TexasFred’s
No Holds Barred: News, Opinion and Commentary
This is The Header Then

Bush defends his record of using military might

December 9th, 2008 . by TexasFred

Bush defends his record of using military might

WEST POINT, N.Y. (AP) - President George W. Bush on Tuesday defended his doctrine of pre-emptive war and warned that the United States must remain willing to “to take the fight to our enemies across the world.”

Down to his waning days in office, Bush is trying to define his own legacy, never more clearly than during his sprawling account here of how the U.S. armed forces have changed under his watch.

The president declared that today’s military is “stronger, more agile and better prepared” than the one he inherited in 2001. It was a defense against criticism that Bush has stretched the military to dangerous levels with wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

“With all the actions we’ve taken these past eight years, we’ve laid a solid foundation on which future presidents and future military leaders can build,” Bush told thousands of cadets at West Point, the premier officer training institution for the Army.

Full Story Here:
Bush defends his record of using military might

I have to agree with Bush on at least 1 point, the military is “stronger, more agile and better prepared”, but that was an action of necessity and not one that has been exploited to the truly needed levels.

A few months ago all we heard was that our military was stretched to the breaking point by being forced to fight a 2 front war, Iraq and Afghanistan. I was, and still am of the opinion that IF this was all it took to stretch our military to the breaking point, then we are in a lot more trouble than the American citizen is privvy to.

Iraq and Afghanistan have not broken our military.

They have, due to administrative mismanagement and poor prosecution, nearly caused this nation to suffer a full financial melt down, but our troops, their WILL and STRENGTH, have NOT been broken. Their will hasn’t even been knocked off course. If that were to happen, then the USA and it’s citizens are done for.

Many of Bush’s critics say his military approach has had disastrous consequences for the U.S., embroiling the U.S. in war, angering allies and running up enormous debt.

Before Bush leaves, he is determined to tell a different story.

Bush can tell it any way he wants to. He is in the process of trying to write his own legacy. President Bush was clearly on the right track when he took us to Afghanistan following the attacks of 9-11, I have never argued that fact. My biggest gripe was Iraq, the reasoning behind it, the explanations for it, the way it was conducted and the weak attempt at managing Iraq AFTER our wonderful military totally destroyed the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Iraq did NOT have to be the long and drawn out, not to mention COSTLY, in terms of dollars and lives, campaign that it has become. A few bombs, a few well placed *A-Teams* and Iraq would be no worse off than it is today. Saddam and his evil whelps would still be dead and Iraq would be none the worse for wear.

Japan was a vanquished nation following WWII, we stepped in and administered the Japanese people and their nation. We helped them to rebuild. Look at where Japan is today. We couldn’t ask for a stronger or more reliable ally, and they are a great trade partner.

Iraq could have become the same shining success had the Iraqi war not been instigated and led by a total moron!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Return: Top of Home Page

5 Responses to “Bush defends his record of using military might”

  1. comment number 1 by: Thor

    I’ve always maintained that Rumsfeld dropped the ball on Iraq, even during it’s initial phases. I’ve NEVER disagreed with the war. I guess that’s because Saddam tried to blow me up. Maybe it was vindictive of Bush43 and myself. I only wished that we had continued in and put an end to Saddam back in 91.

  2. comment number 2 by: TexasFred

    As we discussed this weekend, 1991, Bush 41, Saddam living to tell the tale then…

    As I said, there is something about the Bush family and warfighting, they can’t get it done for some reason…

  3. comment number 3 by: BobF

    After we defeated Japan, MacArthur made an ally of the Emperor of Japan and now they are one of our greatest allies. Patton used former Nazi’s to administer post war Germany and they also became a great ally. Rather than destroy the infrastructure in place, they built on what was there to our advantage. Seems we didn’t learn from two of the greatest military leaders this nation ever had. Under the right leadership going back to the early 90’s, maybe Iraq could have become a strong ally?

  4. comment number 4 by: TexasFred

    Under the right leadership going back to the early 90’s, maybe Iraq could have become a strong ally?

    BINGO!!

    That was MY thoughts for a long time, but WTF do I know?? My spouse isn’t an Altar Boy Fobbitt… :P

  5. comment number 5 by: Concerned Citizen

    I never diagreed with why we went into Iraq the second time. Based upon what we thought we knew at the time and due to the fact that we were still in an uneasy and often violated cease-fire agreement, I had no problem with the decision to go in.

    I think they made the mistake of thinking that the Iraq we were going into now was the same Iraq we had gone into in 1991 where Saddam’s troops would surrender, throw down their arms and flock to American troops just in the hopes of getting fed.

    When we went in and met absolutely no opposition in many areas, we never even paused to think that they might be playing a different game this time around. We surged to Baghdad and then tried to cover an extremely overextended and under manned supply line against a disperse enemy using guerilla tactics, instead of slowly and methodically advancing and securing the territory we took. That is just not easily done. Another military lesson you would have thought we had learned from previous wars.