Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Friday, October 28, 2016


Jeb Bush is off to a heckuva start in the presidential race, answering a question about how he would’ve handled his brother George W. Bush’s most notorious decision as president: The Iraq War.

Click above to watch Jeb’s answer on what he would’ve done differently — or maybe done the same — if he’d known everything we know now. Then share this video!

Video via Fox News .

Get More to Endorse Delivered to Your Inbox

[sailthru_widget fields=”email,ZipCode” sailthru_list=”Endorse This Sign Up”] Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 The National Memo
  • FT66

    Whats wrong with Jeb Bush? Is he OK? He mentioned earlier (few months ago) that he is his own man, which indicated he can’t act neither like his Father nor his Brother “W”. Now he is saying he could do the same in going to Iraq!!!! Republicans, quickly trash this man. He is a HUGE liability to your Party. You can’t win with a person of double talk like Jeb.

    • Theodora30

      He said that then turned around and appointed his brothers’ foreign policy advisers and a few of his dad’s for good measure. this is not posturing. Jeb was a founder of PNAC and signed their manifesto which George did not.

      • Theodora30

        Sorry about the double post but this one did not show up.

    • Theodora30

      After Jeb declared he was his own man he turned around and recruited his brother’s people (Wolfowitz for example) to be his foreign policy advisers then there in a few of his dad’s for good measure. Jeb was a neocon before 9-11. He was a founder of PNAC along with Cheney, Gaffney, Wolfie and a host of others who brought us the war with Iraq.

  • Steve Tierney

    Giving W the authorization to invade is not the same as deciding to invade. The idea was that by giving W authorization Sadam would be more compliant with inspections. That worked. He did become more compliant. W brought the inspectors out and invaded anyway. Don’t tar everyone who thought he would be rational with the brush of being complicit with the decision. The administration orchestrated the intelligence and the propaganda then seeks to avoid blame for the catastrophe. So far Jeb has not shown he has risen above the very low bar of being the smarter brother.

    • FT66

      Unfortunately, there in no a smarter “Bush”. They are all the same. I watched a bit of an interview which will be aired tonight with Fox. This man Jeb is not clever at all. He said he will dismantle the Ex. Order on Immigration which was announced by Pres. Obama. For god’s sake, does he think this will sound good in Latino’s ears. Does he think so long he is married by a Mexican woman, he can speak a bit of their language, thats what will give him votes!!!. He might think again.

    • Theodora30

      Thank you for saying this. I am amazed that it is rarely pointed out that this was a vote to use force as s last resort – if inspections failed, which they did not. Hillary’s speech explaining her vote for authorizing the use of force made it crystal clear that she did this to pressure Saddam into allowing unlimited inspections.
      “While there is no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma, and while people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposed conclusions, I believe the best course is to go to the UN for a strong resolution that scraps the 1998 restrictions on inspections and calls for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded from Iraq. ”

      Had the resolution been voted down Saddam would have had no reason to cooperate with inspections. Yes some Democrats voted against it but I bet most of them did it for political reasons knowing enough Dems would vote yes. As much as I despised Bush I was shocked that he did not act in good faith, allowing the inspections to be completed, but rushed to war instead.

      • Dominick Vila

        “Rushing to war” is too benign to describe what W did. The destruction of Saddam’s WMDs (chemical and biological weapons provided to him during the Iraq-Iran war) was carried out in 1998.
        “During the lead-up to war in 2003, United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix
        said that Iraq made significant progress toward resolving open issues
        of disarmament noting “proactive” but not always “immediate”
        cooperation as called for in UN Security Council Resolution 1441. He concluded that it would take “but months” to resolve the key remaining disarmament tasks.
        The United States asserted this was a breach of Resolution 1441, but
        failed to convince the UN Security Council to pass a new resolution
        authorizing the use of force due to lack of evidence.”
        This, and the slaughter and destruction that followed, are the reasons George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are considered war criminals and would be arrested, charged with crimes against humanity, and spend the rest of their lives in prison if found guilty. Or more likely, until we rescue them and bring them home.

