Jeb Bush: I would have invaded Iraq

"Former governor Jeb Bush said Hillary Clinton would have approved the mission, too."

I won't vote for Jeb in the primaries, and I am hoping we have someone else to oppose HRC.

Jeb Bush I would have invaded Iraq US news The Guardian


I am not a Jeb supporter, but this misquotes him. He was asked if, based on the intel available when the Iraq invasion began, he would have done it. He accurately said that Hillary and almost everyone else bought the bad intel so yes, based on that intel he would have authorized it.

He was not asked if, knowing what we know today, would you have invaded? So I call bullshit on this thread.
Megyn Kelly specifically asked him "knowing what we know today " The Five were spinning afterwards trying to help him suggesting that maybe he didn't understand the question and / or he made a mistake.

lol, yes, the right immediately latched onto the talking point that Jeb didn't understand the question. The GOP lady that Chris Matthews had on said Jeb didn't 'process' the question correctly...

...just more admissions from rightwingers that they know Iraq was a mistake.


Hey dude, everyone agrees that Iraq was a mistake and a waste of lives and money. BUT BOTH PARTIES AUTHORIZED, FUNDED, AND SUPPORTED IT. BUSH DID NOT, AND COULD NOT, DO IT ON HIS OWN. THEY ALL HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

if you libtards would deal with those facts and stop the partisan bullshit, we might be able to move forward.
 
"Former governor Jeb Bush said Hillary Clinton would have approved the mission, too."

I won't vote for Jeb in the primaries, and I am hoping we have someone else to oppose HRC.

Jeb Bush I would have invaded Iraq US news The Guardian


I am not a Jeb supporter, but this misquotes him. He was asked if, based on the intel available when the Iraq invasion began, he would have done it. He accurately said that Hillary and almost everyone else bought the bad intel so yes, based on that intel he would have authorized it.

He was not asked if, knowing what we know today, would you have invaded? So I call bullshit on this thread.
Megyn Kelly specifically asked him "knowing what we know today " The Five were spinning afterwards trying to help him suggesting that maybe he didn't understand the question and / or he made a mistake.

lol, yes, the right immediately latched onto the talking point that Jeb didn't understand the question. The GOP lady that Chris Matthews had on said Jeb didn't 'process' the question correctly...

...just more admissions from rightwingers that they know Iraq was a mistake.
Personally, I believe Jeb understood the question perfectly, and chose to answer differently, to avoid throwing his brother under the bus; the same thing that most of us would have done, I dare say, under similar circumstances. MEH.
 
"Former governor Jeb Bush said Hillary Clinton would have approved the mission, too."

I won't vote for Jeb in the primaries, and I am hoping we have someone else to oppose HRC.

Jeb Bush I would have invaded Iraq US news The Guardian


I am not a Jeb supporter, but this misquotes him. He was asked if, based on the intel available when the Iraq invasion began, he would have done it. He accurately said that Hillary and almost everyone else bought the bad intel so yes, based on that intel he would have authorized it.

He was not asked if, knowing what we know today, would you have invaded? So I call bullshit on this thread.
Megyn Kelly specifically asked him "knowing what we know today " The Five were spinning afterwards trying to help him suggesting that maybe he didn't understand the question and / or he made a mistake.

lol, yes, the right immediately latched onto the talking point that Jeb didn't understand the question. The GOP lady that Chris Matthews had on said Jeb didn't 'process' the question correctly...

...just more admissions from rightwingers that they know Iraq was a mistake.


Hey dude, everyone agrees that Iraq was a mistake and a waste of lives and money. BUT BOTH PARTIES AUTHORIZED, FUNDED, AND SUPPORTED IT. BUSH DID NOT, AND COULD NOT, DO IT ON HIS OWN. THEY ALL HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

if you libtards would deal with those facts and stop the partisan bullshit, we might be able to move forward.

You can't put blood on the hands of the 147 Democrats who voted against it.
 
"Former governor Jeb Bush said Hillary Clinton would have approved the mission, too."

I won't vote for Jeb in the primaries, and I am hoping we have someone else to oppose HRC.

Jeb Bush I would have invaded Iraq US news The Guardian


I am not a Jeb supporter, but this misquotes him. He was asked if, based on the intel available when the Iraq invasion began, he would have done it. He accurately said that Hillary and almost everyone else bought the bad intel so yes, based on that intel he would have authorized it.

He was not asked if, knowing what we know today, would you have invaded? So I call bullshit on this thread.
Megyn Kelly specifically asked him "knowing what we know today " The Five were spinning afterwards trying to help him suggesting that maybe he didn't understand the question and / or he made a mistake.

lol, yes, the right immediately latched onto the talking point that Jeb didn't understand the question. The GOP lady that Chris Matthews had on said Jeb didn't 'process' the question correctly...

...just more admissions from rightwingers that they know Iraq was a mistake.


Hey dude, everyone agrees that Iraq was a mistake and a waste of lives and money. BUT BOTH PARTIES AUTHORIZED, FUNDED, AND SUPPORTED IT. BUSH DID NOT, AND COULD NOT, DO IT ON HIS OWN. THEY ALL HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

if you libtards would deal with those facts and stop the partisan bullshit, we might be able to move forward.

You can't put blood on the hands of the 147 Democrats who voted against it.


Hillary Clinton voted for it. Why do you support that warmonger?
 
We have some seriously dumb shitheads on this forum.

They blame ISIS on Obama for abandoning Iraq too soon, and now they blame Obama for "rebooting the war" they didn't want ended!
That's why these people are evil bastards.
 
[

I voted for Perot twice. I now concede that breaking the 2 party hold on the system is a fantasy.

At one time creating a constitutional republic was considered a fantasy.

In 2000 I voted for Bush because he talked a really good conservative game. Besides, who in their right mind would vote for that idiot Gore?

By 2004 I realized Bush was nothing more than big government interventionist Liberal. However, I went the "lesser of two evils" route because who in their right mind would vote for that cowardly shithead Kerry?

That was the last time I will vote for the lesser of two evils or for any bad government.

I will not participate in electing anybody that will continue with the continuation of big government.

The Republicans are always a 1000 times better than the Democrats. That is a no brainier but the problem is that 1000 times zero is still zero. The difference is not much. The Republicans know how to stimulate capitalism better and that usually produces a better economy but in the long run the advances are ate up by the growth of government and the debt continues to grow.

Jeb Bush will be a better President than that lying scumbag Clinton. Another no brainier. He was a competent governor of Florida. Thank goodness he was in charge of the state during the 2004 hurricane season or else we would have screwed like Democrat control Louisiana when the four hurricanes hit. However, just being better than any Democrat is not good enough. He will continue to grow the filthy ass government, debt will increase, Obamcare will not be repealed, the borders will not be sealed and we will continue with an interventionist foreign policy.

No more voting for bad government for me.
 
[

I voted for Perot twice. I now concede that breaking the 2 party hold on the system is a fantasy.

At one time creating a constitutional republic was considered a fantasy.

In 2000 I voted for Bush because he talked a really good conservative game. Besides, who in their right mind would vote for that idiot Gore?

By 2004 I realized Bush was nothing more than big government interventionist Liberal. However, I went the "lesser of two evils" route because who in their right mind would vote for that cowardly shithead Kerry?

That was the last time I will vote for the lesser of two evils or for any bad government.

I will not participate in electing anybody that will continue with the continuation of big government.

The Republicans are always a 1000 times better than the Democrats. That is a no brainier but the problem is that 1000 times zero is still zero. The difference is not much. The Republicans know how to stimulate capitalism better and that usually produces a better economy but in the long run the advances are ate up by the growth of government and the debt continues to grow.

Jeb Bush will be a better President than that lying scumbag Clinton. Another no brainier. He was a competent governor of Florida. Thank goodness he was in charge of the state during the 2004 hurricane season or else we would have screwed like Democrat control Louisiana when the four hurricanes hit. However, just being better than any Democrat is not good enough. He will continue to grow the filthy ass government, debt will increase, Obamcare will not be repealed, the borders will not be sealed and we will continue with an interventionist foreign policy.

