SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Reyes Gets Hawkish

THE PLANK DECEMBER 6, 2006

Reyes Gets Hawkish

BY ISAAC CHOTINER

Newsweek's Michael Isikioff and Mark Hosenball have a fascinating piece on Silvestre Reyes, who is soon to be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. In an interview, Reyes said that he wants to increase troop levels in Iraq:

 

"We’re not going to have stability in Iraq until we eliminate those militias, those private armies," Reyes said. "We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq ... We certainly can’t leave Iraq and run the risk that it becomes [like] Afghanistan" was before the 2001 invasion by the United States.
Reyes--a Vietnam War veteran who partially lost his hearing in that conflict--even compared his position to that of another Vietnam vet, Sen. John McCain, a staunch supporter of the Iraq war. Like Reyes, McCain also has called for an increase in U.S. troop strength. When asked how many additional troops he envisioned sending to Iraq, Reyes replied: "I would say 20,000 to 30,000--for the specific purpose of making sure those militias are dismantled, working in concert with the Iraqi military."
When a reporter suggested that was not a position that was likely to be popular with many House Democrats, Reyes replied: "Well again, I differ in that I don’t want Iraq to become the next Afghanistan. We could not allow Iraq to become a safe haven for Al Qaeda, for Hamas, for Hizbullah, or anybody else. We cannot allow Iran or Syria to have a free hand in there to further destabilize the Middle East."

 

Reyes also told Isikoff and Hosenball that Pelosi knew his current position on the war before choosing him. Anyway, this stance should give him more credibility with the media when he confronts the Bush administration over various past and present issues. --Isaac Chotiner

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 18 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

18 comments

I really like Reyes right now. He is showing some principle. I don't know where it's gonna get him or McCain or anyone else, but I think it helps give him (and the party) some legitimacy. (Of course there's the obvious question, will sending more troops actually help? I'll leave that to those who know more to me to discuss.)

- achester99

December 6, 2006 at 12:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For the simple reason there are no more troops to send (unless you want to permanently break our military). Sending more troops is a pipe deam and the people forwarding it NOW should be critized.

- Yminale

December 6, 2006 at 12:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

and I'm STILL hearing about how reflexive hawkishness gives you "credibility" in the media. So Reyes, probably out of ignorance, thinks we have more troops to send AND that those troops (what 20K?) would make the crucial difference in Iraq, and for this he gets rewarded? Good lord.

- mattwilshire

December 6, 2006 at 1:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's true, as Mr Chotiner writes, that advocating the use of more troops in Iraq will give Rep. Reyes more credibility in the eyes of the DC press corps and the chattering class. It just shows how dim-witted and out of touch those people are. The more incorrect you have been, the more credibility you have in D.C. To quote the late, great Joker: This town needs an enema!

- Fairfax

December 6, 2006 at 1:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In the last 5 years that line from the Joker has crossed my mind at least a dozen times. I just never had the courage to say or write it in public. Bravo!

- mattwilshire

December 6, 2006 at 1:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You wrote: "I'll leave that to those who know more [than] me to discuss." Man, I gotta cut down on the caffeine. I could swear I read a sentence (yours) in TalkBack that could be construed as evincing...dare I say it...humility. Humility? In a TalkBack thread? I...I gotta get a grip on myself...

- williamyard

December 6, 2006 at 2:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...responsibility is speaking responsibly. I don't know if Reyes is going to have the majority of Democrats behind him. Very likely not. But, I bet he will have a lot of the newly elected ones.

- ChanRobt

December 6, 2006 at 3:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yminale says we can't send more troops to Iraq, "For the simple reason there are no more troops to send (unless you want to permanently break our military)." There are 2 million people in our armed forces. We had 500,000 in Iraq during the Persian Gulf war. If stationing 160,000 tropps in Iraq has brought a 2 million man military to the breaking point, then something is seriously amiss. Even since the end of the Cold War, our military has supposedly been designed to fight 2 and a half wars. And this supposedly against very large conventional including North Korea or China. What up?