        • Theodora30

          No argument with that.

    • RobertCHastings

      Hussein FULLY complied with the requests for a COMPLETE listing of ALL WMD sites and stashes as well as nuclear capability, turning a full accounting into the IAEA, proving the within only a year or two after Desert Storm any capability he had to make war had been greatly degraded. While Bush, et al, identified over 600 sites within Iraq that contained WMD, NONE of these sites received any attention for weeks AFTER the invasion, leaving whatever weapons there WERE at these sites open to whoever wanted to steal them. IF the suspected weapons were indeed at these sites, would not the US military have moved FIRST to protect them, securing these weapons against use against American troops?

  • Don Belanger

    They were planning to invade Iraq long before “intelligence” on weapons of mass destruction. BTW, there was an interesting article that came out in Vanity Fair, within about a year after we went to war there—It was quite a piece showing how everytime our own intelligence agencies couldn’t find a “smoking gun” in Saddam’s arsenal, George W., Dicky Cheney and little “Leezy” Rice kept sending the intelligence reports back to the CIA et al, TELLING them to find something to justify a war. Yes the intelligence was flawed—the intelligence was lacking in the White House and the intelligence was faulty in the American voter for bringing this band of war criminals into the White House.

  • 1standlastword

    The intelligence was cooked just like your goose biatch!!

  • insbuysrv

    The intelligence was “cooked” specifically to justify invasion when in fact there were no weapons of mass destruction. Hillary has said if she knew then what she knows now she would not have voted to give the president authority to invade Iraq. The fact that Jeb still endorses our invasion of a sovereign nation that had not attacked or threatened us demonstrates his imperial aspiration for America. He is a neocon just like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearle et al.

  • Dominick Vila

    The invasion of Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with good or bad intelligence. The real reasons include the need to project the illusion that W, the President that was too busy chopping wood and reading primers, to waste his time attending the daily national security briefings, was avenging 9/11, and at the same time create an environment conducive to the largest redistribution of wealth from the public to the private sector in history. To achieve those goals, Saddam Hussein, the man that enjoyed the unconditional support of President Reagan during the Iran-Iraq war, and who received, among other things, WMDs to defeat the Iranians, was transformed into a two-headed monster, and a threat to humanity. Those who dared challenge the claims made by W about WMDs, nuclear capabilities, and claims of a huge threat to Western civilization, such as Ambassador Wilson and the Dixie Chicks, payed dearly for their audacity. Regarding “intelligence”, let’s not forget what happened when the CIA suggested removing claims of nuclear capabilities from one of W’s SOTU addresses. The statement was temporarily removed. Cheney put it back in. The CIA was ignored. Colin Powell was sent to the UN to deliver an embarrassing tirade about Saddam’s nuclear weapons, including images of storage sites and the trucks that were being used to transport them. The entire U.S. government – and the American people – were deceived and embarrassed. Incredibly, there are still some, not many, who continue to defend one of the most embarrassing episodes in U.S. history. That is, if we ignore what happened after the invasion, and after Saddam was deposed, when Sunny Baathists were removed from government positions and replaced with Shias aligned to Iran, a move that de-stabilized the Persian Gulf, and paved the way for the emergence of ISIS. Yes, there were serious intelligence gaps, most of them between W’s ears. The worst part, however, was Cheney’s deceitful, greedy, and cowardly tactics.

    • RobertCHastings

      While I fully agree with on this issue regarding the “cooked” intel regarding WMD in Iraq, W was not the FIRST US president to provide the American public with knowingly false intelligence. Johnson’s Tonkin Gulf Resolution, Reagan’s complicity in the Iran/Contra scandal, the sinking of the “Maine”, (to name but a few instances) were all surrounded by lies and STILL shrouded in secrecy.

      • Dominick Vila

        …the Pueblo incident was another one. Yes, we have used deceit and fear, repeatedly, to pursue our geo-political goals. W’s was just the most recent.

  • Sean Maguire

    When it comes to the Iraq situation, it seems like the best alternative is to let it split up into three different countries.