[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 80 (Tuesday, May 15, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6081-S6082]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, time is running out to fund the troops. 
There are many of us who believe the policy in Iraq is a failed policy. 
The numbers we are given every week are stark and frightening: Over 
3,370 American soldiers have now lost their lives in the war in Iraq. 
Another five were killed yesterday. Over the weekend, three American 
soldiers were kidnapped. There is a manhunt underway to try to find 
them and rescue them as quickly as possible. And to all those involved, 
they have our prayers and our wishes for Godspeed.
  But we understand the reality of this war, a war where almost 30,000 
Americans have been killed or disabled, a war where many soldiers have 
returned home with injuries that they will have to cope with for a 
lifetime. This war has cost us over $500 billion, $500 billion that 
could have been spent in America for many issues important to us--
improving our schools and education, making certain every American has 
basic health insurance, making sure our children all across America 
have the kind of health care and attention they need at an early age to 
be healthy through the rest of their life, money that could have been 
spent at the National Institutes of Health looking for new cures for 
diseases and illnesses from which we suffer in America. There are so 
many programs in which we could have invested that money.
  Instead, we have invested that money in a war with no end, a war that 
is now in its fifth year. The war in Iraq has lasted longer than the 
Korean war, has lasted longer than World War II. It is the most 
expensive war in the history of the United States, save World War II, 
which was, in fact, a world war where the United States made a total 
national commitment. But we now find that second in rank in terms of 
cost is this war in Iraq.
  There are many of us who understand that Americans across the board 
may have supported the initial invasion but had second thoughts. I was 
one of 23 who voted against this war at the outset in October 2002. 
There were colleagues on both sides of the aisle who in good faith 
thought the President should have the authority to deal with Saddam 
Hussein. They were misled, as the American people were misled by 
intelligence estimates that were just wrong, intelligence estimates 
that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and threatened 
the United States, fear of nuclear holocaust, fear of mushroom-shaped 
clouds. All of these images were paraded before the American people a 
short time after we had gone through the tragedy of 9/11. It is 
understandable the American people were concerned and fearful, and they 
supported the idea of invading Iraq in the hopes of keeping America 
safe.
  We learned that in so many ways the information given to the American 
people before the invasion of Iraq was wrong. There were no weapons of 
mass destruction, there were no nuclear weapons, there was no 
connection between Saddam Hussein and the events of 9/11 that were 
sponsored by al-Qaida. But the invasion took place.
  Many of us felt that once our soldiers were in the field, it was time 
to close ranks behind them, stop the debate. They volunteered, they are 
serving our country, they didn't write this policy. They are risking 
their lives right now, and we should stand behind them. So many of us, 
even those who opposed this war and voted against it from the outset, 
voted year after year for the emergency appropriations President Bush 
sent to Congress, money for our troops in the field. Now we are in the 
fifth year, and there is no end in sight.
  We have been told by our military leaders that even the best military 
in the world in the United States cannot save Iraq. Only the Iraqis can 
save Iraq. It has to be the Iraqi people through their Government who 
decide to move forward toward stability. We cannot police a civil war. 
We cannot contain the violence in Iraq even with 20,000, 30,000, 40,000 
more American soldiers. That is a reality and one we should face. 
Regardless, the President concluded a few months ago that he would 
escalate this war and send even more American soldiers into harm's way. 
I think that was a mistake. I think the President was moving in the 
wrong direction. As I said, I don't believe our military, though it be 
the best in the world, can really contain the violence of the civil war 
in Iraq. I certainly don't believe our military, as good as it is, can 
give spine to Iraqis leaders who can't seem to reach conclusions and 
decisions on timetables about their future.
  So the war continues. The President asked for more money, $80 
billion, $90 billion at a time to continue this war in Iraq. Many of us 
believe we should do two things: fund the troops, make sure they have 
all that they need, but change the policy, start bringing American 
soldiers home. Tell the Iraqis once and for all that we will not be 
there indefinitely. We are not going to stay until you work up the 
political courage to make decisions to govern your country. We are 
going to start coming home. As we come home, these Iraqi soldiers whom 
we have spent millions of dollars to train and equip need to stand up 
and defend their country. The Iraqi Parliamentarians and leaders of 
their Government need to stand up and make the hard political 
decisions.

  That is the reality of Iraq today. It is a reality we are reminded of 
every morning with the newscasts that tell us of the suffering and 
death which takes place in that country.
  I wish to say a word, too, about the Iraqi people. I was reminded 
over the weekend when I was home in Illinois--and a good reminder it 
was--that when we speak about the loss of life in Iraq, don't forget 
the innocent Iraqis who have lost their lives as well. We don't even 
know what that number is today. We know that close to 3,500 American 
soldiers have lost their lives, and we know the coalition forces who 
have lost their lives. We don't know how many innocent Iraqis have lost 
their lives as victims in the civil war or even of our invasion.

