Baird’s war turn blew ‘any chance’ of Iraq ‘compromise.’
Baird’s war turn blew ‘any chance’ of Iraq ‘compromise.’
In August, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) returned from a two-day trip to the war-torn country, proclaiming that “real progress” was being made and that the escalation should be extended “at least into early next year.” Baird touted his new position on the war with a conservative media tour. According to a new analysis by the Politico’s Jim VandeHei and John F. Harris, it was Baird’s pro-escalation turn that ruined “any chance of a compromise” on Iraq policy:
House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told us last week his biggest fear early on was that Democrats would seek compromise solutions with moderate Republicans on the war and other issues.
Blunt suggested the strategy probably would have worked.
But once Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.), a staunch war opponent, returned from a visit to Iraq and applauded the surge, any chance of a compromise clampdown ended.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Ah — they’ve reactivated the dog and pony shows. The Green Zone must be “safe” again.
We can look forward to another parade of politicians going over there and returning home having “seen the light.”
November 13th, 2007 at 10:24 amThe troops in Iraq should be recalled. More importantly, our investments into that country should cease. What’s going on right now in the name of building institutions and furthering democracy is downright stupid. Our initial purpose has been served. Future threats from the region should be dealt with – not by an active military, but through surgical strikes.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:25 amWhy does this matter now? The TV people told me that the surge has been a great success and we can “start” to bring home our soldiers to see if our great triumph can be maintained with fewer troops. The only real questiona are–how much was he paid, or who has the “farm animal” pictures?
November 13th, 2007 at 10:27 amOur initial purpose has been served.
Comment by hits — November 13, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Which purpose was this? Securing production-sharing agreements for U.S. oil companies, or establishing a neocon free-trade wet dream in the Middle East?
November 13th, 2007 at 10:28 amtoasterhead,
The purpose of verifying our initial hypothesis on the presence of an imminent threat. Turns out that the threat while real, was not imminent
Hits
November 13th, 2007 at 10:30 amThe purpose of verifying our initial hypothesis on the presence of an imminent threat. Turns out that the threat while real, was not imminent
Comment by hits — November 13, 2007 @ 10:30 am
I seem to remember the UN inspectors doing the same thing in 2002 without killing 4,000 U.S. soldiers and 1,000,000 Iraqis.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:32 amOh bullshit. VandeHei and Harris just need a Democrat to blame for the GOP’s intransigence. Does anybody believe GOP members of Congress were prepared to compromise, until Baird returned from his trip, that is? Baird was wrong, but putting all blame on him is a load of crap.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:34 amPlease remember that Brian Baird isn’t exactly a dove-turned-hawk overnight. True, he originally voted against the war — and he continues to maintain that the Iraq war was “one of the worst foreign-policy mistakes in the history of our nation”, but he supported the surge and supports our efforts there.
Brian Baird was the guy who, earlier this year, returned from a trip to Iraq supporting the surge and faced his constituents in a volatile town meeting to explain his position: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/28/baird-%e2%80%98verbally-flogged%e2%80%99-over-pro-escalation-stance/
November 13th, 2007 at 10:34 amI wonder which part of Baird’s neck they inserted the silicon chip into.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:36 amI seem to remember the UN inspectors doing the same thing in 2002 without killing 4,000 U.S. soldiers and 1,000,000 Iraqis.
Comment by toasterhead — November 13, 2007 @ 10:32 am
thereby not satisfying neocon hits’ bloodlust and need to get off on mass murder. hits is a danger to civil society: I suggest the cops put 5 in his noggin, as he’s an imminent threat. I offer as proof the same as Bushco offered.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:36 amtoasterhead,
I do not trust UN inspectors with my national security.
Thank you
November 13th, 2007 at 10:40 amHits
Lefty Patriot,
You extrapolate into oblivion. The humor is quite palpable, though
Hits
November 13th, 2007 at 10:41 amIf you look at Brian Baird ’s assets on “Open Secret”, you will notice that over 80% of his investments were in the the sub prime mortgage area. Of course August 2007 was when the market started serious tanking in this area.
If you check his trips, you will see that the biggest trips were paid for by a very right wing “Congressional Leadership” branch of another one of of those infamous DC “Think Tanks”.
Put these two facts together and it wasn’t Petraeus razzle dazzle in Baghdad that chaned Braird’s mind – it was his tanking fortunes and perhaps promises to bail him out??
November 13th, 2007 at 10:42 amhits:
Bush proved on 9/11 he could not be trusted with national security. The UN has a far better record.
fu(k you.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:46 amLefty Patriot,
You make a very credible argument. 9/11 did happen on Bush’s watch and he should be held accountable for being soft on national security prior to that. Where I disagree is in the conclusion that the UN or anyone else could have done anything different and therefore caused a different outcome.
THANK you,
November 13th, 2007 at 10:49 amHits
I do not trust UN inspectors with my national security.
Incorrectly, as it turns out. Inspections worked, just as the UN and our Euro allies said they would. Your unfounded paranoia has some unfortunate consequences: in enabled the deaths of thousands of US Gis, tens of thousand disabled, and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed. Just to satisfy the cowardly, ill-founded paranoia of America’s phony Jack-Bauer-inspired chickenhawks.
