Bush's War

The basic outline of what “Bush’s War” is about can be summed up in its title. The production is about the events following September 11, and what road Bush took. Now throughout the beginning of this production we see the ciaos throughout our government as they try to bring logic to the current situation, I mean come on who would attack the U.S. Bush issues his statement of how we plan to deal with terrorists and the people who help them. Now one of the moments shortly preceding this disaster Bush had a phone call with some of the higher governmental positions in Great Britain and stated that this was a situation in which the solution had to be carefully thought-out. “There is no point in a quick, ineffective retaliation that doesn’t mean anything,” which was he basis of their conversation. This is the Bush that to me sounds like should have been there for the next 7 years, but we all have our own opinions on that. Our government in this situation almost immediately throws Iraq and Afghanistan into the suggestion box of who is responsible. I find this disturbing slightly knowing that yes both of those nations have had some tension between the US before, but why would they now decided to do act now over any other time? I support the government in the sense that they knew who didn’t like us and foremost put the light of them first, but once everyone was fixated on those everything else seemed to be lost in the fog. This is both Bush’s fault and not considering that the people Bush had appointed were running the so call circumstances of trying to get Congress to give them ultimate power of taking out terrorism everywhere. Now just hold on, I thought we were just attacked here, why is it they are concerned with everywhere right now? That is everywhere other than New York, Pennsylvania, and parts of Washington D.C. Another question that must be given attention to is what happened to what was going on right here? A point passed that, we did send special forces into Iraq, but the whole purpose of doing that was to takeout terrorism and yet one of the first things we did was pay off locals, warlords in the area, and other support we needed to bring us the terrorist members. Shouldn’t we be trying to do it ourselves with very minimal inclusion of anyone else? Not to mention what’s to say those people, we paid off, aren’t bring us just anyone or for that matter aren’t the terrorists themselves? Passed that the whole Iraq conflict with trying to find weapons is pulled out, and we can see that other than capturing Sadam Husain, what did it accomplish? The whole situation grew out of what Bush supposedly wanted, and yet many people are now blaming his for what his cabinet did. Well shouldn’t we? After all he’s the one who appointed them. The whole situation grew so fast and Bush and his administration were worried and focused about getting it done fast that he forgot his call, “There is no point in a quick, ineffective retaliation that doesn’t mean anything,” Was there really a good outcome of invading Afghanistan and Iraq? There is no doubt that this will be remembered as Bush’s War after all he created it.