[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 156 (Monday, October 26, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H11771-H11772]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               PROVIDING NEEDED RESOURCES IN AFGHANISTAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WESTMORELAND. Madam Speaker, as the leader of coalition forces in 
a faltering Afghanistan, the United States appears indecisive at this 
critical juncture in the long war.
  Madam Speaker, we owe it to the Afghan people, the Pakistani people, 
our allies and our own national security interests and our courageous 
U.S. troops to stiffen our spines and heed the recommendations put 
forth by General McChrystal. As a leading expert on counterinsurgency 
efforts, General McChrystal has rightly put the focus on winning over 
the Afghan civilians to our side by providing the security they so 
desperately want for their families and villages.
  As an American and as a Member of this House, I hate to put U.S. 
soldiers in harm's way, whether it is on our own shores or halfway 
around the world. We all wish that we could remove our troops from the 
day-to-day, face-to-face conflicts with the insurgent forces in 
Afghanistan. We all wish that we could finish this job by dropping 
bombs on the bad guys from the safety of unmanned drones or conducting 
surgical strikes with Special Forces. These counterterrorism efforts 
hold much appeal and those tactics can win in many battles.
  But there is a problem. Our own very recent experiences teach us that 
counterterrorism alone can't win this wider war.

                              {time}  2015

  We faced a similar crossroads in Iraq 3 years ago. American forces 
had suffered heavy casualties. The Iraqi Government was inept and 
corrupt. The Sunni insurgency and al Qaeda in Iraq ravaged the country. 
Our Nation then took a new course. We took a risk, a highly 
controversial one at the time, Madam Speaker, but that risk turned out 
to be an investment in Iraq's future, and it is an investment that has 
paid off for the United States today. Today we have a measure of 
stability that no one could have predicted 3 years ago. As a result, we 
are positioned to draw down our troop levels there.
  In fact, when President Obama was a candidate, he saw the success in 
Iraq as a chance to redirect our attention to Afghanistan. Then-Senator 
Obama said in August 2008: ``Ending the war will allow us to invest in 
America, to strengthen our military and to finish the fight against al 
Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and the border region of Pakistan. 
This is the central front in the war on terrorism. This is where the 
Taliban is gaining strength and launching new attacks. This is where 
Osama bin Laden and the same terrorists who killed nearly 3,000 
Americans on our own soil are hiding and plotting 7 years after 9/11. 
This is a war that we have to win. And as Commander in Chief, I will 
have no greater priority than taking out these terrorists who threaten 
America and finishing the job against the Taliban.''
  As President, Obama issued an important policy statement on 
Afghanistan in March. He said his goals were to ``disrupt, dismantle 
and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan and to prevent their 
return to either country in the future.'' In that statement, President 
Obama said explicitly that we cannot allow the Afghan Government to 
fall again to the Taliban because ``that country will again be a

[[Page H11772]]

base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they 
possibly can.''
  These are clear words, Madam Speaker. Those words, if they were U.S. 
policy, would give solace to our allies, to the Afghans, to the 
Pakistanis and to our own troops taking the fight to the Taliban. But 
our actual intentions in Afghanistan are not clear, even though General 
McChrystal's report states explicitly that without more troops in the 
next year, the United States faces mission failure where defeating the 
insurgents is no longer possible. That's the view of a respected 
general, the commander handpicked by President Obama, who works in 
Kabul and travels around Afghanistan every day.
  So why is it that the Obama administration is sending mixed signals 
to the American public and to the rest of the world? Why is his 
national security adviser on Sunday morning talk shows saying that 
Afghanistan is not in imminent danger of falling to the Taliban? After 
many years of fighting in Afghanistan, after many years of two steps 
forward and one step back, we cannot flinch. We must let our allies, 
our military and the Afghans and Pakistanis know right now that we will 
do what it takes to provide stability and security.
  Governing is about tough decisions. We must make the tough decisions 
to give General McChrystal the troops he needs to finish this mission. 
We must protect the population and assure them that we're not going 
anywhere. That's our only hope of winning over the Afghan people who 
fear that if they work with us, they'll be slaughtered by the Taliban 
when the Americans leave. As President Obama said just 2 months ago: 
``This will not be quick nor easy. But we must never forget: This is 
not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity.''
  Let's hope that he has not forgotten.

                          ____________________