[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 27, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1221-S1222]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         IRAQ TROOP WITHDRAWAL

  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the 
Iraqi troop withdrawal bill that we are discussing, the bill as 
proposed by Senator Feingold. We have been here before, simply stated. 
The Senate has voted to reject measures similar to this bill at least 
three times over the past year. The only thing that has changed since 
we have had those votes is that conditions on the ground in Iraq have 
continued to improve as a result of the President's new strategy. Even 
the opponents of the surge have had to acknowledge that it is, in fact, 
working. In the midst of this progress and of al-Qaida's continued 
retreat in Iraq, the Senator from Wisconsin would have us surrender to 
an enemy that is on the run.
  I understand his concern for the welfare of our soldiers and for 
those who have sacrificed in Iraq. But the way we pay tribute to those 
who have sacrificed and to our brave men and women still fighting in 
Iraq today is to finish what we started so that we honor them and bring 
those who are still in Iraq home victorious and not defeated. If we are 
trying to reverse the progress we have made in Iraq, embolden our 
enemies and the enemies of the Iraqi people, and ensure that our 
mission fails, I probably could not have crafted a better bill than 
that of the Senator from Wisconsin.
  As a result of the U.S. troop surge, the Al Anbar awakening, 
significant al-Qaida in Iraq defeats, and the unilateral cease-fire 
last August declared by Muqtada al-Sadr, the security in Iraq has 
steadily improved. Violence has reached its lowest level since the 
insurgency began, and there has been a large increase in Iraqi security 
forces trained and equipped. Today that stands at about 440,000 men. In 
the last year ethnosectarian-related deaths have decreased 95 percent. 
Suicide attacks in Baghdad have gone from 12 a month in January of last 
year to just 4 last month, a 66 percent decrease. Attacks have 
decreased in 17 of the 18 provinces in Iraq, and IED detonations are 
down by 45 percent in Baghdad itself. Security incidents countrywide 
and in the 10 Baghdad security districts have declined to their lowest 
level since February 2006 when the Samarra Golden Mosque was bombed.
  As Sunnis in Al Anbar got frustrated with AQI, the troop surge 
provided the opportunity for them to work with coalition forces to 
disrupt AQI operations. Al Anbar now will be transferred to Iraqi 
security control in the near future, bringing 10 of the 18 provinces in 
Iraq under the sole control of Iraqis. AQI attempted to shift 
operations to Baghdad and its surrounding northern provinces, but the 
Al Anbar awakening movement prompted other awakening movements and 
concerned local citizen groups began to spring up all over Iraq. As a 
result, AQI has been disrupted. But as the DNI told the Senate 
Intelligence Committee in February, ``AQI remains capable of conducting 
destabilizing operations and spectacular attacks, despite disruptions 
of its networks.''
  These successes cannot blind us to AQI's abilities or to their 
resolve in attacking Americans. Kurdish areas in northern Iraq were the 
safest in Iraq a year ago, but today AQI is taking advantage of this 
safety by establishing around Mosul and launching attacks against the 
population. This is an area where U.S. troops are used sparingly. In my 
humble opinion, that is no coincidence. U.S. operations forced AQI out 
of al-Anbar, restricted their operations in Baghdad, and they are now 
moving to more rural areas with less U.S. military.

  If this legislation passes and our troops must withdraw from Iraq, 
AQI

[[Page S1222]]

will have the freedom to terrorize the rest of Iraq and beyond. The 
Director of National Intelligence stated that he is ``increasingly 
concerned that as we inflict significant damage on al-Qa'ida in Iraq, 
it may shift resources to mounting more attacks outside of Iraq . . . 
Although the ongoing conflict in Iraq will likely absorb most of AQI's 
resources [over] the next year, AQI has leveraged its broad external 
networks--including some reaching into Europe--in support of external 
operations.'' Forcing our troops out of Iraq would result in a 
resurgent AQI which could mount attacks from Iraq against Americans and 
our allies.
  Security is not the only aspect improving in Iraq. On the political 
front, the Council of Representatives is taking steps to institute 
necessary legislation to help reconcile Iraq.
  Earlier this month, the Council of Representatives passed a 
debaathification law which will help reintegrate former regime 
officials into society. Two weeks ago, the Council of Representatives 
passed three key pieces of legislation: an amnesty law, a provincial 
powers law, and the 2008 fiscal budget. For the first time, Iraq's main 
political parties compromised in order to support passage of these 
bills. The provincial powers law requires the council to pass an 
election law within 90 days and for provincial elections to occur no 
later than October 1, 2008. These are encouraging steps. In spite of 
the fact that the provincial powers law was vetoed yesterday, it is 
encouraging, and I am very hopeful we are going to see the differences 
reconciled in short order and that law become permanent.
  By limiting our military actions to specific areas, this bill would 
ensure that every one of these successes and improvements in security 
is reversed. In the midst of progress in Iraq, which no one denies, and 
with a strategy that is working, it simply does not make sense to tie 
the hands of the commanders on the ground and force them to implement a 
strategy which will lead to failure--a strategy that in the best 
judgment of our military leaders, our intelligence agencies, and from 
the perspective of countless outside observers have stated will lead to 
the failure of our mission and the rapid deterioration of conditions in 
Iraq and for the Iraqi people.
  Hopefully, it is evident to people who are watching this debate and 
have examined the Feingold bill that the strategy which inspires the 
provisions and limitations in this bill is not a military strategy; it 
is a political strategy. The tactics being used by those who would 
enact conditions and limitations on our involvement in Iraq, such as 
those contained in this bill, are not based on strategic thought or 
analysis. Rather, they appeal to a political base that has always 
opposed the war, refuses to acknowledge the progress we are making, and 
wants to see our mission fail.
  Political strategies for fighting wars such as the rhetoric some are 
now imploring all have one thing in common: They all result in failure. 
They are shortsighted, politically motivated, do not serve any national 
security objective and, most importantly, are a disservice to the men 
and women who have been called into action and are on the ground in 
Iraq.
  We are making progress in Iraq. The strategy our President and our 
military commanders have implemented is working. We are receiving 
positive updates from our leaders in the field. Our leaders are 
adjusting their strategy in accordance with those developments on the 
ground as well as the realities back home. They are doing this wisely, 
not hastily or in response to opinion polls, but according to good 
judgment and a realistic assessment of what will work, what will not 
work, and what is appropriate at this point in time.
  The Feingold bill will stop our leaders' ability to do this. It will 
keep them from doing the jobs we sent them to do; and that is to lead, 
to decide, to make judgments, and to report back to us on their 
effectiveness. Most importantly, it will keep them from completing the 
job we have sent them to perform. This is unacceptable. For these 
reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.
  Mr. President, I yield back.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________