[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 137 (Wednesday, October 1, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H9096-H9104]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       SECURING THE PEACE IN IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to open an 
important discussion before the Congress on the topic of securing the 
peace in Iraq.
  I am going to be brief in my opening remarks, Mr. Speaker, because we 
have some colleagues here who want to participate in this debate and 
who have other obligations. But let me simply start by saying that I 
believe it is absolutely essential for this Nation, now that we have 
deposed Saddam Hussein, to rebuild that country and to secure for them 
the peace. And what I mean by that is that it is simply not adequate in 
this world we live in today to get rid of a dictator like Saddam 
Hussein and then walk away. Tragically, America has done that all too 
often in its foreign policy, with disastrous consequences.
  There will be discussion on the floor here tonight in the course of 
this debate of how we did that after World War I. We not only walked 
away, but we demanded reparations. The result was the rise of an 
atrocious dictatorship in Germany and another world war.
  I want to point to another example just briefly here at the outset of 
this

[[Page H9097]]

debate. When we helped the people of Afghanistan fight off the Russian 
invaders, the Soviet invaders in their country, we did the right thing. 
But sadly, tragically, when that effort ended, and the Soviet Union 
retreated from Afghanistan and turned it back over to the people of 
Afghanistan, we simply walked away and we did not help them rebuild 
their nation. We did not help them set up an economy. The result was 
absolutely disastrous. It was the Taliban regime that we have now 
deposed.
  I know firsthand the situation in Afghanistan today. I was there a 
year ago August. I know firsthand the situation in Iraq, because I 
spent 3 days inside Iraq just this last August, and I learned a great 
deal. I went to several different parts of the country. And it is 
absolutely critical that we not just depose Saddam Hussein but that we 
help the people of Iraq to structure a functioning government. That 
will pay dividends for years to come.

                              {time}  1845

  I want to not only talk in this hour about the importance of having 
deposed Saddam Hussein and now securing the peace by aiding the people 
of Iraq, but why it is a bad idea to demand that this be repaid out of 
oil proceeds or to demand that this be a loan from the American 
Government.
  There may be times when we need to make loans. I think right now the 
aid that the President has asked for should be given as a grant, 
because I think it is critical for us to demonstrate not just to the 
people of Iraq, but to all of the people of the Middle East, indeed the 
Muslim world, that when the United States injects itself as we did in 
Iraq and deposes a terrible leader like Saddam Hussein, the United 
States then follows through with its commitment and keeps its word.
  Mr. Speaker, with that as kind of an introduction, I yield to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Schrock).
  Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I recently joined 10 other Members of 
Congress to visit our troops and those working to restore peace to 
Iraq. What I saw there was absolutely amazing. There are many good and 
positive changes occurring in Iraq almost daily. The most remarkable 
and appreciated fact is the fact that Saddam Hussein is no longer in 
power. He clearly made the Iraqi people live in horrible fear.
  Five miles from the historic city of Babylon we visited one of the 59 
mass graves which has been discovered, which contained the remains of 
3,000 Iraqis. To date, 2,100 have been identified and returned to their 
families for burial. There are still 900 unclaimed bodies in clear view 
of where we stood which await identification and a proper burial by 
their families.
  There are a total of 300,000 missing Iraqis. With each new discovery 
of another mass grave, that number shrinks, bringing closure to many 
families.
  The bright spot in this bleak description are the men and women in 
our military who not only liberated Iraq, but work every single day to 
bring peace and prosperity to this deserving country. Our men and women 
have repaired the power system so now light and air conditioning abound 
throughout Iraq. The sanitation and water systems that were in total 
disarray just 3 months ago are becoming more and more operational each 
and every day. Our men and women in uniform are reopening schools so 
all Iraqi children can attend school. Our troops have rebuilt and 
reopened the police academy in Baghdad so the Iraqis can be trained to 
provide for their own safety and their own security.
  Everyone in America should be proud of what our troops are doing 
there. They are the best, and there are none better anywhere in the 
world. They do their jobs in intense heat under the most difficult 
circumstances, and they do it because it is the right thing to do; and 
they will tell you that as well. Every Iraqi we talked to thanked us 
and told us to thank President Bush when we saw him next. To a person, 
they all begged us not to leave their country too early. That is their 
greatest fear, the fear that we will cut and run.
  This $87 billion supplemental is a tremendous investment in our 
future security. It will sustain our military forces in the war on 
terrorism and invest in the future of Iraq and, consequently, the 
future stability of the entire Middle East. The stakes are too high for 
us to fail.
  Remember, only $20.3 billion of the supplemental spending request is 
for Iraq. It seems that the 10 Democratic Presidential nominees have 
either failed to look at the details of the President's proposal, or 
they are purposely misleading the American people into thinking all $87 
billion is for the reconstruction in Iraq. Only $20.3 billion is for 
Iraq. The rest is to support our military in the war on terrorism.
  The Vice President has said that in no way, shape or form will funds 
provided by the United States be used to pay foreign debts from the 
Saddam Hussein era in Iraq. The Iraqi Governing Council has asked the 
World Bank to assist in developing a proper accounting of their foreign 
debt. It is estimated to be about $120 billion. The Governing Council 
feels strongly that governments that knowingly lend money to a sadistic 
dictator such as Saddam Hussein to buy weapons and oppress his people 
do not deserve to have that money paid back.
  There are key members of the Iraqi Governing Council who propose to 
repudiate all foreign debt from that era since that money was used to 
buy weapons and oppress the Iraqi people, and we should strongly 
support that policy.
  We must continue to encourage the development of functioning local 
institutions in Iraq, not dependency on foreign administrators. This 
will take time and persistence. To transfer power before governmental 
institutions have properly developed would be reckless and dangerous. 
What matters most in developing states such as Iraq is leaders and law, 
not aid. The Iraqi Governing Council is committed to developing a 
constitution that creates a secular, democratic, strong federal 
government which embodies principles of equality for all Iraqis. They 
have already passed some of the most progressive laws in the Middle 
East in terms of encouraging foreign investment, allowing for dual 
citizenship, and establishing income and corporate tax structures, but 
it is too early to turn over control completely to the Iraqis.

