Jeb Bush Won't Talk About Wars His Brother Started

[hadit]

Hillary voted for the war.

False. You can repeat it over and over and it still doesn't make it true.

She voted to authorize the use of force. You can rant until you're blue in the face that she didn't and it still doesn't make it true. She has more to answer for about the war than Jeb does.

The Iraq war resolution dumped that thing right back in Bush's lap with the words "if the president thinks it necessary and appropriate. It was Bush's call, his decision, his baby as he thought necessary and appropriate.

That was Congress attempting to avoid being responsible for the use of force by not declaring war, but the bottom line remains, they knew EXACTLY what they were voting on, knew EXACTLY what a "Yea" vote meant, and had they NOT wanted to launch an attack on Iraq, would have voted "Nay". She has a LOT more to answer for re the Iraq war than Jeb.

 

[regent]

Hillary voted for the war.

False. You can repeat it over and over and it still doesn't make it true.

She voted to authorize the use of force. You can rant until you're blue in the face that she didn't and it still doesn't make it true. She has more to answer for about the war than Jeb does.

The Iraq war resolution dumped that thing right back in Bush's lap with the words "if the president thinks it necessary and appropriate. It was Bush's call, his decision, his baby as he thought necessary and appropriate.

That was Congress attempting to avoid being responsible for the use of force by not declaring war, but the bottom line remains, they knew EXACTLY what they were voting on, knew EXACTLY what a "Yea" vote meant, and had they NOT wanted to launch an attack on Iraq, would have voted "Nay". She has a LOT more to answer for re the Iraq war than Jeb.

Did the Congress have all the information the president had?
What would have happened if Bush did not invade Iraq; would he have been impeached, given bad marks, or what? The bottom line is Bush, with the war resolution in hand, did not have to invade Iraq, Some decisions go with just being a president. Nope, it was Bush's call and if the call had been right, Bush would be rated higher than fifth worst president.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

 

[regent]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

 

[regent]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

What difference... it would have never happened without congressional approval. You are insinuating that Bush acted unilaterally, he didn't. Matter of fact, he could not have.

 

[hadit]

Hillary voted for the war.

False. You can repeat it over and over and it still doesn't make it true.

She voted to authorize the use of force. You can rant until you're blue in the face that she didn't and it still doesn't make it true. She has more to answer for about the war than Jeb does.

The Iraq war resolution dumped that thing right back in Bush's lap with the words "if the president thinks it necessary and appropriate. It was Bush's call, his decision, his baby as he thought necessary and appropriate.

That was Congress attempting to avoid being responsible for the use of force by not declaring war, but the bottom line remains, they knew EXACTLY what they were voting on, knew EXACTLY what a "Yea" vote meant, and had they NOT wanted to launch an attack on Iraq, would have voted "Nay". She has a LOT more to answer for re the Iraq war than Jeb.

Did the Congress have all the information the president had?
What would have happened if Bush did not invade Iraq; would he have been impeached, given bad marks, or what? The bottom line is Bush, with the war resolution in hand, did not have to invade Iraq, Some decisions go with just being a president. Nope, it was Bush's call and if the call had been right, Bush would be rated higher than fifth worst president.

Congress certainly had access to a whole lot more info than you and I did, and a lot of them had access to it longer than Bush did. Try as you like to spin it otherwise, Bush received authorization from Congress to do what he did. They knew EXACTLY what he was going to do, and signed off on it. They could have stopped the whole thing cold if they wanted to, but didn't. You're not going to protect Congress from this. They had the opportunity to weigh in on the decision and granted their blessing. Asking Jeb about Iraq will go nowhere because the ones desiring his destruction don't want to open the door to Hillary getting asked the same questions. They have to protect her at all costs, even if it means letting Jeb go on this.

Besides, if we want to start asking candidates about what other people did and about their beliefs, let's start with a few of these:

Ask Catholic pro-abortion democrats how they can claim to be Catholic while thumbing theirs noses at the Church they claim to obey.

Ask all democrat candidates if they agree with Obama that Fort Hood was "workplace violence".

Ask all democrat candidates if they agree with the OA that ISIS can be defanged if we just make sure they have jobs.

Ask all democrat candidates if they agree that Obama could sit in Wright's church for years and never hear him slam America or white people.

Ask Hillary if she really led the squelching of the "bimbo eruptions" and how she can square that with her claim to champion womens' right and dignity.

Ask Hillary if it was okay for Bubba's sycophants to denigrate his accusers as "trailer trash" and how she can square that with her claim to champion womens' right and dignity. Remember, she never ONCE came out and asked that they be treated with dignity.

Ask all democrat candidates if it's okay for environmental wackos like Algore to fly around the world in carbon belching airplanes and ride around in massive, low gas mileage cars while whining about CO2 emissions.

See how this works?

