Jeb Bush Says that, Knowing What He Knows Now, He Would Have Launched the Iraq War

Jeb Bush Says that, Knowing What He Knows Now, He Would Have Launched the Iraq War May 13, 2015

Laura Ingraham responds: “There has to be something wrong with you.”

W is Jeb’s chief Middle East expert, according to Jeb.

The all-out Republican effort to elect Hillary Clinton proceeds apace.

"But the hardcore Trump supporters love his bullying style, don't they? He's not a "cuck". ..."

The Corruption of Humor in the ..."
"Thank you for your kind comments... and for the compliment by assuming I am a ..."

Where Peter Is….
"I think you're on to something here, Marthe. As I mentioned to FrCherub before, the ..."

Where Peter Is….
"It seems we may have been at cross purposes. I am not an obfuscator. The ..."

Where Peter Is….

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Joseph

    This is terrible. However, this is Jeb in theory. In practice, Obama and Hilary have shown that they believe the same thing. So, they’re cut from the same cloth.

    • Tweck

      Pretty much. I don’t even know who to cast a vote for anymore. It’s either this evil, that evil or the other evil.

      • Andy

        I voted for the sapient candidate last time – at least there name said thinking?

        • Joseph

          I voted for Senor Bunghole Magnifico. Unfortunately, he was little known and blacklisted from the debates… otherwise he would have run.

        • antigon

          there name?
          Andy, you weren’t thinking!

          • Andy

            so true – “their” is no excuse:)

      • MarylandBill

        I believe the only rational option these days is to vote for third party candidates. If enough people would vote third party, the politicians might start to realize that they should be trying to represent us.

      • antigon

        Actually, in his safe Illinois State Senate seat, Obama made, for his district also safe tho rather good & certainly prescient speech opposing the invasion. And that speech is central to why he is president today.

        • Peggy

          But he willfully and foolishly toppled a now compliant Quaddafi and the stable Mubarak. He’s created utter chaos, a horribly worse situation than the one he was given.

          • antigon

            Well, at least the population rose up & stopped the Syrian invasion, & his efforts with Iran are infinitely superior to any Republican aspirant’s, excepting probably tho wobbly Rand’s.

  • Dave G.

    That’s like saying knowing what I know now, I’d have bet on Seattle in the Super Bowl.

  • He’s in favor of granting Iran a strong foothold in Iraq?

  • Na

    He didn’t hear the question correctly which is clear based on the fact he also said that Hillary would have voted for the Iraq war.

    I would rather have W as my adviser than the guy who is actually encourage a nuclear arms race in the middle east. Not only do the Isrealis not trust us, the Sunni Arabs don’t believe one word that comes out of the White House and are actively investigating how to buy the bomb. Peace deals are awesome!

    Don’t worry Mark, Marco is going to beat both Hillary and Jeb …easily. The dogmas of the past are inadequate to the storm present.

    • Andy

      Fox’s Megyn Kelly asked Bush, “Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?” Don’t know what is hard to hear –

      • Na

        So you think Jeb thinks that Hillary Clinton, who has flip floped on every position she ever had to become president, still wants to invade Iraq?

        • Joseph

          Hilary has proven to do whatever it takes to kill people… so, if it means killing more people, the answer is a resounding ‘YES wee Khan’!

        • Andy

          He agreed with Hillary – that she voted for the invasion and saw no problem with and Jeb agrees means indeed that L. Ingraham is correct – something is wrong with him.

    • antigon

      ‘Marco is going to beat both Hillary and Jeb.’
      Cling to the hope Na.

      • Na

        my track record for political prognostication is excellent…..lets see..on the one hand …you have an old ex-senator trying to follow a two term president with an economy that is tracking at negative GDP growth, who has no significant accomplishment (other than second X chromosome), who has a long list of misjudgements including iraq and russian reset, who has never won a close election, who is only popular when perceived as a victim or apolitical, who demagogues about income equality and student loans while raking in 1/2 a million a speech, who claims she is dead broke while owning multiple houses, who has flip flopped on amnesty, driver license, free trade, gay marriage and her husbands crime bill all within the last six months and who has no social intelligence or political skills. For me, I’ll put my money on Marco.

        • antigon

          ‘my track record for political prognostication is excellent…I’ll put my money on Marco.’
          Cling to the first illusion for the sake of the hopeless neocon, Na, tho no gainsaying your astute analysis of our coming Queen.

          • Na

            nope dispassionate observer…just introducing truth to power. I predicted barrak would win…and he isn’t a neocon. it was actually pretty easy…once you figure out that democrats are more sexist than they are racist.

            have you had a stroke recently? you keep confusing airy gibberish with insight.

            So the “Queen” is going to sucker…whoops…sorry I meant …bring back the working class voters by railing against the 1% who have ridged the “system”. That should last a full second until everyone notices that Chelsea made $600,000 for her “journalistic” expertise as a “reporter” for NBC.

            • antigon

              ‘confusing airy gibberish with insight.’
              My dear Na, that sort of projection is perhaps too painfully obvious don’t you think?

  • Artevelde

    Knowing what WE (1) know now, is that really different from what WE (1) knew then, and if it is, is it also different from what THEY (3) or THEY (4) knew then?

    (1) The American public, after being told it was all a mistake?
    (2) The American public back then? or me and my buddies on my side of the Atlantic, who were told something entirely different?
    (3) Almost every other intelligence service on the planet, whatever *their* dubious reasoning may have been
    (4) G.W. Bush, his entire entourage AND the Clintons, and God knows who else?

    *You* were lied to, and now if *they* say it was a mistake due to faulty intelligence, you are being lied to again.

    • Joseph

      Damn.Good point!

  • Gunnar Thalweg

    I thought we were going to invade Iraq, dig Saddam Hussein out of the sand, and replace him with someone more respectful of and cooperative with the U.S. I really believed that was the plan. If we had done that, now we’d have a Sunni strong man in Iraq who was cooperative with the U.S.

    The actual plan was unfathomable to me: Create a democracy at gunpoint, in which people will vote tribally …