to eternity"?).
Well, that's it. If you break it in half, the butt end goes on the floor.

I'm not going to try to make jokes any more.

[wolf_meister]

BobLibDem
His leadership was no more effective than it is today. People just needed to rally around something and he was available.
I'd agree with that assessment. As Woody Allen said, "80% of success is just showing up".

This (I think) is the most accurate version of the Woody Allen quote.

[MaxTheVool]

A few quick comments:

(1) There are few issues that get me as riled up as the Pet Goat thing. It just strikes me as GLARINGLY and DEFINITIVELY obvious proof (well, anecdotal proof) that, whatever Bush's strengths as a president, he is NOT decisive and action-oriented. The reason I get so worked up about it is not that I think it's really all that big a deal, in the grand scheme of things. When history is judging the Bush presidency, it will be a footnote at best. Rather, I get so worked up about it because, unlike other issues, it just strikes me as something which can only be viewed one way. I just plain don't accept ANY of the arguments I've heard that it was NOT an error, and a sign of weakness, on Bush's part. I won't go into it at great length here, as I've learned that it's not an argument that gets anywhere, but, of all the contentious issues argued on the SDMB, it is the one where I most feel that, if the issue were formally debated in front of an intelligent but disinterested party, my side would overwhelmingly prevail. (If someone is curious, I'll expound on my views... I love me some arguing about the Pet Goat.)


(2) As for the next 24 hours, I definitely think that Bush should not have overruled the Secret Service at all as far as getting him the heck to a secret location as fast as possible is concerned. I mean, what was he going to do? Go to the white house? Go to ground zero and put on a mask and help out? BUT, he should have addressed the nation far more quickly, far more passionately, and far more often. Even if all he could say was "on this day of incredible tragedy and bravery, blah blah blah, God Bless America, I'll talk again in another hour", that would have done a LOT of good


(3) As most people seem to do, I thought he did a fine enough job in Afghanistan.


(4) While I can't claim I'm particularly knowledgeable about the topic, nothing I know indicates that the leadership he's shown on issues like Homeland Security, intelligence reorganization, etc., has been particularly impressive

(5) And of course, the iraq war is Bad Bad Bad

[rjung]

I'm no barfight veteran, but seems logical to hold the bottle by the neck and point the butt at the adversary. Better yet, break off the to make jagged edge, like Lancaster vs. Borgnine for picking on Sinatra just before Pearl Harbor ("From here to eternity"?).
And if you do it wrong, the neck shatters and you're holding a handful of jagged glass. Hope your opponent doesn't squeeze...

(3) As most people seem to do, I thought he did a fine enough job in Afghanistan.
Except for that whole let's-leave-after-four-months-and-forget-about-Osama-Bin-Whoever bit, yeah...

[tdn]

Cite (http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=397)
Search keywords: "beer", "bottle" or "butt " (with a space at the end).

I think it's a historical anecdote, always superior to real history.
1104. On 4 June 1940, after Dunkirk, Churchill gave his famous speech "We shall fight on the beaches...." As the House of Commons cheered, what did Churchill whisper in an aside to a colleague? "...and we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles, because that’s bloody well all we’ve got.
Who was this collegue? Was this person the only one who knew about it, and if so, how did the story get out?

Not to derail this thread. Maybe we can take this to GQ.

[Xploder]

And if you do it wrong, the neck shatters and you're holding a handful of jagged glass. Hope your opponent doesn't squeeze...

And that shit ain't funny a bit...I've seen it happen in Germany.


Except for that whole let's-leave-after-four-months-and-forget-about-Osama-Bin-Whoever bit, yeah...

No offense but last time I looked, we still had a lot of people over there.

[rjung]

Yeah, but the problem is that there ain't enough of them. Haven't you heard that the Taliban are back? (http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=77134)

[wring]

yea, and IIRC, at best Kabul itself was semi safe, the rest of the country wasn't necessarily.

