[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 153 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13071-S13072]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE

  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I am deeply disturbed by what I believe 
is an attempt to write a revisionist history of our involvement in Iraq 
and our pre-war intelligence.
  Since 1981, I have served as the Chairman or Ranking Member of the 
Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. As one who has watched over the 
Defense Department's Appropriations, I was impressed with President 
Clinton's position on Iraq. The President and his top advisers--Vice 
President Gore, Secretary of State Albright, National Security Adviser 
Sandy Berger, and others--consistently made the case we should take 
seriously the threat Iraq and its weapons, program posed.
  I have come to the floor twice in the past to submit President 
Clinton's February 1998 Pentagon speech into the Congressional Record. 
Before giving his speech, President Clinton was briefed by the generals 
who command all of our forces. Their briefing convinced President 
Clinton that he might have to take military action against Saddam 
Hussein, and he told the generals to be ready.
  Those of us in Congress never doubted President Clinton's sincerity 
or truthfulness regarding this issue. In 1998, he said:

       If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our 
     purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat 
     posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

  Vice President Al Gore echoed this concern. He said:

       Saddam's ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass 
     destruction poses a grave threat . . . to the security of the 
     world.

  Secretary of State Madeline Albright told us:

       Iraq is a long way from here, but what happens there 
     matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of 
     a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological 
     weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security 
     threat we face.

  And National Security Adviser Sandy Berger warned:

       He (Saddam Hussein) will use those weapons of mass 
     destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983.

  Many Members of the Senate agreed the threat was real and imminent. 
In 2002, Senator Kennedy said:

       We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking 
     and developing weapons of mass destruction.

  Senator Rockefeller warned:

       Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons 
     capabilities pose real threats to America, today, tomorrow.

  And Senator Kerry said:

       These weapons pose an unacceptable threat.

  In October 2002, the Senate overwhelmingly supported giving President 
Bush the authority to use force in Iraq. We authorized the use of force 
in a vote of 77 to 23. The facts before us indicated Saddam Hussein 
posed a grave threat.
  Let me be clear: At the time, the facts were undisputed and we were 
all provided the same information. These were the facts as we 
understood them. Saddam Hussein had used weapons of mass destruction 
against the Iranians, his own people and possibly some of our men and 
women in uniform during the first gulf war.
  In 1998, the weapons inspectors were forced out of Iraq. When the 
inspectors left, the regime was capable of resuming bacterial warfare 
agent production within weeks. Iraq had not accounted for hundreds of 
tons of chemical precursors and tens of thousands of unfilled munitions 
canisters. Iraq had not accounted for at least 15,000 artillery rockets 
previously used for delivery of nerve agents or 500 artillery shells 
filled with mustard gas.
  Saddam Hussein had been ordered by the U.N. to disarm 16 times, and 
16 times he refused to comply. He engaged in a series of deceitful 
tactics designed to prevent U.N. inspectors from completing their 
inspections.
  Our intelligence agencies gathered further evidence of his 
activities. This information was classified to protect our sources and 
methods. I received those intelligence briefings. I believe I received 
the same information as President Clinton. These intelligence reports 
were deeply disturbing, and phase I of the Intelligence Committee's 
investigations found this information was not coerced or influenced in 
any way. It was our intelligence agency's best assessment of what was 
going on in Iraq at the time. Had the President received those 
briefings and failed to act, he would have been negligent in his duty 
to keep Americans safe. Those in the Senate who voted for the 
resolution believed this, which is why we authorized the use of force.
  I am now disturbed by the way some are twisting this history to suit 
their own political agendas. Why is anyone calling the people of this 
administration liars when the speaker shared their position? In many 
cases, those who accuse the administration of deception previously had 
made the case even more strongly than President Bush.
  The Senate Intelligence Committee spent 2 years putting together a 
bipartisan report on our prewar intelligence.

[[Page S13072]]

Their report found there were no attempts to influence analysts or no 
evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, 
or pressure an analyst to change his or her judgment--not once.
  Every member of the Intelligence Committee, Republican and Democrat, 
approved that report. The Silverman-Robb report and six other major 
studies found there is no basis for the claim that the administration 
lied to get us to go to war.
  The search for weapons of mass destruction will not be completed on 
our timetable. Look at this picture: The Iraqis buried entire planes in 
the desert. We have two photographs of planes being unearthed, full 
planes buried beneath the sand. When we pulled them out, they were 
still operable.
  Our troops found 30 of these planes buried in the sands of the Al-
Taqqadum airfield west of Baghdad--30 planes. That is one-tenth of 
their entire combat Air Force. If Saddam Hussein's troops had buried 
one-tenth of their combat aircraft in the desert, who is to say there 
were no weapons of mass destruction similarly buried? Just because they 
were not found does not mean they were never there. The Nation of Iraq 
is the size of California. The materials needed to make weapons of mass 
destruction could fit in a container the size of a family bathtub. 
Weapons of mass destruction are no bigger than a family bathtub.
  We now stand at a critical moment in history. I believe we must 
reflect on events leading to the war, but this process is only useful 
if it is honest and accurate. Those who are trying to rewrite history, 
revisionist history of these events are simply advancing their own 
political agendas. They are not advancing the important work due now in 
the region--and do so on a bipartisan basis.
  I agree with the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, the chairman of 
the Committee on Armed Services. A flexible timetable for troop 
withdrawal could jeopardize our men and women in uniform and their 
mission. The only way we can lose in Iraq is if we defeat ourselves, if 
we refuse to stay the course. The path to progress is slow and steady. 
It has milestones, but it does not have timelines. We must remain 
behind our troops.
  Over 200 years ago, our Founding Fathers began the great American 
experiment. They set out to create a government defined by its 
commitment to liberty and freedom. Iraq is one of this century's 
proving grounds for those ideals. Our men and women in uniform, all 
volunteers, are helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan build their 
emerging democracies. Their sacrifices ensure, in the words of Abraham 
Lincoln, ``that government of the people, by the people, and for the 
people shall not perish from this Earth.''
  Distorting our prewar intelligence will not help them complete their 
mission. We must support the important work they are doing in Iraq, not 
send mixed messages. The men and women in uniform were asked to go to 
Iraq to help Iraq become a democracy dedicated to freedom. They are 
doing that. I will continue to support those and stay the course and 
support Iraq's efforts to stand up their own forces so they can defend 
that freedom.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________