[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 18, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3773-S3774]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. REID. Over the last several days the world has looked in horror 
as the terrorist organization ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and 
Syria, has swept across Iraq. As we speak they are sweeping even closer 
to Baghdad. They are murdering and they are pillaging. The group is now 
positioned outside Baghdad. It threatens to unleash its violent 
extremism on the capital of Iraq. ISIS poses a threat to Iraq and the 
surrounding region--and that is an understatement.
  As President Obama and his advisors consider options to combat the 
threat, conservative Members of Congress--or I should say Republican 
Members of Congress and their pundit cheerleaders--are more interested 
in playing their favorite game--their favorite game: blame Obama. It 
doesn't matter what it is, it is his fault for putting people's lives 
in jeopardy--our military, special forces. The FBI captured someone who 
was the ringleader of the Libya Benghazi attack. They have criticized 
the President for bringing this man to justice.
  Yesterday I listened with dismay when the Republican leader suggested 
and claimed that President Obama prematurely withdrew troops from Iraq. 
Think about that for a minute--5,500 dead Americans, tens of thousands 
wounded. Thousands and thousands have been wounded grievously.
  I ask my friend and Republicans he leads, would they have preferred 
the United States stay in Iraq? Would they have preferred our soldiers 
have stayed in Iraq in harm's way? Is he--are they, the Republicans--
willing to risk more American lives?
  The Republican leader and other Republicans seem to have forgotten 
why President Obama initiated the troop drawdown in June of 2009. Why? 
The Iraqis wanted us out. The Iraqi government didn't want American 
forces to stay. Is the Republican leader and the Republicans he leads 
suggesting that American servicemembers should risk their lives even 
more, even as the Iraqi people were telling our military to leave?
  What has been taking place in Iraq is a civil war. Do the Republicans 
and their leader believe that service men and women from Kentucky and 
the other 49 States across this great country should be inserted in the 
middle of their civil war? I don't think so. Fighting between factions 
in Iraq has cost thousands of Iraqi and American lives over the last 
decade, and it spawned a new breed of terrorism now. Yet the original 
architects of the war--of the invasion of Iraq--would have us believe 
that this is all President Obama's fault. Think about that.

[[Page S3774]]

  Is there anything further from the truth?
  I don't think so. This is an Iraqi civil war, and it is time for the 
Iraqis to resolve it themselves. Those who attack President Obama for 
bringing our troops home from Iraq are wrong and out of step with the 
American people. After a decade of war the American people have had 
enough. American families have had enough. I do not support in any way 
putting our men and women in the midst of this civil war in Iraq. It is 
not in the national security interests of our country. It is not worth 
the blood of American soldiers. It is not worth the monetary cost to 
the American taxpayer.
  Rather than spending hundreds of billions of dollars--the war in Iraq 
is at about $1.5 trillion. Rather than spending more money doing that--
fighting George W. Bush's war--how about we use that money to rebuild 
our Nation's infrastructure--roads, bridges, dams, water systems, sewer 
systems. We have a deficit in infrastructure of trillions of dollars.
  How about doing a better job of educating our children? Maybe we 
could raise the minimum wage or give the long-term unemployed 
unemployment compensation or maybe we could help men and women draw the 
same amount of money for doing the same work or maybe we could fully 
fund the Veterans' Administration and ensure that our veterans--more 
than a million have come back from Iraq--are getting the care they need 
and deserve. Instead of addressing these issues at home, they are stuck 
in the same game. And it is not blame Obama; this is a new one--new 
yesterday or the day before. They are stuck listening to the very same 
neocons--obviously, that is where the Republicans are getting their 
information again--the same neocons who pushed us into the Iraq war in 
the first place, as they try to plunge our military in yet another 
foreign misadventure.
  What is absurd is the fact that after all these years their 
suggestions haven't changed. They are in a time warp. Those who are the 
so-called experts are so eager to commit American soldiers to another 
war. Why is their advice so valuable?
  Take President Bush's Paul Wolfowitz, who some say was the architect 
of the war. He has accused President Obama recently of not taking a 
strong position in Iraq. Wolfowitz took a strong position on Iraq's 
sectarian violence when he stated--listen to this bizarre statement--
and this is a quote: ``There's been none of the record in Iraq of 
ethnic militias fighting one another.'' No, only for centuries. Look at 
what he said: There is none of the record in Iraq of militias fighting 
each other. That is Wolfowitz.
  How about Bill Kristol--not the comedian. He is a writer. Bill 
Kristol is another one of the architects of the Iraq war who infamously 
predicted that American soldiers would be welcomed as liberators in 
Iraq. He said the war would last 2 months. Well, he was only wrong by 
about 9 years and 10 months. Kristol also claimed there was no evidence 
of discord among Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. No? Only centuries of 
discord--centuries. Yet even in light of this incorrect assertion about 
Iraq, Kristol went on to say that we need to have more fighting in 
Iraq, beating the drum alongside all the neoconservative friends.
  This morning there was an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal. Who 
would write that? How about Dick Cheney? Just to remind everyone, he is 
the former Vice President of the United States, who clearly was the 
chief architect of the war. If there is one thing this country does not 
need, it is that we should be taking advice from Dick Cheney on wars. 
Being on the wrong side of Dick Cheney is being on the right side of 
history.
  To the architects of the Iraq war, who are now so eager to offer 
their expert analysis, I say thanks but no thanks. Unfortunately, we 
already tried it your way, and it was the biggest foreign policy 
blunder in the history of the country. Now people come back and say 
they can give me some examples that have been worse, and I listen. But 
for me--I know a little bit about history--this was a foreign policy 
blunder that would be hard to take away from being the number one 
foreign policy blunder in the history of the country.
  President Obama and his military advisors are considering their 
options to address ISIS, but putting combat troops back in Iraq isn't 
one of them. I have no doubt that President Obama and America will meet 
this threat head-on without the advice of Wolfowitz, Cheney, Kristol--
the architects of the invasion of Iraq. President Obama will meet the 
threat with the same smart foreign policy which has been the hallmark 
of his administration. The President will continue to identify and 
protect what is truly in our national security interests, using our 
full array of national security tools and standing up to terrorism 
where it threatens our national stability.

                          ____________________