Comments on: Transcript: Bush Interview

President Spoke to 60 Minutes' Scott Pelley At Camp David

[acrossamill]

Iraq as a fascist country is a safe-haven for Terrorist... remember them? So this war is an effort to smoke the snakes out of the grass... you 6th grade logic moron. Eat a pie and shut up. ha ha ha ha I love saying that... ha ha ha ha ha. idiot!

[acrossamill]

I get so sick of leftist comparing this war to Vietnam (Nothing simular... no draft... not fighting communism... War not started by a Dem... NOW we are reacting to terrorist attacks... then we were trying to slow/stop the growth of communism... we lost some 10,000 a year in Vietnam - and we have lost LESS than 1000 per year in this war... nothing simular except for the media trying to make simular complaints as people made then... but they don't work now).
I hope you hippies finish baking your minds on your jo-jo plant and shut your vacant heads. It's all regurgitated lies; and it is old.
P.S. Congress does NOT have the authority to stop the surge... nor did they have alternative plans to offer in place of a surge... so they ought to shut the hell up as well.

[acrossamill]

Bush is no more a war criminal than any of you cry-baby liberals are War Criminals. The entire nation supported this war in 2001; they continued supporting it in 2002, 2003, & 2004. In 2005 the media blamed the war on the negative effects of Katrina (that as well as personally blaming Bush for the aftermath of a catagory 5 hurricane - what a powerful man he must be). So as of 2005 people have been confused and angry about this war... but lets not forget all of the Democrats who ran for President in 2004 supported the war... the problem with them (especially John Kerry) is that they are men who fold under pressure. The media hype would have frightened Kerry to extremes and lead him around by his puppet strings. Bush is a man of character and principle; and his wanting America to succeed in Iraq and Afganahstan (we are still there too, or have you cry-baby liberals all forgoten that) is the massacre of his own approval rating all for the benefit of our safety and dignity. Thank You Mr. Bush!

Firemandav1 wrote:

"I am sure a case can be made for Bush as a war criminal if he is guilty of lying to the public leading up to the war and if his reasons for war were indeed to aid profiteering for his associates...The impulse to remove Saddam and give the Iraqis a chance for freedom is a justifiable reason for military action and does not in itself constitute criminal behavior. Stubbornly continuing with a failed policy and racking up ever greater casualties to save a Presidential legacy...that is a case for war criminal."

Technically, going to war to effect regime change is not a "legitimate" reason for going to war (even though it could be argued both ways).

Regardless, I do see where you're coming from and agree with you.

Sometimes I can't help but feel that Bush is just a tool of Cheney.

[firemandav1]

I am sure a case can be made for Bush as a war criminal if he is guilty of lying to the public leading up to the war and if his reasons for war were indeed to aid profiteering for his associates. Personally I believe he was incompetent and ill equipped to handle the job and once the trigger was pulled he could not undo the damage of his decision. I don't believe he is a war criminal anymore than JFK, Johnson, Nixon (Vietnam) or Truman (Atom bomb, Korea) were criminals. Their decisions led to hundreds of thousands of deaths. Many believe Nixon and Johnson were war criminals but to them, at that time, losing another country to communism was unacceptable (later in the war Nixon and Kissinger certainly fit the war criminal label). Bush views this struggle as desperate as any of those and although I believe he is wrong, I believe he is sincere in his belief. The problem with the man is that he will systematically dismantle our rights as Americans, elevate the executive, and bankrupt us to save face over his incompetent decision to go to war. I can only imagine the level of rationalization that goes on in his mind to keep him from waking up crushed with guilt each morning. The impulse to remove Saddam and give the Iraqis a chance for freedom is a justifiable reason for military action and does not in itself constitute criminal behavior. Stubbornly continuing with a failed policy and racking up ever greater casualties to save a Presidential legacy...that is a case for war criminal.

Firemandav1 wrote:

"Bush is not a war criminal. Bush is a lightweight CEO who listened to bad advice..."

While I agree with most of what you said, I definitely disagree in regards to him not being a war criminal.

He is the leader of a country that invaded another country (some say illegally) and he is responsible for the deaths of many tens of thousands of civilians.

His decisions and his policies have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people - and the world is no safer.