  In the short term, we must continue to increase the level of 
involvement of the Iraqi people in three key areas: security, control 
of money raised by oil revenues, and empowering them to represent 
themselves in world forums, such as OPEC and the United Nations. We 
will retain control of the funding that is provided in the 
supplemental. We have made unprecedented progress, and we must continue 
to be patient and stay the course.
  There are many examples of our success to date. Approximately 5,000 
small businesses have opened in Iraq since May 1, and an Iraqi central 
bank has been established. This took 3 years in postwar Germany. Almost 
all major hospitals and universities have been reopened, and hundreds 
of secondary schools will start school this fall.
  An Iraqi Governing Council has been formed and appointed a cabinet of 
ministers. This took 14 months in postwar Germany. A 56,000 person 
security force has been armed and trained, and is contributing to Iraqi 
security. This took 14 months in postwar Germany.
  There is still a tremendous security challenge, but more troops are 
not the answer. The Iraqis are eager to be responsible for their own 
security. Once the coalition trains Iraqis to be responsible for the 
governance and security of their own country, then we will be able to 
leave.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Marshall) on a fantastic op-ed piece that he wrote, which ran in 
today's Washington Post. The gentleman emphasized that the version of 
events that we see each day on the news is distorted and heavily skewed 
towards destruction and death and not the birth of a new nation that is 
taking place.
  I want to quote from Jim's op-ed. ``We not only need Iraqi tips and 
intelligence, we need Iraqis fighting by our side and eventually 
assuming full responsibility for their internal security.'' He says, 
``Many in Washington view the contest for the Presidency and control of 
Congress as a sum-zero game without external costs and benefits. 
Politicians and activists from both parties reflexively embellish news 
that is bad for the opposition, but to do that with regard to Iraq 
harms our troops and our efforts. Concerning Iraq, this normal 
political tripe can impose a heavy external cost.''

[[Page H9098]]

  I agree with the gentleman from Georgia and commend him for his 
vision and candor. American journalists in Iraq have freely admitted 
that their editors are not interested in printing good news from Iraq, 
but only reporting on death and destruction. Those editors are doing a 
tremendous disservice not only to their readers, but to every American 
serving in Iraq, to the Iraqi people and to our country. We must tell 
the story of the successes as well as the setbacks.
  There is still a long way to go in Iraq, but there are thousands of 
dedicated, intelligent and educated Iraqis eager to assume leadership 
roles and be responsible for the future of their country. They 
desperately need our help.
  Our credibility, our security and the security of the Middle East are 
tightly linked to their success. We must stay the course and provide 
the support needed. The return on our investment is stability, 
democracy and partnership. The failure of our efforts is too 
frightening to contemplate.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support the President's 
requests for additional funding for Iraq. It is absolutely essential.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his thoughtful 
comments and I appreciate the gentleman participating in this 
discussion tonight. I know that the gentleman has family obligations, 
but his attendance here speaks to how important he thinks this topic 
is.
  I also thank the gentleman for pointing out that only $20.3 billion, 
not the entire $87 billion, is dedicated to reconstructing Iraq. And I 
also think it is important that we listen to his comments about the 
Interim Governing Council and the fact that they are making progress, 
but this money is going to be spent by Americans right now, and I think 
to assert that although Americans are spending this money, the Iraqis 
ought to repay it seems unfair.
  I also commend the gentleman about Iraqi involvement and 
responsibility. At the end of the day, this is an Iraqi responsibility 
and ultimately we have to get those people involved in recreating their 
nation, and I very much appreciate the gentleman's comments. I also 
appreciate him pointing out that this is a bipartisan discussion; and 
our colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Marshall) has written 
and spoken on this topic, and I think he will join us in this 
discussion.

  Mr. Speaker, I went to Iraq this August and spent time there. 
Interesting in this debate, people who have been to Iraq and seen what 
is on the ground tend to support the President's position. Those who 
are critical tend to be those who have not been there.
  Ambassador Bremer, I think, laid the groundwork by these remarks in a 
hearing just last month. He said the $20.3 billion in grants to Iraq 
the President is seeking as part of this $57 billion supplemental speed 
the grandeur of vision equal to the one which created the free world at 
the end of World War II. What he is referring to is the Marshall Plan, 
and I think for Americans to understand this discussion, they need to 
understand this aid, put in perspective.
  As I mentioned earlier, at the end of World War I, we walked away. 
Indeed, we demanded reparations. We did not help Europe rebuild. That 
resulted in Hitler and another world war following that. But following 
World War II, we changed our policy rather dramatically, and we 
understood that rebuilding Europe was critically important. That was 
the Marshall Plan.
  This second graph shows in current dollars that the Marshall Plan was 
dramatically more expensive than we are talking about in the 
President's request here. I think it is vitally important for the 
people of America to understand that if we are being asked to put up 
this money to rebuild Iraq, how does that compare to our prior 
experiences.
  And with that, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Hoekstra).
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for doing this 
special order, and maybe we can have a dialogue.
  The gentleman, myself, along with a couple of our other colleagues 
had the opportunity to spend 3 days in Iraq in August. I had an 
opportunity to go back in September to complement that trip and see 
some things we were not able to see in August; and in coming back, 
there are some things we agreed on.
  Number one, we agreed on the quality of our troops. We have very, 
very talented young men and women who fought a war in Iraq and now are 
providing the security zone to allow this country to restructure 
itself.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Not just their quality, their enthusiasm. They are 
committed to this task. They can see in the faces of the Iraqi people 
that they are trying to help every day what it is doing for that 
country and for their people.
  Quite frankly, I think if every Member of Congress were to go to 
Iraq, and for that matter, I urge the administration to take business 
leaders, take average Americans over there, let them see when we help 
the Iraqis by fixing a well that is no longer working or by opening a 
school that is no longer functioning, and we will discuss education 
later in this Special Order, when we do that, the faces of those people 
light up. And these are people embracing the concept of freedom and 
democracy for the first time.
  When we look into the eyes of our troops and soldiers, they know we 
are enabling these people to be free for the first time and to 
understand prosperity for the first time. I could not agree more with 
the gentleman's comments.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, the media is portraying a very different 
story regarding what is going on in Iraq than what we saw. There is no 
doubt that Iraq is still a dangerous place. At least it was in August, 
it was in September, and it probably still is today. But as we flew 
over the city of Baghdad there were cars, buses and trucks on the 
streets. There was commerce. Much of the city of Baghdad was 
functioning.
  We met with a couple of divisional military commanders who talked 
about the thousands of projects that they had going on, rebuilding 
schools, cleaning irrigation ditches, working on clinics, and they 
talked about the progress that they were making. We met with a number 
of talented people.
  The second trip I had over there I met with Peter McPherson, who is 
the president of Michigan State. He is now back at Michigan State. He 
was kind of the shadow finance minister. I asked him, what about the 
plans? You guys did not have a plan for reconstruction.
  He said, What do you mean we did not have a plan? Did you see our 
currency collapse? No.
  He said there was a debate about whether Iraq should keep this 
currency that had Saddam Hussein's picture on it. He said, we made a 
conscious decision, we planned to keep that currency because we did not 
want the currency to collapse, we did not want a run on the banks. 
Commerce continued in Iraq after the war.

