Tony Blair: GW Bush was brave and simple

[eeyore1954]

Tony's writing his memoirs, and he has to talk about the president who he shared the era with, George W. Bush. His words were carefully chosen, almost like somebody writing a letter of recommendation for someone who they know is inept; "You will be lucky to get him to work for you." Yeah, he says:


But then...
Blair writes that Bush was "very smart" while having "immense simplicity in how he saw the world."

Hate to say it, Tony Boy, but that sounds like a contradiction right there. Smart people recognize complexity.

That is not a contradiction. You don't think being able to simplify complex situations can be a sign of an intelligent person.

 

[leftysergeant]

That is not a contradiction. You don't think being able to simplify complex situations can be a sign of an intelligent person.

Sometimes the simplification of a complex problem is a sign of mental failing.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I'll buy it and put it next to Mein Kampf in my shelf.

 

[Chaos]

That is not a contradiction. You don't think being able to simplify complex situations can be a sign of an intelligent person.

When simplifying a complex situation, information is lost. When this information is crucial, losing it is not a good thing.

 

[eeyore1954]

When simplifying a complex situation, information is lost. When this information is crucial, losing it is not a good thing.

If someone can determine what is important simplifying is neccesary in complex situations. Whether President Bush did this or not is not important to my contention that Blairs statement was not neccesarily a contradiction.

 

[foxholeatheist]

Bush indeed was brave in his decision making. I guess because the Right at the time was showing people that looked at a situation differently after bitter experience as "flip-floppers" and certainly Bush could do none of that at all. He made his choice and damned if he was going to let anything like evidence or greater minds than he get int he way of his ambitions.

Yeah... I lost some very good friends of mine in Iraq and I couldn't give you a real good reason why. The psychological problems are beginning to manifest as well (not even just me, everyone from the old unit).

I hope he sleeps soundly with all that. I certainly do not.

 

[JihadJane]

Facebook group:

Subversively move Tony Blair's memoirs to the crime section in book shops

 

[Tricky]

That is not a contradiction. You don't think being able to simplify complex situations can be a sign of an intelligent person.

I can't think of many cases where this is true. While it can be intelligent to prioritize the importance of one step over others, intelligent people do not forget all the other interwoven dependancies.

A good example of how Bush (and Blair) failed to keep those other factors in mind is how they had absolutely no idea how to handle the aftermath of the invasion. From all appearance, Bush expected the invading troops to be welcomed as liberators. He seemed to be completely ignoring the complex religious, social and political quagmire that had existed in Iraq for ages, and he had no plan for dealing with it.

Now perhaps Tony meant that GWB was good at prioritizing, but somehow, I suspect not.

 

[Tricky]

Bush indeed was brave in his decision making. I guess because the Right at the time was showing people that looked at a situation differently after bitter experience as "flip-floppers" and certainly Bush could do none of that at all. He made his choice and damned if he was going to let anything like evidence or greater minds than he get in the way of his ambitions.

Yeah... I lost some very good friends of mine in Iraq and I couldn't give you a real good reason why. The psychological problems are beginning to manifest as well (not even just me, everyone from the old unit).

I hope he sleeps soundly with all that. I certainly do not.

That's awful, FHA, and in the end, that's why even the Right turned against the war. They could no longer convince themselves that there was a good reason for taking a hand in this carnage. Of course, back home there were still the ones on the far right screaming "cut and run" at anyone who wanted to get out.

 

[Chaos]

If someone can determine what is important simplifying is neccesary in complex situations. Whether President Bush did this or not is not important to my contention that Blairs statement was not neccesarily a contradiction.

I piss on "necessarily". It definitely was a contradiction in case of Bush, because Bush did leave out the important parts in all that simplification, because he cannot determine what is important and what is not.

 

[leftysergeant]

If someone can determine what is important simplifying is neccesary in complex situations. Whether President Bush did this or not is not important to my contention that Blairs statement was not neccesarily a contradiction.

There's the problem. Neither the Shrub nor his nosferatu VP nor Rummy had a bloody clue what they were doing militarily.

The facts they disregarded, like the ones that Shinseki was waving in their faces, were, in reality, the determining factor in whether or not the invasion of Iraq would work.

Kind of like the way that the morons ignored the fact that Supply-side piddle-down ecconomics had failed ab initio.

The Shrub is not a "simple man." He's a freaking simpleton. And he is not brave, but rash.

Reminds me of the shavetails straight out of West Point who think they're Clausewitz reincarnate.

 

[Virus]

And he is not brave, but rash.

It's easy just to do nothing. The status quo regarding Iraq was not a tenable long-term solution. The region requires transformation and Saddam drew the short straw.

 

[JihadJane]

It's easy just to do nothing. The status quo regarding Iraq was not a tenable long-term solution. The region requires transformation and Saddam drew the short straw.

The North American region requires transformation. Would some more "Shock and Awe" help?

 

[funk de fino]

It's easy just to do nothing. The status quo regarding Iraq was not a tenable long-term solution. The region requires transformation and Saddam drew the short straw.

They were not doing nothing. Try that one again.

 

[jj-158]

I piss on "necessarily". It definitely was a contradiction in case of Bush, because Bush did leave out the important parts in all that simplification, because he cannot determine what is important and what is not.

How does one do that?

 

[Chaos]

How does one do that?

Simple: if the short version lets you come to a different conclusion than the long one, you´ve left out something vital.

 

[jj-158]

Simple: if the short version lets you come to a different conclusion than the long one, you´ve left out something vital.

But once you have the long one, you are already there.

How do you determine if the version you have is of the correct length?

 

[jj-158]

Sometimes the simplification of a complex problem is a sign of mental failing.

But not every time.

Sometimes the simplification of a complex problem will lead to a solution.

 

[leftysergeant]

But once you have the long one, you are already there.

How do you determine if the version you have is of the correct length?

If it don't work, it's wrong.

The Shrub thought supply-side whackadoodlery worked. It is so simple in its workings and such a bloody disaster for any nation dumb enough to try it.

He's a freaking simpleton.

 

[jj-158]

If it don't work, it's wrong.

But you have to try it, before you know if it works or not.