- ChanRobt

December 6, 2006 at 3:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We will have another 20,000 troops in Iraq, indefinitely. Anyone care to bet whether that infusion of additional troops at this late stage of the game will make one bit of difference after we're gone? Of course, maybe Reyes would be willing to keep those troops there for another 5 - 10 years; seems to me some people used to think it would take that long. That's what I would call a long shot - and it would be very costly too. We would need a tax increase AND a draft. Anyone care to bet whether the American people will allow their government to do such a thing? Reyes and McCain are full of shit. All they are going to achieve is to drag out the war without changing the outcome (at best). At worst, they will prevent America from moving forward to deal more effectively with the global jihadist threat. Here's my proposal: Let's give McCain and Reyes what they want. Let's send 20,000 troops today. Pull them out of Korea and ship them to Iraq, with one provision. If the insurgency isn't substantially suppressed in six months, then we pull them all out and go home within the next 90 days. All the bullshit needs to end, and I think 6 more months of playing in Iraq is all we should give the diehards. When this exercise proves to be as screwed up as the past four years, let Reyes sign the condolence letters to the families of those who died for his mistake.

- purcellneil

December 6, 2006 at 3:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

- rishy

December 6, 2006 at 3:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

only really gives you credibility among the few bundered down, unrepentant discredited die hards who litter outfits like TNR and TWS. And even at those places, these folks are exceptions, not the rule..

- MrCookie1

December 6, 2006 at 4:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If stationing 160,000 tropps in Iraq has brought a 2 million man military to the breaking point, then something is seriously amiss." Yes Chan, it's called exhaustion. troops have to be rotated out or they'll burn out and worn out material has to be either refurbished or replaced. "Even since the end of the Cold War, our military has supposedly been designed to fight 2 and a half wars. And this supposedly against very large conventional including North Korea or China." Iraq and Afganistan take the bulk of our troops. We 30,000 troops in Korea but we don't want to move them. You have to remember 60% of our troops are National Guard and Reserves not active duty.

- Yminale

December 6, 2006 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If they had but 500,000 soldiers for 3 months into Iraq and not disbanded the Iraqi army and not done de-Bathification we be debating about how best to kick Iran in the teeth. They said they studied the occupation of Germany and Japan. Why did they do the exact opposite.

- Yminale

December 6, 2006 at 4:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am a Texan, too, albeit from East Texas -- the original Spanish colonization of Texas. Still, as a Democratic Party official, I have some experience of the Trans-Pecos territories, where the most patriotic of Texans only speak English in official proceedings I am at because I am there. We all get along fine, because my son, too, enlisted and serves in our Army. Which reminds me that the most devastating critiques of this war come from a military, professional, and patriotic "right", not from self-serving chickenhawks all across the spectrum.

- JRBehrman

December 6, 2006 at 5:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You're right about that. Four years into the war, the press still are out of touch. Why would anyone take seriously the idea of sending 20,000 or more troops to Iraq now - when Bush has sat on his hands all this time and denied that more troops were needed? Now - when it couldn't be clearer that the turkey is done - now the "real men" want to take over? Should we give the McCains and Reyes of the world four years to try it their way? Game over Silvestre. Forget the posturing. Give it up, and bring them home now!

- purcellneil

December 6, 2006 at 10:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And I'm also not saying that I think it's automatically a good idea to increase troop levels. But it is certainly no worse (and probably better) than an immediate withdrawal. The reality is that neither of those strategies is likely to increase our chances to "win" (whatever that means) in Iraq. But whereas the latter strategy guarantees that we don't win, the former strategy gives us at least some small chance. As I said earlier, how small that chance is, and whether the proposals are really ways for some in DC to cover their own asses, is not something that I can ascertain, and frankly neither can anyone else on Talkback unless some of you are secretly in CENTCOM. (And if so, I don't blame you for coming here. You're likely to get a more receptive audience than you would in the White House.)

- achester99

December 7, 2006 at 9:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

One of the recomendations was to put more experienced US officers into Iraqi units. This is a good idea. The ground troops needed to win (which, achester, means a reasonably stable, reasonably pro-Western, reasonably democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors and pumping oil) are going to have to be Iraqi. We need to be the de facto Iraqi airforce and heavy armor branch protecting its national integrity from "over the horizon" bases, plus the above-mentioned trainers and some rapid-reaction "fire brigades". Period. We need to get out of the active patrolling/policing in urban environments ASAP. Reyes deserves a lot of credit for reminding people there are responsible Democrats.

- Robert Powell

December 7, 2006 at 10:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

if a deployment of 166K troops has strained our 2 million man military. However, all the troops are not combat troops and some troops are deployed

- tec619

December 7, 2006 at 9:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close