[rjung]

(1) There are few issues that get me as riled up as the Pet Goat thing. It just strikes me as GLARINGLY and DEFINITIVELY obvious proof (well, anecdotal proof) that, whatever Bush's strengths as a president, he is NOT decisive and action-oriented.
It's worth reminding that when Bush first entered the elementary school classroom for the read-along, Flight 175 had already crashed into the WTC a minute earlier. When he is told three minutes later that a second airplane has smacked into the WTC, he's still sitting there (cf: 9/11 timeline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_timeline) courtesy of Wikipedia). Clueless dolt or cold-hearted bastard? How about "all of the above"?

[XT]

Sorry, never learned how to sing kumbya properly.

Personally I think Bush handled 9/11 and the following days pretty well all things considered. A hell of a lot better than I would have said he would prior to what happened. I didn't find him incoherent, stuttering, drooling, etc. Quite the contrary. He came across (to me) as a regular guy in a fucked up situation, doing his best to reassure a shocked and stunned public...instead of as a slick politician. Sure, it was probably as much of an act as when Clinton was bullshitting me with that gleam in his eye...but it didn't FEEL as slimy. It felt (at the time) more...I don't know, real I suppose. YMMV of course.

Face it folks...90% of you in this thread wouldn't have been happy with Bush if he had spoken like the reincarnation of Roosevelt. I also find it ironic that some of you would trot out Churchill, but that’s another matter. Had Bush toss down the book he was reading to those kids and rushed out of the room (causing a panic) you'd be blasting him for that. Had he gone on TV immediately you'd be bustin on him for that. Had he made a big speech instead of a small one, you'd be on him for that. Had he flown straight to the White House you'd be chewing him for that...or for whatever other nitpicky bullshit you could chew on him for. Blah blah blah.

About the only thing Bush could have done on that day to make some of you happy would have been to blow his brains out...and there are one or two of you here that probably would have criticized him for that as well. :p

As I said, I think he did a decent job that day...and in the weeks that followed. I even think he (well, the administation) did a good job in Afghanistan. Everything after that was pure fuckup...but prior to that I was actually pleasantly surprised.

Oh well....we now return you to the regularly scheduled Bush Bash of the Day. Kumbya everyone!

-XT

[wolf_meister]

xtisme
Well, since I started this thread, I am glad you have brought it back to the original topic. I'll admit I'm one of the more notorious SDMB "Dubya-bashers". It was not my intent to concentrate on what he did in the classroom the morning of Sept 11, 2001, nor his alleged "hiding out" later that day, and so on.
Still, I have heard so many people say that Dubya acted very Presidential and authoritative that day and in the weeks following, I just wanted to know specifically what he did or said that was so memorable. This posting has gone well into its second page without anyone coming forward with any example of Dubya taking charge. As a few people (including myself) have said, all he really did was "show up".
September 11, 2001 was the worst attack on our country, in our 200+ year history. So, looking back on that horrific day, what memorable quotes or actions by our Commander In Chief really stand out in your mind?

[Xploder]

Yeah, but the problem is that there ain't enough of them. Haven't you heard that the Taliban are back? (http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=77134)

Yes I had heard that but whatyou said was:

Originally Posted by rjung
Except for that whole let's-leave-after-four-months-and-forget-about-Osama-Bin-Whoever bit, yeah...

So I made a comment, not detecting any lurking sarcasm at the time.

[Xploder]

xtisme
September 11, 2001 was the worst attack on our country, in our 200+ year history. So, looking back on that horrific day, what memorable quotes or actions by our Commander In Chief really stand out in your mind?

I sort of disagree with this statement. The Pearl Harbor attack was MUCH worse. Perhaps you meant the worst attack in our time rather than in our 200+ year history?

[BobLibDem]

I sort of disagree with this statement. The Pearl Harbor attack was MUCH worse. Perhaps you meant the worst attack in our time rather than in our 200+ year history?

To be really picky, Hawaii wasn't a state at the time although it was US territory. Pearl Harbor was a military attack and 9/11 was mass murder. Apples and oranges. Of course, if W had been president when Pearl Harbor happened, he probably would have declared war on Sweden.

