[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 79 (Monday, June 19, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H4191-H4192]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE IRAQ RESOLUTION

  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, last Thursday and Friday, the House 
conducted a very important debate on the global war on terror. The 
resolution in question, H. Res. 861, honored the sacrifice of our 
soldiers and reaffirmed our commitment to victory in that global war on 
terror. I am very heartened that the House Republicans were joined by 
nearly a quarter of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, 42, 
to be exact, voting in support of this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, it was a spirited 10-hour debate, and over the course of 
it I heard some criticisms that I believe deserve a response. Many in 
the minority objected to the resolution and the forum for its 
consideration. They contended that the resolution was hollow, and it 
did not allow for a meaningful debate on the war.
  With such antipathy for the process and the resolution, one would 
have expected the Democratic leadership to ask for a vote on the 
previous question on the rule so that they could, in fact, amend it. In 
fact, they didn't. Or they might have offered a specific official 
substitute resolution which I, on several occasions over a 2-day 
period, said we would have considered making in order.
  But, Mr. Speaker, they did neither. In fact, as I said, for over 2 
days, I asked the Democratic leadership for an alternative. I was told 
that nothing would be forthcoming. While individual Members such as Mr. 
Abercrombie did offer their own alternatives, the minority on the Rules 
Committee chose not to submit any of them as the official Democratic 
substitute.
  Unfortunately, many Members chose to make this a debate about 
process, rather than the real issue at hand. After listening to the 
debate, I know why. The minority party has no clear position on how to 
win the global war on terror and prevail in Iraq. When it comes to the 
biggest challenge of our generation, they are not of one mind. Some 
agree with House Republicans that it is absolutely essential to stay in 
Iraq until we achieve victory. Unfortunately, the majority of Democrats 
favor retreat in one form or another, whether it is the vague policy of 
redeployment or outright and immediate withdrawal, as the Out of Iraq 
Caucus has called it.
  This is a dangerous approach, Mr. Speaker. While perhaps intended to 
comfort our country in the midst of a truly devastating and trying 
struggle, it would serve chiefly to comfort the enemy. We know that two 
decades of tepid responses to attacks on our citizens and our interests 
in Lebanon, Somalia, New York City, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Kenya and 
Yemen only emboldened terrorists. We will not make the same mistake 
again.
  Mr. Speaker, the Iraqi people, its security forces and its government 
are not naive. Nor are we. Despite recent progress such as the killing 
of al Zarqawi and the completion of the Iraqi government's cabinet, 
calm is not just around the corner. The terrorists are unyielding. 
After all, their stated aim is to drive coalition forces out of the 
country and establish a territory-hungry, terrorist-friendly extremist 
state.
  They have openly declared that the United States does not have the 
will to see the fight through. They understand the significance of this 
battle, and so must we. We must accept nothing but total engagement and 
commitment as we help Iraq stabilize herself and become an ally in the 
war on terror. We cannot fulfill our mission, honor the sacrifice of 
our troops and move forward in the war on terror by backing away from 
its central battlefield. In a region where democracy has the potential 
to become more than a hope, we cannot abandon its best hope.
  Mr. Speaker, if we leave prematurely, and Iraq is allowed to become a 
lawless territory, sympathetic to terrorists, and brutal to its own 
people, the safety of the world and the security of the United States 
of America would be directly threatened.
  On September 11, 2001, we saw exactly what could happen when such 
conditions were allowed to exist in Afghanistan.
  Mr. Speaker, I mentioned that some criticized the forum for our 
debate. As one Member described it, the 10 hours would be like a 
glorified special order.
  But make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, our words matter. For proof, look 
no

[[Page H4192]]

further than Zarqawi's bombed-out safe house. In the rubble, a copy of 
Arabic Newsweek was found. Our enemies, the enemies of peace and 
freedom, are listening, they are reading, and they are waiting for 
signs of weakness and timidity in the face of their brutality.
  With a vote in support of H. Res. 861, we gave them no such thing, 
and their kidnapping of our men and women will only strengthen our 
resolve. While there are significant differences between the majority 
and the minority on how to win the global war on terror, I am proud of 
both the process followed for conducting this debate and the 
overwhelming bipartisan vote to support our troops and complete the 
mission in Iraq.

                          ____________________