I recently wrote to my congressman (Rep. Dave Reichert, R-WA8), urging him to support a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq. His response and my return email follow.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the war in Iraq. I appreciate the opportunity to respond. I believe you and I agree that Iraq is one of the preeminent issues we face as a nation.
As you may know, I was not in office when the vote was taken to go to war with Iraq. [Note: He loves to make this point.] In hindsight, much of the information Members of Congress had available to them when deciding how to cast their votes was flawed. However, the vote was made to go into Iraq and our military now is heavily engaged in the region.
When voting on this issue my first priority is that I will always support our young men and women who put their lives on the line for freedom.
Army General David Petraeus was confirmed unanimously in the United States Senate and sent to lead our campaign in Iraq with a clear mission: change the direction of the war effort so that we achieve victory; and report back to Congress on the progress you are making. In fact I voted for a resolution that called for very specific benchmarks to be met; General Petraeus will soon report on the progress toward meeting those benchmarks.
There are two types of benchmark for success in Iraq: what their government is achieving, and what our troops are achieving in the way of security. Ultimately, if the benchmarks set are not met, we should rethink our strategy. But our current strategy of increasing troop levels in Iraq, via a surge in military personnel, has been in full force for only a few months. When it comes to assessing our troop readiness, assessing our equipment needs, assessing our troop needs, I put my faith in General Petraeus rather than in politicians in Congress. On September 10, 2007, General Petraeus is scheduled to present his report to Congress on the status of our current strategy. I believe if adjustments are to be made, they should come after this report, not before.
I firmly believe that we should not use timelines or dates for withdrawal that are centered on the next elections rather than on achieving success. We owe the men and women in the military who have done everything we have asked of them and more to base our decisions not on politics but on facts on the ground and what our military leadership tells us is achievable.
In order for the Iraqi government to achieve the benchmarks set for them, they need to have security. You can't have freedom, you can't have democracy - until you have security. We must first gain safety and stability for the Iraqis before we will see true progress.
We must also keep in mind the consequences of leaving too soon. If we leave before the country is stabilized we will likely see more sectarian violence, the spread of the conflict beyond Iraq's borders, and even genocide.
I have advocated changing our approach in Iraq and for doing whatever it takes to accomplish our objectives in the region so that we leave Iraq with the tools they need to achieve our shared goals: A government ready and able to govern; security forces capable of protecting Iraqis and of policing their nation; and a strong infrastructure and growing economy.
However, let me be clear that I do not support an open-ended commitment to Iraq. We all want our troops to come home as soon as possible and for their sacrifices to have been made toward a successful effort. I do believe that we must at some point communicate to the Iraqis that we have helped them, they are ready, and it is time for us to leave.
I am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2574, the Iraq Study Group Recommendations Implementation Act of 2007, a bill which would implement all 79 recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. This report will also provide for a status update on the existing 18 benchmarks and includes troop reductions as soon as is possible as a recommendation.
I appreciate hearing from you. I apologize for any delay in my response to your concerns.
Sincerely,
David G. Reichert
Member of Congress
I wrote back:
Representative Reichert:
If by “politicians in Congress” you mean the elected representatives of the people — such as yourself — then I don’t follow your reasoning. It seems to me that it is your duty to assess the situation in Iraq and act accordingly. Assessing Iraq involves much more than taking the reports of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker at face value. As your constituent, I expect you delve past that, as well as evaluate other sources of information, such as the recent GAO report. “Acting accordingly” means more than rubber-stamping Bush Administration policy or trying to have it both ways.
Yesterday’s reports made two things clear to this 8th District constituent:
- The tactical “progress” extolled by the General and the Bush Administration is in reality a Pyrrhic victory, as little progress has been made toward a unified government (or an effective government of any kind);
- The request for another six months is simply another cynical bait-and-switch by the Bush Administration. By now, it’s obvious to almost anyone that the President is playing for time in order to hand this mess off to his successor
The best way to “support our young men and women who put their lives on the line for freedom” is to bring them home. As it is, their lives and patriotism are being wasted in propping up a weak and corrupt regime. Please stand up for them.