                              {time}  1900

  The plan is in place. They now have a tax code, 15 percent top rate. 
They have a tariff structure, and they also now have one of the most 
progressive foreign investment laws in the Middle East. They have 
thought through all those things. Now they are working with the Iraqi 
Governing Council to implement it.
  Another individual from Michigan who was kind of their shadow health 
care minister, he said, ``What do you mean, no plan? Did you see a 
breakout of malaria? Did you see a breakout of cholera or diarrheal 
diseases after the war? That is very typical after you have had a 
military conflict.
  ``Those things did not happen. We had plans in place to try to 
prevent that, and we were successful in preventing those things from 
happening. We kept the clinics open. We kept the hospitals open. The 
doctors kept coming to work. We were able to treat the people. There 
were plans in place. We have got talented people who have run major 
universities, major businesses, major sectors of this country who are 
now helping put Iraq together.''
  Does that mean everything has worked perfectly? Absolutely not. But 
these folks have a plan, they are implementing the plan and as they get 
new information they are adjusting it.
  Mr. SHADEGG. I could not agree with the gentleman more. Certainly I 
think it is helpful to hear those kinds of comments. And understand 
when I said at the outset of this special order

[[Page H9099]]

that we want to discuss securing the peace, maybe that confuses people, 
but for the average American what I mean is, we are in a war, a war on 
terrorism; and the battleground of that war is a war to win the hearts 
and minds right now, first and foremost, of the Iraqi people.
  We cannot win their hearts and minds if, for example, they do not 
have electricity to cool or air-condition their homes and it is 140 
degrees out. We cannot win their hearts and minds and tell them we have 
a better system for them if, for example, they cannot get gasoline to 
run their cars.
  There has been some complaining about the President wanting to send 
refined fuels into Iraq. Why do we need to do that? They do not have 
gasoline to run their automobiles to conduct their business lives. We 
saw that great progress has been made, but the aid the President is 
seeking now is so that more progress can be made. I commend the 
gentleman for his thoughts.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Let me add one thing. I do have another commitment. A 
lot of our colleagues are here tonight. That is great to see.
  Mr. SHADEGG. I am thrilled to see so many of them here. I have got to 
get them all on.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. We talked about the horrors of Saddam. I will give you 
one of the ones that I have not seen published anywhere, but that I 
heard on my last trip.
  I had the opportunity to go through the Ministry of Health. Then I 
had the opportunity to go through a hospital. We have heard about the 
mass graves, the slaughter of the Kurds and all of these types of 
folks. The one anecdote that somebody asked if I had heard about, they 
said, have you heard about our cornea transplant policy in Iraq? I 
said, no. He said, all the cornea transplants were done on Monday and 
Thursday. Executions were done Sunday night and Wednesday night.
  Just one other example and these are stories that come from the 
Iraqis.
  These folks are thankful that this man is gone. They are thankful 
that we are there, and they want us to stay because they trust us a 
whole lot more than they trust the U.N. We put together a good 
coalition in a very difficult situation, and as demonstrated by our 
colleagues here tonight, there are a whole lot of folks who have a lot 
more to add to this because we are going out and we are getting a 
complete picture by having this many Members participating in the 
debate, but also spending the time over in Iraq and everybody picking 
up their own little gems of information to give us a complete picture.
  Mr. SHADEGG. I thank the gentleman. Without further ado, because we 
do have so many Members who want to participate, let me yield to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).
  Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I appreciate so much the opportunity to 
be here tonight. I want to thank the gentleman for his efforts because 
he cares about the people of Iraq. He cares about the people of 
America, because that is what we are talking about, the security of the 
people of the United States.
  We are in a war against terrorism. It began, not of our own making, 
on September 11, 2001. We are responding to a very vicious enemy, being 
the terrorists who have determined that the targets of their attack are 
the people of the United States. And so I thank you for doing this.
  I additionally want to point out that the people who are here 
tonight, this is the largest outpouring I have ever seen of people who 
are genuinely concerned about our country, about the war on terrorism. 
I also want to point out that I particularly appreciate your pointing 
out the situation of how we assisted in the redevelopment of Germany 
after World War II. That is exactly what we are doing right now.
  The reason that we redeveloped Germany was not to show any 
appreciation of the war that they brought upon the world during World 
War II, but it was to redevelop Germany so it would not be a breeding 
ground for Communists because that is where we were. We were getting 
ready, as we all knew, to go into the Cold War. And we were able to 
redevelop Germany, and then we were able to defeat the Communists.
  The exact same principle is at hand here. We are trying to redevelop 
Iraq so that we can avoid Iraq continuing, it already has been, now we 
need to stop it, as a breeding ground, a country that supported or 
harbored terrorists, because we are in a war against terrorism. We 
defeated communism. We can defeat terrorism thanks to the efforts of 
the people who are here tonight.
  It is really very heartwarming that the opportunity I had, I returned 
2 weeks ago from the visit to Iraq. This was a trip put together, a 
congressional delegation, by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), 
the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Armed Services, and one of the 
very fine persons with us was the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Marshall).
  I want to congratulate him on his courage. He has been very outspoken 
in what he saw in Iraq. He saw the progress that the American forces 
and the coalition forces from all over the world, from 32 countries 
that are serving in Iraq.
  In fact, in today's Washington Post, I would like to commend him, and 
he will be appearing apparently in a few minutes, on an op-ed which 
appeared in today's Washington Post. He had an excellent op-ed in the 
Atlanta Constitution. I just want to read one part. I do not mean to 
preempt his ability to speak this evening, but the gentleman from 
Georgia indicated, ``I went to Iraq a couple of weeks ago to resolve 
for myself the recent contrast between gloomy news coverage and 
optimistic Pentagon reports of our progress. My trip left no doubt that 
the Pentagon's version is far closer to reality.''
  Mr. Speaker, the text of the op-ed is as follows:

                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 1, 2003]

                      Don't Play Politics on Iraq

                           (By Jim Marshall)

