No Tears for Brian Baird

August 27, 10:56 AMSnohomish County Progressive ExaminerChad Shue

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Snohomish County Progressive Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Because Rep. Brian Baird represents a “local” constituency and the article to which I refer is by a local columnist, I stray for a moment from the “purely state and local.” CS   

Iraq buildup succeeds, Brian Baird still an outcast

Danny Westneat

Seattle Times staff columnist

DENVER — Brian Baird was lonely enough back when all his Democratic friends thought he was wrong.

But now that it appears he was right — that the Iraq war was going better, as he claimed, and President Bush's troop surge was working — the Southwest Washington congressman is even more of an outcast.

Danny, I’m sorry but you and “Congressman Surge” don’t get a free pass on this.

Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA3)

Claiming that “the surge worked” is about as revisionist as saying we invaded Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people. If the purpose of the Iraq escalation was to simply bring down the number of American casualties and thereby distract the American media from the fact that there is still no plan to end the occupation of that country, then you (and Congressman Baird) may continue your celebration. The truth however is more complex than that.

First there is the fact that the stated purpose of “the surge” was to assist the Iraqis in securing their own country enough to be able to bring about the political and economic stability necessary to achieve the selected “benchmarks” laid down by the Bush administration that would then allow us to pull out of that country. Anybody seen any sign of us leaving?

Then there is the matter of just what part “the surge” actually played in the decrease of violence in Iraq over the past 18 months. Even General David Petraeus says that the decrease in violence might have occurred as a result of the so-called Sunni Awakening (another term for American paid Sunni mercenaries) even if there had been no increase in the number of American forces.

Petraeus is careful not to credit all the progress to the surge of U.S. troops in 2007. The sea change came last year from a series of movements now known as the Awakening. […] So would the Sunni Awakening have succeeded without the surge? Possibly, he concedes.

Another under-reported aspect of the decrease in sectarian violence in Iraq is the partitioning of Iraqi cities and the after effects of Iraq’s own version of “ethnic cleansing.”

 …Out of the more than 151,000 families who had fled their houses in Baghdad, just 7,112 had returned to them by mid-July, according to the Iraqi Ministry of Migration. Many of the displaced remain in Baghdad, just in different areas. In one neighborhood alone, Amiriya, in western Baghdad, there are 8,350 displaced families, more than the total number of families who have returned to their houses in all of Baghdad.

The reasons for the hesitation are complex, based on dangers both real and imagined. In most cases, Iraqis say they feel safe with their neighbors but are not sure about other residents. Some are afraid of the new guards on their blocks. In rarer cases, they cannot face neighbors who they suspect helped in killings.

Sadly, Congressman Baird continues to claim that,

 ...if  "the people in our party advocating for an immediate withdrawal of troops last year had gotten their way, it would have been disastrous for the U.S."

First, no one in the Democratic leadership ever called for anything less than a responsible withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. However, given that the immediate results of “the surge” was an all too predictable increase in American and Iraqi deaths – 2007 was by far the deadliest year of the occupation (over 900 American troops and close to 19,000 Iraqis), the fact that we are still there with no end sight, and the continuing lack of anything that might pass for political reconciliation

BAGHDAD (8/7/08)-- The Iraqi parliament broke for summer vacation Wednesday without passing a bill that would have allowed provincial elections to be held this year, dealing a blow to hopes for bringing alienated Sunni and Shiite Muslim voices into the political process any time soon.

The parliament, which tried during a four-day special session to pass the legislation under pressure from the United States and United Nations, could not resolve differences over oil-rich Kirkuk, a volatile mixed area that the Kurds wish to annex to their semiautonomous northern region.

just reinforces my and many others’ opinion that Brian did in fact drink the kool-aid and has embraced the George Bush definitions of disaster and success.

While Westneat may find it unfortunate that more folks don’t embrace Baird’s definition of success in Iraq, he is correct in pointing out that the congressman will face no real competition in November – and certainly no anti-war voice will be heard. Thanks to Washington’s new Two Party Top Two Primary, there will be only Baird and a token Republican challenger for that seat. So please, don’t cry for Congressman Baird. Shed your tears instead for the continuing toll of Americans and Iraqis in Brian’s “Surged and Improved” Iraqi Occupation.

Peace,

Chad Shue