Nixon or Bush Jr?

[steve]

Watergate VS. Manipulation of Intel Data to Launch Iraq War.

Which was worse?

[Guitar Shark]

It's a trick question -- it's a tie.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
It's a trick question -- it's a tie.

Especially since the supporting cast is pretty much the same.

[Nickdfresh]

Re: Nixon or Bush Jr?

Originally posted by steve
Watergate VS. Manipulation of Intel Data to Launch Iraq War.

Which was worse?

Hmmm....That's a pretty tough choice. Both of these jack-offs have the blood of a lot of Americans on there hands. But NIXON didn't start the war in INDOCHINA....Choices, choices....

[steve]

True, but the Nixon administration ordered the FBI to begin keeping tabs on EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN AMERICA that disagrees with them:
"How Mark Felt Became Deep Throat" by Bob Woodward The Watergate investigations later revealed that in 1970 a young White House aide named Tom Charles Huston had come up with a plan to authorize the CIA, the FBI and military intelligence units to intensify electronic surveillance of "domestic security threats," authorize illegal opening of mail, and lift the restrictions on surreptitious entries or break-ins to gather intelligence.
...Huston warned in a top-secret memo that the plan was "clearly illegal." Nixon initially approved the plan anyway...
Felt, a much more learned man than most realized, later wrote that he considered Huston "a kind of White House gauleiter over the intelligence community." The word "gauleiter" is not in most dictionaries, but in the four-inch-thick Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language it is defined as "the leader or chief official of a political district under Nazi control."

There is little doubt Felt thought the Nixon team were Nazis. During this period, he had to stop efforts by others in the bureau to "identify every member of every hippie commune" in the Los Angeles area, for example, or to open a file on every member of Students for a Democratic Society. "How Mark Felt Became Deep Throat" by Bob Woodward

[Nickdfresh]

I also read something about The Nixon White House trying to coerce the CIA to act against the FBI to hinder the investigation.

[steve]

If Felt lives long enough to write his own book, it should be a good read. It'll be like missing pieces to a puzzle.

[Grant]

"Dubbya" exploited the great tragedy of 9/11 by arrogantly pushing his plan to invade Iraq for a "preventive war" which Colin Powell failed to prove it's justifications infront of the international community. Since then, while the war in Iraq may be over, "Mission Accomplished" is still far from the fact. Terrorist attacks and the forestalling of transfer of power to the people in Iraq is an ongoing occurance and Osama Bin Laden is still allegedly on the run and planning more attacks.

"Tricky Dicky", all according to Anna Chenault's testimony, sabotaged Vietnam peace talks before his election into the White House for selfish political purposes which ultimately escalated the war in the incoming years during his administration costing the lives of more than 50,000 American troops and 2 million Asian lives.

Time will tell who was worse...

[BigBadBrian]

Re: Nixon or Bush Jr?

Originally posted by steve
Watergate VS. Manipulation of Intel Data to Launch Iraq War.

Which was worse?

Clinton.

[steve]

Nice Red Herring, BB .

But the Bush administration is going down two paths of history right now:

1. At worst, viewed as manipulating data for their own political purposes to launch the Iraq war.
2. At best, seen as incredibly sloppy in their leadership post 911 with the war and protecting the homeland. The "color coded alert system" and the creation of the "Homeland Security department" is a prime example. It's a nice title, but besides putting a bar on cockpit doors, nothing substantial has been done to strengthen port security, stop ILLEGAL immigration (don't get me wrong, I'm for LEGAL immigration). And pretty much the sole thing it has been used for, the color wheel of panic, was used to manipulate polls and instill fear in people.

And with the war in Iraq, it is only 3 years later, in the midst of a Vietnam-like quagmire created from a callus arrogance of not heeding advice to stop looting and temper the President's insulting language, that Donald Rumsfeld woke up and said this is in large part an ideological war...both the war in Iraq and the "war" on terror. It took the administration THREE YEARS to realize this.

My point is, at BEST, they are incompetant. Incompetance that has cost tens of thousands of lives.

Hopefully the violence will cease soon and they'll learn from their mistakes and build the rule-of-law-based democratic society in Iraq they claim to desire. It is only if they continue to learn from the past 3 years of mistakes and begin a strong, focused war of IDEOLOGY (what this thing is long term) that we can turn the tide in Iraq, "save" the people there, and write a winning history for this administration.

They have begun to do these things in the last year - in my opinion I've noticed a distinct difference in the way Rumsfeld approaches press conferences and the words the President chooses as opposed to the year after 9/11 and in the first year of the Iraq war. I'm even willing to admit that I think Rice has done a good job so far - in fact, I think it is a lot of her nuanced, careful personality that has become the tone of this administration...and it is the wise way. But, they have a long way to go.