Mitt Romney Flip-Flops On Iraq: GOP Candidate Says 'We Would Not Have Gone In' If We Knew There Were No Weapons Of Mass Destruction (VIDEO)

Mitt Romney, speaking on Wednesday to NBC News' Chuck Todd, seemed to shift positions on the Iraq War.

As highlighted by New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait, Romney explained to Todd, "If we knew at the time of our entry into Iraq that there were no weapons of mass destruction, if somehow we had been given that information, obviously we would not have gone in."

The former Massachusetts governor then gave a more detailed response:

Todd: "You don't think we would have gone in?"

Romney: "Well of course not. The president went in based upon intelligence that they had weapons of mass destruction. Had he known that that was not the case, the U.N. would not have put forward resolutions authorizing this type of action. The president would not have been pursuing that course. But we did not know that. Based upon what we knew at the time, we were very much under the impression as a nation, our president was under the impression, that they had weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam Hussein was intent on potentially using those weapons, and so he took action based upon what he knew. But to go back and say, well knowing what we know now would we have gone in. Well, knowing what we know now, they did not have weapons of mass destruction, there would have been no effort on the part of our president or others to take military action."

Chait points out that Romney previously took a much different position on the conflict. Per The New York Times, moderator Tim Russert asked Romney during a 2008 presidential debate if the Iraq War was "a good idea worth the cost in blood and treasure we have spent." Romney answered, "It was the right decision to go into Iraq. I supported it at the time; I support it now." As Chait explains, Romney's debate answer came at a time when it was already clear that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction.

Romney's latest comments come only a few days after the U.S. marked the end of the nearly nine year conflict. The Republican contender has not been shy in his criticism of President Obama's handling of the troop withdrawal. This past Sunday, BBC News reported that Romney said, "I think we're going to find that this president, by not putting in place a status-of-forces agreement with the Iraqi leadership, has pulled our troops out in a precipitous way and we should have left 10-, 20-, 30,000 personnel there to help transition to the Iraqis' own military capabilities."

WATCH ROMNEY'S MSNBC INTERVIEW ABOVE -- IRAQ SECTION BEGINS AT 1:33 (via MSNBC)

 

 

Comments

[csmomo]

11:26 AM on 12/25/2011

Mitt Romney has just proved himself a liar, if there was any doubt before.
I distinctly recall that the UN inspectors went to Iraq to look for WMDs
shortly before the invasion AND DID NOT FIND ANY.

[Christina Bussmann]

02:45 PM on 12/26/2011

Nor did IAEA inspectors find any evidence of such prior to Operation Desert Storm. The chief weapons inspector for IAEA published an interim report reaching this conclusion in January of 2003:

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2003/ebsp2003n003.shtm

Romney either has no clue was to the true motives behind the invasion of Iraq or, more frightening, he chooses to participate in the political spin. The only two politicians currently seeking the presidency who have been consistent on their position about Iraq is President Obama and Rep. Paul.

[csmomo]

10:43 AM on 12/25/2011

Yeah, right--they knew perfectly well there were no "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq until the USA brought them some. And after all the death and destruction that the Bush/Cheney war brought on them, they probably have plenty of them now.

[Pastori Balele]

11:36 PM on 12/23/2011

Why should people worry about Romney now. Mitt has eliminated himself as GOP candidate by refusing to release is tax returns. We are told Mitt tax returns expose him as corrupt person.

[csmomo]

10:44 AM on 12/25/2011

And why am I not surprised?

[jackiekahane]

08:39 PM on 12/25/2011

Who are "we?" Who told "us?" I love you people.

[GhostOne]

10:46 PM on 12/23/2011

Romney is that guy ahead of you in starbucks who takes 45 minutes changing his mind on everything on the menu before remembering he doesn't drink coffee.

[Christina Bussmann]

02:46 PM on 12/26/2011

F&Fd. LOL!

[freedomsxm]

03:06 PM on 12/23/2011

“What a hypercritic, Romney is always saying how he would handle Iran when he becomes President, which most likely means attacking them and starting another war. Well he (Romney) has five (5) sons and not one of them has ever served in either Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan or for that matter even the National Guard? Are they to good and privileged to serve and defend the United States? Why doesn’t he ever address this issue?

[csmomo]

10:45 AM on 12/25/2011

It is not an "issue" to him. They are his sons and he will keep them safe.
The sons and daughters of the poor and middle class can do the fighting
for people like him and Little Georgie Boy.

[RepublicanDepression]

02:30 AM on 12/23/2011

Where is the supposedly liberal media reporting the REAL story?

Romney FAILED on Iraq war history by claiming "Had he known that that was not the case, the U.N. would not have put forward resolutions authorizing this type of action."

But the UN authorized NO military action!

[Phyllis Copeland]

03:18 AM on 12/23/2011

Excellent point!! That snuck past me as I fomented on how no-one seems inclined to remind the indignant GOP candidates-to-be that it was W. who set the date of the US withdrawl, Obama has simply followed through on that national promise! Of course, had Obama decided to extend our involvement, he'd be crucified by the media for not honoring the promises of his predecessor. Nothing Obama does will ever be welcomed by the right, even if they themselves originated the idea! (see also - the lightbulb issue)

[csmomo]

11:32 AM on 12/25/2011

As I have said before, if Obama sprouted wings and a halo and flew over the White House the Republicans would accuse him of impersonating George W. Bush.

