getting us into this endless war with a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 is just the tip of the iceberg. this moron has failed his party, and especially this country. and still 20% support him. he'll go on record as being the president in office when the USA fell from long-held position as best in the world.

Wait...I seem to remember a bumbling incompetent named Rumsfeld. Even if you think the war was justified, this administration has run it very poorly.

So the Korean conflict which is still not officially ended 50 years after hostilities started and requires thousands of US troops to be station along the DMZ to this day is now see as a rousing success????

Perhaps when all the people who lived through the Bush presidency start dying off in a few decades, history will start its revisions.

When did RCP start linking to Onion articles?

Good luck with that!

Truman engaged in an unpopular war that still requires a military force 50 years later.

Bush engaged in a war that will require a military force 50 years later, but mismanaged it so badly that it became unpopular.

There is a difference.

Hey, you keep thinking that. While we're waiting for history, can I talk to you about this bridge I have for sale????

Cagey B: Perhaps when all the people who lived through the Bush presidency start dying off in a few decades, history will start its revisions.

You have a point here. Prior to this, i was wondering if the author of TFA and subby had just sparked up a fat bowl of crack

HAHAHAHahahahahHQHAHAhahHAhAha! Thanks. That was great.

I don't care what the history books say, I still think Truman was a dick with ears.

You know what this sounds like? Bad news...for Obama.

obzerver: So Mods, why do you have have to be a neopublican to get a green light? Trying to pump up the base?



?

How cute, she's writing articles for RCP now!

Charles Krauthammer has zero credibility. His entire career is now all about spinning obvious failures into grand, brilliant successes who are so awesome that their awesomeness is lost on us mere mortals.

Fkn elitist...

Clinton should get some credit after all it was his idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act (new window)

So, how many fathers of Neo-Conservatism where jilted Truman administration officials?

I've yet to figure out why Truman is widely cited by the Right, when the dude was a Democrat. . and as far as I'm aware, economically a radical communist by today's standards.

Fark it.

Obama is the next Eisenhower. He'll send troops to Arkansas.

Ah, yes; the last hail Mary of the right: we know he sucks now but in the future you'll be sorry you doubted us.

/absolutely pathetic.

Slight distinction: N. Kprea launched an invasion of a US ally with Sino/Russian support.

OK Sodamninsane invaded Kuwait.Bu then,
I though Poppy beat Iraq in Gulf War Uno.

Why a second war? Because Sodamninsane gave us the finger!

Truman had the brains to mobilize and work with all free nations. DumbFark W blew them all off.

Bush: Emission accompalished!

"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"

/reconsider? You mean rewrite

Whatever you think of the war itself, you have to admit that Truman at least RAN it competently, first by letting MacArthur do his magic, and the canning his arrogant ass when he decided to take it on himself to try and start Armageddon personally.


Bush on the other hand was a SPECTACLUAR failure at the prosecution of this war. First by ingorning his professional military guys (Gen Shinseki ring any bells?) on the strength of the force need to do the job. Then by picking the absolute WRONG strategy for a country you intend to occupy later (shock and Awe) . And finally by stubbroningly refusing to change strateg after it was apparent to everyone else that his was an abject failure (Remember bush adamantly opposed the surge and only the Dem lanslide of 06 changed his mind)

Clicked link, saw it was Krauthammer, exited.

I'm sure the future generations will appreciate how we started a profiteering war without raising taxes (for no cause), thereby adding trillions onto our federal deficit.

Do you think Bush could say "the buck stops here" with a straight face?

people seem to forget it was all about terrorism WHY we went to war in Iraq. Our national security. Now its spun around to liberate the iraqis, promote freedom. This is a noble ideal, but if we were in that business, we have a LOT of work to be done, and we started in one of the least harmful regimes (relatively) of the big 3 (iraq, Iran, N Korea) We were LIED to, we went to WAR under FALSE PRETENSES in which americans and iraqis dies, it has derailed and for the short time destroyed our national debt. It was not sold to us as a war of liberation, we were deceived and told to fear iraq. Lying to the American people is rarely rewarded in historical perspectives

History has revised that verdict.

No, we've revised history.

We were going to invade Iraq anyway it was just a matter of time.

And since we had to go over there after 9/11 the people who design our foreign policy decided it was best to go ahead and get it over with.

I'm with the bear.

zappadog: people seem to forget it was all about terrorism WHY we went to war in Iraq. Our national security. Now its spun around to liberate the iraqis, promote freedom. This is a noble ideal, but if we were in that business, we have a LOT of work to be done, and we started in one of the least harmful regimes (relatively) of the big 3 (iraq, Iran, N Korea) We were LIED to, we went to WAR under FALSE PRETENSES in which americans and iraqis dies, it has derailed and for the short time destroyed our national debt. It was not sold to us as a war of liberation, we were deceived and told to fear iraq. Lying to the American people is rarely rewarded in historical perspectives

Unless the lying group remains in control, then they made a great decision.

There was this other president named Johnson, that fully engaged the US in a little country called Vietnam. The left office disparaged and highly out of favor. When history is written, that little cluster-fark know as the Vietnam war will be minor compared to the can of worms that Bush opened.

Lionel Mandrake: Charles Krauthammer has zero credibility. His entire career is now all about spinning obvious failures into grand, brilliant successes who are so awesome that their awesomeness is lost on us mere mortals.

Fkn elitist...

The Post building is around the corner from my office; couple of times I've been out at lunch when Krauthammer rolled by in his scooter. It took all my self control not to knock the little twatwad over.

