Brownback Opposes Surge

Wichita Eagle ^ | 1/10/07 | MATT STEARNS

[Obilisk18]

WASHINGTON - Kansas Republican Sen. Sam Brownback came out against President Bush's expected call tonight for a surge of 22,000 more troops into Iraq.

"I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer," Brownback said while traveling in Iraq. "Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution."

Brownback had previously supported a short-term surge of troops if it could help achieve long-term political stability, which the Bush Administration has said it hopes a troop surge will help achieve.

But Brownback rejected that argument after meeting this week with several Iraqi leaders, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and U.S. military commanders.

"I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shi'a are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other," Brownback said.

"The best way to reach a democratic Iraq is to empower the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own nation building," Brownback concluded, saying it is not in U.S. interest to get deeply involved in sectarian strife.

Brownback, a conservative who is running for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, is among a handful of Republican senators to publicly break with Bush on the president's plans to escalate U.S. military involvement.

Brownback has supported the war, but in recent weeks has moved away from the Bush Administration's positions.

He has called for dividing Iraq into three relatively autonomous zones - Kurdish, Shi'a and Sunni - within a federated country. And he also said he generally supported the findings of the Iraq Study Group last month, which Brownback said provided the U.S. the opportunity to "reset the table."

The Bush Administration has rejected calls to split Iraq and was noncommittal toward the Iraq Study Group's recommendations.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

I went to a meeting with Brownback in Des Moines with Sam and his Iowa campaign people. He started ny talking about the need to get Iraq off the radar and the need for a political solution.

He insisted that he would not pull out but the suite of rooms got as cold as the weather outside. My county co-chair was incredulous and fit to be tied.

I liked Sam and thought he had something to offer. But I cannot support without a policy of victory.

[Non-Sequitur]

I really think Brownback is angling for the Veep slot with his eye on 2016. But he is capable of more Macaca Moments than George Allen ever dreamed of, so I figure he'll talk him out of the running long before the end of the year.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Brownback would bring absolutely nothing to the ticket, unless someone like Rudy, who is tough enought on the GWOT, would pick him to appease conservatives.

[Non-Sequitur]

Brownback would bring absolutely nothing to the ticket, unless someone like Rudy, who is tough enought on the GWOT, would pick him to appease conservatives.

Before he started sticking his foot in his mouth, Brownback was portraying himself as the upholder of the solid conservative banner. Candidates like Giuliani and McCain and Romney without a firm conservative record to run on might have found him an attractive running mate that might appease the right wing of the party. Now, of course, Sam's shooting holes in his cause on a daly basis.

Which isn't such a bad thing. If Sam was on the ticket and the GOP won then our governor would appoint a Democrat to replace him - probably Dennis Moore.