MyFox
 

Dak413's Blog

by Dak413 from Krum, Tx

Last Post 10 days, 4 hours Ago


Upholding the Views of a President;

 

Shortly after 911, the U.S. and the world was faced with a difficult decision, one of which would put morals, values, principals and in general, the faith and commitment to the American people as Commander-in-Chief and a leader around the world for freedom and democracy. 

 

Terrorists of Muslim faith had bombed the twin towers in the United States to which is now and always will be known as 911, and we knew who was responsible and how vast their network of extremists had become.  For the most part, President George W. Bush had to respond but the question in everyone’s mind is whether he did the right thing in his actions over the next several years. 

 

From my view, here’s why I believe he will be known as one of the greatest and most significant leaders of the 21st Century. 

 

George W. Bush was faced with a dilemma after 911 that would test the will of any human being to their greatest extent.  A response was certainly inevitable by any American leader and knowing that Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda was responsible for the attack on 911, it would have been simple to do the “Politically Correct” response and go directly after Osama as the leader and hunt him down.  But the magnitude of the dilemma was simple.  Osama would have relished at becoming the Martyr for the Muslim extremists around the world and any visible revenge touting would have brought a certain uprising from extremists and followers of the millions in the Muslim faith around the world. 

 

Knowing that these extremists had penetrated our own infrastructure in the U.S., with normal working jobs and had been training at flight schools as well, the problem seemed to be multi-fold.  If you target Osama Bin Laden, you get him causing an uprising against freedom and democracy around the world or in this case, the President had a choice.  He decided to stand back and look at the long-term solution.  Here are some of the key problems he had faced:

 

Ø      Iran, Syria, Iraq and other Middle-Eastern Muslim countries had been working for years feeding supplies, people and money into Hamas with an ultimate goal of destroying Israel and beating Zionist wherever they exist. 

Ø      Many of these countries had been pursuing nuclear and biological weapons for the purposes of doing the same.

Ø      Al Qaeda had been leveraging American immigration, political and intelligence shortcomings that have been argued by a government funded organization in the U.S. called American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  This organization which was set up to protect people from prejudices or race, color, and other unfair events and actions has become an employer for people wanting to insure the downfall of the United States. 

Ø      Other democracies from around the world had began to see a BLEEP in the armor of the American way of life and had began from an economic perspective to gain successes for their own people.  In particular with the European Union trade and Euro, the U.S. was beginning to become less of a power. 

Ø      At the same time, similar to the direction in China, here in the U.S.,liberal left politicians, News Media and Academia had been enjoying an uprising in power benefits and control  due to the eight Clinton years of “Social and Entertainment” leadership.

Ø      The U.N. was becoming very corrupt with people and funding going directly to Iraq and other foreign leaders.  

Ø      Immigration from Mexico and other countries was being used to create a class based society for America’s liberal left raising the power of the Media, Politicians, and Academia.

 

When George W. Bush came into power, he was quickly despised by the Liberal left politicians, News Media, and Academia.  “W” didn’t intend on carrying on the legacy left behind for “Social and Entertainment” leading and for that reason, shifted from an “Elitist” mentality and almost immediately alienated the people that are showing you your news everyday, educating your children and making key decisions in Washington.

 

With the 911 incident, George W. had to rely on his family make-up, ideals and principals to determine how he would define his Presidency and the future of the American people for many years to come.  When faced with the very complex task of knowing that we had muslim extremists embedded in almost every democracy around the world ready to step up, George W. Bush chose to find a location in the Middle East to fight the war.   He realized we needed a location that was in the middle of the supply chain to Israel and would not require outside approval to fight and win the war.  The U.N. was too corrupt to approve or get involved and this was known.  In my view, Iraq  was the best location if we were to survive as a people and the fact there were no nuclear weapons there matters little.  Iraq was in the middle of the supply chain and happened to have a dictator who brutally murdered his own people.  Iraq was the perfect place to win the war.

 

Over the next several years, Muslim extremists poured into Iraq, I’m certain as the Bush administration had hoped and planned, and most have been killed.  They came from all over the world to fight against Zionism.  In the process, we have seen:

 

Ø      Iraq eliminate a dictator with the help of the American military and many other free democracies from around the world, but with our leadership. 

Ø      America establish a balance of power in the Middle-Eastern Supply chain that was in place to rid the earth of Israel as Iran claims. 

