Which US President has Had the Most Impact in Recent Decades

Post by **duchess of malfi** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 2:21 am

Just thought that since there are so many members here from so many nations, it might be fun to see which US President of recent vintage has had the most impact on world affairs according to our membership. I'm going to leave out the current office holder in the poll, as he has not served out his term of office yet...

Incidentally, my husband says it would be FDR and I say Truman. I'm starting with Clinton and working my way backwards in the poll, but if you think it's someone a bit further back in time than the poll covers, please drop him in, too! The poll limits the choices to 10, and I'm thinking more in terms of say, the entire twentieth century forwards.

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 3:42 am

FDR? Bah, think about it: Great Depression! Anything good you did back then was looked upon as a godsend! History's a pack of lies, anyway. And what'd President Harry do except drop "the bomb"? Oi, and Jimmy Carter! Gerald Ford did more good than he did!

Post by **duchess of malfi** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:13 am

Well, the Truman adminsitration did beget the marshall plan...and he was the one who integrated the armed forces...and was the president who was in office when korea/the cold war started... for good or ill...

Post by **Damelon** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:02 am

I'd say FDR and Wilson. Much of the history of the federal govt. after FDR is either inspired by him or in reaction to him. Wilson was the President who inspired the League of Nations, the forerunner to the U.N.

Post by **danlo** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:46 am

I voted 4 Tricky Dick! Very powerful, deranged man. Had within his grasp the means 2 change the US 2 a police state. Tho a misbegotten Californian crook, sound familiar(?)...had major impact on strengthening the CIA and FBI. Had 2 make some intense discissions in and about Viet Nam. An EXTREMELY formidable Foriegn Affairs President, redefined the coldwar in a way, began 2 make Russia doubt it's invincibilities...

Post by **Vain** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 10:13 am

One word: Reaganomics

Post by **danlo** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 1:29 pm

Yes, speaking of another california crook...what is Reaganomics anyway? A means of securing tons of "invisible" dollars?

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 1:52 pm

Did someone say Woodrow Wilson?! "It is like writing history with lightning, and my only regret is that it is all so true." That's his praise of "The Birth of a Nation" . . .

Post by **duchess of malfi** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:56 pm

Well, all of the presidents are human, a mixture of good and ill. A case could be made for Wilson in his idea of a League of Nations as a world impactor in a good way...and you just pointed out a very negative thing about him, too.

Danlo had a good point in choosing Tricky Dick. The question was the "most impact", which could be either good or bad!

Post by **Lord Mhoram** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:44 pm

I'd go with Wilson. His 18 Points changed Europe, his League of Nations created what we now know of as the United Nations. WW1 made us a serious world power, though WW2 made us a world superpower.

Post by **Skyweir** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 11:38 pm

actually i'd have to agree with Mhoram!

I really admire what he attempted to do with the League of Nations .. and this paved the way for international body like the UN ..

and I he was always sympathetic to the Allied forces pleas for assistance during the 2nd WW ..

I think he may have been a good guy ..

duchess of malfi wrote:Well, all of the presidents are human

mmm *

.. is that so??

Post by **Damelon** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 6:17 am

Skyweir wrote:actually i'd have to agree with Mhoram

Agreeing with us "Warhawks" Sky?

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 4:32 pm

nope .. just Mhoram!!

and its a qualified agreement!!

I would vote for Wilson .. I have expressed my opinion before about him .. (at the Hangar

) .. and I stand by it!!

hey I'm not going to entertain labels .. much

I dont say you four are 'warhawks' .. even if you believe you are

.. you believe genuinely that this war is morally justifiable .. and I get that you would be inclined to that standpoint!

I hope you can appreciate a contrary stance .. I think its a good sign of valour to be able to view a situation from a number of standpoints ..

I dont say .. I agree with all your thinking .. but some of it I do ..

However .. at the end of the day .. there are still some big unanswered questions out there .. that I dont feel comfortable not addressing ..

'humanity' is everything .. and the choices we make compromise the integrity of this notion ..

our choices must be justifiable .. they must be open to scrutiny .. and they must be based on 'right' ..

not just moralistic notions of 'right' .. but based in philosophical notions of 'right' .. legally and unquestionably supportable ..

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 5:06 pm

and as much as I love trees

.. the label 'tree hugger' is used detrimentally .. and unfavourably .. and as a 'label' I think its an over simplistic means of ridiculing the anti-war arguement ..

to me usages like these do little to promote open discussion .. and is not a sound method of arguement .. after all its just about 'name calling'

cool .. its fun to be witty .. I'm be the first to wanna have a laugh ..

so in fun we can laugh about this stuff .. so long as peeps dont really believe that this is an accurate or even fair assessment of the opposite side of the debate.

I see it all the time .. peeps slagging off at each other .. in an a peurile attempt to place assign individuals into classes ..

example: <oh right you are anti-war .. then you must be

1. non-patriotic
2. a tree hugger (meaning simple minded/idealistic - really have no idea of the reality - cos you just want to save trees) <- well yeah sure .. so what? I grasp the broader issues involved here .. do you? *shrug*

lol
3. a terrorist
..... and the list of derrogotary translations go on

Now that isnt prevalent here

.. but it is on the street .. in the broader community .. as danlo has addressed in his posts ..

and its a crying shame imho.

we dont know it all .. there's so much we arent being told .. anyway .. i'll leave it to another post ..

Post by **Damelon** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 6:26 pm

Skyweir wrote:nope .. just Mhoram!!

and its a qualified agreement!!

I would vote for Wilson .. I have expressed my opinion before about him .. (at the Hangar ) .. and I stand by it!!

Actually I also voted for Wilson (along with FDR)

For, I assume, the same reasons as you.

Post by **Skyweir** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:04 pm

ahh hah!!

it is true .. there is more that unites than devides!!

well at least on this issue .. we are united

Post by **Damelon** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:21 pm

Agreed!

Post by **duchess of malfi** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 12:59 am

It doesn't happen often, but sometimes agreement can occur!

Post by **TRC** » Thu Dec 25, 2003 7:31 am

well so far of the voters thre of us are in favor Of Ron, I think most of what has happened in the last 23 years has been influenced by his admin, especially on matters of defense.

Post by **danlo** » Sat Dec 27, 2003 12:55 am

I 4got who I put b4 but I'd have to agree with u TRC: Distorting the public's conception, 4ever, on the National Debt, w/"Reaganomics" and stattering figures we couldn't possibly undersatnd. Covering up Iran/Contra, letting the CIA run wild in Africa, cutting drug and alcohol treatment program funding in 1/2 and literally destroying halfway house programs for the mentally challenged that almost tripled the homeless problem in American overnight--just for starters...

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch

Which US President has Had the Most Impact in Recent Decades

Who has Had the Most Impact?

Which US President has Had the Most Impact in Recent Decades