The answer to “Should we have invaded Iraq?” should be:
“If we’d known then that our … loyal opposition was going to surrender every last possible beneficial aspect directly to declared enemies, then the answer should be not only “No” but “Hell no.” You in the press were declaring Iraq a total success just a couple of years ago, but the pullout-party has been in charge of the military since then….”
As much as I agree with Rand’s article @ricochet, I have to say Al’s comment here is spot on as well.
“You in the press were declaring Iraq a total success just a couple of years ago,”
And the media was declaring it a failure 3 days in and kept doing so until Obama was elected. Now, we can’t even get the media to mention Afghanistan much less anything that has been going on there over the last 6 years.
The media has been so terrible that after ISIS invaded, people thought we still had soldiers in Iraq and didn’t realize the war was declared over years earlier.
There seems to be a pattern of the left getting the opponent they want and Jeb seems to fit the bill this time around.
With so many running (with perhaps more to come) perhaps we’ll accidentally get a good candidate they aren’t prepared for?
The “pattern” you mention can be laid at the door of the stupid party. There have been recent indications that, perhaps, they may be putting in the first team this time around. Of course, proof of the pudding ….
No candidate should ever be willing to answer a question prefaced with “Knowing what we know now.” The whole point of an executive is that he has to be able to make as prudent a decision as possible based on incomplete and conflicting information as it comes in.
“Knowing what we know now, Mr. Hitler, would you have kept the Panzers in reserve in anticipation of a landing at Calais, or would you have committed them to Normandy?”
The answer to “Should we have invaded Iraq?” should be:
“If we’d known then that our … loyal opposition was going to surrender every last possible beneficial aspect directly to declared enemies, then the answer should be not only “No” but “Hell no.” You in the press were declaring Iraq a total success just a couple of years ago, but the pullout-party has been in charge of the military since then….”
As much as I agree with Rand’s article @ricochet, I have to say Al’s comment here is spot on as well.
“You in the press were declaring Iraq a total success just a couple of years ago,”
And the media was declaring it a failure 3 days in and kept doing so until Obama was elected. Now, we can’t even get the media to mention Afghanistan much less anything that has been going on there over the last 6 years.
The media has been so terrible that after ISIS invaded, people thought we still had soldiers in Iraq and didn’t realize the war was declared over years earlier.
There seems to be a pattern of the left getting the opponent they want and Jeb seems to fit the bill this time around.
With so many running (with perhaps more to come) perhaps we’ll accidentally get a good candidate they aren’t prepared for?
The “pattern” you mention can be laid at the door of the stupid party. There have been recent indications that, perhaps, they may be putting in the first team this time around. Of course, proof of the pudding ….
No candidate should ever be willing to answer a question prefaced with “Knowing what we know now.” The whole point of an executive is that he has to be able to make as prudent a decision as possible based on incomplete and conflicting information as it comes in.
“Knowing what we know now, Mr. Hitler, would you have kept the Panzers in reserve in anticipation of a landing at Calais, or would you have committed them to Normandy?”
Uh….