It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
After days of refusing to say whether, with the benefit of hindsight, he would have ordered the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Jeb Bush relented Thursday and said he would not have invaded.
"If we're all supposed to answer hypothetical questions, knowing what we know now, what would you have done?" Bush said with a twinge of annoyance while campaigning in Arizona. "I would have not engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq."
originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
originally posted by: Southern Guardian
A change of heart? Or maybe a change in campaign strategy?
You do realize you are talking about a member of the Bush dynasty, don't you? I think the word you are looking for is "lie."
originally posted by: beezzer
Basically, this stemmed from Megyn Kelly asking Jeb if he could see into the future, would he do anything different.
But none of us can see into the future.
Ms. Kelly might have well just asked, if he had super powers, what would he do to change the world!
originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: beezzer
Would you be bothered if somebody said that presidential candidates didn't have to answer questions on other major issues like Health Care and the economy? Former Australian Prime Minster John Howard has addressed the issue of his support for the Iraq war in a better manner than Jeb Bush managed to do.
Now he did say knowing what we know now so really, he's being careful with the wording.