[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 185 (Wednesday, December 5, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H14228-H14229]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1815
THE SO-CALLED SURGE HAS FAILED
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Foreign Affairs
Committee, I was pleased to participate in a joint hearing that took
testimony from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker. It was supposed
to be a turning point in the occupation of Iraq. The purpose of this
hearing was to get a report from our military and diplomatic leaders
about the record of the so-called surge or escalation in Iraq.
Let's first look at what the main purpose of the escalation really
was. According to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Michael
Mullen, the surge was to give space for political reconciliation. I
quote him here: ``Security is critical to providing the Government of
Iraq the breathing space it needs to work toward political national
reconciliation and economic growth. Barring that, no amount of troops
in no amount of time will make much of a difference.''
The President celebrates that there has been a short-term downward
trend in violence. Of course that would happen. When we put our
fighting men and women, the best in the world, on the ground in greater
and greater numbers, of course they will bring some form of order. But
let's be realistic. This is not sustainable. We cannot keep the same
number of troops for very much longer. We simply do not have the
resources to do so, and our troops should not have such a task.
So, yes, they are temporarily keeping a lid on the uprising and
attacks. In fact, they've reached back to 2006 numbers, which at that
time appalled us, and it should not be something we celebrate today. We
are missing our ultimate goal. Like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
said, the purpose of the surge was political reconciliation. If the
White House put even half of the resources, political and fiscal,
behind political reconciliation, we would be in a much different place
right now. We would have a stable and inclusive Iraqi national
government, not one propped up by the United States. It would have the
support of the Iraqi people, and it would be providing strength and
dependable security. That, Mr. Speaker, is not what we have. In fact,
just last month, a new deal called the Declaration of Principles was
inked between President Bush and Prime Minister al-Maliki. It's
basically a blueprint to keep our troops in Iraq indefinitely, and it
allows permanent bases.
It may even provide for arming insurgent security forces, which
actually looks like arming a militia. The last time we got into the
business of arming folks, we ended up with the Taliban. Are we ever
going to learn the lesson not to repeat the mistakes of the past? It
will be interesting to see how the two leaders will try to jam this
latest agreement down the throats of the Iraqi Parliament because the
Iraqi Parliament has clearly stated that they are not pleased with the
agreement, to say the very least. Let's take a good look at what's
going on: The surge has failed. The new White House agreement would
keep our troops in Iraq indefinitely. This is not the road to success.
This will not make America safer.
Mr. Speaker, it's time for bold action. Our friends in the other
Chamber and the resident down the road on Pennsylvania Avenue need to
face up
[[Page H14229]]
to reality. Let's act boldly and fulfill our mandate. It's time to end
this misguided occupation. It's time to bring our troops home.
____________________