Kmarion wrote:
War time leader are rarely viewed "popular" at the the time. Much of the same stuff they say about Bush was said about Lincoln during his presidency.
Even if the Iraq War results in an outstanding success, I would find it difficult to stomach a comparison between the presidents presiding over the American Civil War and the current Iraq War.
Lincoln's stubbornness in the face of negative public opinion ensured victory. Eventually Lincoln convinced the American people that he was right. Today Lincoln is credited with successfully defending the very unity of the United States.
In sharp contrast, Bush's stubbornness in the face of negative public opinion was, by all accounts, not taking the US in the right direction. Eventually the American people convinced Bush that he was wrong. The "resignation" of Don Rumsfeld, the talk of a need for new direction - I do NOT believe this would have happened had the elections not gone the way they had.
Personally I am not convinced that it is possible to "succeed" militarily in Iraq. I have a feeling that in 20 years if we see peace in Iraq, the world will credit it NOT to Bush's military efforts, but to sweeping changes yet to come in Iraq policy that will have been a direct result of the 2006 referendum on the Bush administration - one that gave it a failing grade.
