Who was the USA's last good president?

[Maurepas]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army

An organisation that formed to resist the genocides being perpetrated by nationalist Serbs?

That MIGHT (according to Serbs) have killed as many as a thousand people?

While Slobodan Milošević can be held accountable for a quarter million.

Your history isn't just revisionist, it's ridiculously partisan.

Im not sure how many pages ago it was...but, I think its alot, lol, I said that already,

Once again, I turn up two hours late, and twenty dollars short.

Dont fret, for yours sounded much better,

[F-Carthage IV]

Andrew Jackson was a populist hack.

The last good president was probably Raegan, (Cliched? Yes. True? Yes.) if only because the USSR fell during his presidency.

[Grave_n_idle]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army

An organisation that formed to resist the genocides being perpetrated by nationalist Serbs?

That MIGHT (according to Serbs) have killed as many as a thousand people?

While Slobodan Milošević can be held accountable for a quarter million.

Your history isn't just revisionist, it's ridiculously partisan.

Im not sure how many pages ago it was...but, I think its alot, lol, I said that already,

Once again, I turn up two hours late, and twenty dollars short.

Dont fret, for yours sounded much better,

Well, that's where the $20 went...

[Caninope]

Reagan FTW

[Maurepas]

Andrew Jackson was a populist hack.

The last good president was probably Reagan, (Cliched? Yes. True? Yes.) if only because the USSR fell during his presidency.

Yeah, but, that was a very correct way to put it, "It fell during his presidency", what he had to do with it personally, I believe, is pretty negligible, and the harm he did to our own Country far outweighs it, imo...

Plus, my opinion of him as a person is pretty low after taking credit for Carter's work in Iran...

[F-Carthage IV]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

[Maurepas]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

[F-Carthage IV]

Deregulating: Ok, maybe. I could give you a nice list of liberals over the past two decades who are easily more responsible for the rape of the American economy than Reagan.

Bin Laden: That is a stretch. Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do, 911 couldn't have been predicted back then.

[Milks Empire]

Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do

It was as illegitimate as any of our butting into foreign affairs that did not (and do not) concern us in the least, and, as usual, came back to bite us in the ass.

[Ashaven]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

[Caninope]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

Charlie Wilson's war

[Ashaven]

Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do

It was as illegitimate as any of our butting into foreign affairs that did not (and do not) concern us in the least, and, as usual, came back to bite us in the ass.

Like World War II?
*fakes isolationism* Pfft, it wasn't our problem, England and the Soviets could've handled it.

[Ashaven]

Deregulating: Ok, maybe. I could give you a nice list of liberals over the past two decades who are easily more responsible for the rape of the American economy than Reagan.

Bin Laden: That is a stretch. Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do, 911 couldn't have been predicted back then.

Like Obama (socializing GM, great plan. And what did the Stimulus do)?

[Maxaxle]

President W. Bush.

ohwait.

I really don't know. But Lincoln was, no doubt, a good president. So unless there's a later "last good president", he's my pick.

[Maurepas]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

You mean all those Chinese workers they hired? Im finding it hard for me to be happy about these "jobs" created with the fat cats' new pocket money,

[Ashaven]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

You mean all those Chinese workers they hired? Im finding it hard for me to be happy about these "jobs" created with the fat cats' new pocket money,

Beats Obama, who managed to create no jobs (or any number of jobs worth mentioning).

[Maurepas]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

You mean all those Chinese workers they hired? Im finding it hard for me to be happy about these "jobs" created with the fat cats' new pocket money,

Beats Obama, who managed to create no jobs (or any number of jobs worth mentioning).

Idk...Im not a fan of Obama's bailouts, Bush's playbook isnt the best thing to get your own plays from, but, at least they were bailouts of American jobs, and not just incentive, even reward, to outsource...

[Ashaven]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

You mean all those Chinese workers they hired? Im finding it hard for me to be happy about these "jobs" created with the fat cats' new pocket money,

Beats Obama, who managed to create no jobs (or any number of jobs worth mentioning).

Idk...Im not a fan of Obama's bailouts, Bush's playbook isnt the best thing to get your own plays from, but, at least they were bailouts of American jobs, and not just incentive, even reward, to outsource...

Jobs (depending on the type) we won't be getting back?

[Grave_n_idle]

I really don't know. But Lincoln was, no doubt, a good president. So unless there's a later "last good president", he's my pick.

There's 'no doubt' that Lincoln was a good president? That sounds almost theological, there should always be doubt.

His complete disregard for the Constitution would bother me. And his hypocrisy.

