[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 70 (Tuesday, May 1, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5318-S5320]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, 4 years ago today, President Bush landed 
on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln in his flight suit. The banner behind him 
proudly said, ``Mission accomplished.'' President Bush announced to the 
world, and to the American people, that ``major combat operations in 
Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our 
allies have prevailed.''
  I can think of almost no greater act of hubris, arrogance, and denial 
than the declaration of mission accomplished in Iraq 4 years ago. It is 
truly stunning how false that statement was.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet, since that time, 3,000 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq. Over 
104 American troops died in April alone, making it the deadliest month 
since last December.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet we have now spent over $450 billion on the war in Iraq. This war is 
costing us almost 10 times what the Bush administration initially said 
it would.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet we have now been in Iraq for nearly 50 months, longer than the 
United States was in World War II.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet U.S. troop fatalities are up 33 percent since the President's 
escalation of the war in January.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet today, Iraqi civilian casualties are estimated to be in the tens or 
even hundreds of thousands. It is impossible to know how many have been 
killed in Iraq, but the United Nations estimates that 35,000 civilians 
have been killed.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet today oil production in Iraq is still 15 percent lower than it was 
before the war.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet Baghdad is only getting 6 hours of electricity a day, significantly 
less than before the war.
  Four years ago today, President Bush declared mission accomplished. 
Yet the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction just put out 
a new report detailing how projects the administration declared a 
``success'' are actually failing and no longer operating.
  Frankly, it reminds me of all the other ways we were misled by this 
administration. Let us remember what this administration told us about 
this war. Let us remember the Iraq myths. Remember the unfound weapons 
of mass destruction; remember the missing mobile weapons labs; remember 
the yellowcake uranium in Africa; remember Saddam's nonexistent vast 
stockpiles of chemical weapons; remember when Secretary Rumsfeld told 
us that ``we know where the weapons of mass destruction are;'' remember 
the nonexistent link between al-Qaida and Saddam; remember the claims 
that Iraqi oil and other countries, not the United States taxpayer, 
would pay for the cost of reconstruction; remember when the 
administration told us the war would cost only between $50 billion and 
$60 billion; remember when Paul Wolfowitz said ``it seems outlandish'' 
to think we would need several hundred thousand troops in Iraq; and 
remember when President Bush told us on May 1, 2003, that ``major 
combat operations in Iraq have ended.''
  This is the same administration that now comes to this Congress and 
says: Trust us. This is the same administration that says: Trust us, 
our new escalation plan will work. This is the same administration that 
tells this Congress and the American people to be patient, to give 
their ``new'' plan to escalate the war time to work.
  Yet their new plan is more of the same. To quote one of the witnesses 
who testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

       This plan is just stay-the-course plus 20,000 troops.

  That is what they thought then when the witness testified, but 
eventually it has been a lot more than 20,000 troops.

[[Page S5319]]

  Well, the American people and this Congress have run out of patience. 
This administration has run out of credibility to ask for more time or 
another chance, when all we are largely doing is staying the course. 
Frankly, I find it insulting that this administration thinks this 
Congress would simply go along with their escalation plan without 
question.
  Why should we support President Bush's escalation--a plan with 
benchmarks but no real consequences? As I have said time and time 
again, benchmarks without consequences are simply aspirations. We have 
seen countless misguided plans from this administration, but the Iraqis 
have never been held accountable.
  We were told by the end of 2006 a provincial election law would be 
approved. But that benchmark has not been met. We were told that Iraqis 
would approve a law for de-Baathification. But that benchmark has not 
been met.
  We were told that Iraqis would create a law to help restrain 
sectarian militias. But that benchmark, too, has not been met.
  We were told the Iraqis would establish a law to regulate the oil 
industry and share revenues, which is one of the critical elements to 
be able to achieve reconciliation in Iraq, the sharing of the nation's 
national resources. But that benchmark has not been met.
  We were told that, by March, the Iraqi Government was supposed to 
hold a referendum on constitutional amendments. But that benchmark has 
not been met.
  Time and again, the Iraqi Government has fallen short; and time and 
again, this administration has looked the other way--basing their plans 
on the hope that the Iraqis will step up. Continuing this failed policy 
in Iraq based on the mere hope that things will improve is not good 
enough. The broken promises must stop.
  It also seems to me the President is once again out of touch about 
our progress on the ground and his escalation plan. The President said 
last week:

       The direction of the fight is beginning to shift . . . and 
     so far the operation is meeting expectations.

