If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
The best president the US has ever had?
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Nobel Peace Prize winner
You could certainly do worse than Mr Carter. He seems the most balanced, internationally aware and intelligent US president in recent times.
What do our American posters think?
You could certainly do worse than Mr Carter. He seems the most balanced, internationally aware and intelligent US president in recent times.
What do our American posters think?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
editted for typos
kill me!
Carter: reasonable, sensible and intellegent... not too shabby i say.
though i didn't live thru his time so i dont' really know from personal experience.
Sweden didn't even stand up to the Nazi's so any award from them...who cares. They've , like the Swiss, created a culture of cowardance where standing for nothing...stands for something.
Bush has a shot at being considered one of the greats...if his bluff against Iraq works without war and if other severe attacks against Americans are prevented. Not to mention he needs to get the economy moving even better...even though we're doing better than most. So glad Germany is crumbling.
Sorry, be hasn't got a chance at being one of the "greats". Why? Because the problems that he had to face were nothing compared to what Roosevelt, Kennedy, Lincoln, Eisenhower, even Truman had to face.
Kennedy and Eisenhower had to face an enemy with the capability of killing millions of Americans within an hour.
Roosevelt had to face a Nazi military that held the largest empire since Napolean.
Lincoln had the Civil War.
Truman had the Korean War.
First off, as previously said, Carter's greatness has little to do with his one term in office and practically everything to do with his humanitarian work in the ensuing years.
Secondly, the Nobel Foundation is Norwegian not Swedish. Further to this, Sweden as a country was neutral as was Switzerland and Ireland for that matter during WWII so you cannot lambast them for staying out since that neutrality has been the consistent national choice of those and other countries long before and long after (to this day in fact).
Lastly, Bush in no way qualifies for the Nobel peace prize. His attitude and actions with regard to peace and (more importantly) multilateral institutions created to increase global peace (or at least to reduce war) is blatant disdain. No, Bush has neither the intelligence nor the demeanor to be credibly considered a peacemaker.
(Edited to say Alessandro)> ummm best to check your facts regarding the Nazi "empire" (which it never really was per say). Largest since Napolean?? ummm have you forgotten the British Empire which came after Napolean and which is considered the most extensive in history (though perhaps the Roman Empire was larger in actual land mass).
You have to look at this in a historical context.
The downturn in the economy right now isn't even completely attributable to the attacks in NY. Signs of the end of the economic boom were visible while Clinton was still in office. There are always booms and recessions in the economy, no one could ever expect the economy to keep growing like it did throughout the Nineties. Every bubble has to burst sometime.
Compare the current 6% unemployment with the rates in the 1930's. Or compare economic growth currently with the 1970's. Or current inflation with that of the 1980's.
No comparison.
The thing is, the real power of this country is in things that terrorists cannot destroy...the huge manufacturing capabilities, the massive capital resources, the world's most powerful military....do you really think that bombing the WTC changed any of that?
Not in terms of land mass, don't forget, it covered from Spain to just outside of Moscow, all of North Africa to Scandanavia.
And even so, if anything it would have been "since the British Empire" not "since Napolean".
Just to clear up those oversights.
Canada? India? Australia?
These are three huge land masses. They were also part of the British Empire at the same time as the German "empire" existed.
The challenges of the time of their service.
The things they said (that are remembered)
The things they did (that are remembered).
One action always results in a President being rated at the bottom regardless of the above three, and that is impeachment.
Following those factors, and by century:
18th century
1. George Washington
2. John Adams
19th century
1. Abraham Lincoln
2. Thomas Jefferson
3. James Monroe
20th Century
1. Franklin Delano Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Theodore Roosevelt
4. John F. Kennedy
5. Woodrow Wilson
America didn't even stand up to the Nazis until one of the Nazis' allies attacked them and the Nazis themselves declared war, so why the hell should we care about the opinion of America, except that they now have quite a few guns? They've created a culture in which standing only for your blantant immediate self-interest actually counts as standing for something, rather than the cowardice it is.
How does it feel to have it put that way?
And, for your information, the neutrality of countries like Switzerland and Sweden saved lives in WWII -- where else could civilian refugees have fled if nobody had been neutral?
JFK wasn't exactly an angel either...
[although I do agree with your basic point]
seems yer forgeting the american destroyers their american crews riding shotgun on amercian freighters with american war materials and food headed to YOUR country while fending off u boats. we collected private citizens arms in this country to arm YOUR home guard.
Noted
And true.
Americans were dying in the fight against Germany from 1940 onwards. in the case of merchant seamen many were not even asked to (unlike the Armed services, where you should assume on joining that you may have to lay down your life for your country/cause).
Nixon and Carter both seemed to have done a LOT of work in the 70's to defuse the cold war and bring dialog between the two camps. Specificly Nixon talking to China, and Carter with the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaties. Tis a shame tricky dicky permitted himself to get involved in that awkward situation.
Still my Money would be on FDR. Attacked from both within and without America, still managing to steer America through two of its most dangerous Crisis ever (the depression and WW2). Coupled with cool international diplomatic skill (He had to deal with Stalin AND Churchill, prickly customers at the best of times, and DeGaul who could out do the pair of them) and able to cary the fine line between the large pro-German Lobby, the large Isolationist Lobby and the influential Pro-intervetion Lobby.
There stands a better man than me for sure.
Americans should be embaressed at Joe McCarthy and Co for attacking such a man for being 'un-American'.