does Bush Subliminally want to accomplish dictatorship or is he really seeking peace?
488173
This is a dictatorship. Presidency R, House R, Senate R, Supreme Court R, = Dictator. Nobody to oppose him or their party right now. No vote from the people. The mans ratings are 30%, and in Congress it's only 35% that are really supporting president Bush. The Republicans are bailing daily on his Presidency. I look for indictments coming after the November elections. Impeachment could be imminent.
122912
no, but:\n\nBush is a puppet for the wolfowitz doctrine and other high profile secret societies. He is not for the people, he is for corporations, and making money for him and his cronies. Not helping any of use americans. Bush is a good puppet.
171630
Bush is definitely trying hard to do it...
443708
When President Bush says "We have no territorial ambitions; we don’t seek an empire," he is telling half a truth. Certainly the United States isn’t looking to make Iraq the 51st state. But that’s not the way of empire today -- it’s about control, not about territory!\nThe key is not who owns the oil but who controls the flow of oil and oil profits!!Until this is done he will not pull anyone out!! Bush wants control of the oil and that is his bottom line!!The ultimate goal is not Iraq--that bombed, blockaded state partially controlled by a witless thug whom the gang once succored--but domination of the world's oil supplies in the coming century, when the surging nations of China and India will reach their economic peak. These vast entities could eventually tilt the imbalance of world wealth away from the Anglo-American elites who have for so long held the high and palmy ground of privilege. But the voracious economies of the Asian behemoths will require unstinting draughts of the oil reserves now locked under the sands of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. There is oil elsewhere, yes--but nowhere else in the world are there reserves deep enough to satisfy the thirsts of China and India as they come into their own.
169606
there is always a percentage or possibility, but I don't think so.  \n\nBush is a puppet for the wolfowitz doctrine and other high profile secret societies. He is not for the people, he is for corporations, and making money for him and his cronies. Not helping any of use americans. Bush is a good puppet.
985361
In light of Bush's insistence that we should stay the course it seems plausible that the USA also conducted sectarian bombings to drum up domestic support for a bogus 'war'.\n\nSaddam understood what some cannot  - that  democracy is almost impossible to achieve in 'tribal' nations.  Military rule is the most effective.  Something that Bush, as commander in chief,  should have known. \n\nI think he deliberated went in to cause civil strive but not a full blown war as a distraction from and justification of his true intent - control of the oil fields.  \n\nThen he tried to control the escalation of discord and with the cooperation of the media hide it from the American public. \n\nNow we know but we still don't grasp the full extent of what this man did to the Middle East and more importantly -  world stability.\n\nAnd no, I'm not paranoid - I'm analyzing.
448329
I think he's trying to do what's best for America. Is he going to be able to? I'm not sure.
951954
It is a way of accepting that Bush is the Freedom taker-in-chief. You know..? the best way to avoid the truth is to pretend it never existed.
388607
gosh, you other answerers misunderstand Bush completely.  He's trying to help the USA by killing off all those mideast types and taking their oil for nothing.  He's absolutely sure he is doing God's work.  But I really don't see how MURDERing people is doing God's work, do you?
1147613
What do you mean, "why won't republicans see we need progress?"?!?  How can you say that?  What do you think President Bush is seeking in Iraq and Afghanistan?  He's seeking progress for the people there that have been under harsh oppression for so long.  What do you think he is doing in raising security for our nation?  He's making it easier for the "independent minds" of America to make their own progress (we are capable of making progress without the government's supervision at every step) without fear of terrorist attacks on centers of economic progress (The World Trade Center).  You are simply wrong in saying that Republicans don't see that we need progress.  Perhaps if the Democrats would see that progress in areas other than their own is still progress, they would stop accuse the Republicans of squandering resources on unneeded action.
1052381
Sounds like something Bush either wants to run or already does!!!
979173
Good point.  When Bush talks about "spreading freedom to the darkest corners of the world", what he's really talking about is spreading his brand of government.  I can't blame them for not wanting that, because I don't like his version of "democracy" either.  It looks more like fascism to me.  I can't wait until we're rid of him, but in the meantime I'm hoping a big shakeup in Congress will make him a totally ineffectual lame duck.