  This is very much like ``mission accomplished.'' Yet, last Monday, an 
attack carried out by a suicide bomber near Baqubah killed 9 soldiers 
and wounded 20 others. The explosion was one of the deadliest single 
ground attacks on American forces since the start of the war.
  Two weeks ago, five different bombs exploded in Baghdad, killing at 
least 171 people. These attacks mark the deadliest day in the capital 
city since the new security plan was implemented 2 months ago.
  In fact, almost four coalition soldiers have been killed per day in 
the past month--the highest rate since January of 2005. As I pointed 
out before, over 100 soldiers were killed in April, including 9 killed 
over the weekend, 1 of only 6 times that more than 100 servicemembers 
were killed in 1 month since the start of the war.
  Violence outside of Baghdad is on the rise, with more than twice the 
number of American troops killed in the past 5 months in Diyala 
Province than were killed all of last year.
  In terms of civilians, over 1,500 Iraqis were killed between February 
14 and April 12. That is almost 500 more people than were killed during 
the previous 2 months.

  Frankly, I don't believe the President's escalation plan is working. 
So I say to the President: The era of blank checks is over and the time 
of congressional oversight has begun.
  The President would largely want us to send him a blank check. We 
have spent 10 times more than we were told we would spend on this war, 
and there is no end in sight in terms of lives and national treasure. 
That is why this Senate and the House sent the President an Iraq 
spending bill with a responsible timeline for withdrawing our troops 
from Iraq. I believe the President is making a serious mistake with his 
plan to veto the bill.
  Some on the other side of the aisle like to point out that the 
President is the Commander in Chief. I remind my friends the 
Constitution puts the Congress in charge of appropriating funds. The 
Constitution, in article I, section 8, provides what scholars call the 
power of the purse, and it says: ``The Congress''--the Congress--
``shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and 
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and 
general Welfare of the United States.'' Congress has the power and the 
right and the obligation to make sure we spend the taxpayers' money 
wisely.
  In a recent editorial, Leon Panetta, a member of the Iraq Study 
Group, reminded us the President has stated the goal of our involvement 
is for Iraq to be able to ``govern itself, sustain itself, defend 
itself.''
  In order for us to get to that point, we need to hold Iraqis 
accountable for meeting the benchmarks they helped set. The emergency 
supplemental bill that passed the House and the Senate does just that, 
by including a plan to redeploy U.S. forces in relation to progress 
made by the Iraqi Government in achieving security and diplomatic 
benchmarks.
  Leon Panetta also said:

       The worst mistake now would be to provide money for the war 
     without sending the Iraqis any message at all about their 
     responsibility for reforms. Both the President and the 
     Congress at the very least must make the Iraqi Government 
     understand that future financial and military support is 
     going to depend on Baghdad's making substantial progress 
     toward the milestones Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has 
     publicly committed to.

  The Iraq supplemental sends a strong message to the Iraqis that it is 
their responsibility to take control of their own country and that our 
involvement in Iraq is not indefinite.
  Vetoing the supplemental sends the message to the Iraqis that they do 
not have to take responsibility and that our troops will be in Iraq 
indefinitely. But staying in Iraq isn't in the national interest or 
national security of the United States.
  Our troops are caught in the middle of a civil war they cannot solve. 
Keeping more troops there will only put them directly in the middle of 
an Iraqi fight. Keeping our troops there is trying to solve a political 
problem with a military solution. Staying in Iraq actually keeps the 
Iraqis from taking responsibility for their actions.
  Frankly, what we hear from the other side doesn't make sense. They 
talk about victory, but what is the definition of ``victory''? Is that 
the victory we have heard is around the corner? They talk about 
benchmarks for the Iraqis, but they set no consequences.
  Four years after the President declared ``mission accomplished,'' 4 
years and over 3,000 Americans lives later, 4 years and over $450 
billion later, 4 years with no new plan for Iraq, just more of the 
same, 4 years after the President declared ``mission accomplished,'' I 
ask: How many more lives must we lose and how much more money must we 
spend?
  I close by asking: When will this administration finally understand 
that ``mission accomplished'' was a myth of their own imagination, born 
of delusion and denial, yet another terrible mistake in a series of 
tragic errors? When will we finally hear the words ``major combat in 
Iraq has ended'' and know they are true?
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, 4 years ago today, as Senator Menendez 
said, the President landed on an aircraft carrier, amid a flurry of 
pomp and circumstance, and declared, ``Mission accomplished.''
  Since that day, much has happened. Since that day, 3,000 brave 
American soldiers and marines have died in Iraq. This war has gone on, 
since that day, longer than World War II. Since that day, the United 
Nations has estimated that 35,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. 
Since that day, U.S. taxpayers have spent $450 billion on the war in 
Iraq.
  To get an understanding of what $450 billion is, if we spent $500 
every second of every minute of every hour of every day, it would take 
29 years to spend the $450 billion we have spent in Iraq.
  Now, 4 years later, our troops in Iraq are stuck in the middle of a 
civil war. Too many of our brave soldiers do not have the body armor 
they need, in spite of the imploring of so many of us to the 
administration to do what they need to do to protect our soldiers. Now 
thousands of Guard men and women face early and extended redeployment.
  Four years later, the will of the people resonates in townhalls and 
in