[Xploder]

To be really picky, Hawaii wasn't a state at the time although it was US territory. Pearl Harbor was a military attack and 9/11 was mass murder. Apples and oranges. Of course, if W had been president when Pearl Harbor happened, he probably would have declared war on Sweden.

Agreed. I thought about HAwaii not being a state at the time right after I posted previously. As to 9/11 being a military attack, that's pretty much open to interpretation. In order to attack your "enemies" you would use whatever you possibly could. Kind of hard to say that OBL doesn't consider the U.S. as his enemies.

The thing about W declaring war on Sweden was pretty funny though.

[tdn]

About the only thing Bush could have done on that day to make some of you happy would have been to blow his brains out...and there are one or two of you here that probably would have criticized him for that as well.
Surely you hyperbolize.

But when it comes to cutting the President a little slack, the Conservative record isn't exactly stellar, either.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

I know this is fairly well-trod ground, but I am curious, xtisme, given your history for eventual rationality during discourse, can you really not think of any way that the President could have left the classroom without causing panic among the school children?

Are school children given to panic simply because an important visitor has to leave in the midst of an activity?

I suspect a reasonably functioning adult, especially one with a number of aides, could find a way to excuse himself from the room without causing problems for the children. Imagine, for example, that he was about to experience a horrific bout of diarrhea. Would you ask him to remain reading The Pet Goat while shit runs down his leg and stinks up the room? Would he have to jump up and yell "Hey everyone! I've got the shits! PANIC NOW!"?

Or is it possible that he could say, "Excuse me children, I have to step out of the room. Please enjoy the rest of the book, and thank you for allowing me to share in your activities today."

[What Exit?]

I know this is fairly well-trod ground, but I am curious, xtisme, given your history for eventual rationality during discourse, can you really not think of any way that the President could have left the classroom without causing panic among the school children?

Are school children given to panic simply because an important visitor has to leave in the midst of an activity?

I suspect a reasonably functioning adult, especially one with a number of aides, could find a way to excuse himself from the room without causing problems for the children. Imagine, for example, that he was about to experience a horrific bout of diarrhea. Would you ask him to remain reading The Pet Goat while shit runs down his leg and stinks up the room? Would he have to jump up and yell "Hey everyone! I've got the shits! PANIC NOW!"?

Or is it possible that he could say, "Excuse me children, I have to step out of the room. Please enjoy the rest of the book, and thank you for allowing me to share in your activities today."

You suddenly bring to mind an infamous episode with Daddy Bush and the Japanese.

[XT]

I know this is fairly well-trod ground, but I am curious, xtisme, given your history for eventual rationality during discourse, can you really not think of any way that the President could have left the classroom without causing panic among the school children?

Oh, I'm sure I could think of ways he could leave without causing a panic...in retrospect. I think you and I discussed all this in one of the myriad timeline theads about 9/11 (IIRC...I think it was you, if not appologies). Personally I am neutral about this...I just don't see it as a big deal. Certainly I don't see it as a major screw up by the president that its made out to be in various threads. Going by the timeline of events there really wasn't anything Bush could have done to make a jot of difference...and I'm uncertain really how much the protection aspect actually comes into play...i.e. where would he have been safer for those 5 min really? Moving or sitting tight?

To me there are a lot more serious things to bust the President on than this, and I think the whole 'goat book' meme is...well, overblown. Just MHO of course.

Are school children given to panic simply because an important visitor has to leave in the midst of an activity?

You are assuming here that the sole (or even primary) audiance for Bush's show of bravado (if thats what it was) was the children. I think that, assuming he actually was thinking it through and wasn't just frozen like a rabbit, he had a wider audiance in mind...namely the American people. IMO he was trying to project 'calm' and 'Presidential' to the the citizens during a crisis.

I suspect a reasonably functioning adult, especially one with a number of aides, could find a way to excuse himself from the room without causing problems for the children. Imagine, for example, that he was about to experience a horrific bout of diarrhea. Would you ask him to remain reading The Pet Goat while shit runs down his leg and stinks up the room? Would he have to jump up and yell "Hey everyone! I've got the shits! PANIC NOW!"?

