Scott Walker Also Says He Wouldn’t Authorize Iraq Invasion With Today’s Intel

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker speaks at the Iowa Faith & Freedom 15th Annual Spring Kick Off, in Waukee, Iowa, Saturday, April 25, 2015. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) joined the pile-on of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) on the Iraq War and said he would not have authorized an invasion with the information available today.

Walker, in a statement passed to TPM by his political team, did however say that any president would have done what then-President George W. Bush did. Here’s the statement:

Any president would have likely taken the same action Bush did with the information he had, even Hillary Clinton voted for it, but knowing what we know now, we should not have gone into Iraq. President Bush deserves enormous credit for ordering the surge, a courageous move that worked. Unfortunately, President Obama and Secretary Clinton hastily withdrew our troops, threw away the gains of the surge, and embarked on a broader policy of pivoting away from the Middle East and leading from behind that has created chaos in the region.

The statement was first reported by Jennifer Rubin’s Right Turn blog.

A day earlier, Bush said given what we know now, he would not have authorized an invasion of Iraq. That comment was a 180-degree stark turn from Monday when Bush said he would have authorized an invasion.

Other likely and declared candidates all said they would not have authorized an invasion. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who’s declared his bid for the White House, said that he would not have gone into Iraq with the information available now, and that President George W. Bush wouldn’t have, either.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. yet they would have gone to war with the false intel .if there 's a buck to be made and force their ideology onto others … there sure as hell gonna do it be it here or overseas

  2. Walker’s handlers at least have him on a leash. Notice that they wait until everybody else has weighed in on this, including the right wing media, and then he issues a statement.

    Which of course is aimed, not at any republican, including Jeb, but at Hillary and Obama, as if it was all their fault.

    Complete BS, of course, but that is the correct response. It sets him up as the front runner; he doesn’t have to take shots at the lessers in the race with him, he focuses on his eventual competitor in the general instead. Its the sort of “bridge the schisms-everyone can rally behind Scott” type of statement that the RNC is looking for.

  3. Avatar for clk clk says:

    Somehow this whole hashing over Iraq seems a sideshow when Netanyahoo has so much influence with the GOPTP, they are bound and determined to undermine any Iran agreements which tells me they would go to war with Iran and against the Palestinians right after the inaugural speech in exchange for Adelson’s money and support, the Koch brothers money and support, the military industries money and support to get themselves elected.

    The entire Iraq question keeps the talk away from the theocracy talk, deportation of immigrants, and budgetary sabotage greater than we have seen yet.

    Our media continue to be pipers leading lemmings over the brink.

  4. I like this trend of asking the GOP candidates questions about what they would have done “knowing what we know now” about other Bush debacles. For instance:

    “Gov. Walker, Sen Cruz, Sen Rubio, etc., Knowing what we know now, would you have worked to undermine and undercut FEMA and place an Arabian horse fancier, Michael Brown in charge of it?”

    http://www.southernstudies.org/2005/09/how-bush-dismantled-fema.html

    “Gov. Walker, Sen Cruz, Sen Rubio, etc., Knowing what we know now, would you, like George Bush have supported unfunded and catastrophic tax cuts and refunds?”

    “Gov. Walker, Sen Cruz, Sen Rubio, etc., Knowing what we know now, would you have supported the deregulation and coddling of the financial industry prior to the 2008 financial catastophe?”

    The list goes on…

  5. It is not so much as in hindsight but rather in foresight that the Iraq war was a mistake. I mean even if the intelligence had been correct and Saddam had chemical weapons, weapons based on WW1 technology and obsolete by WW2, other than terrorists now having those weapons, the war would still have been a disaster for America.

    To begin with I think the intelligence was right. “It is inconceivable we invaded Iraq over suspected WMDs and then failed to secure any suspected WMD site upon taking over the country.” Former Bush chief weapons inspector David Kay.

    That is we know from Bush’s actions, securing ONLY the Oil Ministry and the oil fields why Bush invaded Iraq. But even if Bush had invaded over WMDs defined to include chemical weapons which we all thought Saddam had, the war would still have been a disaster.

    Pat Buchannon called those of us opposed to the Iraq War from the beginning as “the Coalition of the Intelligent”. Not having as high opinion of myself I call those of us opposed to the war from the beginning as “the Coalition of the not really dumb”.

    That regardless of WMDs or no WMDs, America was never prepared to pay the cost for a successful war. For the war to have been successful Bush would have needed at least 300,000 troops to occupy Iraq for 10 years (can you say DRAFT) and $1,000,000,000,000.00 in rebuilding/infrastructure Marshall type plan (can you say TAX INCREASE) as America did in Germany, Japan et al after WW2.

    The fact is America was never going to pay the price for the Iraq War to be anything other than the disaster it is today WMDs or no WMDs. When this became clear to even the hardest supporters of the war, Bush and the GOP chose to shed even more blood and other treasures to delay the full extent of the disaster until Bush was out of office and others could be blamed. Something else we all predicted Bush would do before the war began.

    The problem is that the mainstream media which ignored, insulted and otherwise marginalized those of us who understood the challange of Iraq and instead beat the drums of war for Bush over the lie of WMDs is now looking to excuse its own part in this disaster by saying if only we had known there were no WMDs we would not have invaded. But the fact is even had there been WMDs we should still not have invaded and Bush and the media are guilty of misleading America into this disater by lying and helping Bush lie about the cost of the war.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

26 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for clk Avatar for littlegirlblue Avatar for ncsteve Avatar for opinionated1 Avatar for trnc Avatar for cwazycajun Avatar for ralph_novy Avatar for wwss Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for grandpoobah Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for johnrm Avatar for justamarine Avatar for ottnott Avatar for amandacorliss Avatar for pmb28 Avatar for exspectator Avatar for dangoodbar Avatar for bd2999 Avatar for darrtown Avatar for mainemomma Avatar for bankerpup

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: