This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
Since Hitler's article mentions his crimes in the first paragraph of his article, why not mention the crimes of Bush in the first paragraph. Bush is responsible for the deaths of a million people in Iraq. That's a solid crime. That's a big bit of killing. So if Hitler gets that treatment, why not Bush? Fair is fair. It must be the pro American stance of wikipedia, right? Can't be calling out American presidents in the first paragraph of their articles? Too mean to American presidents is it?
NeutralityForAll (
talk)
05:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
wow, Hitler and bush. Amazingly enough all the people who say things about how Iraq and Afghanistan were handled never have any proof just theory. What would you say if after 911 he did nothing. After all the reason it happened is because Clinton did nothing a few times. World trade center bombing, how about the USS Cole. There's more. Since we're speculating and talking smack.
2600:1004:B1C1:90DB:8031:9C6C:D147:F95 (
talk)
03:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps it should also be noted that Bush was not chosen by a majority in 2000; this is not illegal according to US law, but the Supreme Court stopped the recount. In essence, the recount was stopped so that no further discussion of the circumstances being dubious (at best) would be allowed to be mentioned. Al Gore also served in Vietnam, which is mentioned in his Wikipedia page. Even in an alternate circumstance where Gore had decided to go to war in Afghanistan or even Iraq, it seems that Gore, who actually saw combat (he served with the 20th Engineers Brigade. Also, even if George W. Bush is never reported to have failed a course at Yale University or Harvard Business School, his going AWOL from the Air National Guard was below the minimum standards, and his performance was therefore equivalent to a failing grade. Therefore George W. Bush was not "barely" qualified to be President. He was unqualified by all logical conclusions.
2603:6000:C305:78DF:D9F2:80EE:A18F:A307 (
talk)
03:23, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
"He was unqualified by all logical conclusions." Possibly, but there are no standard qualifications for the American presidents. Any
clown can get elected through the voting system.
Dimadick (
talk)
10:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
I am not advocating being hateful or derisive toward George W. Bush. In fact, what I request is that we make as honest an assessment as we can. The Wikipedia page mentions the Partial Birth Abortion ban, which was signed into law in late 2003. No one would want to be "pro-partial birth abortion," even if the procedure is so-called and not literally a "partial birth." So in essence this is indicative of how Bush used privilege and expedience and let's not forget "luck" (last but not least), to build his political career.
2603:6000:C305:78DF:A0B4:B983:EDBA:7B78 (
talk)
05:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Respectfully, I don't think your political beliefs should interfere with Wikipedia. Others have disagreed with your point in other ways, but I think their responses are more inmature as well.
Ulysses Grant Official (
talk)
22:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
i think wikipedia should be honest and critical of all figures, since he did kill 1 million civilians, wikipedia should cover that in the first paragraph.
41.225.66.214 (
talk)
12:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Uh? "Bush famously passed mints to Obama during the McCain funeral in September 2018 and gave them to her again during the funeral of his father in December 2018." ???? --
Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (
talk)
22:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
The paragraph is about Bush's relationship with Michelle Obama, the "Obama" and the "her" in the sentence. The "him" in the sentence refers to Bush's father. The wording is a direct copy from the source.
HiLo48 (
talk)
23:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)