I suspect that a reasonably functional adult COULD do that...if they weren't under stress. People do strange things under stress from my experience. Did Bush do the right thing? Maybe not. But considering how events were moving, myself I'm willing to cut him slack on this one as I don't see the importance. I think that the 'goat' thing is just a snipe by the left...and personally, I don't get it. The guy is a target rich environment...why harp on THIS thing?

Or is it possible that he could say, "Excuse me children, I have to step out of the room. Please enjoy the rest of the book, and thank you for allowing me to share in your activities today."

Sure...but again, you are assuming that the children were his target audiance for his little show. In addition, you have plenty of time to think it through...he didn't. He had to make a snap decision how best to project during the crisis. Again, was it the optimal decision? Maybe not. But it wasn't a horrifically stupid decision either...certainly not on the order of how much its been discussed.

YMMV though Hentor. :)

-XT

[tdn]

Did Bush do the right thing? Maybe not. But considering how events were moving, myself I'm willing to cut him slack on this one as I don't see the importance.
That's just it. I'm as much of a Bush-basher as anyone, Reeder included. And even I think that Bush's Pet Goat is pretty much a non-issue. In retrospect, we can look back and pick apart how his performance could have stood improvement, but really, I think he handled himself just fine, considering the circumstances. We can all shout "He ain't no Giulinani!", but really, who is?

[Neurotik]

Sorry, never learned how to sing kumbya properly.
About the only thing Bush could have done on that day to make some of you happy would have been to blow his brains out...and there are one or two of you here that probably would have criticized him for that as well. :p
And who'd have to clean that shit up?

That's right, the working class housekeeping staff. I swear, Bush can't do anything without fucking over the poor and middle class.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

That's just it. I'm as much of a Bush-basher as anyone, Reeder included. And even I think that Bush's Pet Goat is pretty much a non-issue. And I don't. I think it is an unvarnished insight into the true character of the man. At the moment of greatest crisis of my lifetime, how did my President respond? This is not a non-issue.

Clearly we differ on that.

[What Exit?]

That's just it. I'm as much of a Bush-basher as anyone, Reeder included. And even I think that Bush's Pet Goat is pretty much a non-issue. In retrospect, we can look back and pick apart how his performance could have stood improvement, but really, I think he handled himself just fine, considering the circumstances. We can all shout "He ain't no Giulinani!", but really, who is?

As long as we are in the Pit.

Giulinani for President in 2008.

With your supplied rallying cry: We can all shout "He ain't no Giulinani!", but really, who is?

[XT]

And who'd have to clean that shit up?

Exactly. :p

We can all shout "He ain't no Giulinani!", but really, who is?

Certainly not Bush, thats for sure. ;)

Clearly we differ on that.

And thats what makes the board such an interesting place, ehe?

-XT

[tdn]

Clearly we differ on that.
This is America. We're allowed to disagree.

I sometimes think we expect too much of our presidents. We expect them to be more machine than man sometimes. Personally, I won't begrudge Bush a moment or three of shock when the shit hits the fan. It's a human reaction.

Starting an illegal war 18 months later in an unrelated country ain't, of course. That's inexcusable.

But I remember my reaction on 9/11. By the time I turned on the TV, both towers had already been hit. My first reaction was "Meh, this show sucks." I turned over to the Game Show Network. It was several minutes before I said to myself "Hey, maybe I should watch that. It looked important." Even then, it was a good hour before I could convince myself that what I saw on the TV was real. It was beyond my comprehension.

[Clothahump]

But Turek mentioned that people were complaining of Bush's gas use in this thread. It's a little disingenuous to post a link to a different thread where almost no one complained about the gas use in the first place.

I didn't get that impression. He sounded like he was fed up with the Bash-Bush-At-Any-Price-For-Any-Reason Brigade in general, and I don't blame him in the slightest.

