[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 108 (Monday, July 21, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H7208]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Harris). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I have been here for a while and listened
to the remarks such as those just given by my colleagues from the great
State of Texas, but quite honestly I cannot understand how it is
possible to criticize the President for the action that he took in
Operation Iraqi Freedom and at the same time ask the President to go
forward in an action in Liberia.
That being said, I think it is incumbent upon us on the Republican
side of this House to point out that after the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001, it had become apparent that the United States
needed, the United States was required to be more vigilant about
terrorism and weapons proliferation and pay particular attention to the
prospect of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of
groups or states that would use them against American interests,
American interests either here at home or abroad. And unfortunately,
over the prior 10 years we have seen that with attacks in Saudi Arabia,
the Khobar Towers, the bombing of the Cole and, of course, the attacks
here on September 11.
The Bush administration, the Clinton administration, indeed, the
United Nations all agreed that Saddam Hussein possessed a significant
biological and chemical capability in 1998 when the inspectors were
withdrawn. There is broad agreement that Saddam Hussein, different from
any other leader, had proven himself capable of using these weapons for
offensive purposes and not merely in a defensive posture.
Where those weapons are today falls into one of several categories.
They may still be hidden. Saddam Hussein had become a master of
concealment. Please remember that in 1995 the United Nations was
preparing to lift sanctions believing that Iraq had disarmed. It was
only the defection of Saddam's son-in-law, Hussein Jamal and the
revelation that significant weapons were presented that halted the
United Nations from lifting the sanctions in 1995.
Perhaps Hussein did destroy the weapons after the inspectors left in
1998. It seems preposterous on its face, but while this was unlikely
given his other behavior, the burden of proof was clearly still on
Saddam Hussein, not the United States, not President Bush and not the
United Nations to demonstrate the destruction of the weapons had indeed
occurred.
There is also the possibility that the weapons had degraded over
time or were destroyed in the bombing or looted during the first combat
phase in Iraqi Freedom. It does not really matter. The disorder and
political uncertainty we are witnessing in post-war Iraq, while at one
level unsettling, are to some extent a reflection of how completely
Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime dominated and dictated Iraqi life.
There are efforts in the Congress to employ a full investigation
into these difficult issues to understand whether any mistakes were
made and to take action to fix them in fulfillment of Congress's
important oversight responsibilities.
To date, the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence reject a broader probe of the weapons of mass
destruction issue.
I believe that Congress is exercising its oversight authority and
has set in place procedures to review comprehensively and on a
bipartisan basis the intelligence surrounding Iraq prior to the
outbreak of war and to take into account any dissenting views on the
Iraqi threat within the intelligence community.
People who have lived in a police state with no freedom of speech
are unlikely to volunteer information until stability and security are
achieved in Iraq. We must remember 30 years of living under a
dictatorship cannot be reversed overnight.
But the most important point is this: A free Iraq makes American and
its allies safer by removing a destabilizing force in the region,
removing a regime that pursued weapons of mass destruction, eliminating
a state sponsor of terrorism and, ultimately, by serving as a living
example to the people of the Middle East of the benefits of freedom and
democracy.
____________________