[Maurepas]

Ok, I disagree. The USSR would have fallen without Reagan, but I think he deserves some credit for it one way or another.

What "harm" are you talking about? Actual harm, or "Harm" from a liberal perspective?

His whole Iran thing was very strange, I'll give you that.

He put into motion alot of the deregulating of industry that eventually led to our current crises, as well his training of Osama bin Laden can arguably be said to have led directly to 9/11...

You mean by cutting corporate taxes so they could hire more people and (by extension) create more jobs with the money they saved?

You mean all those Chinese workers they hired? Im finding it hard for me to be happy about these "jobs" created with the fat cats' new pocket money,

Beats Obama, who managed to create no jobs (or any number of jobs worth mentioning).

Idk...Im not a fan of Obama's bailouts, Bush's playbook isnt the best thing to get your own plays from, but, at least they were bailouts of American jobs, and not just incentive, even reward, to outsource...

Jobs (depending on the type) we won't be getting back?

I find the idea that we were going to keep them in the first place, given the Big Three's actions in that regard until that point, to be rather laughable...

Hell, I took Obama's advice and bought American, only to find out later its another Korean car(which I was trying to avoid buying again, fuckin Hyundai) with a Chevy logo on it...

[Ashaven]

>_<
Had to kill the quote pyramid. Continue.

[Milks Empire]

Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do

It was as illegitimate as any of our butting into foreign affairs that did not (and do not) concern us in the least, and, as usual, came back to bite us in the ass.

Like World War II?
*fakes isolationism* Pfft, it wasn't our problem, England and the Soviets could've handled it.

Not like World War II. Japan attacked us, which made it our problem. Nazi Germany then declared war on us, making that theater of the war our problem. I'm talking about useless, unprovoked shit like [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état]the 1953 assassination of Iran's democratically-elected prime minister[/url] or training Osama bin Laden or the 2003 Iraq invasion, where we're sticking our collective nose in where no smell has drawn it.

[Ashaven]

Supporting Bin Laden against the soviets was a legitimate thing to do

It was as illegitimate as any of our butting into foreign affairs that did not (and do not) concern us in the least, and, as usual, came back to bite us in the ass.

Like World War II?
*fakes isolationism* Pfft, it wasn't our problem, England and the Soviets could've handled it.

Not like World War II. Japan attacked us, which made it our problem. Nazi Germany then declared war on us, making that theater of the war our problem. I'm talking about useless, unprovoked shit like [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état]the 1953 assassination of Iran's democratically-elected prime minister[/url] or training Osama bin Laden or the 2003 Iraq invasion, where we're sticking our collective nose in where no smell has drawn it.

Good, you've passed my rationality test. To be honest, I have to agree with you.
Even if we had a remotely good reason for being in Afghanistan, we can't even easily get our equipment in the country (silly landlocked states, whatever will we do with you?). I'm pleased we signed that agreement where we have to be out of Iraq by the end of 2010.

Edit: Although, in the case of WWII, we should have been able to guess it would eventually become our problem.

[Inertina]

Edit: Although, in the case of WWII, we should have been able to guess it would eventually become our problem.

Kinda yeah. I'm not going to go as far as some and claim the US provoked Japan into war- that was clearly all Japan's doing. But by cutting off all oil trade with Japan and refusing to start again essentially unless Japan retreated to pre-war borders. Since the US supplied most of their oil, this was a Catch 22 for the Japanese: without oil their war machine would quickly grind to a halt but retreating back to the pre-war borders would have been humiliating and a major loss. I know the purpose of the embargo was to try and force Japan to the negotiating table to bring about peace, but the realist part of me thinks Roosevelt should have known the Japanese would see it as provocation, see neither option the US was presenting them with as acceptable, and would have decided they simply needed to secure a new oil supply and invade Indochina instead.

[Ashaven]

Edit: Although, in the case of WWII, we should have been able to guess it would eventually become our problem.

Kinda yeah. I'm not going to go as far as some and claim the US provoked Japan into war- that was clearly all Japan's doing. But by cutting off all oil trade with Japan and refusing to start again essentially unless Japan retreated to pre-war borders. Since the US supplied most of their oil, this was a Catch 22 for the Japanese: without oil their war machine would quickly grind to a halt but retreating back to the pre-war borders would have been humiliating and a major loss. I know the purpose of the embargo was to try and force Japan to the negotiating table to bring about peace, but the realist part of me thinks Roosevelt should have known the Japanese would see it as provocation, see neither option the US was presenting them with as acceptable, and would have decided they simply needed to secure a new oil supply and invade Indochina instead.

It was a gutsy move. Realistic, but gutsy.