George Bush isn't qualified to light Harry Truman's farts.

I don't know what that means, but it's true.

mesohorny 2008-09-19 03:25:38 PM
We were going to invade Iraq anyway it was just a matter of time.

And since we had to go over there after 9/11 the people who design our foreign policy decided it was best to go ahead and get it over with.

Yep. I did the same thing yesterday - I needed to go to the store for Dorito's, and I stopped at the Dry Cleaners because it was in the same neighborhood.

I, for one, applaud the Neo-Cons for being fuel-efficient.

mesohorny: We were going to invade Iraq anyway it was just a matter of time.

And since we had to go over there after 9/11 the people who design our foreign policy decided it was best to go ahead and get it over with.

Yeah, with our statist policies and an empire to maintain, we needed a scapegoating mission eventually.

We didn't have to go to Iraq, at all. We didn't have to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. We didn't have to fight the Kosovars. Nor the Vietnamese, Koreans, or Russians. The last time we NEEDED to fight, was against the Japanese, because they came here.

Of course their will be historians revising Bush's place in history. But that tells us more about historians than Bush. They need to sell books and if every history of Bush's presidency (and the majority of people who lived through his administration) says he sucked, an enterprising historian would obviously put out a "hey he wasn't that bad" book to stand out in the market. It also doesn't hurt that you have several right wing media outlets dedicated to worshiping all things Bush. Oh and David Halberstam dealt with the Truman comparison a couple of years ago. I think the article was called "History Boys" if I'm not mistaken.

You can lick a turd and call it ice cream all you want, it still won't taste like cookies and cream.

I also seem to recall that the North Koreans/Chinese were the agressors in that war - not, you know, the United States.

But you know, factual distinctions like that aren't important to neo-conservative dipshiats like Chuck Krauthammer.

Only 3 mentions of this being a Krauthammer op ed?

Just cause it's not the NRO doesn't mean this guy suddenly starts being worth reading folks.

I'm impressed by this writer of this article. I had assumed it would be hard to see the monitor with GW's balls in your mouth. Apparently he doesn't need to look at the screen while he types.

Truman became hugely unpopular largely because he canned McCarthur - the the Taft, far right loonies where convinced he was a secret communist whose pals in the State Department where working in cahoots with England to turn the U.S. over to Stalin. The same bago' right wing nuts is presently in charge of the U.S. government.

McCarthur is probably the most misunderstood person in U.S. history - the right thinks of him as a God, but in many respects he was a very progressive liberal. He became a bit demented in Korea - the "wall of radioactive waste" he wanted to lay down between China and the Yalu River, well, that was just as nutso as Bush invading Iraq (well, not quite).

IIRC, a lot of the disapproval for Truman came from dismissing Douglas MacArthur for insubordination (McA wanted to escalate the Korean conflict into a war with China), and his support for civil rights including desegregating the armed forces.

Bush, on the other hand, gets knocked for an endless, pointless war, a tanked economy, torture, wiretaps on nearly all Americans, outing a CIA agent for political reasons, corruption, stonewalling, cronyism and smirking a lot.

Anybody really want to compare Bush's risk-takings to Truman's? Or do you want to claim that history will come to equate pro-civil rights actions with pro-torture?

I have a strange feeling that W's legacy will be having built the largest government social institution in US history, plus the semi-nationalization of the mortgage industry.

Calvin Coolidge: I also seem to recall that the North Koreans/Chinese were the agressors in that war - not, you know, the United States.

But you know, factual distinctions like that aren't important to neo-conservative dipshiats like Chuck Krauthammer.

North Koreans, perhaps, Chinese, they where reacting to our pushing the NK back and MacArthur was making bellicose statements about turning Chaing lose from Formosa and they decided to intervene. In reality, the SK and the NK where about equally as bad and the U.S. really had no business having anything to do with Korea.

iawai: mesohorny: We were going to invade Iraq anyway it was just a matter of time.

And since we had to go over there after 9/11 the people who design our foreign policy decided it was best to go ahead and get it over with.

Yeah, with our statist policies and an empire to maintain, we needed a scapegoating mission eventually.

We didn't have to go to Iraq, at all. We didn't have to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. We didn't have to fight the Kosovars. Nor the Vietnamese, Koreans, or Russians. The last time we NEEDED to fight, was against the Japanese, because they came here.

I agree with you but im just explaining how the architects of our foreign policy think.

The same people that worked with Clinton and Bush are working with Mccain and Obama.

We will keep bases in Iraq just like Japan and Korea. 2009 will be full year of sanctions no matter who is president. Iran, Pakistan, Venezuela, Russia.

sanctions will escalate into war most likely just like Iraq.

Charles Krauthammer?

obzerver: So Mods, why do you have have to be a neopublican to get a green light? Trying to pump up the base?

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, are you serious? Look at the political links for today.... or for the entire lifetime of this site.

Bush is forever stuck with the image of being the fascist-wannabe President. Not a damn thing any of you can do about it, no PR campaign, no speeches, nothing.

But somehow in all this hoopla, his actual war crimes have been avoided/ignored, and while he'll be hated, he will live FREE and PHAT off the public trough for the rest of his beady-eyed meager little life.

Calvin Coolidge: I also seem to recall that the North Koreans/Chinese were the agressors in that war - not, you know, the United States.

But you know, factual distinctions like that aren't important to neo-conservative dipshiats like Chuck Krauthammer.

He is anything but a neo-con and has disagreed with Bush Co. many times.