       My first trip to a combat zone occurred in 1969. I was a 
     21-year-old staff sergeant, naive as hell, a freshly trained 
     Army Ranger who had left Princeton University to volunteer 
     for ground combat in Vietnam. I vividly recall feeling way 
     out of step with my Ivy League colleagues.
       Well, that same out-of-step feeling is back. But this time 
     it's about Iraq and involves some of my professional 
     colleagues, political leaders and activists who carelessly 
     using words, and phrases such as ``quagmire,'' ``our failure 
     in Iraq,'' ``this is just another Vietnam,'' or the ``Bush 
     administration has no plan.''
       I went to Iraq a couple of weeks ago to resolve for myself 
     the recent contrast between gloomy news coverage and 
     optimistic Pentagon reports of our progress. My trip left no 
     doubt that the Pentagon's version is far closer to reality. 
     Our news coverage disproportionately dwells on the deaths, 
     mistakes and setbacks suffered by coalition forces. Some will 
     attribute this to a grand left-wing conspiracy, but a more 
     plausible explanation is simply the tendency of our new media 
     to focus on bad news. It sells. Few Americans think local 
     news coverage fairly captures the essence of daily life and 
     progress in their hometowns. Coverage from Iraq is no 
     different.
       Falsely bleak Iraq news circulating in the United States is 
     a serious problem for coalition forces because it discourages 
     Iraqi cooperation, the key to our ultimate success or 
     failure, a daily determinant of life or death for American 
     soldiers. As one example, coalition forces are now 
     discovering nearly 50 percent of the improvised explosive 
     devices through tips. Guess how they discover the rest.
       We not only need Iraqi tips and intelligence, we need 
     Iraqis fighting by our side and eventually assuming full 
     responsibility for their internal security. But Iraqis have 
     not forgotten the 1991 Gulf War. America encouraged the 
     Shiites to rebel, then abandoned them to be slaughtered. I 
     visited one of the mass graves, mute testimony to the 
     wisdom of being cautious about relying on American 
     politicians to live up to their commitments.
       For Iraqis, news of America's resolve is critical to any 
     decision to cooperate with coalition forces, a decision that 
     can lead to death. Newspaper start-up ventures and sales of 
     satellite dishes absolutely exploded following the collapse 
     of Saddam Hussein's regime. With this on top of the Internet, 
     Iraqis do get the picture from America--literally.
       Many in Washington view the contest for the presidency and 
     control of Congress as a zero-sum game without external costs 
     or benefits. Politicians and activists in each party 
     reflexively celebrate, spread and embellish news that is bad 
     for the opposition. But to do that now with regard to Iraq 
     harms our troops and our effort. Concerning Iraq, this normal 
     political tripe can impose a heavy external cost.
       It is too soon to determine whether Iraqis will step 
     forward to secure their own freedom. For now, responsible 
     Democrats should carefully avoid using the language of 
     failure. It is false. It endangers our troops and our effort. 
     It can be unforgivably self-fulfilling.
       Democratic candidates for the presidency should repeatedly 
     hammer home their support, if elected, for helping the Iraqi 
     people

[[Page H9100]]

     secure their own freedom. It is fine for each to contend that 
     he or she is a better choice for securing victory in Iraq. 
     But in making this argument, care should be taken not to 
     dwell on perceived failures of the current team or plan. 
     Americans, with help from commentators and others, will 
     decide this for themselves.
       Instead of being negative about Iraq, Democratic 
     presidential candidates should emphasize the positive aspects 
     of their own plans for Iraq. Save the negative attacks for 
     the issues of jobs and the economy. Iraqis are far less 
     likely to support the coalition effort if they think America 
     might withdraw following the 2004 election.
       Finally, no better signal of our commitment to this effort 
     could currently be provided than for Congress to quickly 
     approve, with little dissent or dithering, the president's 
     request for an additional $87 billion for Iraq and 
     Afghanistan. Of course no one wants to spend such a sum. But 
     it is well worth it if it leads to a stable, secular 
     representative government in Iraq, something that could 
     immeasurably improve our future national security.

  I minored in journalism at Washington & Lee University, and I served 
as a reporter for the Post and Courier in Charleston, South Carolina. 
What I have seen in Iraq is really sad, and that is that the level of 
news reporting has been of the police blotter, and that is that in lieu 
of covering what is going on in a community, a country, a State or a 
capital, what has occurred is that the reporters have gone to the 
police station, gotten the very negative reporting of incidents of 
violence, level of violence, and then reported that as the news. That 
is inappropriate. I would hope that they would cover the positive.
  I brought some indications, I feel like show and tell tonight, but I 
brought several items that I want to show that I believe indicate the 
progress.
  First of all, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) has been so good 
in bringing to our attention earlier today on the floor of Congress 
that the schools have reopened today, October 1, 2003, in Iraq. This is 
very significant. Many of the schools were closed, particularly in 
communities that did not support Saddam Hussein. Thanks to the work, 
the civil action projects of the American military, the schools have 
reopened.
  By American standards, we would be appalled. These are one-room 
schoolhouses that have been repainted; we are not talking about elegant 
schoolhouses, but they reopened today. When they did reopen, the 
teachers and the students were given tablets so they could write on 
them what they learned and what they were having the ability to learn.
  For the first time, they were in classrooms where they were not given 
propaganda. The propaganda in subliminal messages on the mathematics 
were how evil the Western world is, how evil the American people were. 
Now they know that there is an open society in the United States and in 
the Western democracies, and it is one that can be positive for the 
people of Iraq.
  I am excited. Today is a big day for the people of Iraq. Over 1.5 
million students have received the new textbooks and the new book bags 
to carry and go to school.
  Another indication of progress is the money itself of Iraq. Those of 
us in South Carolina are very proud that George Wolfe, who is the 
general counsel of the U.S. Department of Treasury, is serving with the 
Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq in one of Saddam's palaces. 
What they are doing is that on October 15, 2 weeks from today, they 
will be turning in the money which is currently in Iraq and they will 
be, first of all, deleting the dictator Saddam Hussein's picture, and 
the new money will be issued.
  It will be dinars. It will be from what we have learned from prior 
experience, and that is, it will not be currency manipulation; the 
people will receive dinar per dinar. It will be of the new money. It is 
being done at 150 locations in a very large country, 26 million people 
throughout the country to turn in the money, and Saddam Hussein will be 
gone in terms of the money. That is very important.
  A final point in my show and tell tonight, it was very exciting for 
me to be with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Forbes) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) 
to visit the reopening of the Kisik Oil Refinery. This is very 
significant. It is in the northern part of the country. The person who 
really coordinated this is General David Petraeus of the 101st Airborne 
Division.
  They had the opportunity, again just 2 weeks ago, of reopening this 
refinery. It had closed 4 years ago; under the dictatorship of Saddam 
Hussein, the refinery had closed. But it was reopened. Now we have 
production of gasoline and kerosene which will be used by the people of 
northern Iraq, it will be traded to the country of Syria. Syria was so 
confident of all things, and that had not been identified as one of the 
countries that has been favorable to us, but Syria actually provided, 
by way of barter, electricity several weeks ago, anticipating the 
opening of the refinery so that this electricity could be forwarded 
into northern Iraq, which is already democratically operating and 
operating fully, and it will be sent to Baghdad.
  And so we saw firsthand tremendous progress. I want the American 
people to know the progress that has been made, how much we appreciate 
the sacrifices of the Armed Forces that are serving there, the 
competence of their leadership and themselves; and for the family 
members who have young people serving in Iraq, the equipment that is 
there, the technology to protect our troops. And I say that as a parent 
of three people in the military, as a retiree 2 months ago yesterday of 
31 years in the Army National Guard.
  Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona for his leadership 
as we bring this. It should not be, but it seems to be new news to the 
people of the United States.
  Mr. SHADEGG. I thank the gentleman for his comments in support of 
this effort. I know that he believes deeply, as I do, that we have an 
obligation, having thrown out Saddam, as was needed to be done, a 
terrible dictator, to now help the Iraqi people. I think his 
illustrations of what we have done have helped.
  Quite frankly, when I do these special orders, I like to have them be 
a discussion between several people, back and forth. Stunningly, we 
have so many people here tonight that it is almost not possible to 
follow that form.
  One of our colleagues is the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon). He 
is here, and I know he feels passionately that we need to rebuild Iraq, 
that the President is going in the right direction and that it is 
indeed a mandate in history, that this has lifelong consequences for 
our war against terror.
  I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I will be 
brief because I know there are several people who have been to Iraq.
  I believe my physician colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Burgess), may get up in a little while and talk about the medical 
situation over there, which was really abominable under Saddam Hussein.
  I just want to state that I support the President's request to make 
this grant to Iraq. It is the right thing to do from a military 
strategy, it is the right thing to do from a political strategy and I 
am very, very pleased that this is going to be a bipartisan special 
order.
  I just want to make one comment. I was so glad that you put this 
poster up here, because this $100 billion that we spent rebuilding 
Europe after World War II was somewhat in our own interests in that 
Europe was in such disarray that Communist forces were beginning to 
take over.

