[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 81 (Wednesday, June 21, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1238-E1239]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DECLARING THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL PREVAIL IN THE GLOBAL WAR ON 
                                 TERROR

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. MIKE THOMPSON

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 21, 2006

  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, this resolution will not 
ensure any success in Iraq. It will not bring our troops home. It will 
only signal the death of true, honest debate within the walls of this 
great Chamber.
  For many more years than any of us have been alive, this House, the 
People's House, has been democracy's citadel for intelligent, 
meaningful, real debate that has led to solutions to some of history's 
most important and vexing crises.
  The charade that many on this floor are attempting to pass as a 
debate today does a great disservice to those monumental American 
leaders who have spoken from this same floor over the past two 
centuries. It does a great disservice to the American public, which 
expects its leaders to lead, not pander. And it does a great disservice 
to our military men and women who are depending on us to work together 
and complete our mission so that they may complete their mission and 
come home. Today's so called debate is politics at its worst--we're 
playing politics while U.S. men and women are being killed, wounded and 
kept away from their families.
  Mr. Speaker, I remember lying in a military hospital bed just home 
from Vietnam while Congress played politics--it was disdainful then and 
when I think of those brave men and women I've visited at Walter Reed 
Hospital, Bethesda Hospital and Ramstein Hospital in Germany--it makes 
me sick today. Let's do our job and bring our troops home as soon as 
possible.
  For weeks we have been told, and the American people have been 
promised, by the Republican majority that there would be a debate on 
this floor on the Iraq war. Instead, we get what the news is reporting 
as ``Republican election year strategy.'' Mr. Speaker, this charade 
represents a shameless dereliction of our duties and a missed 
opportunity to provide the American public with the open and honest 
debate they have been demanding for the past 3 long years now.
  This feel-good resolution ignores the issues most important to the 
men and women serving in Iraq, their families and the taxpayers who 
have already been billed nearly half a trillion dollars.
  It ignores the issues raised by some of our most respected generals. 
Just listen to what a few have said about the Administration's rush to 
war:

       ``We are paying the price for the lack of credible 
     planning, or the lack of a plan.''--General Anthony Zinni
       ``What we are living with now is the consequences of 
     successive policy failures.''--Lieutenant General Greg 
     Newbold
       ``They pressed for open warfare before the diplomacy was 
     finished. It was a tragic mistake. It's a strategic 
     blunder.''--General Wesley Clark

  This resolution ignores the lack of accountability and oversight 
that's led to some of the most egregious and embarrassing examples of 
waste, fraud and abuse on record, such as:
  $9 billion in missing reconstruction funds.
  $263 million in excessive or unsubstantiated costs for importing 
gasoline into Iraq.
  Over $20 million for items that weren't delivered, including:
  Security for civilian flights at Baghdad International Airport that 
never occurred; nonexistent pipeline employees; old and broken down 
trucks; spray-painted Iraqi cranes passed off as new; police trucks; 
and a refurbished police academy and library. And millions more have 
been wasted at taxpayer expense due to no-bid and over-billed contracts 
awarded by the Bush administration.
  This resolution ignores how the civilian leadership of the Defense 
Department grossly miscalculated the armor and equipment needs of our 
troops before sending them into combat, which resulted in:
  40,000 troops who didn't have basic Kevlar vests or the ceramic 
plates needed for full protection, which left parents and spouses to 
buy body armor for their loved ones;
  30,000 Marines who needed twice as many heavy machine guns, more 
fully protected armored vehicles and more communications equipment to 
perform their operations successfully;
  Soldiers who were issued boots with cheap and soft soles that quickly 
wore out, thus having to sew material to the bottom of their boots out 
of desperation;
  Soldiers who went to combat with inadequate or poor field radios, 
ammo carriers, weapon lubricant, socks and even rifle slings;
  Military units that were deployed without the necessary armor needed 
to protect ground vehicles, making them vulnerable to IEDs. And when 
our troops jerry-rigged them with steel playing, they often flipped or 
rolled-over, injuring or killing soldiers;
  And soldiers who subsequently had to sift through garbage dumps for 
scrap metal to uparmor ground vehicles.
  Mr. Speaker, if you are in charge, you are responsible. That is why 
several respected generals have cast a vote of no confidence with our 
civilian leadership of the Defense Department for its lack of planning:

       Rumsfeld and his team turned what should have been a 
     deliberate victory in Iraq into a prolonged challenge.--Major 
     General John Batiste.
       I do not believe Secretary Rumsfeld is the right person to 
     fight that war, based on his absolute failures in managing 
     the war against Saddam in Iraq.--Major General Charles H. 
     Swannack, Jr.
       They only need the military advice when it satisfies their 
     agenda.--Lieutenant General John Riggs
       If I was President I would have relieved him three years 
     ago.--Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper
       Two and a half more years of that leadership was too long 
     for my nation, for my Army, and for my family.--Major General 
     Paul Eaton
  Mr. Speaker, we need to be working non-stop to bring our troops home 
as soon as possible, not to score political points while they

