Former President George W. Bush has been known for making mistakes while giving speeches and he has always taken criticism lightly. But after a recent speech at the George W. Bush Institue where he said Iraq in place of Ukraine, his words are under far more scrutiny.

Subscribe to The Byron York Show in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

Published in: General

There are 6 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Leslie Watkins Member
    Leslie Watkins
    @LeslieWatkins

    It doesn’t sound to me like George Bush continues to be bothered by his decision to invade Iraq. It sounds to me like he overtly regrets it. “Heh, Iraq too,” he said, mostly under his breath and with a clear nod to self-acknowledgment. I found it difficult listening to him (as I always did, though I supported the invasion but not at all because of WMDs). Hearing that made me shake my head and ask him through the video screen, What on earth are you doing talking about any of this stuff given what you just said? What the hell are you doing? Wise-cracking. Calling Zelensky a “cool little guy” with whom you “Zoomed the other day” (taking what reeked of a page from the Obama playbook). I for one won’t be sorry at all if the end of the Bush dynasty is indeed at hand, given the recent primary loss of George P. Bush in Texas. Salud y adios.

    • #1
  2. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Such an excellent analysis. Gaffe of the Century came to my mind upon learning of this.

    It absolutely undermined his intended message of planting a very real and recent counterfactual – or parallel example into an apt comparison. It was paradoxically cringeworthy – a reflection of a reflection level

    Now everyone is forced to compare the two invasions by ‘dictators’, and are confounded into synesthesia. 

    Bush was operating from his briefings. Who briefed him? Intelligence. But they cannot be at fault – in fact, not even mentioned?

    When was the Bush family not friendly and connected to Intelligence? 

    The setup to the gaffe was very interesting. Propaganda aggrandizing and humanizing Zelinsky as the little guy who heroically leads us, Churchill-like against an invading tyrant.

    So it’s also a contest of personalities, never mind the nature or origins of the actual dispute. Cartoon politics. It’s Marvel Comics.

    This is the smudged rubber-stamp from neo-cons that they are behind the proxy-war effort.

    Of course.

    They are really itching for a fight.

    • #2
  3. Dr.Guido Member
    Dr.Guido
    @DrGuido

    My imagination is not THAT good….I recall distinctly a NY Times piece that said US troops had discovered what had been a WMD storage site due to the radioactivity they were measuring.

    never saw a retraction. That, plus the myriad observations that spoke of WMD’s being trucked OUT of the country PLUS the many Iraqi generals who thought that Saddam was not misinforming them when he told them there were, in fact, WMDs!

    This after the fact self-flagellation by SO many is frankly annoying and difficult to understand.

    • #3
  4. Leslie Watkins Member
    Leslie Watkins
    @LeslieWatkins

    Dr.Guido (View Comment):

    My imagination is not THAT good….I recall distinctly a NY Times piece that said US troops had discovered what had been a WMD storage site due to the radioactivity they were measuring.

    I never saw a retraction. That, plus the myriad observations that spoke of WMD’s being trucked OUT of the country PLUS the many Iraqi generals who thought that Saddam was not misinforming them when he told them there were, in fact, WMDs!

    This after the fact self-flagellation by SO many is frankly annoying and difficult to understand.

    Yes, the force is weak with this one.

    • #4
  5. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    The guy who cares about “invasions” is mum on the invasion across our borders. Granted, one is a military invasion, the other is a demographic invasion. But it’s become obvious that Bush and everyone who chuckled at his faux pas, care more about policing internationally than they do with their own nation, which also has borders.

     

     Bush, Cheney, Chertoff, Bolton et al, claim to care about our nations’ security. However when juxtaposed by their actions on our weakest security flank, our border with Mexico, they have paid little to no attention. Most of the people flowing into our country are nice and kind and innocent. That’s correct. And it’s good cheap labor for their corporate donors. However, some of these border-crossers are gang members, fleeing criminals. 10% 20% ? Doesn’t matter. Do they let 10% of us at airports board our planes to another country without showing ID? We get to avoid the scanner? 

    Any terrorist smart and committed enough to take flight lessons, board a plane, kill people and then cause great death and destruction, might figure out he can get in through our southern border.

    So are these people really that committed to security? Are they stupid enough not understand that a security perimeter must be in place?

    That’s why the biggest fraud here is the neocon cabal led by Bushies. 

     

    • #5
  6. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    Leslie Watkins (View Comment):

    Dr.Guido (View Comment):

    My imagination is not THAT good….I recall distinctly a NY Times piece that said US troops had discovered what had been a WMD storage site due to the radioactivity they were measuring.

    I never saw a retraction. That, plus the myriad observations that spoke of WMD’s being trucked OUT of the country PLUS the many Iraqi generals who thought that Saddam was not misinforming them when he told them there were, in fact, WMDs!

    This after the fact self-flagellation by SO many is frankly annoying and difficult to understand.

    Yes, the force is weak with this one.

    According to the New York Times, the Allies found around 5000 old poison gas  artillery shells in Iraq.  “No WMDs in Iraq” was never literally true.

    However, this was probably a lower bound.  My understanding is, whenever such a shell was found in an Iraqi munitions dump, the Allies immediately stopped counting, backed off, and entombed everything in concrete.

    But George W. Bush refused to defend his decision to invade Iraq.*. After 2004, his attitude was apparently that he didn’t have to stand election again, so he didn’t care how unpopular he got — and the Republican Party could go hang.

    Which it proceeded to do:  the 2008 Senate election brought the Democrats to within one vote of a filibuster proof majority; and the defection of Arlen Specter did give them 60 votes for most of a year, just long enough to pass Obamacare.

    I don’t know if Bush Jr. really minded. In retrospect, his Presidency looks like the last gasp of the Northeastern liberal Republican establishment, dressed in Texan clothing.

    *I remember Republican Senators’ jaws dropping when, during a routine military briefing, a General let slip that the Allies had, up to that point, found 500 WMD shells.  Why wasn’t the Bush Administration letting people know, the Senators asked.

    • #6
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.