Ø      Immigration and Borders begin to get straightened out in the U.S. and around the world

Ø      Intelligence get re-aligned in the U.S. and between other countries

Ø      U.N. finance and dirty laundry exposed and now getting cleaned up

Ø      Completely

 

In my view, George W. Bush was faced with a decision that was as complex as anyone’s moral compass.  He chose to fight this war on their soil and not ours and Iraq was the best place to have this war since it would be ridding the world of a brutal dictator and warrior against freedom. 

 

With that said, George W. Bush will go down in history as the leader that “Righted” the ship of America and other freedom loving democracies.  When you think about who you’ll vote for as next president, ask yourself if they have the same values as President Bush or would you prefer we re-enter this country in the direction of a class-based society. 

 

Will the next President uphold the views of a true leader or be an Elitist with the Media, Politicians, and Academia benefiting from a “Social and Entertainment” lifestyle while the rest live off of the Government.  Choose your candidate wisely because more government control will certainly mean relaxed policies around immigration, intelligence and a Class Based Society where the Elitists have all the benefits while everyone else including the poor, middle-class and wealthy are under more and more government control with less and less freedoms. 

 

(From an Average American’s Perspective)

28 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 28
Page 1 of 2
1
Last
furbie read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 10:05 AM

Good post, Dak - nice to read something that is not a bash against someone for a change.

Being an Independent, I really don't have a say in right or wrong policies that are made. However, bashing our president, over his decisions, has become a nightmare . People elected him, and they should abide by his judgements, right or wrong.

Who could have, or would have, done better ? We surely don't know.

I do think that more people will be voting against Bush, than for either candidate, come November !

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 10:14 AM

probably so, and for all the wrong reasons, and not many with the best interest in the future of this country , I think all the bashing of a sitting President, is very unpatriotic , and damages the prestige of the people of this country

Coltrane read my blog
Jun 23, 2008 | 12:20 PM

Remeber these words when Obama becomes president and don't bash him.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 12:43 PM

I never bash presidents while in office, but know for a fact the 2 worst presidents in My lifetime, were carter and clinton , both weakened this country militarily and I voted for carter, that fiasco , hurt this country deeply , Jimmy Carter was one of the nicest people I ever knew of, and just didn't have the stomach to make tough decisions you would expect a president make being President is kinda like being a parent, , after all for that brief period, He is the Father of a whole country

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 1:01 PM

Regardless of what you think is and is not "bashing", the public has a responsibility to question our elected officials. If they make decisions that are against the public trust or clearly violate the law to the extent that one could deem his actions to be high crimes or misdemeanors then I would HOPE you would speak up and not just go along with the madness.

I'm sure there were a lot of people that felt the same way in Germany during WWII. I'm sure there were many that felt the same way in the colonies during the revolutionary war. I'm sure there were even those that felt that way during the Watergate scandal here in America... so it is no surprise to know there are appeasers here now willing to go along with the status quo. You are entitled to think what you want but we are all entitled to question the authority we have given to the people we elect... especially if we suspect abuse of power.
Thanks.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 1:15 PM

we will see if you will question anything after the election if Obama is elected , will be interesting , *smiles* I think it is one thing to question, things, but quite another to call names and malign people , to me that is bashing, not the questioning of policies , and people can question without insiulting or being derogatory

DDawg read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 1:35 PM

George W. Bush will be remembered as one of the most significantly BAD leaders of the 21st Century, that I can agree on.

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 1:37 PM

Here Dak:

http://community.myfoxdfw.com/blogs/cyrusmartin/2008/06
/23/George_W_Bush_Portrait_of_a_Hero

I have outlined some of the evidence against your hero.

Thanks
-Cy

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 2:08 PM

evidence is evidence, did ya dig up anything on Clinton ? or Obama , and supositions , can mean lots of things, and He's not running for re-election, *smiles*, so what !

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 2:42 PM

Oh so now we should all shut up because he isnt running for an office.

Ah...

Of course.

You were specifically talking about Bush. I responded to provide context to the "bashing" you referenced. No get out of jail free card on this one bub.

...which ironically is part of the criticism against Dubya.




*smiles*




Thanks though.
-Cy

cbfan read my blog
Jun 23, 2008 | 2:56 PM

We should hold ALL presidents' feet to the fire.

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 3:00 PM

Agreed Cbfan.

