[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 87 (Monday, June 27, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5224-H5225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BRINGING TROOPS HOME
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, as the right honorable gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), a good friend, former coach, had indicated,
there are Members of this body who believe the solution in Iraq is to
set a date certain by which we will begin removing or have our troops
removed from Iraq. When asked recently if such a strategy would not
have been devastating if used in World War II and would not have left
Hitler in power, one Congressman said, well, World War II is not really
an appropriate comparison. He believed the more appropriate model was
that of Vietnam, where we set a time and then we got out.
I do not question anyone's motive here, but for freedom's sake, what
in the world kind of a mission is that? The retreat from Vietnam
created a vacuum that was filled by dead and mutilated bodies of those
we ran out and deserted, and it is one of our darkest and most heinous
hours in American history. It is rivaled, however, for its humiliating
nature by the very war in Vietnam itself in which we sent soldiers to
fight but tied one arm behind their backs and did not give them the
equipment and backing to actually win. They were not authorized to win.
They were told to just hold what they had. No war can ever be won
unless there is a commitment by the government to win.
If we did not learn anything from the wars of the 20th century, it
would be obvious here, but in 1979, we had an attack on American soil.
That is what it is when someone attacks an American
[[Page H5225]]
embassy, and they took hostages of our diplomats and we did nothing. We
failed to defend our soil and our people and our diplomats and a
terrible message went forward.
{time} 2015
We failed to address the attacks properly of the first bombing of the
World Trade Center and on the U.S.S. Cole and other attacks.
We have sent a terribly erroneous message in the past that America
does not have the courage or the stomach to complete the defense of
ourselves or to finish what we start. That is what Osama bin Laden has
been saying for years. If we just keep attacking, keep up the
insurgency, America does not have the stomach to win. We will wear them
down.
And now I hear colleagues verifying they do not have the stomach to
complete what we started. My colleagues, when I was in Iraq in March,
one former general under Saddam looked me in the eyes, a Sunni, and
said, If the U.S. will just stay behind us and back us until we get our
constitution and have the next election, you will see most of the
violence in Iraq stop. The terrorists know how critical it is that this
battle go on. They know that if freedom and a free society take hold in
Iraq, in a Muslim country in the Middle East, they lose.
Some of the people who now are calling for a date certain to withdraw
are some of the same people in 1991 who screamed at former President
Bush, stop, stop, do not attack, they are surrendering. Get out. Do not
go to Baghdad. And shortly after that, after he did as they implored,
they said well, he is just too weak. He did not have the stomach to
finish what he started. He was a weak President. He should have done
what he started and gone on to Baghdad. Now they are doing the same
thing to this President. I thank God he has the backbone to stay in
there.
Please, I would encourage my colleagues to not push for a date
certain. It would not have worked in World War II or in any war. It
tells the opponents, the enemy, that we do not have the stomach to stay
in there. We have a plan. We are training policemen, we are training
soldiers. They will be able to defend themselves. Let us ensure that
Iraq will win the peace and that the terrorists lose.
____________________