No more voting for bad government for me.


who will you vote for then? will voting 3rd party help the greater of two evils? I agree with much of what you say, but I will not help elect HRC in any way. I will vote against her by voting for someone who can beat her in the general election.
 
If Jeb says otherwise, he condemns his brother's actions.

If George were my brother, I would support him publicly, while berating him in private for his poor judgment or his weakness in allowing others to steer him into a war with a phony-baloney casus belli.

Personally, my priorities are (1) God, (2) Family, (3) Country, (4) Friends, then (5) Everybody Else, in that order.

I suspect that a great many other folks have similar priorities, on both sides of the political aisle.

If it came down to destroying my brother or destroying my country, I would like to think that I would embrace the brother and then save the country, and then weep afterwards...

Meaning that I would sacrifice a family member for the good of my country when the lives of 1 versus 330,000,000 were at-issue, but, for anything short of a mortal danger to each, requiring such a decision, I would generally tend to side with the brother, in all things of a lesser nature.

As would most of us, I dare say.

Afghanistan was a Righteous War (if there can ever be said that such a thing exists), but we should have been in-and-out of there in six months. We should have slaughtered OBL and his minions in Tora Bora and in the mountain passes leading into Pakistan, and then walked away; leaving them to massacre each other in their shit-hole country; something of a national pastime that they've been enjoying there for thousands of years.

Iraq was not a Righteous War - the casus bellli was a grotesque and obvious fabrication - and, even if we did go in without just cause, we should have been in-and-out of there in six months as well. We should have butchered Saddam and his Neanderthal male spawn-miscreants - leaving them, too, to slaughter each other as we walked away; another shit-hole where slaughtering each other has been a regional pastime for thousands of years.

But, other than the fact that I want Shrub and his Handlers to face hard scrutiny and censure from the American People themselves, for foolishly making war in Iraq when none was necessary...

I cannot and will not fault a brother, for refusing to betray one of his own.

Nobody with even half a brain ever really expected him to, by the way.

Had he betrayed his brother, then he TRULY would NOT have deserved his shot at the title... anyone who would throw a brother under the bus is not to be trusted.

Standing by his brother (in the face of popular sentiment against that brother and his handling of the Iraq War) demonstrates considerable personal courage, and dedication to family, in the face of an impossibly difficult range of circumstances and sentiments.

It is doubly pleasing when such a resolute standing alongside a brother is done in such a way that it does not betray the country aligned in opposition to the brother's actions, nor does it betray the memory of the sacrifice made by the men and women who fought that misguided war.

Ol' Jeb may or may not be a good choice for President - hell, I haven't really even looked at him closely yet - but he passes the Personal Courage and Dedication to Family tests.

Thanks for highlighting that intriguing and tastefully-done demonstration of family solidarity.

You've made me want to take a closer and more favorable look at him now.

Well done.
Would you respect a man that "stood by" his child rapist or murderer brother ad well?

At face value your post rings true, but when you consider the facts, it falls apart.
 
[


Hillary Clinton voted for it. Why do you support that warmonger?

Can I answer that for him?

The answer is that he really doesn't care about interventionism and war mongering.

He also doesn't hold the Democrats accountable for the things he criticizes the Republicans for doing.

The word for that is hypocrisy.

He likes the socialism of the Democrat Party so he gives them a pass on everything including war mongering, incompetency, dishonesty and corruption.

His welfare check is more important to him than intellectual or moral honesty.

He is one of the stupid Americans Jonathan Gruber told us about.
 
snake snarkey is a dem/lib plant, he is not, never was, or never will be, a republican. What he is is a liar.
What an excellent projection, son. You are a far right reactionary non-GOP pretending you are mainstream. You are a liar.
 
Gipper is a filthy libertarian, so his opinion is immaterial.
 

Forum List

Back
Top