[[Page S6082]]

  Mr. President, ``60 Minutes'' on Sunday night had a gripping story 
about a youngster, 12-year-old, who, during the bombing of our invasion 
of Iraq, lost both his arms. This young boy, whose name is Ali, came to 
the attention of people across the world and was given a chance to go 
to England, where he goes to school now. He was really inspiring when 
he talked about how he was going to make something of his life even 
though he lost both his arms. He is just an innocent victim of this war 
who lost family and friends in a bombing, a tragic incident we wished 
never occurred.
  Keep in mind that these innocent Iraqis are part of this calculation 
about the future of Iraq as well. If this civil war is to come to an 
end, we not only need to start bringing American troops home, we need 
for the Iraqi Government to start making decisions to protect their 
people and project their future in a positive way.
  I sincerely hope that at the end of next week when we present to the 
President the money necessary for the troops, we will also make it 
clear that we are taking a step forward to correct this failed policy 
in Iraq.
  I might also add that if we are not successful in changing the policy 
with this bill, it is not the end of the debate. We are 4 months into 
this new Congress, 4 months since the Democratic majority took control 
of the House and Senate. In a little over 4 months, we have seen a 
dramatic change in the national debate on the war in Iraq. For the last 
4 years, we have been sleepwalking through this policy in this war in 
Iraq with few challenges from Capitol Hill. The legislative branch of 
our Federal Government did little or nothing to meet its constitutional 
responsibility, to challenge the Executive when it came to policy and 
execution of that policy.
  Now things have changed. Now, with a Democratic majority in the House 
and the Senate, the debate is underway, as it should be, a debate on 
policy. I think most Americans would agree that over the last 4 months 
with this new Congress, we have had a more active and vigorous debate 
on Iraq than any time since this war started. That is the way it should 
be. The American people believe Iraq is the primary issue on which we 
should focus, and we have, and we will continue to focus on Iraq. Even 
beyond the supplemental appropriations bill, we will move to a Defense 
authorization bill and a Defense appropriations bill, giving ample 
opportunity for Members on both sides of the aisle to come up with 
alternatives to deal with this failed policy.
  In conclusion, there is one key to changing the failed policy in 
Iraq. The key to changing the failed policy in Iraq is 11 Republican 
Senators. When 11 Republican Senators reach the point that they want 
this policy changed, it will happen. We have 49 Democratic Senators who 
have voted repeatedly to change that policy. Two Republican Senators--
the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Smith, and the Senator from Nebraska, Mr. 
Hagel--have stepped forward and joined us on the Democratic side. We 
need nine more. With nine more Republican Senators, the failed policy 
in Iraq will change. Why does it take so many? It takes 60 votes in the 
Senate to move forward a significant and controversial measure such as 
a change of policy in the war in Iraq.
  I was heartened to learn last week that some Republican House Members 
met with the President. There were press reports afterward that they 
told him point blank that they can no longer continue to support his 
policies. Change has to take place. The President needed to hear that. 
I hope Republican Senators who feel the same way will step forward.
  It is not enough for them to say we will come up with 11 different 
ideas and vote one at a time for each of them. That isn't the way this 
works. We have to put our minds together and try to find compromise and 
cooperation so that we can serve the best needs of America--not only 
our national security needs but the needs of our troops in the field 
and the needs of the Iraqi people. If 11 Republican Senators will join 
the 49 Democrats, this policy can change. We will give them that 
opportunity tomorrow with two cloture votes and then beyond that some 
votes I am sure next week on a conference report when we reach that 
stage in the proceedings, and then in subsequent legislation.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the spirit of 
compromise and cooperation to try to find ways that we can end this war 
in an honorable way, bring our troops home to the heroes' welcome they 
deserve, and say to the Iraqi people: The Americans have given you more 
than any nation could ever ask for. We have given you over 3,300 
American lives of the best and bravest soldiers in the world. We have 
given you 25,000 injured soldiers, some with serious injuries they will 
carry for a lifetime. We have spent $500 billion. We have stood behind 
your country as you deposed your dictator, put him on trial, and 
executed him. We have stood behind your country when you wrote your 
Constitution and held your elections. We have been there for more than 
4 years. Now it is your turn. Now it is the turn of the Iraqis to step 
forward and guide their nation forward.
  We need to understand that we won't have a change in policy unless 
the President agrees to change--and it is unlikely he will--or this 
Congress forces a change. The only way that occurs is when 11 
Republican Senators join 49 Democrats to make it happen and make it a 
reality.
  Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of the time for the majority 
in morning business. I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time on 
the Republican side be equally divided among myself, Senator Cornyn, 
and Senator Gregg.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________