[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 22716-22717]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE WAR WITH IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, recently Senator Edward Kennedy of 
Massachusetts took the floor of the other body and made the observation 
that the stated reasons of the President for going to war in Iraq were 
a fraud, that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with the war on 
terrorism and certainly nothing to do with the specific attack on the 
United States of September 11. Rather, his observation was that the 
President's reasons for going to war in

[[Page 22717]]

Iraq were political, and partisan political reasons at that.
  Senator Kennedy's observations were correct and courageous. Since 
September 11, for almost 2 years, the President has inferred that there 
was a direct relationship between the attack on the United States by 
the al Qaeda network of September 11, 2001, and the Government of Iraq; 
that there was a direct connection between those two. Just recently the 
President had to admit that there was no evidence whatsoever 
associating either Saddam Hussein or the Government of Iraq in any way 
with the attack on our country of September 11.
  The President has alleged that the other reason for going to war in 
Iraq was that Iraq possessed substantial so-called weapons of mass 
destruction, chemical and biological weapons. He made that statement 
repeatedly, and that statement was made also by Secretary Rumsfeld and 
Vice President Cheney. In fact, statements were made at certain points 
that they knew precisely where those so-called weapons of mass 
destruction were located and that they could find them very easily. 
That, too, has proven not to be an accurate statement.

                              {time}  2000

  The reasons that we have gone to war in Iraq have nothing to do with 
terrorism, nothing to do with the attack on the United States of 
September 11 and nothing to do with the presence of so-called weapons 
of mass destruction. They have not been found.
  The administration has got to answer a basic question: Why? Why did 
we engage in a preventive war against another sovereign country? Why 
have more than 200 Americans lost their lives? Why have more than 70 
Americans lost their lives since the President declared victory in 
Iraq? And why, because of the destruction that was caused in that war, 
are we now about to spend in the neighborhood of $200 billion or more 
for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of that country?
  The President most recently has asked this body for $87 billion. That 
expenditure would have been unnecessary had this war not taken place.
  So there is much that this administration has to answer for, and the 
American people, and specifically their representatives in this body, 
have the profound obligation to answer those questions.
  If the leadership of this House was discharging its responsibilities, 
it would begin a series of hearings to get to the bottom of the 
rationale behind the administration's actions in Iraq. Why was this 
preventive war engaged in, and why have we lost so many lives? Why have 
so many Iraqis been killed? And why are we spending so much of our 
treasure in Iraq, when our needs here at home are so substantial and 
significant and those needs are not being addressed?
  These are serious questions, they need to be asked, and that is one 
of our most important duties as Members of the House of 
Representatives, to raise these questions. Why is the leadership of 
this House not raising these questions? Why are we not engaged in those 
hearings? Why are we not trying to get to the bottom of this matter? 
That is the responsibility of the people who operate this House of 
Representatives.
  I call upon the leadership to engage in a concerted and directed 
effort to find the answer to this question: Why did we go to war? Why 
did we engage in this so-called preventive war, when the President now 
has admitted there was no connection between September 11 and the 
government in Iraq, when no so-called weapons of mass destruction have 
been found. Therefore, the stated reasons of the administration for 
engaging in this war have been shown to have absolutely no legitimacy, 
yet the costs of this action are substantial, in human life and in 
treasure. We must get to the bottom of this.

                          ____________________