WASHINGTON -- As Barack Obama met with top figures in Iraq today, Virginia lawmakers -- who have made a combined 31 trips to the war-torn country -- were divided over the value of such trips.
Some said the trips provide a better understanding of the U.S. military effort in Iraq, while others called them useless public-relations exercises.
"It was extraordinarily important to understand from the military leaders -- and the troops' point of view -- what the challenges were and how they felt the war was going," said Rep. Rob Wittman, R-1st, who visited Iraq within three months of taking office.
Rep. Robert Scott, D-3rd, disagreed, arguing that, "What you get is people under orders to tell you what the administration wants them to tell you. I can get that" in Washington.
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., a member of the Armed Services Committee, has visited the country once since his election in 2006.
"I don't think Franklin Roosevelt had to go to France in order to understand what was going on in World War II," Webb said on MSNBC. "In some cases it can help when one goes to these places, and in other cases it can be a very narrow, limited experience."
Republican John W. Warner has visited Iraq 10 times since 2003, his office said.
While some politicians have used their trips to Iraq to harden their views about the war, others like Warner have returned with a new stance.
An initial supporter of the Bush administration's plan to increase troop levels, Warner came home from Iraq in August 2007 and urged the president to begin withdrawing troops by the end of that year.
Rep. James P. Moran, D-8th, who has traveled to Iraq three times, said the first trips lawmakers take there can be useless.
But after the first visit, he said, lawmakers know what to look for and can ask more pointed questions.
"When you see it and feel it and touch it and smell it," you understand the country better, said Rep. Frank R. Wolf, R-10th.
Contact Neil H. Simon at nsimon@mediageneral.com
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement