Shays Urges Iraq Withdrawal

A Former War Backer, GOP Congressman Calls for Timetable
By Anushka Asthana
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 25, 2006; Page A03

Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), once an ardent supporter of the war in Iraq, said yesterday that the Bush administration should set a time frame for withdrawing U.S. troops. He added that most of the withdrawal could take place next year.

Shays, who faces a tough reelection campaign because of his previous support for President Bush's war policies, made his comments after completing his 14th trip to Iraq this week.

He said he found a "noticeable lack of political will" among Iraqis "to move in what I would call a timely fashion" and concluded that Iraqi officials would act with greater urgency if the United States this fall set a timetable for withdrawal.

"My view is that it may be that the only way we are able to encourage some political will on the part of Iraqis is to have a timeline for troop withdrawal," Shays said from London in a conference call with reporters. "A timeline of when the bulk of heavy lifting is in the hands of the Iraqis."

Shays is one of only a few congressional Republicans supporting a timetable for ending U.S. involvement in the Iraq fighting, which has claimed the lives of more than 2,600 U.S. troops and an estimated 40,000 to 45,000 Iraqi civilians. Bush reaffirmed this week his opposition to the withdrawal of U.S. troops. "Leaving before the job was done would be a disaster," he warned.

Shays said it is essential to signal to the Iraqi government that there is no open checkbook or indefinite time frame.

Shays, chairman of the House Government Reform subcommittee on national security, emerging threats and international relations, plans to outline a time frame for withdrawal next month, after he holds three hearings titled "Iraq: Democracy or Civil War."

Critics said Shays is significantly modifying his stand because he is facing a tough challenge from an antiwar opponent in a state that has become a center of opposition to the war. "Americans have known for a long time that Iraq was a mess, and the only thing that changed is proximity to Election Day," said Bill Burton, spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Diane Farrell, Shays's Democratic challenger, said: "I think it is unfortunate it took him 14 trips and three years to recognize that Iraq has been in a constant state of turmoil since the day that Baghdad fell." She added that Shays's timetable may not meet the "expectations of the American public."

Shays said that while a timetable can and should be set, having one does not necessarily mean the withdrawal would be quick. He said it would be an outrage to leave Iraq before the Iraqis have the security they need. Some forces would have to remain to provide logistical support to the government and its armed forces. "It may be a timeline Americans don't want to hear," he said.

Shays criticized what he called the "huge mistakes" made by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, in particular the disbanding of the former Iraqi army, police and border patrols shortly after the toppling of Saddam Hussein. "I haven't had faith in the secretary in a long time," Shays said. He said Bush should let go of those who consistently offer bad advice.

Never let it be said that Republicans don't have their fair share of idiots.

This is a typical politician who is forsaking his beliefs to keep his job. The guy deserves to be booted for that alone.

This is a typical politician who is forsaking his beliefs to keep his job. The guy deserves to be booted for that alone.

Never let it be said that Republicans don't have their fair share of idiots.

This is a typical politician who is forsaking his beliefs to keep his job. The guy deserves to be booted for that alone.

You guys just don't accept people disagreeing with you. You're all in denial about the administration's handling of terrorism and how badly it has sucked.

Yeah, four more years of Clinton.

Wait, let's put the other Clinton in.

Wait, we should have voted for Gore. I bet he would have put a "lock box" on this problem.

No, Gore would have sucked, we should have just elected Kerry, because he had "a better way to fight terrorism."

Iraqi's arent worth the lives of American soldiers. Bring them home. If the Iraqi's want their freedom, let them fight it out. There is nothign more we can do but waste money and our kids lives.

The only reason Iraqis are worth more than Rwandans is because they sit on a valuable natural resource. Otherwise we wouldn't give half a shit about them either.

The only reason Iraqis are worth more than Rwandans is because they sit on a valuable natural resource. Otherwise we wouldn't give half a shit about them either.

Well, that and Rwanda never turned into a terrorist haven like Iraq is sure to do.

...now that the government has been removed.

Iraqi's arent worth the lives of American soldiers. Bring them home. If the Iraqi's want their freedom, let them fight it out. There is nothign more we can do but waste money and our kids lives.

There's another scenario worth considering - the existing government is overthrown and replaced by an extremist group (most likely from Al-Sadr's circle) that would make Iraq a terrorist haven. I don't think trading in one threat for another makes much sense.

A) I'm resolved that this is what will likely happen anyway.

B) al Sadr seems to be one of the few sane people in this whole fuckhole. I have no doubt he’d oppress Sunnis, but I don’t see him turning Iraq into al Qaeda’s homebase. Not my worst case scenario by any stretch.

Iran already is the dominant power and I gotta agree with PD on this, it's very, very likely that no matter what we do the current government will fall and be replaced by a Shiite ruling party. So why continue to let our men and women die? Pull them back to the Kurdish areas and work there, where there is a chance of success.