No wonder rightwingers can’t win wars. They don’t have what it takes: regular contact with reality. They live in Fantasyland.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:49 amComment by hits — November 13, 2007 @ 10:49 am
Wrong. Any democrat woiuld have followed up on the NSA reports instead of ignoring them, as Bush and Rice did. Al Gore would never have allowed NORAD to go down for the day. You are fact free, as usual.
f**k you.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:51 amI love the conservative hits. After all the waste of blood, money and international standing, he finally says that we should just remove our troops. Hits believed that there was an a threat, just not imminent. Sorry hits, but what was the threat? Some day Saddam might re-institute his nuclear research or work on other WMD? Hardly enough to justify the war.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:52 amOT but this is on CNN…
SULAIMANIYAH, Iraq (AP) — Turkish helicopter gunships attacked villages inside Iraq on Tuesday, Iraqi officials said, the first such airstrike since border tensions have escalated in recent months.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:52 amLefty Patriot,
You cannot prove that. Again, you extrapolate quite poorly
Hits
November 13th, 2007 at 10:53 amJMOHR,
I am not necessarily a Conservative. I believe you do not understand the concept of a perceived threat
Hits
November 13th, 2007 at 10:54 amI believe you do not understand the concept of a perceived threat.
Then why don’t you clarify it for us, blowhard? Bear in mind, we may not be mindlessly paranoid bedwetters like you.
November 13th, 2007 at 10:57 amGood morning all!
November 13th, 2007 at 10:59 amPLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS! Troll “hits” managed to singlehandedly hi jack a previous thread. THIS is what they are here for. Try not to fall for it. Although this troll makes an attempt to be “on topic” he none-the-less uses the standard troll MO of passive aggressively goading TPers into arguements that he NEVER backs up with facts. Who else would spend their days on a blog that does not follow his ideals and warped philosophies under the guise of trying to “illuminate” TP visitors with nothing but his deep fears to back up his lackluster arguements. Simple strawman arguements and meaningless drivel that is posted with the sole intention of driving you to distraction. Don’t feed him and he will thankfully go away.
I am not necessarily a Conservative. I believe you do not understand the concept of a perceived threat
Comment by hits — November 13, 2007 @ 10:54 am
I do. A perceived threat is the same as an imaginary threat. Which is why a neutral party should be the one to investigate it.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:00 amNo Democratic President would have launched this fiasco of an invasion. Indeed, I believe no President with authentic miltary experience, Dem or GOP, would have been ignorant and pigheaded enough to.
Six months before Bush invaded Iraq, Al Gore said that a pre-emptive war on Iraq would increase the number of terrorists, undercut US influence in the region, and diminish US legitimacy in the world affairs.
George Bush said that his war on Iraq would last “weeks, not months,” Iraqi oil revenues would pay for the war, and a tide of Democracy would sweep through the Middle East.
Al Gore was 100% right.
George Bush was 100% wrong.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:00 am“I am not necessarily a Conservative. I believe you do not understand the concept of a perceived threat”
Another conservative-turned-libertarian. The perceived threat was the mid-term elections. That’s why Bush rushed the congress to approve his invasion. We perceived that just fine.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:03 amWell for what ever reason he sold out, he has to live with the consequences: the deaths, not just of our young people but the men women and most of all children of Iraq.
I have full confidence in the people of Washington State retire this, this – what ever he is.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:05 amHey, anyone should be allowed to change their minds, and even Democrats are allowed to support the war, IF they explain to us what it was they saw that changed their minds or why they believe in the war so we can judge fairly if they’ve lost their f**king minds or not.
It’s the difference between someone taking advantage of their lack of brains to convince them the surge is working and political back scratching or threats to get them to change their minds. We deserve to know which it was.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:20 amYou extrapolate into oblivion. The humor is quite palpable, though
Comment by hits — November 13, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Did you get a new “word a day” calendar?
November 13th, 2007 at 11:33 amThis is very interesting. Baird moves TOWARD the Republican position and this make compromise IMPOSSIBLE. Usually compromise involves both sides incrementally giving in to reach a position in the middle.
But not anymore. The paradigm has shifted. We need to stop taking a step closer to their position; all they do is take a step further back.
It is time to hold firm. It is time to hold fast to our positions and hold them accountable for their positions and the administration’s crimes. We forget that we are in the majority. No more compromise; it is time for IMPEACHMENT!
November 13th, 2007 at 11:37 amIt’s the difference between someone taking advantage of their lack of brains to convince them the surge is working and political back scratching or threats to get them to change their minds. We deserve to know which it was.
Comment by swordsbane — November 13, 2007 @ 11:20 am
It’s the first slide in Ryan Crocker’s powerpoint. The one titled “You Are Getting Very Sleepy” and has a swinging pocketwatch animated gif and the sound of a ticking metronome.
November 13th, 2007 at 11:47 amGet rid of the ONO Democrat.
November 13th, 2007 at 12:18 pmRep. Brian Baird (D-WA) it’s now November 13, 2007 the serge didn’t work. The Government has made no concessions as of this date. I am sure the family of the fallen during this time would like to thank you. I am from the 4th District WA and Doc Hastings has been nothing more than Bush rubber stamp.
November 13th, 2007 at 3:08 pmAN OCCUPYING ARMY DOES NOT WIN! THE ONLY PROGRESS YOU ARE GETTING IN IRAQ IS THE NUMBER OF CASUALTIES. FROM 3856 TO 3860 AND COUNTING! IT WILL BE LIKE THAT FOR YEAR TO COME UNTIL THE TERRORIST AND AGRESSOR (USA) GETS OUT OF IRAQ.
November 13th, 2007 at 3:16 pmAT LEAST THE UN INSPECTOR WAS TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN IT CAME WMD WHILE CHENNEY, BUSH AND RICE WERE NOT!
November 13th, 2007 at 3:18 pmI wonder if Baird’s district got as large of an “aid package” as all the sunni chieftans did?
November 14th, 2007 at 8:20 am>I believe you do not understand the concept of a perceived threat
try shooting someone then using “the concept of a perceived threat” as a defense and see how well it keeps you out of jail…
November 14th, 2007 at 8:22 am