In an interview with Fox News host Megyn Kelly, the potential Republican presidential candidate, said he would have authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
"Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?" Kelly asked in an interview scheduled to air Monday night.
"I would have," Bush replied. "And so would have Hillary Clinton, just to remind everybody. And so would almost everybody that was confronted with the intelligence they got."
Possibly realizing his faux pas by aligning himself with his brother's destructive foreign policy tactic, Bush backtracked Wednesday saying he misheard the question and then refused to answer it because he did not want to do a disservice to American troops. But at an event in Tempe, Arizona on Thursday, Bush finally reversed his original position saying, "I would have not engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq."
Clearly, it would be wise for Bush to distance himself politically from his brother as the 2016 election heats up (especially from George W.’s biggest foreign policy blunder that ultimately defined him as the worst American president), yet Bush continues to stick by his brother’s side, specifically in blaming President Barack Obama — not his brother — for the rise of ISIS.
Furthermore, on May 5, Bush told a group of wealthy donors that his most trusted adviser on Middle East policy is, frightening enough, his brother.
“If you want to know who I listen to for advice, it’s him.”
There you have it. Bush is taking foreign policy cues from his idiot brother. If he agrees George W.'s Middle East decisions were good ideas, what else is he okay with it?