[[Page S5320]]

churches, in back yards and in living rooms across this country. Their 
message is clear: Mr. President, redeploy our troops out of Iraq.
  Up to now, however, the President has refused to hear the calls of 
millions of Americans. He has refused to listen to voters last fall who 
demanded a different course in Iraq. He has refused to listen to the 
Iraq Study Group, which recommended the redeployment of our troops out 
of Iraq. He has refused to listen to his own generals who have implored 
him, in many cases, to disengage from this civil war. He has refused to 
listen to Congress.

  The supplemental on its way to the White House echoes what many of us 
in Congress and military families across this great country have been 
saying: We need a new direction for Iraq.
  We take a backseat to no one in supporting the brave men and women 
fighting in Iraq. That is why so many of us have pushed this 
administration, pushed the civilian leadership in the Pentagon and in 
the White House to equip our soldiers with proper body armor.
  We take a backseat to no one in supporting the families of our 
soldiers overseas. That is why so many of us in this Chamber have 
pushed to help these support groups that have formed all over the 
country for soldiers and helping them reintegrate back into their jobs, 
back with their families and their society when they return home from 
Iraq.
  But more of the same is not a plan for our troops and will not end 
the war in Iraq. This war has made our country and our world less safe. 
Congress will continue to fight for our Nation's military by working to 
see that they have the resources and the support they need and the 
leadership they deserve.
  This legislation fully funds and supports our troops, while 
establishing conditions that will bring our troops home. It provides 
desperately needed funding to the Veterans' Administration, something 
this administration and previous Republican Congresses have woefully 
underfunded. It provides desperately needed funding to the Veterans' 
Administration to help care for the hundreds of thousands of new 
veterans created by this war.
  If the President will not take responsibility for his failures in his 
conduct of this war, then Congress will. If the President will not lead 
our troops home, then Congress will. We owe it to our soldiers, to our 
sailors, to our airmen, airwomen, and to our marines, and we owe it to 
their families.
  Instead of threatening a veto, the President should listen to the 
military leaders, listen to the American people, and work with Congress 
to change the course in Iraq.
  Vetoing this legislation would deny funding our military and our 
veterans desperately need: $99 billion in emergency Department of 
Defense spending, more than the President's budget; $3 billion for Mine 
Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles; $4.8 billion in military 
construction for BRAC, the Base Closing Commission; and the VA, which 
has been underfunded by $2 billion in the President's budget, under 
this bill would get $1.7 billion immediately, more than the President's 
VA proposal, and will do better in the next budget. It includes $100 
million for VA mental health services.
  It is absolutely outrageous that this Congress--the House and 
Senate--and this President send our men and women off to war, not 
equipping them with the right body armor, not giving them the Mine 
Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles we know how to build in this 
country, and then when they return home, not giving tens of thousands 
of soldiers and marines the health care they deserve.
  In addition to what we do to restore that spending and take care of 
our veterans when they return home, this emergency legislation has over 
$1 billion for Katrina relief, $13 million for mine safety because of 
the increase in deaths in mines in places such as Pennsylvania and West 
Virginia, $625 million for the pandemic flu response, something we 
absolutely need to be prepared for, and $400 million for energy 
assistance for the low-income elderly.
  Please, Mr. President, before you decide to veto this bill, read this 
legislation. Don't turn your back on millions of Americans, don't turn 
your back on your military advisers and the military experts, don't 
turn your back on our soldiers. Sign this legislation.

                          ____________________