[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 28, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1656-S1657]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                             WAR WITH IRAQ

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, as I go out among my constituents, the 
one question I always get asked in these present times is: Are we going 
to go to war with Iraq?
  For a while my answer was, that is up to Saddam Hussein. It depends 
on how he acts and what he does, as to whether or not we are going to 
go to war with Iraq.
  But what he does now is fairly clear. The position he has taken is 
fairly clear. He made the comment to an Egyptian journalist, that has 
been repeated now around the world:

       Time is working for us.

  He has made it clear that he is not going to change. There will be no 
disarmament of Iraq from within. There will be no genuine cooperation 
with the inspectors. So I think my earlier answer probably is no longer 
correct. The decision now lies with President Bush: Will we go to war 
or won't we?
  In that circumstance, the President is being bombarded on all sides 
with editorial comment and punditry, with firm, solid recommendations, 
yes and no, depending on the ideological status of the particular 
pundit. They can make those firm recommendations from the safe, secure 
position of knowing that they will not have to be acted upon and that 
they will not be held accountable if their recommendation is followed 
and the result is not successful.
  The President faces what is clearly the most agonizing and difficult 
decision of his Presidency. I pray for him and urge other Americans to 
pray for him as he makes this decision.
  I want to lay down what I see as the challenge here. I do not think 
it is an easy question. I do not think it is clear, one way or the 
other. The truly Presidential decisions never are. If the decisions 
were easy, they would be made before they got to the level of the 
President. If the action was clear, smart people at lower levels of 
Government would take it. It is only when the decision is agonizingly 
close and the options not clear on either side that it ends up 
ultimately on the President's desk in the Oval Office and becomes his 
decision and his decision alone.

  This is what I see. Saddam Hussein is going through the motions of 
cooperating with the inspectors, and there are those who say: Let that 
process play out. We have him contained. As long as there are 
inspectors in the country, there will not be any effort to use weapons 
of mass destruction. Let's just let that play out.
  Then there are those who say: He has violated the resolution of the 
United Nations. The legal position is absolutely clear. If the United 
Nations and the United States are going to be taken seriously around 
the world, we must now take military action and we cannot wait any 
longer.
  I am sure those legal arguments with respect to Resolution 1441 in 
the United Nations are valid. I don't argue with them. But they don't 
change the practicality of the situation, that an attack on Iraq--even 
if it is justified under the legality of the United Nations 
resolution--might still prove to be a mistake. The solidity of the 
legal position with respect to Resolution 1441 is a legitimate question 
for Colin Powell to raise with his fellow diplomats, but it does not 
ease the agony of the necessity of making the final decision in the 
Oval Office.
  I believe that Saddam Hussein is cooperating with the investigators 
for one reason and one reason only; that is that American troops are 
massing on the border. He knows American military power is sufficient, 
if unleashed, to bring his regime down and probably end his life. He is 
taking every step he can to try prevent that.
  Those who say let this play out, leave the status quo and let it go 
forward, don't appreciate the difficulty of America keeping those 
troops on line, keeping those troops on the border, keeping those 
airplanes on alert so that he will continue to try to satisfy the 
inspectors. We cannot continue to do that for an extended period of 
time. It is not fair. It is not possible, given the lives and other 
challenges faced by these young people. At some point and at some point 
relatively soon, the President is going to have to make a decision to 
either move in or stand down. And the ultimate question here is not 
what is the legality of U.N. Resolution 1441 or what is the relevance 
of the United Nations in the world community. The ultimate question 
here is, What will be the result if he moves forward, and what will be 
the result if he stands down, he, in this case, of course, being 
President Bush.
  We have heard a lot of talk. That is not the right term. That implies 
something less than seriousness. We have heard a lot of analysis about 
what could happen if he moves forward. Some of the scenarios are very 
encouraging; some are frightening. We don't know in advance which ones 
would come true. We have had less analysis placed on the question of 
what would happen if the President orders the troops to stand down and 
start to come home. We do have some historic precedent for this. I 
remember going to the room in the Capitol on the fourth floor and 
hearing Madeleine Albright describe the situation in Iraq, in terms 
eerily familiar to the terms we are currently hearing from Secretary 
Powell. I remember walking out of that briefing in room 407 and saying 
to myself: We will be at war with Iraq within 3 days.
  Then President Clinton made the decision that we would stand down. 
American troops were not at the forward edge they are now, so that 
decision was not as difficult in terms of the logistics, as it would be 
for President Bush now. But at the same time, the progress being made 
then was not as good as it is now. President Clinton, for whatever 
reasons--good, bad, or indifferent--decided to stand down and the 
result has not been one with which the world is pleased.
  Now, if we stand down, the result ultimately, in my opinion, would be 
more devastating for world peace, long term, than if we move forward.
  I know how agonizing that decision must be for the President. I will 
look forward to listening to him discuss it with us tonight. I hope he 
will outline for us what would be the consequences if we stand down, in 
terms of American credibility--credibility that is not just saving face 
in some kind of psychological way, credibility that is essential to 
keeping the peace in the world. What would happen to those countries 
that are urging, hoping, praying for Saddam Hussein to be gone, if they 
said the Americans got this far, they came this close, and then they 
turned around and left? That means we cannot depend on the Americans 
ever again. We can't trust their word ever again. What would be the 
consequences of that? I think they would be serious.
  I remember a couplet I learned as a child. I never quite understood 
what it meant until someone in my later years explained the historic 
context. It is just a child's rhyme, but it was based on a historic 
event. It said:

     The King of France went up the hill
     With twenty thousand men;
     The King of France came down the hill,
     And ne'er went up again.

  There was even a tune that went to it. I will not duplicate Senator 
D'Amato and sing on the Senate floor. But that is where we are.

     The King of France went up the hill
     With twenty thousand men;
     The king of France came down the hill,
     And ne'er went up again.

  The United States of America, acting on a 15-to-nothing resolution 
out of the Security Council of the United Nations, as well as an 
overwhelming vote in this Chamber and in the other body, has marched up 
the hill and told Saddam Hussein he must disarm. Now there are those 
who say because he has stopped producing these weapons, as long as 
these troops are at his border we can afford to turn around and march 
down again.
  It is, as I said, an agonizing decision. It will be made by the 
President of the United States. He will not ask my advice, for I have 
no expertise in these matters. But my constituents do ask me about it 
because I represent them in this body.
  I think having marched up the hill, having taken the United Nations 
Resolution 1441 at its face value, and having stood the troops there, 
that has produced the results we have had so far. We cannot now back 
down.
  I wish the President well. As I said, he is in my prayers, and I hope 
that of all Americans, as he makes this most momentous decision. The 
consequence is: What happens if we do? And what happens if we do not?
  I wish the President well as he makes that analysis. I have 
confidence in this

[[Page S1657]]

President and his instincts that he will, in fact, ultimately make the 
correct decision.

                          ____________________