[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 6 (Thursday, January 11, 2007)]
[House]
[Page H403]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        STOP MILITARY CASUALTIES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker and Members of the 
House, last night the President spoke to the Nation and presented his 
proposal to the Nation to increase the troop levels an additional 
20,000 troops to be sent to Iraq to continue the war in Iraq. What the 
President didn't do was lay out the plan of how that would be 
successful, how that would be different than what we are currently 
doing, and how the results would be different.
  The President, with his initial decision to invade Iraq, a decision 
that was his choice, and this was not a war of necessity, this was not 
a war to protect the vital interests of the United States, or the 
integrity of the United States or the safety of our homeland, this was 
a war where the President chose to go to war.
  At the time he was considering going to war, he was advised by many. 
We all know this history of many saying not to do this and also saying 
that this would not work in Iraq with its history, with its culture, 
with its religious differences. But the President chose to go anyway, 
and we have been there now for 3 years. Over 3,000 young Americans have 
paid with their lives for this endeavor, and over 20,000 have been 
wounded, seriously wounded.
  I have had the honor to visit with many of those soldiers as they 
have returned to Walter Reed Hospital with life-changing, life-changing 
wounds. It is remarkable that they would survive them at all, a great 
testimony to the medical care that is available to them, but 
nevertheless, life-changing injuries for these young men and women.
  Now the President is suggesting, with his plan for escalation, that 
we will send another 20,000. The fact of the matter is that American 
soldiers have done all that they can for the Iraqi people. The Iraqi 
people, the Iraqi Government, has chosen not to take advantage of 
having the Americans in the country to resolve their political 
differences, to resolve their differences of culture and religion. They 
have chosen to continue to fight.
  In fact, we find that our soldiers more and more now are simply the 
targets within the civil war that is going on in Iraq; and for all 
intents and purposes there is no reason to suggest that that is going 
to change. The President has suggested that somehow the current Iraqi 
Government will have to meet some thresholds.
  Those thresholds are absolutely contrary to the interest of that 
government in terms of their survival. It is asking for a betrayal of 
that government against its Shi'a base, and it fails to recognize how 
fundamental, how fundamental the clash is between the Sunnis and the 
Shi'a, not just in Iraq, but throughout this region. If the President 
had taken time before the invasion, he might have been able to 
understand that. But it is a fundamental clash between these two 
factions in Islam.
  Because of the actions of this President, he has unleashed the 
ability of that clash to present very real rewards and very high stakes 
for either sides. It is not just the oil in Iraq or the governance in 
Iraq, but it is really about the ability of the Shi'a to spread their 
influence beyond Iran, to spread their influence beyond being a 
majority minority in Iraq, to spread their influence beyond being a 
minority in Lebanon or in Syria; and these are fundamental, and they go 
back a long time in the history in the clashes between Sunni and Shi'a 
and how the Shi'a have been treated in countries where they are a 
minority whether it is in Jordan or whether it is in Saudi Arabia or 
other countries in the peninsula.
  This is very, very fundamental, and the stakes are very high. At this 
moment our troops are a pawn in that game, in spite of what the 
President suggests that this is about the security of the region, this 
is about the blooming of democracy. It is not about any of that any 
longer. It may have been in his mind when he signed the order to send 
these troops to Iraq; but the fact of the matter is, it has been 
overwhelmed by history, by culture, by the nature of the region, all of 
which he made worse by this disastrous decision of his to choose to go 
to war in Iraq.
  The idea now that contrary to the overwhelming desire of the American 
people to disengage from this area, and of this Congress that he would 
go forward, is arrogance that is so dangerous, so dangerous to our 
country, our standing in the world, and our troops in the region that 
immediately action should be taken in this Congress to stop this 
President from going forward with this very dangerous escalation that 
will do nothing more than add to the list of casualties by American 
soldiers in this region.

                          ____________________