As some in the traditional media have a field day tormenting would-be Republican presidents with the hypothetical "if you knew then what you know now" on Iraq, the large universe of us who knew better then are
getting increasingly frustrated with the fact that they continue to let the Bush administration—and themselves—off the hook for being complicit in the lies that took the nation to war.
"I was amazed, absolutely amazed at how people were supporting going to war on the basis of things that just weren’t so," said former Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), one of a handful of members who opposed the invasion. "It was clear as it could be. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. None of the intel suggested they had anything to do with 9/11 and the whole rationale for WMD [weapons of mass destruction] was just very, very thin for anybody who read the intelligence reports." As for the 2016 candidates' comments, he said: "It is just a rewriting of history in an attempt for everybody to cover their extraordinary mistake; probably one of the most serious mistakes in the military and diplomatic history of the United States, and they were all complicit." […]
The more interesting question, war skeptics said, is what the candidates would have done during the months when the invasion was being debated—a time when airing doubts about the intelligence or the motives of the Bush administration carried political risk.
"I have to say, not being privy to intelligence briefings as others were, I probably had the benefit of objectivity," former Sen. Gary Hart (D-Colo.), a war critic, told The Huffington Post. "That is to say, I wasn't being misled by intelligence briefings by the administration or anyone else. But it didn't pass the smell test. And, to be honest with you, I didn't trust the people promoting the war in Iraq. I knew many of them and thought they had a different agenda. They had in mind to use Iraq as an American political and military base in the Middle East and reach out from there to impose peace on the region. It was a grand scheme, but many bridges too far."
A lot of people didn't fall for it, including 133 members of the House and 23 senators. Many saw clearly that the Bush/Cheney regime was cooking the books to force this war. Ignoring that fact now does a disservice to the people who got it right, to history, to the men and women who went to war, and to the electorate who is going to choose the next president. Allowing Jeb Bush and all the other candidates—and
that includes then-Sen. Hillary Clinton—to say that it was the intelligence that was faulty is perpetuating the lie. The intelligence wasn't faulty, it was manufactured.
We knew that back then, and we know it now.