Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Bush Case Study
Case Study in Decision Making
Onlookers often assume that a man who has a firm mindset, and a strong will does not go through what onlookers would consider a "traditional decision making process" Men with strong minds, and a sense of moral right and wrong often take much more time considering a course of action than other who make decisions based on personal agendas. Men with moral mindsets are simply not easily persuaded once a new decision is firmly made on the basis of what the decision make considers moral grounds. For the moral decision maker, the moral right and wrong of a situation dictate the course of action once the somewhat rigid boundaries are crossed. It is the moral absolutism which the on looking world does not understand.
When George W. Bush decided that the country would go to war against those responsible for the 9-11 attacks on our country, he did not make the decision alone, nor did he make the decision out of a personal agenda. The national media would attempt to spin the events that even now are unfolding. He made the decision on the basis of a moral groundwork which supports going to war when our nation is attacked first. Bob Woodward echoed this sentiment in a recent interview with the Harvard International Review. He said "The Bush administration is clearly different. In neutral terms, it pursues a much more aggressive, assertive foreign policy. It is very clear that many people abroad, including foreign leaders and the public in European and other countries worldwide, perceive it as arrogant. That is a problem that the Bush administration has. It either is arrogant or is strongly perceived as arrogant."
No one would have labeled President Roosevelt's speech regarding our entrance into WWII after Pearl Harbor as an arrogant "reactionary decision based on a personal agenda." With the full support of the congress, President Roosevelt declared war on Japan the day after its attack on the naval base in Hawaii. In the same way, the full support of Congress was signed onto a document issuing to president full support, and the political and legal right to declare war on those who were responsible for attacking buildings in New York, and Our nation's capitol. No one knows the damage that would have been caused in the streets of Washington DC had the 4th plane reached its target.
A comparison which evaluates George Bushes decision making process against the "normal" or "rational" decision making process makes an underlying political assumption. The assumption declares that George Bush did not make a "rational" decision via a rational process. This writer disagrees with this assumption, as does Mr. Woodward. Bob continues in his Harvard interview, "He (Pres. Bush) believes that the United States must lead reluctant countries in what he calls the "flip stream" of U.S. leadership and decisiveness, and he believes that other states will follow." In the evaluation of the president's decision in this matter, this review will make the comparison between a rational process and the actions of our president without the underlying surreptitious assumption. Ultimately, the decision for the actions of our country lies with the president. Although his consultant, advisors, and even his wife have the opportunity to make major influence on the president, Mr. Bush is the only one responsible for the lives of American combat men and women. He alone bears the consequences in the world community for the actions of the nation. This is an important aspect that all leaders know too well, and all arm chair leaders in the halls of Congress and behind reporter desks do not yet understand.
Woodward's virtual wiretap into the White House Situation Room reveals a stunning group portrait of an untested president and his advisers. Three of these men are presidential material themselves. During the 100 days after the 911 attacks, the Bush cabinet is portrayed as a constantly squabbling group whose differences and disagreements are solved by the threat of presidential intervention. No one wants to look bad in front of the MBA in Chief, it seems, and a great deal of energy is apparently allocated to jockeying for position. Is this an aberration of the rational decision making process? If the key managers of a high tech manufacturing plant were called into a product development meeting in order to issue a final yes or know on the launch of a new product, the same level of jockeying for position, and working out details ahead of the final meeting would take place. The difference in this setting is that Mr. Woodward is able to place the preliminary discussions in front of the reader, who expected to see a smooth running government, even in the midst of a national crisis.
The key players in this setting are the president's cabinet, and department chiefs. Vice president Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, National Security Advisor Condolesa Rice, and CIS director George Tenet. These five were responsible to the president to give in put on an impending conflict.
Vice President Dick Cheney, taciturn but hard-line, was one who had the experience of a white house tour of duty prior to his service for the current George Bush. His was a forward looking, effectiveness of the operation approach, and his perspective helped move along the political efforts, such as Powell's. Part of his activeness was a constant pressing for more urgency in Afghanistan and toward Iraq. In one meeting Woodward reports Cheney as saying "Air operations without boots on the ground would look weak." Cheney's observations were in turn balanced buy those responsible for the political and media viewpoints, in that they did want to force our troops into a situation just to do something to look good in a PR opportunity. Cheney was quoted: "Do it because it is smart."
The book indicates that Vice President Cheney made the decision himself to go into an undisclosed location Oct. 29 after Bush went macho when told there was intelligence about a possible dirty bomb-like weapon. While Bush stuck his Texas heels in the ground and declared "Those bastards are going to find me exactly here," Bush said. "And if they get me, they're going to get me right here." VP Cheney erupted: "This isn't about you. This is about our Constitution.... And that's why I'm going to a secure, undisclosed location."