[tdn]

I didn't get that impression. He sounded like he was fed up with the Bash-Bush-At-Any-Price-For-Any-Reason Brigade in general, and I don't blame him in the slightest.
Then he should have cited something where people were bashing Bush. His example was a strawman.

[XT]

I think there was another thread recently that was talking about the cost of gas in the presidential vehicles (not just about Bush BTW)...I figured it was an oblique reference to that. If I have time later I'll dig up that thread if you are that interested in it tdn.

-XT

[Cervaise]

Then he should have cited something where people were bashing Bush. His example was a strawman.Word of advice, when addressing Clothahump, you might want to cut down on all those complicated multisyllabic words.

[tdn]

I think there was another thread recently that was talking about the cost of gas in the presidential vehicles (not just about Bush BTW)...I figured it was an oblique reference to that. If I have time later I'll dig up that thread if you are that interested in it tdn.
Oh, I was aware of that thread. But even in that, not too many people were taking thoughtless potshots at Bush. Not that I saw, anyway.

[wolf_meister]

I really don't think we (the Dubya-bashing sector of the SDMB) take every opportunity to bash "Dubya". I think the thread about gas-guzzling "Dubya" proved that.

So, now that this thread has reached its third page, there's hasn't been one reply that showed "Dubya" being decisive, authoritative or inspiring in the days, weeks or even years after Sept 11, 2001. My God, a few days after that horrible day, don't you think Dubya Bush could at least have had someone write a great speech to rally the people? Instead what have we heard? "Bring it on." OR "You can run but you can't hide." (about Osama Bin Laden who's has been running and hiding for 4 years now.)

So, as I've said on every page of this thread, if you want to call me a "Dubya basher" - fine. But the thing that would really put me in my place is countering my assertions with some great action or speech made by Dubya that truly rallied the people.

[RickJay]

Inconceivable? Inconceivable?!?!? The CIA knew TWO FULL YEARS BEFORE 9/11 that it was one of Al Queda's plans! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/18/attack/main509488.shtml
Hell, Tom Clancy thought it up before that.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0425147584/103-6219013-1395810?v=glance

xploder, how was Pearl Harbor worse? 9/11 killed more people.

[Xploder]

Hell, Tom Clancy thought it up before that.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0425147584/103-6219013-1395810?v=glance

xploder, how was Pearl Harbor worse? 9/11 killed more people.

Kudos on the Tom Clancy reference.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. On 9/11 we lost more people but at Pearl Harbor, of ninety-six ships present that morning, eighteen were sunk or severely damaged including nine battleships. Of 394 army, navy and marine aircraft on the island, 188 were destroyed, another 159 damaged.

Over 2300 military personnel died, 2008 of whom were sailors.

Being that this was almost the complete Pacific war fleet, and it was mostly destroyed, I can arguably say that Pearl Harbor was worse. Especially when we subsequently lost Wake Island, Guam, Singapore, the East Indies, the Phillipines and other Pacific bases at the START (for us) of a global war.

While the casualties on 9/11 were horrific, and I never meant to intimate that they weren't, the debacle at Pearl Harbor could have quickly lost us the war in the Pacific. One reason it didn't was because all our carriers were out to sea when it happened.

[robertliguori]

Hell, Tom Clancy thought it up before that.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0425147584/103-6219013-1395810?v=glance

xploder, how was Pearl Harbor worse? 9/11 killed more people.

Also, in Arthur C. Clarke's book The Trigger Effect (co-authored with someone whose name I can't remember), hijacking and crashing an airliner is given as a possible plan of violent extremists. Inconceivable, it wasn't.

[What Exit?]

Kudos on the Tom Clancy reference.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. On 9/11 we lost more people but at Pearl Harbor, of ninety-six ships present that morning, eighteen were sunk or severely damaged including nine battleships. Of 394 army, navy and marine aircraft on the island, 188 were destroyed, another 159 damaged.

Over 2300 military personnel died, 2008 of whom were sailors.

