You cannot back up this false assertion with any facts. It is merely a "Liberal" perception which has been reinforced by a campaign of ignorance led by the New York Times against a President they never liked and thought stole the election from their man in 2000.
Really? Liberal perception, is it?? The fact that George Bush was more of a pawn than a strategist, is beside the point.
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Toxic world fallout from Iraq invasion
The diplomatic fallout
As for America's standing around the world, the war alienated some major American allies, France and Germany most notably. Others did send troops after the invasion - Spain and Italy among them - but then left as public opinions at home turned hostile.
On the other hand, a number of smaller countries, many of them from the former Soviet block, saw an opportunity to show their loyalty to the US and sent contingents - the Czech Republic, Poland, Georgia and others. For them, a strong and active United States bodes well for their future security.
In turn, Britain's support for the United States has led to further divisions within Europe. These had an impact in the Lisbon treaty talks about a future foreign policy for the EU, strengthening the British determination to keep it firmly in the hands of individual governments.
The invasion of Iraq also caused alarm bells to ring in Russia. There, a new mood of hostility to the West has developed and the Russians have become wary of American power.
Nor has Iraq sparked the democratic revolution in the Middle East that Mr Bush hoped for. And the Israeli/Palestinian conflict remains unresolved.
Ironically it is Iran, with which the US shares a mutual hostility, that has emerged with greater strength, to the concern of the Gulf Arab states.
The fallout continues.
The Magazine of Future Warfare
......Bremer also alienated Iraqis as he "privatized" Iraq's national industries, although "piratized" is a more accurate term. Iraqi industries were given away to American corporations, with American oil companies first in line. Bremer also awarded numerous "no bid" contracts to insider companies like Dick Cheney's Halliburton. The waste and corruption was so bad that the US Army Comptroller recently testified before Congress that it was the worst he had seen in his career. The plunder was so blatant that there is no accounting for billions of dollars in hundred dollar bills that were flown in by the planeload and disappeared.
The fact that it(the Iraq War) was unjustified, illegal according to international laws and treaties, opposed by the UN, opposed by most US allies, bad for the war on terror, and disastrous for the Iraqi people, American taxpayer, America's image, and devastating to hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and their families are minor concerns.
Last time I looked, Iran told Obama to pound sand.
Last time I looked, North Korea told Obama to pound sand.
Are you living in the same world I live in?
Please. Other than 'saber-rattling" at Iran and totally ignoring the threat that N.Korea represented, Bush was "out to lunch".....all talk and no action.
In regards to Obama:
Obama Reaches Out to Iran, Looks for Engagement - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com
Obama Condemns N. Korea Missile Launch, Vows to Pursue Missile Defense in Europe - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com
More than what Bush did.
Okay let me be sure I understand this; you think HIGH opinion polls are an indicator of leadership?
No, they are reflections of Americans view of leadership
Did you know that Congressional Democrats have lower polling numbers than Bush did? What does that tell you?
Tells me that the Democrats in Congress have yet to step up to the plate, in the fashion of Obama....but Congressional Republicans are viewed even more negatively. What does that tell you?
How high do you think those numbers will be this time next year? I can give you a guess; not much higher than Bush's and they may even go below Bush's numbers by the end of his first term.
Anything can happen....and likely, "will". Nothing is guaranteed. But I predict, that Obama will not be at his "wit's end", unlike Bush, and will respond to challenges, "presidentially".
But again, the thing I liked about Bush is that he was a leader and didn't make decision by sticking a finger into the wind and trying to figure out what was easy an popular.
Bush was the opposite of a leader, who inspired only those in the base of his own party. Everyone knows, or suspects that Cheney was the puller of Bush's strings, as he possesses the intellect of a rock.
Obama doesn't either, he just happens to be clueless of the disaster his policies are going to be.