...Consider Iraq. After each pounding from U.S . warplanes, Iraq has dusted itself off and gone right back to work developing a nuclear arsenal. Six years of tough talk and U.S. fireworks in Baghdad have done little to slow Iraq's crash program to become a nuclear power. They've got missiles capable of flying nine hundred kilometers-more than enough to reach Tel Aviv. They've got enriched uranium. All they need is the material for nuclear fission to complete the job, and, according to the Rumsfeld report, we don't even know for sure if they've laid their hands on that yet. That's what our last aerial assault on Iraq in 1999 was about. Saddam Hussein wouldn't let UN weapons inspectors examine certain sites where that material might be stored. The result when our bombing was over? We still don't know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I'm no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.
I was for the war before I was against it.
This is a real dilemma for Trump supporters. Since they believe in the leader principle (the idea that the leader is always right), they must now decide if he was right when he agreed with Bush, or is he right now that he’s assumed the Michael Moore/Cod Pink position. I know they’re a resilient bunch. I’ve seen them overcome major Trump-induced cognitive dissonance before. What they can do is begin by attacking Cincinatus’ Wife, then THE GUARDIAN, the RINOS, GOPe, Google for maintaining previous Trump statements, and anyone else with a living memory of Trump positions that contradict his now infallible positions.
Glad you went to all the trouble, but I’m still voting for Trump. :-D
Donald should never have brought up the Iraq war or blamed Bush. That was a mistake.
Using four letter words is a mistake also.
The author fails to note this “I guess” statement was made on the first anniversary of 9/11 weeks before the Iraq Resolution was introduced to Congress on October 2, 2002. Before any Congessional deliberations. 6 months before the invasion. Trump offered short but lengthier comments in January 2003 showing skepticism that the invasion would be a good idea and suggested Bush focus on the economy instead.
Tag line.
During Thursday's town hall, just five days later, he backtracked, saying:"There are a lot of people that think that. Bottom line is there were no weapons of mass destruction."
Take your pick Trumpsters and Trumpettes. Was Trump lying about George Bush at the debate or five days later? I'm betting it was at the debate but I could be wrong. It could have been yesterday.
Yep, once Bush and Cruz got us in the Iraq war, Trump supported the troops. Mr. Trump tried to warn them ahead of time of the long term consequences, but the politicians needed to distract from their failures.
I don’t intend to defend Trump here, but we could have gone after their weapons without doing an all-out war. I supported the Iraq war because Bush did and I trusted him. He was trustworthy but looking back the all-out war seems to have been a mistake.
Oh, right, he gets to use nothing but hind sight which is based on facts and results that happened well after the event turned South.
Wrong Iraq war, you GOPe morons. Trump is talking about the first Gulf War.