While Bin Laden may have been responsible for the deaths of close to 3000 people on 9/11 and more afterwards, GW Bush is responsible for far more deaths than Bin Laden could ever dream of.

[mosnas--2008]

It is interesting to note that some of the last paragraph on page 5 that is still there was deleted from the video. The part where George once more links 911 with the occupation of Iraq.
It doesn't seem quite cricket?

quote:
( What happens in the Middle East matters to the security of this country. We learned that lesson on September the 11th. The stakes are very high, and we have got not only to stay engaged diplomatically, but we've gotta succeed in chasing down terrorists as well as helping young democracies survive. What's interesting is that you got a young democracy in Lebanon being challenged. I believe there ought to be a Palestinian democracy. It is being challenged by militants. A young democracy in Afghanistan and a young democracy in Iraq, all being challenged by radicals and extremists. And they may seem like disparate elements, but they share the same vision and same philosophy, and they have the same desire to inflict damage, particularly on the United States of America.)

details:

http://mosnas2.blogspot.com/2007/01/cbs-on-jan.html

[firemandav1]

Bush is not a war criminal. Bush is a lightweight CEO who listened to bad advice. He was recruited as a candidate and groomed by king maker Karl Rove and was bankrolled by big business to promote their interests but when 9-11 came, he was hurled into a situation he has not the leadership skills nor intellect to handle. The underlings and assistants combined with the forceful influence of *** Cheney kept his ear filled with Neoconservative ideas grown and nurtured in think tanks. Bush trusted this crowd and made decisions accordingly. He was told Saddam threatened stability and that Iraq would become some sort of Democratic and friendly oasis amidst the unfriendly greater middle east. It was all wrong. He "broke" Iraq by getting rid of Saddam who although a vicious and murderous dictator, was still a stable influence on Iraq. As Americans we have been fine with this sort of tolerated stability since the end of WWII. Bush heeded bad advice, stirred the hornet's nest and now can't stop the stinging. Although he did not have my vote either election, as a people, we put him there and it is our fault for not paying enough attention to who Bush was paying attention.

[blueeyed12]

I have to wonder why Scott Pelley didn't ask the obvious question. He asked Mr. Bush if he thought he owed the Iragi people an apology, but he never asked Mr. Bush if he thought he owed the American people an apology for starting this war and for his administration's gross mismanagement of his war. He should have further asked if Mr. Bush felt he owed an apology to the families of those killed and to those who have been wounded.

[chowchow9]

Bush is an evil war criminal that should be tried for his crimes against humanity... for the untold suffering he has created for innocent men, women and children both in Iraq and here in America. How terrible that our honorable men and women are sacrificing life and limb to fight a war that no one, not even the president himself can justify. This war is utterly immoral, and has served no one except the war monger profiteers in our government. We now live in a world *more* full of hate and injustice - the world is not a better place for all the killing and bloodshed Bush and his cronies have caused. Not one *** thing has been served by this war except to make a bunch of utterly immoral, evil people richer - in the name of religious fundamentalism to boot. Bush, YOU are the one we need to be saved from.

[firemandav1]

Please. Enough with the "Bush is evil" routine. The man has a certain worldview that results in decisions reflective of that worldview and his experience. Life experience has given him a very favorable view of business, business leaders and corporate culture. He is naturally conservative and distrustful of Liberals and all those who espouse a liberal viewpoint. He believes that America is threatened by Islamic extremists and he is right. From Bush's worldview the safety of the American public depends upon its economic might and an extremist takeover in oil rich middle eastern countries means being cutoff from the oil with catastrophic results for the American economy. I believe this is more nightmarish to him than the threat of terror on the streets of America. He fights for American interests and American interest number one is continued safe access to abundant oil. The question Pelley should have asked is: Why don't we have a heavily funded federal and private research project to get us off of oil??? Without the need for oil, the middle east could go back to what it used to be, a meaningless sandbox full of nomadic tribes fighting one another for land and water.