                              {time}  1915

  And those funds that were spent helped stabilize Europe, helped the 
democracies in Europe to emerge, and we essentially got a tremendous 
dividend from this investment in that there was a tremendous decade of 
peace and free trade, and ultimately in the end our economy benefitted 
from that.
  And the situation here today is very similar. We have a unique 
opportunity to create a Western, U.S.-friendly, democratic beachhead in 
the middle of what has been a very problematic area in the Middle East 
that could have tremendous positive implications in decades and decades 
to come. And if we fail, the results could be absolutely horrible, not 
only in terms of dollars spent but as well in human lives. So I think 
the President's approach is right. All the military leaders say that 
this is desperately needed. All of the Members, and they are going to 
be speaking

[[Page H9101]]

more tonight like the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), say it is 
very much needed. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, in the dialogue format, I just want to make 
one point. The gentleman points out the consequences in human lives, 
and I think he has spoken eloquently upon that topic. I just want to 
throw it back to him. I think he has made the point very clear that if 
we back away from Iraq right now, all those people in the country who 
are helping us right now, their lives will not be worth a penny, and I 
would like the gentleman to make a quick comment on that.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned that at the House 
Republican conference last week, and it is a point that I do not think 
has been emphasized enough. If we fail, what is likely to happen? One 
of the scenarios is that another brutal, vicious, murderous 
dictatorship regime could come back. The worst case scenario, of 
course, is that Saddam himself could crawl out from under a rock and 
regain the reins of power. And we all know what he did in Basra after 
the first Gulf War. He executed 10,000 people. I think the bloodshed 
this time around would be much worse. So we really need to follow 
through on this, and we really need to make sure it is a success.
  I think the President's proposal is very much the right thing to do, 
and I think all of us in the House and in the Senate should be backing 
him. This is money, I believe, that will be very well-spent in the 
long-term. This war on terror, I believe very strongly, it could end up 
resembling the Cold War. It may take decades or generations, and this 
is a very critical moment for us. If we succeed, it could have huge 
positive implications for the future. If we fail, it could be 
disastrous. And I yield back.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments.
  One of the most eloquent spokesman who has gotten a lot of national 
coverage for his courage in speaking out, who makes this discussion 
tonight bipartisan and who makes this debate bipartisan, though there 
will be many, many Democrats who will vote with the President next week 
when we take up this legislation, is the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Marshall). I yield to him on this topic.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I 
guess I would say that had I had a little bit more notice and 
appreciated the attempt to have a bipartisan effort here, I could have 
had plenty of Democrats on this side. There is no question about it. 
What we are going to find is that on the Democratic side, also on the 
Republican side, and I do not know how publicly on the gentleman's 
side, but certainly on the Democratic side, there will be questions 
concerning exactly how the money is planned to be spent. Is this 
appropriate? Is that appropriate? And there may be some who say this is 
inappropriate and that is inappropriate. But, in general, I think what 
we will find, and to a person this is what I have heard, Democrats are 
certainly in support of this effort to help the Iraqi people create a 
secular, representative government.
  I do not want to take too much time because there are a number of 
people, and that might have caused a problem with my bringing a whole 
bunch of Democrats; so I do not want to steal the gentleman's thunder 
here. Let me say this. I appreciate the comments about my op-ed in the 
Post this morning.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Two of our colleagues have already commented on it.
  Mr. MARSHALL. And those who are viewing, if they wanted to get a more 
complete version of how I analyze our current situation, that would be 
a good place to go, and I would encourage people to do that.
  I was a recon platoon sergeant in Vietnam. Vietnam is similar to the 
Iraqi situation and very dissimilar in other respects. In Vietnam, 
Russia and China were supporting the insurgency. So we had North 
Vietnam, Russia, and China. It made it very difficult for us to stamp 
the insurgency out, an insurgency that had been there for decades, was 
very well-organized. Iraq is very different from that. We do not have 
an external government with an awful lot of oomph, as China and Russia 
did at that time, and a great deal of commitment, as China and Russia 
had at that time, backing this insurgency. The insurgency is not 
something that is well-developed, but it could become so.

