Monday, December 18, 2006

Durbin on More Troops, Securing Baghdad and Obama's Run

Senator Dick Durbin: ...So the idea of sending 50,000 more [troops]—the fear I have, Mr. Kimber [sitting to Senator Durbin’s right] can remember-- during Vietnam, it was always just another 50,000, another 50,000, another 100,000 and pretty soon, we were...
**************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Are we down to a three person race in the Democratic [Presidential] Primary between Clinton, Obama and Edwards?

Senator Durbin: I think those are the three major candidates, but...
***************************************
Senator Dick Durbin [D-IL], now No. 2 in the U.S. Senate, this morning gave a thumbs down to General Jack Keane’s [USA Ret.] proposal for more troops in Iraq. The Keane proposal, which has apparently been made to the President, addresses the issue that Senator McCain says [Watch Q/A on "Public Affairs," show of Oct. 30, 2006 with Sen. McCain here] has been the conclusion of virtually every serious, independent analysis of the Iraq War, i.e., the U. S. never committed sufficient troops to win the War to remove Saddam Hussein and then win those essentially post-war efforts in Iraq to create a democracy that, as President Bush likes to say, can sustain itself, govern itself, defend itself and become an ally of the United States in its war on Terrorism. Further, Gen. Keane argues the U. S. never made it its mission to achieve security in Baghdad [and make sure that Al Anbar Province does not become a side show by the terrorists to prevent success in Baghdad], a mission that Gen. Keane asserts is essential to prevailing on our efforts to Win the "War in Iraq," or perhaps what is more accurately called the post-war effort to secure a stable, operating democracy in Iraq.

Gen. Keane argues that an additional 50,000 troops, or so, could achieve that mission now. Moreover, by achieving security in Baghdad and handling Al Anwar Province, which could be accomplished in 12 to 18 months, and by pursuing the political and economic reforms, goals and Shia-Sunni agreements/compromises that security in Baghad and Al Anbar would make possible, the population in Iraq [both Shia and Sunni] would then have the right incentives to cooperative with Coalition forces to put down the insurgents and sectarian violence.

This, of course, is the conventional wisdom for the counter-insurgency key to success—win the heart and minds of the population at large and they will help military forces put down the insurgents and terrorists. Moreover, the approach seems to be a fresh, new approach to winning in Iraq, something the U. S. public implicitly, if not explicitly, seems to want.

On the other hand, Senator Durbin is clearly not buying. But, what will those senators and Democratic presidential candidates, e.g., Hillary Clinton, who may be more centrist, say? What about those Democratic Senators and Presidential candidate, e.g., Obama and Edwards, who are a bit more to the left than Senator Clinton? What would they say to the Keane proposal? Those are good questions that someone else will have to ask. There is only so much this correspondent can do in a morning.
**********************************************
Senator Dick Durbin [D-IL]: ...The Baker Hamilton Commission made it clear that they believe and I share the belief that the American troops should be re-deployed to a safe position and out of Iraq by March, 2008. That has to be our national goal. Now, if the President tells us that they need a surge of troops to protect our troops as they move out, Senator Reid has said-- and I think I would agree-- Yes. But, only on temporary basis, and only with the specific goal in mind of returning our troops to America…
************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Senator, yesterday morning on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, one of the former generals- a retired General [Gen. Jack Keane (USA Ret.), former Army Vice-Chief of Staff] who has met with President Bush [recently], outlined a proposal to--as he said, we have never had a mission to secure Baghdad, to secure Al Anwar province-- and the General outlined that kind of mission, which has been proposed to the President, which would entail about 50,000 [additional] troops for 12 to 18 months [See here and here]. The President is said to be considering that proposal. If he proposes that to the nation, what will the response be of the Democrats in the U. S. Senate.

Senator Dick Durbin: I will only speak for myself. I would oppose that. When I visited Al Anbar province, which is to the west of Baghdad, in the first week in October, I went to visit a group of Marines under General Zellmer, who has been quoted in the press. He told us he was under an “Economy of Force directive,” and I said what does that mean? He said that means we have moved marines and soldiers out of Al Anbar province and put them in Baghdad. So, we were losing ground in Al Anbar because of Baghdad and I said why did they do that. He said because Baghdad is the whole ball game. If Baghdad falls, this war is over. We can’t let that happen. So, what has happened is we have transferred troops into Baghdad—I can’t even tell you how many at this moment in an effort to try to create some stability there and to stop the killing and it has not worked, so the idea of sending 50,000 more—the fear I have, Mr. Kimber [sitting to Senator Durbin’s right] can remember-- during Vietnam, it was always just another 50,000, another 50,000, another 100,000 and pretty soon, we were in a position where we ended up with so many lives lost. I, for one, believe this bi-partisan Commission [Baker Hamilton Iraq Study Group] had the right idea. It is time for the Iraqis to stand and fight. It is time for us to start bringing our troops home.
**************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Are we down to a three person race in the Democratic Primary between Clinton, Obama and Edwards?

Senator Durbin: I think those are the three major candidates, but who would have guessed a year before Iowa that John Kerry would be the nominee [in 2004]. In fact, I think most people would have assumed he wouldn’t be the nominee. So, things do change and making predictions in 2006 about a race in 2008 is a risky business.

Berkowitz: Are you sure that Senator Obama will decide to run [for President]?

Senator Durbin: No, I’m not sure. He still has to make that decision and make that announcement. I think he [Barack Obama] is leaning in that direction.
************************************************
Senator Dick Durbin, answering questions from the Press after Senator Durbin presented six medals of honor, including a Purple Heart, to Vietnam Veteran Arthur Kimber in his Chicago Senate office, this morning.
************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************