[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 37 (Monday, March 5, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E458-E459]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     HONORING THE LIFE AND SERVICE OF 2ND LIEUTENANT MARK J. DAILY

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JOHN CAMPBELL

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, March 5, 2007

  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the 
life of 2nd Lieutenant Mark J. Daily--an honorable citizen and hero in 
our nation's War on Terrorism.
  Lieutenant Daily grew up in Irvine, California, and graduated from 
Woodbridge High School in 2001. He was known among family and friends 
as having an amazing breadth of knowledge, a strong desire to serve, 
and a wonderful sense of humor.
  In 2005, Lieutenant Daily graduated from the University of California 
at Los Angeles as a Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) cadet with 
a bachelor's degree in political science. His ability and work ethic 
was further exemplified that year when he was named as both the ROTC 
outstanding cadet and a Distinguished Military Graduate, the highest 
honor one can receive in the ROTC.
  As a member of the United States Army's 4th Brigade Combat Team, he 
was stationed in Iraq's northern city of Mosul. Tragically, on January 
15, 2007, Lieutenant Daily made the ultimate sacrifice when he was 
killed conducting operations in the city.
  Lieutenant Daily is survived by his wife, Snejana; his parents, John 
and Linda; his sisters, Christine and Nicole; and his brother, Eric. He 
valued their love, and they miss him terribly now. On his webpage, 
Lieutenant Daily listed his interests as ``family, peace, and 
progress.'' And it is in the value that he placed on these three things 
that we see the quality of his character.
  The night before he left for Iraq, Lieutenant Daily wrote an online 
weblog to friends and family entitled ``Why I Joined.'' In the post, he 
articulately stated the importance of fostering a stable democratic 
government in Iraq, and the harsh consequences of failure. He called 
upon all Americans to challenge themselves, to not just enjoy the 
blessings of liberty, but to act upon them.
  In the wake of his death, Lieutenant Daily's web log was widely 
distributed in newspapers and on the internet. These words have served 
as an inspiration and encouragement to many. It is clear he felt 
passionately about what he was doing and why he was doing it. What 
better way to remember his heart for service and commitment to progress 
than by reflecting on his own words. Mr. Speaker, the following web log 
entry was posted on his website on October 29, 2006:

                              Why I Joined

       This question has been asked of me so many times in so many 
     different contexts

[[Page E459]]

     that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for 
     joining the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more 
     accurate question is why I volunteered to go to Iraq. After 
     all, I joined the Army a week after we declared war on 
     Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq. Now, 
     after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
       Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal 
     Ba'ath regime has been replaced by an insurgency fueled by 
     Iraq's neighbors who hope to partition Iraq for their own 
     ends. This is coupled with the ever present transnational 
     militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the 
     greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they 
     happen to be standing near. What was once a paralyzed state 
     of fear is now the staging ground for one of the largest 
     transformations of power and ideology the Middle East has 
     experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks 
     to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this 
     transformation will be plagued by interregional hatred and 
     genocide. And I am now in the center of this.
       Is this why I joined?
       Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in 
     overthrowing Saddam Hussein and seeking to establish a new 
     state based upon political representation and individual 
     rights. Many have framed the paradigm through which they view 
     the conflict around one-word explanations such as ``oil'' or 
     ``terrorism,'' favoring the one which best serves their 
     political persuasion. I did the same thing, and anyone who 
     knew me before I joined knows that I am quite aware and at 
     times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in Iraq. 
     If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to 
     volunteer for this war is through sheer desperation or blind 
     obedience then consider me the exception (though there are 
     countless like me).
       I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many 
     modern day ``humanists'' who claim to possess a genuine 
     concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact 
     quite content to allow their fellow ``global citizens'' to 
     suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and 
     conditions. Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked 
     why we shouldn't confront the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or 
     the various other tyrannies throughout this world, my answers 
     would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance (forcing 
     women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint 
     cultural tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty 
     (how eager we internationalists are to throw up borders to 
     defend dictatorships!) or even a creeping suspicion of 
     America's intentions. When all else failed, I would retreat 
     to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace 
     and liberty had provided me. I would write off war because 
     civilian casualties were guaranteed, or temporary alliances 
     with illiberal forces would be made, or tank fuel was toxic 
     for the environment. My fellow ``humanists'' and I would 
     relish contently in our self righteous declaration of 
     opposition against all military campaigns against 
     dictatorships, congratulating one another for refusing to 
     taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem that many 
     still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the 
     members of Rage against the Machine and Green Day. Others 
     would point to America's historical support of Saddam 
     Hussein, citing it as hypocritical that we would now vilify 
     him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so to 
     ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly 
     identified as the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled 
     and hypocrisy is declared. Forgetting that America sided with 
     Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly confronted once the 
     Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with 
     Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the 
     ultimate argument against America's moral crusade.
       And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all 
     political action inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is 
     these adventures in philosophical masturbation that prevent 
     people from ever taking any kind of effective action against 
     men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain, as 
     disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray 
     may be, consider what peace vigils against genocide have 
     accomplished lately. Consider that there are 19 year old 
     soldiers from the Midwest who have never touched a college 
     campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the 
     universal legitimacy of representative government and 
     individual rights by placing themselves between Iraqi voting 
     lines and homicidal religious fanatics. Often times it is 
     less about how clean your actions are and more about how 
     pure your intentions are.
       So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to 
     read this explanation, innocent people your age have suffered 
     under the crushing misery of tyranny. Every tool of 
     philosophical advancement and communication that we use to 
     develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless 
     human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the 
     regimes that have, in my opinion, been legitimately targeted 
     for destruction. Some have allowed their resentment of the 
     President to stir silent applause for setbacks in Iraq. 
     Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up 
     our forces and prevented them from confronting criminal 
     regimes in Sudan, Uganda, and elsewhere.
       I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of 
     the oppressed was over, and I joined.
       In digesting this posting, please remember that America's 
     commitment to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed 
     before the current administration and would exist into our 
     future children's lives had we not acted. Please remember 
     that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in motion 
     centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most 
     cruel of cages. Don't forget that human beings have a 
     responsibility to one another and that Americans will always 
     have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't overlook the 
     obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen 
     the moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed 
     population in converting their torn society into a plural, 
     democratic one is dangerous and difficult business, 
     especially when being attacked and sabotaged from literally 
     every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the 
     end of this reading, let it at least include ``Good Luck.''--
     Lt. Mark J. Daily, United States Army.

                          ____________________