 

[timslash]

Of course he don't wanna speak about these wars! Because he's running and "great deeds" of his brothers will not be very useful for Jeb. It's like situation with Clinton and her brother who likes teenage prostitutes, i'm sure that it will be NOT honest elections, but they at least will be very funny!

 

[hadit]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

Congress, knowing that a "Yea" vote meant we were going to attack Iraq, signed off on the deal. You can't separate them from this, because they have responsibility for it too.

 

[regent]

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration."

Too bad.

Such questions are perfectly appropriate and legitimate to ask of a presidential candidate, particularly given the fact the candidate's brother started two failed, illegal wars as president.

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

Congress, knowing that a "Yea" vote meant we were going to attack Iraq, signed off on the deal. You can't separate them from this, because they have responsibility for it too.

The resolutions clearly put the response in Bush's hands, as he believed "necessary and appropriate." Suppose Bush decided that it was only necessary and appropriate to warn Iraq, what would the Congress have done? Would the Congress have ordered Bush to invade?

 

[hadit]

Sure, as long as the discussion involves the fact that without the approval of a Democrat Congress, the war would have never been... the Dems were beating that war drum back as far as the nineties... and they got it. Deal with it.

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

Congress, knowing that a "Yea" vote meant we were going to attack Iraq, signed off on the deal. You can't separate them from this, because they have responsibility for it too.

The resolutions clearly put the response in Bush's hands, as he believed "necessary and appropriate." Suppose Bush decided that it was only necessary and appropriate to warn Iraq, what would the Congress have done? Would the Congress have ordered Bush to invade?

You're playing in hypotheticals. I challenge you to find one democrat who will honestly say they did NOT think the vote for the use of force meant the actual use of force. No, they knew going in what it meant, and chose to vote accordingly. Thus, if Jeb is going to be questioned on this, Hillary has a LOT more to answer for (she voted for it, just in case anyone is pretending she didn't).

 

[regent]

Beating a war drum is different than a president ordering an invasion. It was Bush's decision. We beat the war drums for over sixty years with the USSR, but never invaded.
The war resolution did not say, "If you don't invade, Congress is gonna really be angry and make bad noises." Nope, it said if the president thought it necessary and appropriate. I guess Jeb was never aware of that periond of his brother's presidency.

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

Congress, knowing that a "Yea" vote meant we were going to attack Iraq, signed off on the deal. You can't separate them from this, because they have responsibility for it too.

The resolutions clearly put the response in Bush's hands, as he believed "necessary and appropriate." Suppose Bush decided that it was only necessary and appropriate to warn Iraq, what would the Congress have done? Would the Congress have ordered Bush to invade?

You're playing in hypotheticals. I challenge you to find one democrat who will honestly say they did NOT think the vote for the use of force meant the actual use of force. No, they knew going in what it meant, and chose to vote accordingly. Thus, if Jeb is going to be questioned on this, Hillary has a LOT more to answer for (she voted for it, just in case anyone is pretending she didn't).

The Congress put it in writing, "necessary and appropriate." Might read the resolution and in particular, Sec. 3, b.1.

 

[zeke]

You're playing in hypotheticals. I challenge you to find one democrat who will honestly say they did NOT think the vote for the use of force meant the actual use of force. No, they knew going in what it meant, and chose to vote accordingly. Thus, if Jeb is going to be questioned on this, Hillary has a LOT more to answer for (she voted for it, just in case anyone is pretending she didn't).

I take it that you agree that invading Iraq was a terrible idea and you want some blame sharing from the Democrats?

Do you think the Dems and 7 Repubs who voted against the Iraq resolution are smarter politicians than ALL the ones that voted for the war?

And I agree, Hillary will need to explain her piss poor vote. But it won't matter to me. If Hillary and Bush are my choices, I ain't voting.

 

[hadit]

Bush didn't order an invasion... the congress voted on it twice, thus authorizing it.

If Congress authorized it, who ordered it?

Congress, knowing that a "Yea" vote meant we were going to attack Iraq, signed off on the deal. You can't separate them from this, because they have responsibility for it too.

The resolutions clearly put the response in Bush's hands, as he believed "necessary and appropriate." Suppose Bush decided that it was only necessary and appropriate to warn Iraq, what would the Congress have done? Would the Congress have ordered Bush to invade?

You're playing in hypotheticals. I challenge you to find one democrat who will honestly say they did NOT think the vote for the use of force meant the actual use of force. No, they knew going in what it meant, and chose to vote accordingly. Thus, if Jeb is going to be questioned on this, Hillary has a LOT more to answer for (she voted for it, just in case anyone is pretending she didn't).

The Congress put it in writing, "necessary and appropriate." Might read the resolution and in particular, Sec. 3, b.1.

How does that in any way change the meaning of the vote? A "Nay" vote would have killed off the war before it started. Congress, and Hillary in particular, cannot duck responsibility for this.

