[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 18847-18853]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McCotter). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) 
is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk about the rotation of troops 
in Iraq that has occurred over the last year or so and the rotation 
that is being scheduled for the next year.
  There has been a statement by the Kerry campaign, by Senator Kerry, 
to the effect that there is a secret plan to call up a lot more troops 
and to do some wild thing after the election. That is not the case, Mr. 
Speaker. And, in fact, we held a hearing in July in which the 
Department of Defense walked through their plan for the next phase or 
the next rotation of troops into Iraq. And let me for the record just 
go over what has taken place.
  The first half of this chart showing Iraq shows the present 
configuration of major ground forces in Iraq; and what we had before 
this, of course, was the 101st Airborne up north in the northern area. 
We had the 4th Infantry Division in the Tikrit area. That is over here. 
We had the 1st Armored Division in the heart of Baghdad, and we had out 
to the western area, all the way to the Syrian border, the 82nd 
Airborne Division. That rotation took place in which those forces were 
replaced by the forces that are there right now.

[[Page 18848]]

  And as a result of that, we have got a striker brigade up north that 
took the place of the 101st Airborne. We have got the 1st Marine 
Division, in fact, the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force consisting mainly 
of the 1st Marine Division and supporting elements in this western area 
of operation. That is this big AO that goes all the way to the Syrian 
border. Elements of the 1st Armored Division remain in Iraq, did not 
move out, while some of them did move back to Germany. And to 
supplement that force, the 1st Cavalry Division moved into the Baghdad 
area. And, of course, we have the 1st Infantry Division that took over 
for the 4th Infantry Division in the Tikrit area.
  That is the present state of forces. And the complement of Reserve 
forces that mainly supports these active major units is roughly 40 
percent of the total force of the 138,000-or-so Americans who serve in 
Iraq right now.
  We will have what we call OIF-3. That is the next phase of 
deployments to Iraq, and that was briefed by the Department of Defense. 
It was not a secret, for Senator Kerry's edification. In fact, they 
came in and had a hearing with the Committee on Armed Services, with 
our committee, and laid out their blueprint; and we had nationally 
televised hearings on this rotation. And this rotation reflected this: 
that we will be going in the western area of operation, that is this 
area that goes west of Baghdad to the Syrian border. The 1st Marine 
Expeditionary Force will be replaced by another Marine Expeditionary 
Force. To the north we will have another striker brigade. That is the 
Mosul area. The 1st Infantry Division will be replaced in the Tikrit 
area up north of Baghdad by the 42nd Infantry Division. The 3rd 
Infantry Division will move into the Baghdad area, and portions of the 
10th Mountain Division will move into the Baghdad area also, displacing 
the 1st Cav, which is presently in the Baghdad area, and the 1st 
Armored Division.
  After Senator Kerry made those remarks, I contacted the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs, General Myers, and he sent a letter, which I am going 
to place in the Record, Mr. Speaker, saying this: ``With regard to the 
recent comments concerning our Reserve and National Guard alert 
notification process, I can assure you there has never been any 
guidance to defer notification until after the Presidential election.''
  The clear message in Senator Kerry's remarks was that somehow there 
was a secret plan to have a big rotation of troops that would be 
announced shortly after the election. Well, every 180 days there is an 
announcement of the next rotation of troops, and the reason we do that 
is so that the troops will have notification and will be able to tell 
their loved ones and get their affairs in order so that they can, in 
fact, embark on that particular rotation.
  So in the spring, the Department of Defense came and told us about 
this next rotation that is called OIF-3 that will take place starting 
this fall and moving through the spring. Then in November or December, 
they will come in, and they will give notification just like they did 
in April and May about the next rotation of forces that will displace 
OIF-3 and rotate into Iraq on a regularly scheduled basis.
  The Reserve component of this 135,000 to 138,000 troops that is 
presently in Iraq will continue to be between 35 and 40 percent of the 
total force. So it will remain constant. There is not going to be any 
huge spike in the proportion or number of troops from the Reserves that 
make this particular force mix.
  Let me read the last statement by General Myers when he talked about 
this. This is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after having 
said ``I can assure you there has never been any guidance,'' never been 
any guidance, ``to defer notification until after the Presidential 
election''; so every 6 months they make an announcement, and they lay 
down a blueprint like the blueprint that is front of us here. He says, 
``Alert notification is an established and consistent process based on 
meeting the needs of the combatant commander while ensuring, to the 
maximum extent possible, earliest notification of those units affected. 
As in the past, our goal is to alert as early as possible and mobilize 
in order to conduct necessary training before deployment.
  ``Our target for Reserve combat units is 6 months prior to their 
deployment given the time required to achieve proficiency at the 
company, battalion, and brigade levels of competence. Our target for 
our Reserve logistics units is less, currently at 4 months prior to 
deployment, since their tasks are typically smaller and less complex 
than their combat counterparts.
  ``The notification date is a balance between early notification and 
ensuring units are notified in as complete a package as possible and 
not so early that changes in the operational situation may alter the 
combatant commander's needs and ultimately the composition of the 
deploying force. In the case of the current rotation, we announced our 
plan in the spring of 2004, testified before your committee in July, 
2004, and deployed the first unit in the fall of 2004. For the next 
rotation, we will announce our plan in November, 2004, with the first 
unit deploying in May, 2005.''
  He goes on: ``As of September 15, 2004, 800 individual ready Reserve 
members have been activated. The intent is to fill 5,600 slots by 
December, 2004, with the potential to go higher if required. The skill 
sets that are in the highest demand are transportation, logisticians, 
mechanics, military police, and engineers.'' And that figure is 
consistent with what DOD told us several months ago, referring to the 
5,600 people.
  So, Mr. Speaker, this is a blueprint of the deployment that has taken 
place and a blueprint of the deployment that is to come; and every 6 
months, without regard to politics, without regard to elections, and 
simply with regard to the men and women who wear the uniform of the 
United States and their families, the Department of Defense will 
continue to give advance notice on about a 180-day basis. So, Mr. 
Speaker, I wanted to lay that out.
  A letter from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff follows:

                                                   Chairman of the


                                        Joint Chiefs of Staff,

                               Washington, DC, September 20, 2004.
     Hon. Duncan Hunter,
     Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: With regard to the recent comments 
     concerning our Reserve and National Guard alert notification 
     process, I can assure you there has never been any guidance 
     to defer notification until after the Presidential election.
       Alert notification is an established and consistent process 
     based on meeting the needs of the Combatant Commander while 
     ensuring, to the maximum extent possible, earliest 
     notification of those units affected. As in the past, our 
     goal is to alert as early as possible and mobilize in order 
     to conduct necessary training before deployment. Our target 
     for reserve combat units is six months prior to their 
     deployment, given the time required to achieve proficiency at 
     the company, battalion and brigade levels of competence. Our 
     target for our reserve logistics units is less, currently at 
     four months prior to deployment, since their tasks are 
     typically smaller and less complex than their combat 
     counterparts. The notification date is a balance between 
     early notification and ensuring units are notified in as 
     complete a package as possible, and not so early that changes 
     in the operational situation may alter the Combatant 
     Commander's needs and ultimately the composition of the 
     deploying force. In the case of the current rotation, we 
     announced our plan in the spring of 2004, testified before 
     your committee in July 2004, and deployed the first unit in 
     the fall of 2004. For the next rotation, we will announce our 
     plan in November 2004, with the first unit deploying in May 
     2005.
       As of September 25, 2004, 800 Individual Ready Reserve 
     members have been activated. The intent is to fill 5,600 
     slots by December 2004, with a potential to go higher, if 
     required. The skill sets that are in the highest demand are 
     transportation, logisticians, mechanics, military police and 
     engineers.
       To reiterate, and consistent with our notification process, 
     we will notify the next package of combat troops in support 
     of OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM and OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM in 
     late November 2004 to meet a May 2005 deployment date or the 
     lead unit of the rotation.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Richard B. Myers,
                                                         Chairman.

  I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and allow him to 
make a few remarks on the subject of Iraq.

