[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6298-6299]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN KOSOVO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, last evening I indicated that I would be 
back to finish today what I started yesterday as to why I introduced 
legislation that calls on the Congress to be full partners when we 
determine which civil war we will enter or which we will not. That 
certainly is the responsibility of the Congress.

                              {time}  1430

  My legislation basically says that no DOD money can be used to send 
ground troops into Kosovo unless approved by the Congress of the United 
States.
  Now, it is right to condemn Milosevic for driving ethnic Albanians 
out of Kosovo, particularly after the bombing began. And, of course, 
unfortunately, at the same time, as I mentioned yesterday, we play up 
to China.
  Now, Yugoslavia has 114,000 military and they are the size of 
Kentucky. China is the size of the United States and they have 2.8 
million military. They have another reserve of 1.2 million. They are 
the worst human rights violators in the world. Their own statistics 
indicate that they execute more in 1 year than all of the rest of the 
countries in the world, and yet we play up to them. We know that they 
send nuclear and chemical arms to rogue nations that we have to deal 
with.
  Again, I hear a lot of people in the well now supporting this issue 
who were not here when 1.8 million Sudanese found death through either 
starvation or because of execution. What

[[Page 6299]]

was the difference? Where were we then? Who was here in the well 
claiming that somehow or other we should enter that civil war? What 
about 2.6 million refugees in Afghanistan at the present time, and the 
other 1.5 million who the Afghan government has dislocated? Who is 
crying about our involvement there or whether we should be involved?
  As I indicated yesterday, when the administration came before us and 
said we are going into Bosnia for a year, I asked what are we going to 
do in a year? It began in the 4th Century, the problems in the Balkans. 
It began in the 4th Century with the fall of the Roman Empire. It was 
exacerbated in the 10th Century with the rise of the Ottoman Empire. 
What will we do in a year to undo all the hatred that has been built 
through all of those centuries? And of course the answer, as we now 
know it, is nothing. Four years later and $7 billion later we are still 
there.
  And when the White House came before us and said we are going into 
Haiti for a year, I said this will be the 11th time; the last time we 
were there 15 years. What will we do differently this time? The answer 
is nothing, because again we are still there and still spending the 
money of our taxpayers.
  I got to the point where I talked about apples and oranges because 
people like to somehow or other say this has something to do with 
Hitler and Nazi Germany. That is nonsense. It has nothing to do with 
that at all. There is no correlation at all.
  What happened at that particular time is the free world did the same 
stupid thing we do always. After a war, we melt down our defenses. We 
sat there and we watched Germany build the largest war machine anyone 
could ever imagine. And so when poor old Chamberlain has to go and try 
to do a little negotiating to buy time, we blame him as an appeaser. 
What else could he have done?
  We saw a big military buildup in Germany not with the idea of staying 
within Germany, of course, but with the idea of moving all over the 
continent, and perhaps all over the world. So there are no similarities 
in that particular situation.
  It is important that we as a Congress be part of this decision-making 
process when we decide that we are going to enter someone's civil war. 
Why? Number one, the draft. We positively have to come with the draft. 
We have spread our forces so thin that the Secretary of the Army last 
week was out recruiting on his own, trying to get people to join, 
because we have depleted our forces dramatically. So we better be 
involved because the draft will be an issue.
  We better be involved because body bags will be coming back. We 
better be involved because, as someone said in an article this weekend, 
an all-volunteer army is dangerous. It is dangerous because it is used 
very quickly without much thought. Yes, I am concerned about three GIs. 
I am also very concerned that GIs would have been where they were. What 
kind of planning was that? I am also concerned about our raining bombs 
and missiles on trains carrying passengers who have nothing against us 
and have not participated in the efforts going on in Kosovo at the 
present time.
  So, again, I call on my colleagues. Join with me and merely say that 
the Congress of the United States has to be very much involved when we 
determine which civil war is to our interest and our security and which 
is not. We will be making decisions, and draft will be one of those 
decisions, and that will change public opinion dramatically.

                          ____________________