If Obama was to betray us like W has then I would be first in line to say so.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 3:20 PM

oh, now just how did He betray ya , and there ya go again ,calling names

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 3:54 PM

If I entrust someone with the protection of our nation and he then uses this as an opportunity to make lots and lots of money at the expense of our personal welfare then yes... I call that a betrayal.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:02 PM

ok, and how is He making lots of money from it , and we haven't been attacked here, for almost 7 years, now if were being attacked, then I would say He is not upholding his duties to us , He swore to protect us , He has done so !!

cyrusmartin read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:10 PM

How is he making money?
Are you serious?

Did you even read my blog post?

His family has been knee deep in the oil business for decades... and not just the oil business... the Saudi Arabian oil business.

That is just one way he has benefited.
Check into it.

Also, we have not been attacked in 7 years because they achieved their objective. They started a friggin Jihad. That was what they wanted. Al Queda was trying to start a war in the middle east. We obliged. Now they can attack us at their leisure and broadcast it all over their tv stations. Why would they attack us here? "Mission accomplished".

Bush has protected us against Saddam Hussein who wasnt even trying to attack us. He let Bin Laden go so he could take Iraq. Gee, thanks. America is so much safer now that we have our entire military stuck in a hostile foreign nation.

Job well done.

Sheeeesh.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:18 PM

Rose
and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
The Hoover
Institution
Stanford
University
Stanford, California 94305










By Thomas
Sowell
Tuesday, April 29,
2008

Many years ago, a great hitter named Paul Waner was
nearing the end of his long career. He entered a ballgame with 2,999 hits -- one
hit away from the landmark total of 3,000, which so many hitters want to reach,
but which relatively few actually do
reach.

Waner hit a ball that the fielder did not handle
cleanly but the official scorer called it a hit, making it Waner's 3,000th. Paul
Waner then sent word to the official scorer that he did not want that
questionable hit to be the one that put him over the
top.

The official scorer reversed himself and called it an
error. Later Paul Waner got a clean hit for number
3,000.

What reminded me of this is the great fervor that
many seem to feel over the prospect of the first black President of
the United
States.

No doubt it is only a matter of time
before there is a black president, just as it was only a matter of time before
Paul Waner got his 3,000th hit. The issue is whe ther we want to reach that
landmark so badly that we are willing to overlook how questionably that landmark
is reached.

Paul Waner had too much pride to accept a scratch
hit. Choosing a President of the United
States is
a lot more momentous than a baseball record. We the voters need to have far more
concern about who we put in that office that holds the destiny of a nation and
of generations yet unborn.

There is no re

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:20 PM

reason why someone as
arrogant, foolishly clever and ultimately dangerous as Barack Obama should
become president -- especially not at a time when the threat of international
terrorists with nuclear weapons looms over 300 million
Americans.

Many people seem to regard elections as occasions for
venting emotions, like cheering for your favorite team or choosing a Homecoming
Queen.

The three leading candidates for their party's
nomination are being discussed in terms of their demographics -- race, sex and
age -- as if that is what the job is
about.

One of the painful aspects of studying great
catastrophes of the past is discovering how many times people were preoccupied
with trivialities when they were teetering on the edge of doom. The demographics
of the presidency are far less important than the momentous weight of
responsibility that office
carries.

Just the power to nominate federal judges to t rial
courts and appellate courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, can
have an enormous impact for decades to come. There is no point feeling outraged
by things done by federal judges, if you vote on the basis of emotion for those
who appoint them.

Barack Obama has already indicated
that he wants judges who make social policy instead of just applying the law. He
has already tried to stop young violent criminals from being tried as
adults.

Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the
candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold
fact is that virtually everything he s

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:23 PM

he says about domestic policy is straight out
of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight
out of the 1930s.

Protecting criminals, attacking
business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and
grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who
are not -- all this is a re-run of the
1960s.

We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in
the years that followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit
inflation and double-digit unemployment. During the 1960s, ghettoes across the
countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully recovered to this
day.

The violence and destruction were concentrated not
where there was the greatest poverty or injustice but where there were the most
liberal politicians, promoting grievances and hamstringing the
police.

Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama
proposes -- including the media magic of meetings between heads of state -- was
tried during the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the
most catastrophic war in human
history.

Everything seems new to those too young to remember
the old and too ignorant of history to have heard about it.



Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover
Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the
Economy.

Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:28 PM

well, what do ya think they accomplished by starting a war with us ? you mean the past 20 years they've been attacking us , should just be allowed to continue indefinitely ?

Page 1 of 2
1
Last


Write your comment below:




Dak413

I am 66 years old and moved to Texas about a year and half ago to be closer to My sons.

Member Since: 2/6/2008