  Here is the similarity: My job was to go out, find, engage the enemy. 
It was hard as heck to do. Iraqis, Iraqi troops, have a comparative 
advantage over any alien force, including Americans, that we simply 
cannot match. They speak the language. They read the street signs. They 
understand the culture. They can sort out friend from foe. Having their 
cooperation is critical to this endeavor. And, in part, I think one can 
understand why it is critical to the endeavor, because what we are 
trying to do is establish a representative government for the Iraqi 
people. One can force a dictatorship on folks, but one cannot force 
them to have a democracy. One cannot force people to be free. They have 
got to take it for themselves.
  I think, as a country, we need to recognize that, that we have 
tremendous capabilities militarily, but there are some things that we 
just simply cannot do, and we cannot force freedom on people. They need 
to be coming forward and take it for themselves.
  What does that involve? It involves Iraqis taking help from us. At 
least at this point they cannot do it on their own. They have got to 
step forward and be willing to cooperate with Americans. That involves 
taking risk. It is a tremendous benefit to us, and I think everybody 
here knows that. Right now, we are discovering about 50 percent of what 
they are calling IEDs now, improvised explosive devices. When I was in 
Nam, it was booby traps. We are discovering about 50 percent of those 
things, a little less than 50 percent, because people give us tips. 
They tell us where they are. Guess how we discover the rest of them? It 
is when our soldiers get hit by them, pretty much. More cooperation 
makes it safer for our soldiers. We find out where the ambushes are, 
where the booby traps are. We identify who the bad guys are. We are 
able to get them before they get us. But, very importantly, cooperation 
leads to people stepping forward, Iraqis stepping forward, taking up 
arms and going after the guerillas enthusiastically themselves. Simply 
having a police force, simply having an army, I do not care how many 
thousands of people, is not going to do it. They are going to have to 
be enthusiastic.
  If I am an Iraqi, after 1991 when we encouraged the Shiites to rebel, 
then we withdrew and they were slaughtered, and some of my colleagues 
have been to the mass graves, as I have been, I am not going to step 
forward if I do not think the United States is committed.
  So I encourage all of us to speak words of commitment, speak 
positively about the future of Iraq. We can differ on how we are going 
to get there, what is the best plan, when to bring in, how to bring in 
international folks, whether we can entice international folks, how we 
made mistakes in the past; but all of us should be talking about that. 
And, in addition, I think it is a good idea to go ahead and approve the 
President's request. It is a clear signal to Iraqis that we are 
committed. That is a big number, $20 billion for reconstruction.
  The troops in Iraq told me repeatedly money is ammo, and what they 
meant by that was not that they did not have enough bullets or shells. 
What they meant by that is money enables them to do these 
reconstruction projects. These reconstruction projects build 
relationships and commitments with the Iraqis, lead to intelligence, 
lead to assistance, and ultimately lead to the commitment that we need 
from them if we are going to be successful here.
  I have already spoken too long. The gentleman can tell I am 
passionate about this. I appreciate the gentleman's giving me an 
opportunity to speak, and I can tell my colleagues we would have tons 
of Democrats up here doing the same thing if we had just a little bit 
more notice.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman points out this is 
not partisan. This is largely a divide on who has been there and who 
has not been there, but I want to compliment the gentleman on one 
particular point, and that is I have been saying now for lo these many 
weeks that this has been on the discussion table, America, that the 
$20.3 billion for so-called reconstruction is as important to our 
military's success as the $60-some billion

[[Page H9102]]

for the military side, but the gentleman said it so eloquently. The 
real reason is, as the gentleman explained, and it certainly comes from 
his background having been in Vietnam. People, and that is if the Iraqi 
people are on our side, if they believe in us, if they want to help us, 
they are a resource that is absolutely invaluable. It is a resource 
that is worth ten times, in my opinion, $20 billion, if they come 
forward and say, ``There is an improvised explosive device right over 
here, and you need to go get it and get it out of there before it kills 
an American.''

  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, in fact, 
what would be better is if they just take care of it themselves.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Absolutely.
  Mr. MARSHALL. They do not come to us and say, ``There it is. Would 
you take care of it?'' They go take care of it themselves. Ultimately, 
they have to be responsible for the security of their country. We do 
not need to be doing that. We will be able to tell in the next 6 months 
or a year or something like that, I cannot put a time frame on it, 
whether or not we are actually going to be able to entice them to come 
forward, and by gosh, we ought not to shrink from that effort right 
now, not after what we have spent, not given the opportunity that we 
have got as a country to make an immeasurable improvement in our future 
security.
  Mr. SHADEGG. And this reconstruction aid is a way for us to 
illustrate that we are on their side, and for them to come to realize 
we are on their side, and for them to decide they need to be on our 
side and not on the side of the terrorists who want to destroy that 
country and bring Saddam back or some other regime that would be anti-
American and be in line with the rest of the countries in that part of 
the world where terrorism is brewing against it.
  So I think the gentleman's comments are eloquent, and I thank him for 
his participation and for all of his remarks on the topic.
  I now yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake). I think he 
feels passionately about this issue as well.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Arizona for 
arranging this special order and for all of those who have spoken. The 
most important part about this tonight, I think, is to hear from so 
many who have been there, and given what we hear in the news, I think 
that is particularly important because just watching the news channels, 
we simply do not get a good picture of what is going on there. We get a 
much better feel from those who have just returned. So I have 
appreciated this opportunity to hear that.
  And I appreciated the concern that was raised before that not only do 
we make sure that we do not impose more debt on the Iraqi people, but 
that we ensure that the other debt that is held already is forgiven. It 
is extremely important. When we look, estimates vary anywhere from $60 
billion to $150 billion and some more as far as outstanding debt. A lot 
of it is held by countries that are friendly with us and are on our 
side here, most of them, in fact. And I would hope that the 
administration, and I know they will, would exert all the pressure they 
can on these countries to make sure that we are not the only ones who 
are leaving Iraq debt-free and with an opportunity to grow and 
progress, that they have a responsibility to do so as well. I think if 
we want the support of Americans in this endeavor, we have to make sure 
that our partners around the world participate in this regard as well.
  I would also encourage the administration to do what it can to 
exercise with us in Congress, and I think we need to remind our 
colleagues continually here to exercise fiscal restraint domestically. 
The primary function of the Federal Government, we all know, is 
national security. That is our first and primary function. This is 
important, what we are doing here. And we need, because of the 
situation we are in with a large deficit and a big debt, to make sure 
that we husband our resources properly and spend them where we need to 
and where the Federal Government has priority, and that is in our 
national defense. Again, I just want to thank my colleague from Arizona 
and all of the others who have appeared so far, and I just appreciate 
learning more myself and also to lend my support to this effort.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his input.
  In the light of the fact that I want to get all of the remaining 
Members here who want to speak, a chance to speak, let me yield to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).
  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arizona for 
yielding but also for organizing this special order.
  I think this is extremely important. Others have said it more 
eloquently than I will. I think the fundamental reality here is we have 
an opportunity as well as a responsibility to win the peace just as we 
won the war, and the President's proposal is about winning the peace. 
The $20.3 billion that will go towards rebuilding Iraq is about one 
winning the peace in Iraq. It is about helping the Iraqi people build a 
viable society that will not be a threat to its neighbors and to us 
anymore.
  The President's determined that this money is needed soon after the 
decades during which Saddam Hussein's tyranny and the wars that he has 
brought on the Iraqi people has made this need urgent, and I hope we 
will all fully support this President's request.
  I do, however, want to introduce an idea that I think is perfectly 
consistent with funding this request, and that is an idea that goes to 
the heart of what we ought to be doing here in Congress, and I think 
that is establishing our priorities, funding our priorities, and 
tightening our belts and living with some fiscal discipline throughout 
our budgeting process.
  Today just happens to mark the first day of a new fiscal year for the 
Federal Government, and, unfortunately, it is a fiscal year in which we 
are going to undoubtedly run a several hundred billion dollar deficit. 
Given that situation, I think it is all the more important that we 
exercise the fiscal discipline and identify the priorities that we need 
to.

