|Well, utimately, the question whether you think that Bush is a hero, a good politician or a champion of liberty, or not depends on what you regard as more important. The number of democracies arising or freedom at home. If you are a champion of freedom and you mean your personal freedom, not some freedom for some people far away, who want to kick your butts, then you may not choose Bush as a champion of liberty.|
He is a Democrat at home and a General in foreign relations. The pressure on the middle east was increasing on its own over the last 6-7 years. It wouldn't have been Iraq that had fallen first, but maybe Palestine, Lybia, Egypt or Iran, but the democratic change was inevitable.
Now, however, Iraq has an Islam government rather than a secular dictator. This means less torture (obvious torture), but more anti-americanism and a unholy "amistice" between the 3 different social groups.
And if we look at Afghanistan we have a kind of a lesser Somalia with tribes clinging to their local dominions with the presidents power ceasing beyond Kabul. This is not the liberal country, Mr. Bush promised and Afghanistan didn't have the problems Iraq has. Plus, the extreme Islamists are leaking back into Afghanistan (German KSK troops have been forcing a new wave of attacks on resident terrorist groups since January).
Yes, I grant it always takes awhile for nations to adjust and balance out, but we already have 1 and a half year. After that time, Japan and German, the prime ideals, were well underway to prosperity. I still can't see that things in Afghanistan and Iraq...
And to the god theory, I must not support the evidence that Bush isn't a champion of liberty, but the others must prove their position and despite some good inclinations, I still think that he causes more harm than benefit.
(though his rhetoric skills have improved since his last term....)