[csmomo]

10:46 AM on 12/25/2011

I distinctly recall the UN inspectors finding NO EVIDENCE of WMDS.

[Christina Bussmann]

02:49 PM on 12/26/2011

You remember correctly.

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2003/ebsp2003n003.shtml

[Crisdean Wulver]

12:01 AM on 12/23/2011

Mystery solved. George H. W. Bush has backed Romney for the GOP nomination. Romney is going after the swing vote. That's what he's saying what he's saying about the Iraq war.

The far right has become so extreme that they're unrealistic, even when it's to their own advantage to be more realistic. They think that an extreme right presidential candidate can win the general election without attracting swing voters. It can't be done. And George H.W. Bush has always known that. He thinks Romney is the best choice to get the swing vote. And he's probably right.

That's why I could never understand why Newt Gingrich ran. He could never hope to get the swing vote with his record. Anyway, that's what Romney's up to. He's trying to make himself look more moderate. But the Tea Party is so volatile and reckless, they'll try to either force Romney out of the race or force him back to the right again. In the end they'll make it very hard for him to attract the swing vote.

The extreme right has gone crazy. They're shooting themselves in the foot.

[Phyllis Copeland]

03:20 AM on 12/23/2011

Yes, the GOP has gone round the twist, but they're only shooting themselves in the foot to fully exercise their second-amendment rights!! :-)

[csmomo]

11:32 AM on 12/25/2011

And sometimes that HURTS.

[csmomo]

10:47 AM on 12/25/2011

They have always been crazy; they are just getting CRAZIER.

[essbird]

10:39 PM on 12/22/2011

Can some Romney fan tell me what the man thinks, or what he would do if he were President, and present some reason for thinking so? I sure can't. I almost feel sorry for him because I think he's much more liberal in his heart, but he's so consumed with the idea of winning that he has sold his soul to the Tea Party and the Evangelicals.

[Phyllis Copeland]

03:24 AM on 12/23/2011

:-) I'd feel sorry for him, too, if I didn't get the sense that he is an opportunist who seems convinced that this, at long last, is his best chance to take the office he was tried so hard to win many times before! Truth be told, all politicians are opportunists, but success is only to be had by those with the ability to pass themselves off as ambitious, or at least as skillful strategists.

[csmomo]

10:48 AM on 12/25/2011

Obviously THINKING is not something that is customary among Republicans. Little George got by for eight years without having a single thought except maybe how to dodge shoes.

[wrabbitt]

08:52 PM on 12/22/2011

Is their any thing that Willard ain't changed his position on?

[argved]

06:33 PM on 12/23/2011

A more pertinent question is there anything that Willard won't change his position if he thinks it will help him get elected? By the way the answer is no.

[Snippert]

07:59 PM on 12/22/2011

Mitt Romney breathes air.

[Phyllis Copeland]

03:26 AM on 12/23/2011

Sadly, I share that vice ... I keep trying to quit, but it is so hard to break the habit! If you find oxygen patches or gum, please let me know. ;-)

[hot blond]

10:22 PM on 12/24/2011

Hey, I've got the bestest gum ever--no kidding--it's ORBIT WHITE-chicklets, flavor is bubblemint--( yes, bubblegum)--it's sugar-free too-( in pink pkg)---so won't stick to dental work. It's awesome in flavor, and makes great bubbles ( need at least 3 pieces). Sold in most stores--but in big container of 60 pieces- Walmart it's cheaper $2.88. Or--Sam's club. enjoy!!! ( it helps when quitting things--like breathing, smoking, etc)

[csmomo]

10:49 AM on 12/25/2011

Can't be really sure of that.

[Ssufyerd Kaz]

07:43 PM on 12/22/2011

Here is a site that features all of Mitt's flip-flops:

http://mittromneyflipflops.com/

Thanks for the link jmd.

[minusjason]

07:38 PM on 12/22/2011

The rationalization about the Iraq War gets on my nerves.

"They're the same as Al Qaeda!"

"Oh, they're not? Well then we've got to go to war because they are a dangerous regime and have WMDs!"

"Oh, they don't? Then it's about freedom! We're freeing the Iraqi people!"

"The world is a better place without Saddam!"

Even General Odierno went with that last bit on the Colbert Report. I was disappointed. I guess it helps him sleep at night, 150,000 Iraqi citizens later.

[hot blond]

10:33 PM on 12/24/2011

Years ago I heard that when his daddy( Bush senior)- started Desert Storm, Saddam put a contract on his head---so many millions to have him dead. I heard that was the reason Bush went into Iraq- for revenge on Saddam for doing that.

[frdm399]

06:16 PM on 12/22/2011

Every politician flip flops, this one has it down to a fine art

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=obama+flip

[boomcat44]

06:09 PM on 12/22/2011

It'll be news when you can find an issue that he HASN'T flip-flopped on.

[RepublicanDepression]

05:57 PM on 12/22/2011

This is a Cian/Bachmann-sized gaffe!

Huffington Post, your buried the lede!

Romney: "Had he known that that was not the case, the U.N. would not have put forward resolutions authorizing this type of action."

The UN did NOT authorize "this type of action!" Most of our allies opposed and could veto the US, Britain and Spain, so Bush invaded WITHOUT the US!

Romney FAILS!

[tman418]

08:14 PM on 12/22/2011

I caught that too. The U.N. didn't give us permission to do s h i t.