Overall, VP Cheney was one of the less visible contributors to the process of planning the war, but one of the more stabilizing influences by focusing on the structure which was needed to facilitate the government, and the media, and an efficient prosecution of the war efforts
Next in line of the advisors who had a significant role was national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, the ever-present troubleshooter. She surprisingly emerges as perhaps the president's most important adviser. In one typical example, the president described Condi this way. "Sometimes that's the way I am - Fiery. On the other hand, Rice's job is to bear the brunt of some of the fire, so that it takes the edge off it a bit. And She's good at that" It was just in his nature to be fiery, the President said.
Woodward goes on to describe a national security council meeting on Oct. 16 in which Rumsfeld insisted that the military was following the C.I.A.'s strategy in Afghanistan. Oh no, Tenet's deputy, John McLaughlin, said, "our guys work with the CINC" -- that is, the commander in chief in the field, Gen. Tommy R. Franks. "We're supporting the CINC. The CINC is in charge." "No," Rumsfeld countered, "you guys are in charge.... We're going where you tell us to go." After the meeting, according to Woodward, Rice took Rumsfeld aside and said, "Don, this is now a military operation and you really have to be in charge." Condi had the ability to work with people's personalities, and both take the fire off the edge, and put the fire underneath when it needed to be there.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the brainy agitator and media star who led the military through Afghanistan and, he is identified as one of the few who hopes to lead a military effort through Iraq.
Rumsfeld was one of Bush's advisors who, wile not offering as much direct advice to the commander in chief, demanded that information coming into his office was accurate, up-to-date, and complete. He had a penchant for typos on memos, and was known to give multi-star generals an 'ass chewing' if they came to his office unprepared.
Bush at War includes a vivid portrait of CIA director George Tenet, ready and eager for covert action against terrorists in Afghanistan and worldwide. It follows a CIA paramilitary team leader on a covert mission inside Afghanistan to pay off assets and buy friends with millions in U.S. currency carried in giant suitcases. The first Americans on the ground in northern Afghanistan, a team of CIA covert…[continue]
"Bush Administration" (2003, November 12) Retrieved October 28, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bush-administration-157877
"Bush Administration" 12 November 2003. Web.28 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bush-administration-157877>
"Bush Administration", 12 November 2003, Accessed.28 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/bush-administration-157877
Bush Administration - Job Creation The Bush Administration is doing a great job of hyping a recent report published by BBC News and other media showing that the economy had added an extra 308,000 jobs in March, 2004, almost three times more than had been forecasted. However, a closer examination of the underlying numbers shows several reasons for skepticism in this supposedly rosy economic data. The old adage, "All that glitters
With the production of Dolly, we also entered a vast technological frontier of possibilities. The cloned sheep "was born after nuclear transfer from a mammary gland cell, the first mammal to develop from a cell derived from adult tissue." Taking a cell containing 98 per cent of the DNA, or its genetic blueprint, from the udder of a six-year-old adult sheep, they fused it to the egg of another
As President Bush argued, the intervention set forth a mission to "to bring freedom to the Middle East, a freedom that wasn't "America's gift to the world," but "God's gift to mankind." (Smoltczyk and Zand, 2010) The dilemma appears from the fact that morality seats on rules, and these were not respected. If one would take as fair and moral for states to invade others that do not preserve international
The most worrying aspect in this case is the fact that the Patriot Act seems to be endangering some of the fundamental liberties of the American individual. The motivation seems simple: the country is at war and, in any such conditions, it is allowed to resort to all means to achieve victory. On the other hand, the fact that certain governmental practices (many of which have probably been going on
Bush Administration's Section 8 voucher program may be to limit the number of lower-income people who can enter the housing market for the first time. Bush's plan reduces the amount of money available to rehabilitate multi-housing buildings. That will reduce the number of multi-housing buildings available to be bought and sold in the real estate market (Castellanet, 2003). In addition, the plan would limit the amount of money available to
Bush administration's crowning contribution to the American educational system was to be the program known as "No Child Left Behind," however, from its beginning the program has been the subject of acrimonious debate with many educators arguing that it must be abandoned. Those educators advocating against the program argue that No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is fundamentally flawed and is punitive in nature and results in too many schools
Instead a violent transfer of power occurred, in 2004, with an armed rebellion led by former military and paramilitary leaders sweeping through the country, all with the veiled support of the Bush administration of the supposedly non-violent political opposition parties ("The International Republican Institute"). In this most recent Haiti operation, in 2004, the U.S. Treasury Undersecretary, John Taylor, noted that the United States would contribute $232 million and the Inter-American