                              {time}  1930

  This is a priority. So I have proposed, together with our colleague, 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), that we fund this, and we 
fund this fully but, at the same time, over the next several years, we 
find offsetting spending reductions in other foreign aid proposals, 
programs, areas that are not as high a priority, frankly, as rebuilding 
Iraq; and we reduce that spending by an amount that will, over time, 
add up to the amount we are spending in Iraq so that at the end of the 
day, the American taxpayer is not paying any additional net new sum of 
money to do this vital function. I think it is about priorities.
  There are a number of areas that I would not suggest that we reduce 
funding in our foreign aid budget. For instance, our aid to Israel and 
Egypt is fundamental and very important. For other reasons, diplomatic 
and embassy security. There are a number of programs we should not 
touch. But frankly, if we were to trim by about 15 percent a year for 
the next 4 years, the next 5 years, I correct myself, for the next 5 
years, we could fully offset this critical $20.3 billion expenditure 
that we need to make for our own security and for the security of our 
troops in Iraq and for the sake of the security of that region.
  So I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight. Again, I am very 
supportive of the President's request, but I would urge my colleagues 
to join me in an effort to find the appropriate offsets over the next 
several years so that this vital priority gets funded and some less 
important foreign aid programs wait until we have the resources to do 
it.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
participation, and I want to express my appreciation for his thoughtful 
analysis of this issue. We do have to prioritize, and the suggestion he 
makes is a good one. As was mentioned earlier, today was the first day 
of school in Iraq; and in my visit there, we learned that America has 
done a great deal to rebuild the schools, although Americans will say, 
well, why are we rebuilding their schools and not ours. As I explained 
earlier, what we are doing is going in and painting existing school 
buildings.
  But helping the people of Iraq educate their children is a critically 
important role for America. Again, it helps us to win over their hearts 
and minds and to do what our colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Marshall), said, and that is have the Iraqi

[[Page H9103]]

people side with us in this struggle. For example, for them to help our 
troops find an explosive device that is planted and intended to kill an 
American, they are the best ones who can do that. Education is a big 
part of that effort; and to discuss education in Iraq further, I yield 
to our colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Arizona. People have 
asked me what the trend is in Iraq, for better or for worse. I just 
returned from Iraq and the trend is for the better. The last time I was 
in Iraq, I was in uniform flying at 20,000 feet and the Iraqi Air 
Defense network was shooting at us. That force is now gone.
  Now that the allies have won, I think we should follow several key 
principles. One, the war on terror must be fought overseas and not in 
America's cities. I come from Chicago, home to America's tallest 
building. The Sears Tower is still standing, and we want to keep it 
that way.
  Second, we must finish the job in Iraq; otherwise, we condemn a 
future generation of young Americans to refight this war. If Desert 
Storm had a key lesson, it is that unfinished work ensures a new Middle 
East war. I think we should make sure that no future generation of 
Americans has to fight again, and that is why we need to finish what we 
are doing in Iraq.
  Our goals must match the best ideals of Americans: an Iraq that does 
not invade another member of the U.N. each decade; an Iraq that governs 
by the consent of Iraqis; and an Iraq that cooperates with the United 
Nations, not confronts it. These are worthy missions and if we accept 
these missions, we must accept that we need to give our troops the 
tools they need to complete this job.
  This is a difficult job. Let us look at Iraq under Saddam. Life 
expectancy in Iraq totaled just 58 years. Forty-seven percent of 
children did not attend school. Half of Baghdad's phones did not work. 
Iraq had the highest infant mortality rate in the Middle East. Seventy 
of 90 city water systems did not work. Saddam's health budget totaled 
75 cents per person per year. There was only one newspaper, Uday 
Hussein's newspaper.
  Under the allies now, the situation has changed. Ninety percent of 
Iraqi school kids started class today. Power generation is up 100 
percent from 1,200 megawatts to 3,700. Five million school books were 
delivered, but these school books did not have the anti-U.S., anti-
Semitic rhetoric. Now there are several dozen newspapers. I brought 
them back with me. These are newspapers that did not exist before May 
1, like Azzaman, al-Balad, Al Mutamar, Ashraa, and even an English 
language newspaper, Iraq Today.
  When I was in Iraq, I learned that 90 percent of Western reporters 
have left Iraq and for those young reporters who remain, their editors 
have told them that they are only interested in one story: injuries to 
Americans. We are not allowed to know about anything else happening in 
Iraq, but there are many developments in Iraq that we should know 
about.
  I want to tell one last story. As my colleague from Arizona said, 
today is the first day of school in Iraq. And we, the United States 
Government, have prepared a school kit with the U.S. emblem on the 
front. This school kit is a book bag with pens, a calculator, school 
supplies, all intended for Iraqi children. The U.S. Government 
delivered 1.5 million of these school kits to the children of Iraq to 
ensure a good start with the school year. This was a start of the 
school year which did not include half of Iraqi children; it included 
90 percent. They got a good start. Each day, Iraqi children, when they 
open their book bag, will see the U.S. emblem on the front. And that is 
a powerful message that they will remember: who helped them in their 
earliest years in class.
  I think this represents some of the best ideals of America. It is 
showing that we are part of the future of this country. The situation 
is changing and changing for the better, and I thank my colleague for 
having this Special Order.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman illustrates how exactly we 
are going about winning the hearts and minds of the people of Iraq, and 
I thank him.
  I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for putting on this 
Special Order, and I really feel privileged to be a part of this story 
tonight.
  I too traveled to Iraq the last week in August. I came back to this 
country and turned on the national network news one night and the lead 
story was about Iraq. But honestly, I did not recognize the country 
that they were talking about, the country I had just left a few hours 
before. Perhaps General James Conway of the First Marine Expeditionary 
Force summed it up best when he said, ``Iraq is a vivid success 
story.'' Iraqis are concerned not that we will stay too long, but that 
we will leave too soon.
  Let me talk for just a minute about health care in Iraq. Put this in 
the context that there was no health care infrastructure improvement in 
over 30 years. A member of the 385th Civil Affairs Brigade, Lieutenant 
Colonel Michael Keller, a good west Texas boy, had been to the medical 
library in Baghdad. He reported to me that within the medical library 
he could not find a medical text that had a copyright date later than 
1984. Pharmaceutical agents that were manufactured in Iraq were 
useless; and, in fact, after the end of the combat phase, we relied 
heavily upon donations of medicine from the Kuwaitis. Saddam's per 
capita medical expenditures were 50 cent a person, compared now to $45 
a person in the last 6 months.

