What We Know Now

By Ed Hoffman

“Knowing what we know now, would you have invaded Iraq?”

That question was asked of Jeb Bush in a TV interview in May, and again at the first Republican primary debate on August 6. Given that the moderators know there are always first-time debate viewers watching, the question will likely be asked of him again…and again…and again. So I want to make two points about this: First, that question really isn’t fair. Second, Jeb Bush’s answer was weak – and that’s putting it nicely.

Let’s cut to the chase: Depending on who it’s being asked by, the “knowing what we know now” question is usually designed to reveal whether the candidate is willing to admit that shortcomings in the George W. Bush administration led to the deaths of thousands of American soldiers. But that’s just one reason why it’s not a fair question.

Where Jeb Bush is concerned, the question is also designed to determine whether he is truly “his own man” as he claims, as opposed to being a replica of his brother (as Democrats would love for voters to believe). Remember: Everyone is supposed to want him to say no, because everyone is supposed to believe the war was unjustified. To start the question with “knowing what we know now” implies that we now know there were no weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) present, and therefore the war was totally unsubstantiated.

But guess what? WMDs were found buried all over Iraq just last year. They were there all along. That information isn’t coming from some agenized source; it’s coming from the New York Times in October 2014. The Times also reported that many WMDs were moved out of Iraq into Syria in 2003, right around the time of the invasion. So for Jeb Bush to say that he would not have invaded Iraq because of “faulty intelligence and not having security be the first priority” is pretty egregious. As it turns out, the intelligence was not faulty – and what exactly does he mean by security not being our “first priority?”

Furthermore, as I pointed out on my radio show last week, WMDs were not the only reason we invaded Iraq. President Bush made that clear in his address to the nation on March 22, 2003 when he said, “And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.” What we knew then and know now is that Hussein, in addition to using chemical weapons on his own people, was taking in the terrorists that we were attempting to take out. WMDs may have been what sold Congress on the invasion, but President Bush was honest with the American people from the start about our reasons for going in. We may not have known where Osama Bin Laden was at that time, but we did know that Saddam Hussein was patching up some other terrorists after we tried to wipe them out – and as Bush told the United Nations in September 2004, “There is no distinction between the terrorists and the countries that harbor them.” Three years prior, just days after September 11, 2001, Bush told the nation: “Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists and every government that supports them. Our war on terror begins with Al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.” All along, the President made it clear this war was about much more than WMDs.

Asking candidates whether they would invade Iraq “knowing what we know now” is clearly a litmus test to see if the candidate is willing to state that George W. Bush was wrong, whether he really believes it or not. If Jeb Bush is so desperate to win over voters who don’t like his brother that he’s willing to pretend the WMDs never existed, then he’s not getting my vote. I want a President with a spine.

Ed Hoffman is host of The Main Event on AM590, which airs Saturday 9:30 AM- 10:30 AM and Sunday 4:00 PM- 5:00 PM. Follow him on Twitter @EdHoffman, and like him on Facebook by searching The Main Event 590.