1115174
Bush is a Fascist, who is dismantling the Constitution, breaking laws he wants at a whim, ignores treaties, illegally wiretaps, gets our phone and email records, wants to make Internet companies keep a record of every site you visited on the Internet for 2 years, can go into anywhere and see your records without you knowledge and it is illegal for them to tell you that he has done so, now has been found to have been tracking all money coming into or out of this country, has secret CIA torture camps, and wants to spread "his" democracy to the whole world. By force it seems! ""we're actively working with our partners to spread peace and democracy" George Bush\n\nBut Austrian Wolfgang Schuessel also prodded Bush.\n\n"We can only have a victory in the fight against terror if we don't undermine our common values," Schuessel said. \n\n"It can never be a victory, a credible victory over terrorists if we give up our values: democracy, rule of law, individual rights." TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent 6/21/2006\n\nGet it! At what price. We give up all of our values, rule of law and individual rights!! THIS REMARK WAS DIRECTLY AIMED AT BUSH!!\n\n\n\nI think there are a lot of comparisons I think
1154529
Although I dislike George Bush as much as the next person, he is NOT the real culprit in the "Tyrants" category. Bush like most of the rest of the leaders in the world take their orders from some groups of those known as the "Power elite". They are members of various groups which seem to be sub-groups of the main group known as the "Illuminati" founded by Adam Weishaupt in May 1776. Their goal or purpose is to instill Global Economy, Global Political Union and Global Religion. Their aim is to reduce the population of the world and make those remaining into their slaves. The CEO's of all the big corporations and news medias are mostly members of the Trilateral Commission or the Councle on Foreign Relations. \n\nSome of the other groups that are connected with the Illuminati are: The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Builderburgers, and The Club of Rome. There are others as well.\n\nAll I can advise is that those of you who have read my answer please PLEASE read some of the information I have provided below. It is vitally important that you know who you are fighting and what and why things are occurring not only in the USA but in all the world as well! There are those that say it is not true and a conspiracy, You read for yourself then decide.
496509
Because George bush is money and power hungry warmonger in a quest for world domination. Its all about the money
955418
I don't trust him either... ever since day one that he came into power, he has been converting their new democracy into a dictatorship. His has changed many previous elected positions into 'assigned' positions... meaning he picks them and they are not elected. \n\nBut, I don't think he is trying to convert back to communism... rather, he is literally running a dictatorship. \n\nAlso, I believe that he has knowingly made all these changes while he knows the USA is distracted and preoccupied with Iraq.
669946
In his latest audiotape which was released on January 19th, Osama ben Laden had declared: "If you [Americans] are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression, then it would be useful for you to read the book _Rogue State', which states in its introduction ... " He then goes on to quote the opening of a paragraph (which appears actually in the Foreword of the British edition only, that was later translated to Arabic), which in full reads:\n "If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize -- very publicly and very sincerely -- to all the widows and the orphans, the impoverished and the tortured, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. I would then announce that America’s global interventions -- including the awful bombings -- have come to an end. And I would inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the union but -– oddly enough -– a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims and repair the damage from the many American bombings and invasions. There would be more than enough money. Do you know what one year of the US military budget is equal to? One year. It’s equal to more than $20,000 per hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born.\n"That’s what I’d do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I’d be assassinated."\nThe stunning victory of the Islamic Resistance Movement Party Hamas in the Palestinian elections underlines the central contradictions in the Bush administration's policies toward the the Islamic World. Hamas' stunning victory underlines the contradictions, hypocrisies and double-standard in Bush's Mideast policies.\nDemocracy depends not just on elections but on a rule of law, on stable institutions, on basic economic security for the population, and on checks and balances that forestall a tyranny of the majority. Elections in the absence of this key societal context can produce authoritarian regimes and abuses as easily as they can produce genuine people power. Bush is on the whole unwilling to invest sufficiently in these key institutions and practices abroad. And by either creating or failing to deal with hated foreign occupations, he has opened our minds to the fact that only militant Islamist movements that gain popularity because of their honest credentials is only the way forward.