• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush brings democracy to the ME

"Iraqi democracy will succeed," President George W. Bush declared in November 2003, "and that success will send forth the news from Damascus to Tehran that freedom can be the future of every nation." The audience at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington answered with hearty applause. Bush went on: "The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution."

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/25/rebirth-of-a-nation.html

Looks like he was right. Iraq is becoming a functioning democracy, and citizens of other nations in the region covet those same freedoms enough to rise up.

Some more prewar comments:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.bush07nov07,0,5347312.story

WASHINGTON -- President Bush laid out a broad vision Thursday of an American mission to spread democracy throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world, saying, "Freedom can be the future of every nation."

Engendering democracy across the Middle East "must be a focus of American policy for decades to come," the president said in a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy, a federally funded foundation that promotes reform abroad.

He offered no new program for promoting democracy nor any specifics for how the United States will encourage what he called the "global democratic revolution."

However, the speech was his most detailed and far-reaching explanation of a theme he first sounded in the run-up to the war in Iraq. "The freedom we prize is not for us alone," he said, "it is the right and the capacity of all mankind."

The United States has long supported authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, partly because of the nation's need for oil from the region. Several countries in the region were also seen as allies in the superpower competition with the Soviet Union.

Bush took the uncharacteristic step of implicitly criticizing his predecessors, saying that previous policies were shortsighted.

"Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty," the president said.
 
Bush can claim all the credit he wants, but Iraq was a thriving democracy before Saddam. The US also supported Saddam as it has so many other dictators and, in doing so, has repeatedly demonstrated that it is willing to support any form of government that it to its advantage. Hell, even in the recent Egyptian uprising people were carrying around signs in English saying "Stop the Hypocrisy". But I guess some people just don't get it.
 
Bush can claim all the credit he wants, but Iraq was a thriving democracy before Saddam. The US also supported Saddam as it has so many other dictators and, in doing so, has repeatedly demonstrated that it is willing to support any form of government that it to its advantage. Hell, even in the recent Egyptian uprising people were carrying around signs in English saying "Stop the Hypocrisy". But I guess some people just don't get it.

Iraq was a thriving democracy before Saddam? When was that time period?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_pre-Saddam_Iraq

Yes, Bush also criticized previous administration policy, I'm sure he is happy you agree with him.
 
Google "post hoc ergo propter hoc".

True, u cannot definitively point to Iraq as the sole reason for the current uprisings, but it's worth noting this did not happen until there was a democratic Iraq.

Can you think of any other factor whose influence could be as significant?
 
Bush can claim all the credit he wants, but Iraq was a thriving democracy before Saddam. The US also supported Saddam as it has so many other dictators and, in doing so, has repeatedly demonstrated that it is willing to support any form of government that it to its advantage. Hell, even in the recent Egyptian uprising people were carrying around signs in English saying "Stop the Hypocrisy". But I guess some people just don't get it.

I don't recall hearing bush claim the credit for any of this.

The media is, not him.
 
True, u cannot definitively point to Iraq as the sole reason for the current uprisings, but it's worth noting this did not happen until there was a democratic Iraq.

Can you think of any other factor whose influence could be as significant?


Google "social media" for starters.
 
Still the Bush Apologist after all these years. /facepalm

haters-4.jpg
 
The US funded and trained many of the pro-democracy activists in the Middle East, especially in Egypt. That was an influence, not the invasion of Iraq.
 
At the end of the day the only thing that matters is why the people began the revolts to begin with, and that my dear friends is because they were tired of being poor & food prices were unaffordable by most of them, and everyone knows starvation is NOT an option, it was either stand up or starve, bottom line...

Now that we can probably lay some credit to the war hungry bush administration for the global inflation, but how the revolts & revolution came about is not solely because of facebook / twitter / nor any other technology, the real technology at work here is the skills of the elite...

And I gotta hand it to them, they pulled off some ___ here, to be sure, the only thing that remains to be seen is who will pop up to replace the ousted leaders.
 
Meh, he was wrong then, he's wrong now.

I'm not disagreeing with your first point. What exactly is he wrong about now?

He did what I think all ex-presidents should do. He moved out of the spotlight and STFU about anything political.

Its people like you and the media who won't leave the guy alone. If you want to pick on him, pick on his choice of flowers for his front yard. Not shit that happened almost 10 years ago. Even Rush Limbaugh stopped making cigar jokes years ago. There comes a time where enough is enough.
 
I'm not disagreeing with your first point. What exactly is he wrong about now?

He did what I think all ex-presidents should do. He moved out of the spotlight and STFU about anything political.

Its people like you and the media who won't leave the guy alone. If you want to pick on him, pick on his choice of flowers for his front yard. Not shit that happened almost 10 years ago. Even Rush Limbaugh stopped making cigar jokes years ago. There comes a time where enough is enough.

I'm talking about the OP.
 
The US funded and trained many of the pro-democracy activists in the Middle East, especially in Egypt. That was an influence, not the invasion of Iraq.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ding Ding Ding, I think we have our stupidity winner in CanoWorms.

It was actually Ronald Reagan you see, as he armed and trained Al-Quida trainees in Afghanistan. Ole Ronald funded Ossama Bin Laden too, taught him to fight using CIA training, a lesson well learned, and many still retaining.

These Arab revolts are led by the young who demand the end of their own government corruption mainly, as long time US allies leaders mainly pay the price. Why should the young Arab leaders in future trust the USA, as prior US policy worked against them?
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ding Ding Ding, I think we have our stupidity winner in CanoWorms.

It was actually Ronald Reagan you see, as he armed and trained Al-Quida trainees in Afghanistan. Ole Ronald funded Ossama Bin Laden too, taught him to fight using CIA training, a lesson well learned, and many still retaining.

These Arab revolts are led by the young who demand the end of their own government corruption mainly, as long time US allies leaders mainly pay the price. Why should the young Arab leaders in future trust the USA, as prior US policy worked against them?

You seem to want to oversimplify everything. The actions of the US are schizophrenic. Over 80% of the young Egyptian activists were trained by democracy programs funded by the United States.
 
Back
Top