Baird defends new position on IraqMonday, August 27, 2007
By MICHAEL ANDERSEN Columbian Staff Writer
Two weeks after deciding to oppose a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, Rep. Brian Baird said he thinks that most of the country agrees with him.
"I have to believe that there is a quiet majority of people out there who think the war has been a terrible mistake, but they sure don't want to see us lose," he told The Columbian's editorial board Monday morning.
Even so, Baird said he expects a verbal beating from anti-war constituents at public forums tonight and Tuesday night.
In May, Baird supported a bill that would have required troop levels to start falling by Oct. 1. But
his perspective changed after a visit to Iraq in early August."One of the colonels over there said, 'Sir, we're going to need time,' " he recalled. "And I said, 'I'm going to try and get you some.' "
Whatever Congress may do, Baird said, a simple shortage of troops will likely force generals to order a drawdown by April.
But that's a military issue, he said. Politicians in both parties should avoid mandated withdrawals.
"
Crocker and Petraeus -- they're the people I respect in this," Baird said, referring to the U.S. ambassador to Iraq and the top military general in the war.
If the military finds a way to extend troop levels beyond April, Baird said he'd support that, barring other major developments.
Anti-war group moveon.org says it expects 100 local activists at tonight's town hall meeting at Fort Vancouver High School, including veterans who have served in Iraq.
The 7 p.m. meeting is in the high school auditorium at 5700 E. 18th St. in Vancouver.
Tuesday, a similar meeting will take place at 7 p.m. in the Cowlitz County Expo Center at 1900 Seventh Avenue in Longview.
"Somebody said to me, 'Oh man, you're going to get killed tonight,' " Baird said Monday. "I said, 'No, they get killed in Iraq. I'm going to get criticized.' "
Criticism will also come from Democratic colleagues, he said. He's swimming against a current of politicians in both parties calling increasingly for withdrawals.
Baird said he based his decision on private discussions with Iraqi, Iranian and Jordanian leaders and on two observations that he said had been infrequently debated:
* The chance of regional chaos, should neighboring nations' troops be drawn into the conflict.
* The notion that talk of a U.S. pullout has Iraqi political players "retrenching" to maintain their power rather than seeking the common ground that would be needed for a stable government.
To succeed, Baird said, Iraqis must agree on how to share oil revenue and must finish re-hiring the former Baath party members removed by U.S. officials in the occupation's early days.
Baird voted in 2002 against the use of military force. He has never been more certain that the invasion should never have happened, he said Monday.
Nuclear inspections and flight restrictions on Saddam Hussein's government would have kept his regime from harming the U.S., Baird believes.
"We had him contained," he said.
http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/08272007news189511.cfm
