[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 130 (Wednesday, September 5, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11087-S11088]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           NATIONAL SECURITY

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me talk for a moment about the issue 
of what is our national security. This morning, as I was getting ready 
for work, I saw another television advertisement put together by people 
who have accumulated some money and put ads on television. The 
advertisement is one that says: We have to stay in Iraq. We can't 
surrender in Iraq. We have to finish the job in Iraq. It says they 
attacked us on 9/11. The whole implication of the ad is, we are in Iraq 
because we are fighting the people who attacked us on 9/11. It is the 
same dishonesty we have heard for a long time.
  Let me describe again our national security interests and who 
attacked us on 9/11. We know who did because they bragged about it. 
They boasted about attacking America. It was Osama bin Laden, al-
Zawahiri, and others, the leadership of al-Qaida. And where are they? 
Are they in Iraq? No, they are in Pakistan, we believe, somewhere 
between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Let me describe the connection of all 
of this and our national security interests.
  This morning in the newspaper we see that in Copenhagen, Denmark, the 
police have arrested some terrorists engaged in a terrorist plot with 
links to al-Qaida. They say these terrorists had traveled to Pakistan 
for training, and the case against them involves links to militants in 
Pakistan. Separately, last night a German Federal prosecutor had three 
suspects picked up and arrested late Tuesday. The suspects were members 
of a terrorist organization, presumably with connections to al-Qaida. 
There is evidence the men had trained in camps in Pakistan.
  So let's understand, whether this is a surprise to any of us. Here is 
what we learned in February of this year. Senior leaders of al-Qaida 
operating from Pakistan over the past year have set up a band of 
training camps in the tribal region near the Afghan border, according 
to American intelligence and counterterrorism officials. There was 
mounting evidence that Osama bin Laden, and his deputy, al-Zawahiri, 
had been steadily building an operations hub in the mountainous 
Pakistani tribal area of northern Waziristan. That is from the New York 
Times, quoting top intelligence sources.
  In June: Al-Qaida regroups in new sanctuary on Pakistan border. While 
the U.S. presses its war against an insurgency linked to al-Qaida in 
Iraq, Osama bin Laden's group is recruiting, regrouping, and rebuilding 
in a sanctuary along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, 
according to senior U.S. military and intelligence officials. The 
threat from the radical Islamic enclave in Waziristan is more dangerous 
than from Iraq, which President Bush and his aides call the ``central 
front'' of the war on terrorism, according to some current and former 
U.S. officials and experts.
  The National Intelligence Estimate from July of this year says: Al-
Qaida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to our 
homeland. We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements 
of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in Pakistan's 
federally administrated tribal areas.
  Is it a surprise that we pick up the newspaper this morning and see 
terrorists picked up in Germany, threatening to launch attacks against 
the largest U.S. base in Europe, and that we read that they trained in 
Pakistan, likely at an al-Qaida reconstituted training camp? Is that a 
surprise to us?
  We are engaged in a war in Iraq. The television commercial this 
morning, my colleague this morning, and others, continue to say that is 
the central fight of the war against terrorism. It is not. It is a 
civil war. There is widespread sectarian violence. Yes, there are some 
terrorists there. Yes, al-Qaida is there. But that is not the central 
part of what al-Qaida has been about.
  Al-Qaida did not have a presence in Iraq prior to 9/11. The 
television commercial this morning says they attacked us on 9/11. 
Implying that this is why we are in Iraq fighting that war ignores a 
whole body of truth, the body of truth I have just described. Those who 
attacked us and boasted of killing innocent Americans on 9/11 are now 
in a secure hideaway or a safe haven somewhere in Pakistan, not in 
Iraq.
  I ask this question of the President and the Congress: Why should 
there be any square inch on the face of this planet that is safe or 
secure for the leaders of the organization that boasted about attacking 
America? Why should there be any place on this Earth that is safe or 
secure for those who the intelligence estimate now tells us are 
plotting new attacks against our country? Why are they safe and secure? 
Because this country is engaging door to door in Baghdad in the middle 
of a civil war. That is a fact.
  We have people say: You can't surrender. If you try to redeploy, you 
are surrendering. I say this: What we ought to do is redeploy and 
understand that our policy is to fight the terrorists first. When we 
talk about redeploying, we are not talking about not being able to 
fight terrorists, even in Iraq, to the extent they exist there. We are 
talking about leaving enough troops for training of Iraqi forces, about 
fighting terrorists who exist in Iraq, and about force protection. But 
you redeploy the troops to fight the terrorists first. Why on Earth 
should we be debating in the Senate, and the President be in Australia 
today talking to his counterpart in that country about continuing the 
fight in Iraq, when Osama bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and others are 
planning additional attacks against this country? While, at the same 
time, bin Laden and his henchmen are ``safe'' and ``secure'' in or near 
Pakistan? That is unbelievable.
  We need to change tactics. We need a change in course. When we pick 
up the paper this morning and read about terrorists being picked up in 
Germany, plotting attacks against the largest American military base in 
Europe, and they are trained in Pakistan, likely at an al-Qaida 
training camp, we are experiencing the fruits of bad policy and 
dishonest representation about where the fight exists. The central 
fight against terrorism, it seems to me, is to eliminate the leadership 
of al-Qaida, the very leadership who boasted about killing innocent 
Americans on 9/11 and the very leadership who our National Intelligence 
Estimate now tells us are planning additional attacks against our 
homeland.
  We need a change in course. If we stand here and debate this question

[[Page S11088]]

about, well, if you redeploy, change course here or there, you are 
surrendering, that is not looking truth in the eye at all. The 
television commercial I saw this morning--put together, I am sure, by 
some big money interests that are suggesting somehow we are in Iraq 
because they attacked us on 9/11--is the perpetration of the same 
dishonesty we have seen for years.
  We have had soldiers in Iraq longer than we were fighting in the 
Second World War. I want Iraqis to be free. Saddam Hussein is gone. He 
is dead. He was executed. They now have a new Constitution and a new 
Government. Now the question is, Will the Iraqi people have the will to 
provide for their own security?
  We are going to leave Iraq. The question is not whether; it is when. 
We cannot keep 160,000 American troops in the middle of a civil war in 
Iraq for any lengthy period of time, especially while Osama bin Laden 
and al-Zawahiri are in the mountains training additional terrorists 
whom they then send to Germany and perhaps to our country. We have to 
change course. That is a fact. I am not giving you my opinion. I am 
telling you what the National Intelligence Estimate tells us about the 
greatest threat to our country.
  The greatest threat to our homeland, according to the National 
Intelligence Estimate, is the leadership of al-Qaida, and they are in a 
safe and secure haven, and they are planning additional attacks against 
our country. If one does not understand that by reading that which we 
should read, go back to just prior to 2001 and take a look at the 
headline on the PDF briefing given to the President in August 2001: 
``Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.'' It is time we read and 
it is time we understand. Regrettably, that has not been the case 
recently. I hope it will as we turn to this debate in a serious way.
  The change in course has to be, in my judgment: Fight the terrorists 
first. That ought to be this country's policy.
  That was not why I came to the floor of the Senate today, but I was 
inspired to remember the television commercial I saw the first thing 
this morning and then inspired by my colleague's statement about Iraq, 
once again.

                          ____________________