[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 56 (Wednesday, April 28, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H2454-H2455]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 THE PRESIDENT MUST KEEP HIS PROMISE AND PROVIDE OUR TROOPS WITH WHAT 
                               THEY NEED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). Under a previous order 
of the House, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) 
said earlier, he referred back to the prime time press conference that 
the President had some weeks ago where he could not think of any 
mistakes he had made in response to a question. So some of us have been 
offering ideas so at the next, if he has one, prime time press 
conference he would not have to fumble for an answer.
  I have to say that with the year anniversary of ``mission 
accomplished,'' that speech on the deck of the aircraft carrier, that 
he might want to think about some mistakes that have been made 
regarding the war in Iraq. Whether one is for or against the war in 
Iraq, here is something to consider. I wanted to use not my own words, 
but I wanted to refer to the Newsweek of May 3 and just read a couple 
of sections here.

[[Page H2455]]

  ``For the Bush administration,'' this is all a quote, ``it has been a 
mantra, one the President intones repeatedly: America's troops will get 
whatever they need to do the job. But as Iraq's liberation has turned 
into a daily grind of low intensity combat and Defense Secretary Donald 
Rumsfeld grudgingly raises troop levels, many soldiers who are there 
say the Pentagon is failing to protect them with the best technology 
America has to offer. Especially tanks, Bradleys, and other heavy 
vehicles, even in some cases body armor. That has been the tragic 
lesson of April, a month in which a record 115 U.S. soldiers have died 
so far, and 879 others have been wounded, 560 of them fairly seriously.
  ``Soldiers in Iraq complain that Washington has been too slow to 
acknowledge that the Iraqi insurgency consists of more than `dead-
enders.' And even at the Pentagon many officers say Rumsfeld and his 
brass have been too reluctant to modify their long-term plans for a 
lighter military. On the battlefield, that has translated into a lack 
of armor. Perhaps the most telling example: a year ago the Pentagon had 
more than 400 main battle tanks in Iraq; as of recently, a senior 
defense official told Newsweek, there was barely a brigade's worth of 
operational tanks still there. (A brigade usually has about 70 
tanks.)''
  How about this: ``According to an unofficial study by a defense 
consultant that is now circulating through the Army, of a total of 789 
Coalition deaths as of April 15, (686 of them Americans), 142 were 
killed by land mines or improvised explosive devices, while 48 others 
died in rocket-propelled grenade attacks. Almost all of those soldiers 
were killed while in unprotected vehicles, which means that perhaps one 
in four of those killed in combat in Iraq might be alive if they had 
had stronger armor around them, the study suggested.''
  I want to repeat that: ``One in four of those killed in combat might 
be alive if they had had stronger armor around them, the study 
suggested. Thousands more who were unprotected have suffered grievous 
wounds such as the loss of limbs.''
  I guess it was a week ago Sunday I attended a meeting in my district 
of 500 people organized by Military Families Speak Out, who have a 
website that has actually provided a lot of comfort to some of the 
families who feel quite alone in this situation, Military Families 
Speak Out. There was an aunt of a soldier who went down in an Illinois 
National Guard Chinook helicopter on November 2, 2003. This helicopter 
was not equipped with the latest automatic antimissile blocking system. 
That is partly because the National Guard is lower down the list on who 
gets the really good equipment.
  Finally, let me quote from a letter from a soldier that was in the 
Peoria Journal Star, actually. He said, ``Our unit's tour of duty in 
Iraq has been extended past our one-year mark. This is not in line with 
what our supposed leaders have proposed.
  ``Let your readers know as well that this unit does not have the 
extra armor that is now required for vehicle convoys.'' This is April 
24, 2004. ``Even though we have been here for over a year, we still do 
not have the right protection from roadside bombs or small-arms fire. 
Our doors are basically just two sides of sheet metal.''
  He says, ``I would like to get home and continue my life, as our 
Congressmen are doing with theirs. Members of,'' and he mentions his 
company, ``have done our time here in Iraq with honor, and now we are 
ready to go home.''
  So, Mr. President, it seems to me that the mistake was made and is 
still being made, and cries out for a remedy. The least we ought to do 
is what you promised, and that is that our troops will have everything 
they need. They still do not. They must. And that is the least that we 
can do for our soldiers. For those of us who were against the war from 
the beginning or those who supported the war, all of us support our 
troops. It is a mistake not to.

                          ____________________