Reagan vs Bush

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by area43, Sep 12, 2007.

  1. area43

    area43 New Member

    Hey all you knuckel heads. Stuck down here in the Old smelly current events forum. This place smells like one big armpit. Why don't you guys(Im talking to the males only here) take a walk up stairs to the Top deck of the discussions floor. Get some fresh air. Take a dip into the deep blue thread. Mac, D, Av8r,Tie, Jones and the rest of the nerds don't be basement dwellers. As Al pacino said in Scarface, " You ain't nothin but a bunch of Coacka Roaches". LOL

    Anyhow, what did you do to my girl, Braze? Ok, about the thread. I believe that Bush will be considered an equal or greater president than Reagan. History will tell. Don't judge Bush now, wait intill 10 to 15 years after his presidency is over. I think you will be surprised. Get your crystal ball out and do some predictions. Bush Jr. one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history. ( : ps Be nice. LOL
  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I think he'll be remembered more for his stubborn stance on his convictions. He also runs the risk of being forever remembered as the village idiot referenced by nostradamus.
  3. over9five

    over9five Moderator Staff Member

    Is there any other boss in the world who is 100% behind his people? George Bush will stand behind his people AND stand up for them wholly.

    I always hope someday if the chips are down, my boss at UPS will back me like George Bush would.
  4. diesel96

    diesel96 Well-Known Member

    The Joint Chiefs and Bush's previous set of Commanders in Iraq didn't want a surge and increase troops.
    According to Administration and Military Officials, the Joint Chiefs believe it is of crucial strategic importance to reduce the size of the U.S. force in Iraq in order to reload the military's ability to respond to other threats, a view that is shared by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. So what does GW jr do, he ditched them in favor of some different commanders that share his views. My guess is the previous set of Commanders won't share the same opinion as you.

  5. area43

    area43 New Member

    Good advise area, and we should not let political grudges conflict or carry over on the Discussion floor niether.

    D, Im not sure really how to read into this. Not to stir up anything, but can you elaborate? I cringe when people beat around the Bush. Im perplexed. Is it something I said? 9/5 or Tie, perphaps. Lets get it out in the open and get it resolved. Were all adults here. Aren't we? Forgive and Forget? Constructive dialogue. sincerely area 43
  6. diesel96

    diesel96 Well-Known Member

    I'm being sincere, we may all have differ opinions in current events, but when we talk shop in UPS discussions I look at ALL of you as my UPS Brothers and Sisters. Hard to admit, but I even have mngmt friends off the clock. Btw.....I'm not sure how to read "cringing when people beat around the Bush"..LOL
  7. UPS Lifer

    UPS Lifer Well-Known Member

    I think that over time GW's handling of 911 will overshadow anything else he did in his presidency. Reagan will continue to be the president that stands out amongst the rest of the presidents in the eyes of the people.

    The next president will contend with environmental (global warming and energy) and infrastructure & social issues (such as inner city, Social Security, Healthcare, and immigration) and the emergence of China as a world power. Terrorism is here to stay and we will just get used to inconveniences on a regular basis.
  8. I think they both have their good points and bad. I dont think we have ever had a "perfect" president. But I feel in my opinion Bush doesn't get enough credit for the good things he has done. It really upsets me that every internet blog, bumper sticker, news story, message board always focuses on the negative things and not enough on the positive.
  9. govols019

    govols019 You smell that?

    Which positives would you like them to focus on?
  10. Would you rather he stood by and did nothing while Osama Bin Ladin's private army rammed a few more 767's into our landmarks? If taking the fight to the terrorists is not a positive action, I don't know what is.
  11. govols019

    govols019 You smell that?

    You mean the same Osama that is still out there over 6 years later? Yeah, bang up job he did on that one.
  12. diesel96

    diesel96 Well-Known Member

    Uhmmm...Where did Osama and most of his 9/11 cronies come from ?


  13. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    You should have added the parrott soundtrack from the James Bond movie where he said, "Give Us A Kiss!"

    To follow up Vols, take some time and go out to FoxNews website and search the columes of Col. Hunt. That's a quick easy start. He's done several on missions where we had hard intel on where Osama was, the choppers on the pad warmed up and the special-ops teams on board to take him out and your fearless leader and his cronies scrubbed the mission within minutes of takeoff. Guys like you have fielddays with Clinton on his "finger in the wind" actions (there were many)and the truth is, the Bush adminstration is just as bad when the rubber meets the road.

    Simple fact is, we took our eye off of Afghanistan and the Pakistan region and let the real culprits of 9/11 go so a bunch of internationalist could play their empire games. The whole reason we are in the middle of this sandwich right now is because of Saudia Arabia and what do we do?

    Kissy Kissy!
  14. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    Good case in point.

    We know for fact that Pakistan has nukes and yet we sit by and allow it to become a breeding ground for the same extremist that masterminded the 9/11 attacks. Instead, we went to Iraq. What will you say if the terrorist who were allowed to mend and heal their wounds from the Afghan ouster overthrow Pakistan and get their hands on real nukes unlike the alledged WMD we were told in Iraq?

    I agree there are always good points and bad points with any adminstration but IMO this adminstration has really dropped the ball on fighting terrorism when days after 9/11 we had the world literally behind us and a nation firmly behind the President. IMO, it's a tragic case of literally wasting so much political clout because the President was surrounded by people who were operating off of other agendas that IMO were contary to the best interest of the country.
  15. My point is at least he tried. Clinton allowed terrorists to punch a hole in the side of one of our destroyers and did nothing. He also allowed them to bomb the World Trade Center the first time again did nothing. Khobar Towers. Nothing. Within an hour of the 9-11 attack I received a phone call ordering me that my leave was canceled and I made it down to Norfolk in record time. By midnight that night my ship was underway, The day we arrived in the Indian Ocean we started launching attacks.
  16. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    I read this article and came to almost the exact opposite conclusion that you did. It does not seem like we are wasting political clout as you say. You seem to advocate that the US do something in Pakistan and it seems like they are doing something political when you read this article. I think we all know the US has had military action in Pakistan on a small scale. According to your article we are also using political pressure. If it is in the best interest to minimize the effects of Al Queada and a few other groups why is this tragic? Do you suggest we should declare war on Pakistan? Is your position that we should leave everyone alone in Pakistan because they are not across the border? Or is your position that if the government is not telling you everything they are doing this is bad?
  17. area43

    area43 New Member

    Dudes!!!!!!!!! and all the lovely ladies of the Brown Cafe. I considered this thread officiallllllyyy Dead. LoL Hey, lets do a little brainstorming and get a few new ideas. Just something to think about. take care area43 ( ;