Being that this was almost the complete Pacific war fleet, and it was mostly destroyed, I can arguably say that Pearl Harbor was worse. Especially when we subsequently lost Wake Island, Guam, Singapore, the East Indies, the Phillipines and other Pacific bases at the START (for us) of a global war.

While the casualties on 9/11 were horrific, and I never meant to intimate that they weren't, the debacle at Pearl Harbor could have quickly lost us the war in the Pacific. One reason it didn't was because all our carriers were out to sea when it happened.

Much of what you say about Pearl Harbor is not true. We would not have lost the war even if we loast the carriers, it would have been much longer however and with much greater loss of life so you are probably correct that Pearl was probably worse than 9/11. Please see http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=332475 starting at about post 10 for detailed debate on the effects of Pearl Harbor attack and the Carriers.

[Clothahump]

Word of advice, when addressing Clothahump, you might want to cut down on all those complicated multisyllabic words.

Word of advice, Cervaise: when addressing me or speaking about me, try to have something intelligent to say instead of ignorant, childish bullshit like that.
:wally

[Xploder]

Much of what you say about Pearl Harbor is not true. We would not have lost the war even if we loast the carriers, it would have been much longer however and with much greater loss of life so you are probably correct that Pearl was probably worse than 9/11. Please see http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=332475 starting at about post 10 for detailed debate on the effects of Pearl Harbor attack and the Carriers.

What I actually said was:

While the casualties on 9/11 were horrific, and I never meant to intimate that they weren't, the debacle at Pearl Harbor could have quickly lost us the war in the Pacific.

Note the bolded part. I didn't mean to imply that we would have lost all of WWII just from that one attack. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

Now off to read that thread...

[MaxTheVool]

Sorry, never learned how to sing kumbya properly.

Huh? What do you mean, precisely?


He came across (to me) as a regular guy in a fucked up situation,

A reasonable analysis. But is that what we WANT? Should we attempt to elect, as president, the most average and regular American? Or should we attempt to elect someone who is stronger and smarter and better and purer and more righteous than most of us?

doing his best to reassure a stunned public

Are you still talking about the classroom here? Because the public had NO IDEA WHAT HE WAS DOING AT THE MOMENT. He was not being broadcast live on national TV, projecting calm, reassuring people, calming unrest. He was in an elementary school classroom!




Face it folks...90% of you in this thread wouldn't have been happy with Bush if he had spoken like the reincarnation of Roosevelt.

This concept, "it doesn't matter what Bush does, you all will criticize him no matter what" pisses me off SO MUCH because it SO EASILY PROVEN FALSE. The easiest example being to compare the reactions to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Heck, just read all the posts in this thread, and see how many of them say something like mine did, which is "some things he did OK, some things not so OK". Yes, a lot of poeple really don't like Bush. Yes, that dislike sometimes crosses the border into irrationality. But that doesn't mean that we just unthinkingly auto-criticize everything he does. Heck, someone brought up the recent thread about how much gas Bush's SUV caravan uses, and there were TONS of people who posted "I hate Bush as much as the next guy, and I think this is a non-issue".


Had Bush toss down the book he was reading to those kids and rushed out of the room (causing a panic) you'd be blasting him for that.

Balderdash! Tommyrot! Do you think any would have cared if Bush had alarmed some schoolchildren (and NOT caused a national panic because there were no live national cameras on him), given that those schoolchildren would, about half an hour later, learn about 9/11? This is perhaps the single most ridiculous claim I've ever heard multiple SDMBers repeatedly make. I find it so laughable that I wrote an entire parody (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=271515) about it, which no one got.



And yes, I agree that this whole Pet Goat issue really isn't that big a deal. But that doesn't mean I'm going to let total BS arguments about it slide by.

[Merijeek]

A reasonable analysis. But is that what we WANT? Should we attempt to elect, as president, the most average and regular American?

The headline "President Simpson Wins Superbowl" explodes my bowels in terror...

-Joe

[What Exit?]

The headline "President Simpson Wins Superbowl" explodes my bowels in terror...

-Joe

But Lisa would make a good President, she just has to watch out for Nepotism.