[jcgrim]

Scott, You let Bush get away with the meme "winning there or else the enemy will follow us here." How does destroying a country who never attacked & had no capability to attack us, keep terrorists out of the US? That's 6th grade level logic. And why didn't you ask him why he rejected key recommendations of the ISG? (Which cost taxpayers one million dollars) And how about the obscene amount of tax money paying corporate war profiteers? And what about the Bush family's international involvement in arms sales and oil profits? And how about the incompetent loyalists hired to rebuild Iraq?
It is painfully clear that Bush has not the capacity to understand the complexities of dealing with enemies like Bin Laden or the geopolitical morass in the Middle East. He can't even generate coherent benchmarks that define "winning." He simply spouts tough sounding platitudes. Unfortunately, like a recalcitrant adolescent, he's ignoring wise advice.
It was also painfully obvious that he & his media team used 60 minutes to try to persuade the public to accept his "new" plan. This interview was not about transparency. The citizenry learned nothing substantive from the "educator-president". The staged visit to the dead soldiers families, his weak mea culpa for failures, denying he's concerned about his legacy- all carefully planned by the White House PR team. In the end, no amount of staged sets can change the facts-on-the-ground of his tragic failure to competently govern our country.

[jcgrim]

Scott, You let Bush get away with the meme "winning there or else the enemy will follow us here." How does destroying a country who never attacked & had no capability to attack us, keep terrorists out of the US? That's 6th grade level logic. And why didn't you ask him why he rejected key recommendations of the ISG? (Which cost taxpayers one million dollars) And how about the obscene amount of tax money paying corporate war profiteers? And what about the Bush family's international involvement in arms sales and oil profits? And how about the incompetent loyalists hired to rebuild Iraq?
It is painfully clear that Bush has not the capacity to understand the complexities of dealing with enemies like Bin Laden or the geopolitical morass in the Middle East. He can't even generate coherent benchmarks that define "winning." He simply spouts tough sounding platitudes. Unfortunately, like a recalcitrant adolescent, he's ignoring wise advice.
It was also painfully obvious that he & his media team used 60 minutes to try to persuade the public to accept his "new" plan. This interview was not about transparency. The citizenry learned nothing substantive from the "educator-president". The staged visit to the dead soldiers families, his weak mea culpa for failures, denying he's concerned about his legacy- all carefully planned by the White House PR team. In the end, no amount of staged sets can change the facts-on-the-ground of his tragic failure to competently govern our country.

[adfecteau]

This guy is such a loser, moron, idiot, criminal, and so consummately evil. He/It needs to be impeached, convicted, sentenced and turned over to the Hague for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity charges immediately. Go to impeachbush.org for delineation of all the details. UFB
Alexis

[adfecteau]

This guy is such a loser, moron, idiot, criminal, and so consummately evil. He/It needs to be impeached, convicted, sentenced and turned over to the Hague for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity charges immediately. Go to impeachbush.org for delineation of all the details. UFB
Alexis

[adfecteau]

This guy is such a loser, moron, idiot, criminal, and so consummately evil. He/It needs to be impeached, convicted, sentenced and turned over to the Hague for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity charges immediately. Go to impeachbush.org for delineation of all the details. UFB
Alexis

I'm amazed at some of the answers provided by GW Bush - blatant lies.

It seems to me that the Republicanazis aren't capable of telling the truth ever.

GW Bush is not worthy of being the President and the Democrats either need to grow some b*lls and impeach that SOB or they should just admit that they are part of the problem.

[wayfedup]

"You can't win a war without good intelligence", (GeorgeW. Bush) Does Anyone Think for a MOMENT, that George W. Bush has EVER had "good intelligence"?

[peaceash]

Why did 60 minutes choose not to air last part of this interview? And where were the "tough questions" Pelley tiptoed around Bush. This was a one-time chance and 60 Minutes blew it. Bush said "I was surprised as anybody to find out there weren't WMD's." Instead of questioning this statement Pelley says "you must have been mad as hell" a good reported ASKS questions, and doesn't lead their subject in a desired direction. Where are questions about oil intersts, war profiteering and sources of intellegence failure? Why didn't you ask Bush if he would be hiding in Camp David on 1/27/07 when AMERICA demands answers?

Didn't this topic warrant the full 60 Minutes? The Duke case could have waited until next week.

[sbeaumont1]

Cut to the chase. GW is unwilling now and has been in the past to perform the duties of the President. He is unwilling to represent the majority of the people of the US, and therefore he and his staff should not be allowed to represent this country to any other country.

Sorry GW it is still a govt by, and for the people. Last election should have proved that to you.