  Perhaps the most searing comparison was the opulence of the palaces 
compared with the dreadful poverty of the hospitals in Iraq, palaces 
that had marble veneers on every wall, two-story-high fireplaces, and 
hospitals that did not even have linoleum on the floors, hospitals that 
did not even have medical gases piped in.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the points that was brought up earlier was the 
humanitarian disaster that did not occur in Iraq. Let me point out that 
if there had been 15,000 heat-related deaths in Iraq this summer, we 
would have been blistered in this country because of that. The 15,000 
heat-related deaths occurred in France. We barely heard a word about it 
from our news media.
  I know time is tight, so I yield back to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. SHADEGG. I thank the gentleman who brings a great perspective. I 
yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague yielding to me.
  I rise in very strong support of the supplemental appropriation that 
the President has requested. In doing so, I do not take the position, 
and I am sure my colleagues do not, that this supplemental 
appropriation will be free of scrutiny. We will look it over; and, 
frankly, we will check it out, and I have no doubt in the legislative 
process we will improve it greatly.
  But I think as to the big question, the President has it right, and I 
think he has it right for three reasons. First, as has been alluded to 
several times by a number of speakers tonight, our own history gives us 
the lessons that we should be drawing in this particular case. In the 
First World War, we won the war, we participated with our allies, but 
we did not do anything to rebuild a shattered Europe afterwards. Less 
than a generation later, young Americans were dying again in the same 
fields, in the same countries, for the same cause. In the Second World 
War, we took a different approach and it was extraordinarily 
successful. We not only won the war, we won the peace, we secured 
Europe; and, in doing so, we set up a powerful example in Europe that 
saved that continent from the awful tyranny of Communism.
  There is even a more recent example and, frankly, a less happy one 
that I think as Americans we ought to reflect upon. We were engaged 
indirectly and, to some extent, directly in the struggle in Afghanistan 
to push out the old Soviet Union, and we were successful in that. We 
walked away from the problem. And in walking away, we left a country 
that was destroyed, that was devastated, that was divided; and in less 
than a generation, frankly, in a matter of a few years, terrorists set 
in, took over and planned and launched a deadly attack on the United 
States that we have lived with the consequences of. We should learn 
from our own history.

[[Page H9104]]

  The second reason I support this supplemental is, quite frankly, the 
situation in Iraq. There is no question Iraq is a potentially rich 
country, but it is not rich today. The oil revenues, the revenues that 
the people of Iraq generate from their hard labor and work need to be 
reinvested in Iraq and will be reinvested in Iraq. The reality is there 
is simply not enough wealth to be created to get the job done and to 
get the job done in a timely, expeditious way, a way that is good for 
Iraq and, frankly, in a time frame that makes it possible for our own 
people to leave as quickly as possible, which is what we want and what 
they want.
  Finally, and most powerfully, I think I favor this resolution simply 
because I support our American troops that are on the ground there. We 
have asked a generation of young Americans to perform a dangerous and 
difficult task.
  I serve on the Committee on Armed Services, Mr. Speaker; and every 
single military person that has come to visit with us has told us this 
is an important part of winning the war, securing the peace, and that 
these dollars, particularly spent on civilian projects and rebuilding 
and reconstruction in Iraq, enhance the security of American forces 
that are deployed. I want American troops to be looked upon as what 
they are: liberators and benefactors. I do not want them to be regarded 
as conquerors, occupiers, and exploiters; and I think the latter will 
be the case.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I think this is a historic opportunity. All of us 
have a responsibility, I think, to do what previous generations of 
Americans have done: rise up, meet this challenge.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the gentleman for his 
leadership. He has not only spoken eloquently tonight, but I too heard 
the gentleman repeatedly in groups, caucuses, and organizations; and 
the gentleman is doing a fantastic job.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, rather than closing, my colleague, the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Chocola), is here. I know he feels 
passionately about this. I guess we have 15 seconds left. The gentleman 
led his own Special Order on this issue last night, and I yield to the 
gentleman to close.
  Mr. CHOCOLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much, and I 
think the fact that we only have 15 seconds left, we have had so many 
Members here tonight to tell the real story.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I have ever seen a Special 
Order with this many speakers.
  Mr. CHOCOLA. Mr. Speaker, the fact that we have so many Members who 
want to share the real story of Iraq I think speaks well, for the facts 
are that there is great hope, there is great optimism. Supporting the 
President's request is the right thing to do. We have one chance to get 
it right.
  I thank the gentleman very much for hosting this evening's 
discussion.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. It is clear to me 
that we need to win over the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. As 
our colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Marshall), said from the 
other side of the aisle here tonight, we absolutely must have them on 
our side. This is the way to do it. I urge my colleagues to join us in 
supporting the President's full request.

                          ____________________