 

[hadit]

You're playing in hypotheticals. I challenge you to find one democrat who will honestly say they did NOT think the vote for the use of force meant the actual use of force. No, they knew going in what it meant, and chose to vote accordingly. Thus, if Jeb is going to be questioned on this, Hillary has a LOT more to answer for (she voted for it, just in case anyone is pretending she didn't).

I take it that you agree that invading Iraq was a terrible idea and you want some blame sharing from the Democrats?

Do you think the Dems and 7 Repubs who voted against the Iraq resolution are smarter politicians than ALL the ones that voted for the war?

And I agree, Hillary will need to explain her piss poor vote. But it won't matter to me. If Hillary and Bush are my choices, I ain't voting.

I'm not opining on the wisdom of liberating Iraq. I'm point out that trying to use the war to smear Jeb is a fool's errand, because Hillary actually voted to authorize it while he had nothing to do with it.

 

[Disir]

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration.

"I won't talk about the past," Bush said at a Friday press conference when asked how he would have handled the conflicts differently, according to The Washington Post. "I'll talk about the future. If I'm in the process of considering the possibility of running, it's not about re-litigating anything in the past. It's about trying to create a set of ideas and principles that will help us move forward."

The governor, who is almost certain to jump into the 2016 race, said that instead he would focus on a positive vision for the country that revolved around the future. He will elaborate on that vision when he delivers what his aides are describing as a major foreign policy address in Chicago next week.

It's unlikely Bush will be able to avoid the subject for long. Democrats are already pointing to his brother's legacy, which has left U.S. forces in the Middle East more than a decade after their initial deployment. Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars remain unpopular -- with a 2013 poll finding majorities that said the campaigns were not worth the tremendous sacrifice. Some Republicans, too, are likely to criticize Bush over the matter. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), another would-be presidential candidate with libertarian leanings, has spoken out against false pretenses used to justify the war.

More: Jeb Bush Won't Talk About Wars His Brother Started

"I won't talk about the past." Of course Jeb doesn't want to talk about the wars his brother started. Is he ashamed? However, if those wars had been popular - he wouldn't stop talking about them. Jeb has a rough row to hoe.

I'm not a Jeb Bush fan. At all. In fact, I lived in Florida when he was governor.
This is why I am not a Jeb Bush fan,

If the name of the game is "gotcha" in the line of questioning towards Jeb to drum up answers or excuses for his brother then it's going to backfire.

A lot has happened since then. That will come out as well.

It's going to be some really sad crap when the Democrats sink to that level of spin and Nancy Grace crap.

 

[zeke]

I'm not opining on the wisdom of liberating Iraq.

What was it we liberated Iraq from? A functioning way of life. Oh boy. Seems like the only ones think they were liberated is us invaders. Of course, what else can we say? That we destroyed their country for profit.

 

[hadit]

I'm not opining on the wisdom of liberating Iraq.

What was it we liberated Iraq from? A functioning way of life. Oh boy. Seems like the only ones think they were liberated is us invaders. Of course, what else can we say? That we destroyed their country for profit.

Well, that's what Hillary voted to authorize.

 

[Redfish]

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has no interest in "re-litigating" the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which began under his brother's administration.

"I won't talk about the past," Bush said at a Friday press conference when asked how he would have handled the conflicts differently, according to The Washington Post. "I'll talk about the future. If I'm in the process of considering the possibility of running, it's not about re-litigating anything in the past. It's about trying to create a set of ideas and principles that will help us move forward."

The governor, who is almost certain to jump into the 2016 race, said that instead he would focus on a positive vision for the country that revolved around the future. He will elaborate on that vision when he delivers what his aides are describing as a major foreign policy address in Chicago next week.

It's unlikely Bush will be able to avoid the subject for long. Democrats are already pointing to his brother's legacy, which has left U.S. forces in the Middle East more than a decade after their initial deployment. Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars remain unpopular -- with a 2013 poll finding majorities that said the campaigns were not worth the tremendous sacrifice. Some Republicans, too, are likely to criticize Bush over the matter. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), another would-be presidential candidate with libertarian leanings, has spoken out against false pretenses used to justify the war.

More: Jeb Bush Won't Talk About Wars His Brother Started

"I won't talk about the past." Of course Jeb doesn't want to talk about the wars his brother started. Is he ashamed? However, if those wars had been popular - he wouldn't stop talking about them. Jeb has a rough row to hoe.

Ok, lets get a couple things straight i.e. correct a couple of your lies.

The Iraq fiasco was authorized and funded by idiots in both parties, Bush did not, and could not, do it all on his own. No president could do that.

So when you say the "wars that his brother started" you are lying. The US congress and the UN started those stupid wasteful wars that obama has now managed to cause us to lose.