[[Page E1239]]

are fighting a war. And we need to be working to keep them as safe as 
possible until they are home.
  For starters, we need to send a loud message to the insurgents that 
we will not occupy Iraq and that we will not control Iraq's oil--a 
message that we want to leave Iraq as much as they want us to leave. 
Instead, Mr. Speaker, the President has given every impression that the 
U.S. military has become an occupying force. We are in the process of 
building a gigantic new U.S. embassy in Baghdad that will span 104 
acres, the size of nearly 80 football fields. This does not give the 
impression that we are winding things down in Iraq. It says to 
insurgents that we want a permanent military presence and it serves as 
a recruiting tool to sign up more insurgents. Moreover, it provides no 
incentives for the Iraqi government to assume more responsibility for 
the security of its country.
  On my last visit to Iraq everyone I spoke with--privates, sergeants 
and the officers in charge of training the Iraqi security forces--want 
the Iraqis to assume more of the security responsibilities. Our 
military has done its job--more often than not in two, three or four 
tours of deployment--an unconscionable demand on our troops, an 
unconscionable demand on their families and an unconscionable demand on 
their communities. And make no mistake--it's taking a toll on our 
military. Continuous deployment in Iraq has hurt military personnel and 
their families, and strained recruiting and retention. Consider some of 
the latest statistics on active duty personnel and selected reserves as 
well as on recruiting and retention:
  Each month the equivalent of one battalion is lost due to deaths and 
wounds.
  All the Army's available active duty combat brigades have served at 
least a 12-month tour in Iraq or Afghanistan.
  At least half of those combat brigades have completed their second 
tour of duty.
  By next year the Army projects that it will be short 3,500 active 
duty officers, primarily captains and majors.
  Approximately 3,500 airmen, as well as sailors, are currently 
performing Army missions they were not adequately trained to do.
  Ninety-seven percent of the National Guard combat and special 
operations battalions have been mobilized since September 11th.
  The average tour for National Guard members is 342 days.
  Continuous deployment has damaged readiness for mission skills 
necessary in the war on terror outside those required in Iraq. Consider 
some of the latest statistics:
  Forty percent of all the Army's and Marine Corps' ground equipment is 
deployed to Iraq. That equipment is wearing out 2 to 9 time's peacetime 
rate.
  Humvees that are designed for 14 years of operation needs are being 
overhauled or replaced in just 3 years.
  The Army has lost over 100 tanks and armored vehicles and over 1,000 
vehicles since the start of the war.
  If the war in Iraq ended today, it would take the Army more than 2 
years to repair or replace its damaged equipment.
  The Marine Corps has determined that equipment deployed to Iraq has 
suffered such significant damage and wear and tear that 80 percent of 
it will need to be replaced.
  In excess of $50 billion is needed to repair and replace equipment 
damaged or lost in Iraq for the Army and Marine Corps.
  Mr. Speaker, stay the course is not a strategy for success and we're 
not doing our job by being a rubber stamp for the Administration. Each 
day, it becomes more apparent that the Administration does not have, 
nor has it ever had, a clear, concise and realistic strategy for ending 
large scale U.S. involvement in Iraq. The American people deserve a 
clear explanation of what we are doing in Iraq. They deserve to know 
what the President is going to do to reduce the incredible physical, 
emotional and financial burden that all Americans are bearing. If this 
Congress and the President expect the American people to continue 
making these sacrifices, then there must be a strategy for success.
  Mr. Speaker, we must set the bar and identify what it will take for 
us to accomplish the mission in Iraq. When the Iraqi people conclude 
the process of amending their constitution, or by September 30, 2006, 
we must begin the process of redeployment as soon as practicable. This 
is a workable approach that tracks a timeline set by the 
Administration. That is why I have introduced H. Con. Res. 348, which 
would do just that. This legislation is a bipartisan, comprehensive 
plan to redeploy American forces out of Iraq and send a clear message 
to the Iraqi people that the United States has no plans to be a 
permanent occupying force and we have no designs on Iraqi oil. Six 
Republicans have signed onto this bill. This bipartisan measure has 
been introduced in the Senate (S. Con. Res. 93), making it the only 
bicameral approach to Iraq.

  Mr. Speaker, I did not support the President's plan to invade Iraq. I 
considered it to be an unnecessary distraction from hunting down those 
responsible for the attacks of September 11th. But, as the U.S. has 
entered its fourth year in Iraq, this is where we are and now we must 
find a rational and reasonable way out of this mess.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not an honest debate about this important issue 
and while the majority plays politics our men and women serving in Iraq 
are in terrible danger.
  Rhetorical attempts to obfuscate failed tactical decisions in Iraq 
with the global war on terror will do nothing to solve the problem that 
is before us today. Nor will it correct this body's failure to provide 
its constitutional oversight responsibility that has led to the 
billions of American taxpayer dollars that have either been misused or 
remain unaccounted for in our efforts to rebuild Iraq.
  Mr. Speaker, global terrorism remains a grave national security 
threat to the United States. However, the war in Iraq and this 
resolution is a distraction from our struggle against terrorism. As the 
President continues his stay the course strategy in Iraq, the Taliban 
is regaining strength in Afghanistan. If we are to prevail in the war 
on terrorism we must refocus our efforts on terrorist hotbeds, such as 
Afghanistan.
  The brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces are the best-
equipped, best-trained and most professional fighting forces in the 
world. They have been performing their jobs courageously and honorably 
and their morale remains high. These men and women deserve our thanks 
and our respect. They deserve better than this sham resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, give this House back to the people for real debate on 
our policy in Iraq.

                          ____________________