[[Page 18849]]


  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California, my 
chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services, for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, in recent days many of my colleagues from the other side 
of the aisle have come to the floor of the House to criticize the 
President's policies on Afghanistan and Iraq. The rhetoric of the 
minority side of the aisle is paltry at best, and tonight I would like 
to try to set the record straight.
  The two chief arguments of the Democratic Party that I believe are 
based on faulty logic are these: first, America has lost its focus on 
the war on terrorism in Afghanistan; and, second, President Bush has 
failed to build a true international coalition to fight this war.
  Let us point to the administration's Afghan focus. First and 
foremost, we in the Congress must make the distinction between less 
cable news coverage and less administrative attention to the situation 
in Afghanistan. Despite what many would have us believe, the success 
stories coming out of Afghanistan are not only remarkable, but they far 
outnumber the negative ones. Negative stories make the news, but the 
positive ones are there as well. And native Afghans are returning to 
their homeland in droves now that the country has been liberated from 
the oppression of the Taliban. Just this year 200,000 Afghans have 
returned home from Pakistan, bringing the total number to 2.2 million 
from Pakistan since 2002. Also, recently the 1 millionth Afghan refugee 
returned home from Iran. Many of these refugees are highly educated 
teachers, health care providers, and community leaders that were thrown 
out of the country by the Taliban.
  I do not believe that this extraordinary number of Afghan citizens 
would pick up and return home if they believed that Afghanistan was not 
a safer place. To the contrary, they are returning home because their 
country has been liberated from an oppressive regime and they are once 
again free. The Afghan economy continues to power ahead; and previously 
unheard-of opportunities are opening up, particularly, Mr. Speaker, for 
Afghan women.
  Let us talk about democratic development. Perhaps the most notable 
development in Afghanistan is the progress of democracy. The country's 
first post-war presidential election is scheduled for October of this 
year. Voter registration efforts have exceeded, far exceeded, 
expectations. Several months ago, officials predicted up to 5 million 
registered voters, but according to the Joint Election Commission, more 
than 9 million people, out of 10 million eligible voters, have 
registered to vote, and 41.6 percent of them are women.

                             {time}   2200

  Furthermore, despite serious efforts to disrupt it, voter 
registration continues at a pace of up to 125,000 people per day. 
Afghan citizens are optimistic and excited by democracy, I think their 
country is headed in the right direction, and I commend our President 
for his efforts in this regard.
  President Bush's efforts to build a true international coalition, let 
us just talk about that for a little while. Few positive and accurate 
statements have been made regarding the 32-nation United States-British 
led coalition in Iraq or the 35-country security force in Afghanistan. 
Unfortunately, this has reinforced the falsehood that America is 
isolated and hated on the world stage.
  Well, to the contrary, in fighting the War on Terror, the United 
States has assembled one of the greatest international coalitions this 
world has ever seen. The coalition in Iraq includes 21 nations from 
Europe and nine from Asia and Australia. Twelve of the 25 members of 
the European Union are represented. Sixteen of the 26 NATO member 
States are represented as well.
  Let us recall that the decision to go to war in Iraq was undertaken 
only after years, years, of negotiations with the UN Security Council 
and no less than 17 failed resolutions.
  There is broad political support internationally for United States 
aims and objectives in Iraq, as confirmed by the unanimously-passed UN 
Security Council Resolution 1546 which endorses the return of full 
sovereignty to Iraq and its interim government; sets out the role of 
the United Nations; and outlines the relationship between the new Iraqi 
government and the multinational force in the country after the end of 
the occupation by the CPA, the Coalition Provisional Authority, on May 
28.
  Furthermore, the United States has spearheaded a huge international 
effort to reconstruct Iraq and to negotiate forgiveness of the 
country's massive debts.
  I am concerned that a failure to properly account for the reality of 
international coalition efforts strengthens all of this anti-American 
sentiment abroad and diminishes the sacrifices and the contributions 
that our allies are making in the war on terror.
  Mr. Speaker, with the aid of the international coalition, millions of 
people have been liberated, 170 newspapers are now being published, new 
modern power plants are being built, 64,000 secondary school teachers 
have been trained and some 5,000 school principals and administrators. 
More than 8.7 million textbooks have been printed and distributed 
throughout Iraq. Coalition forces have rehabilitated almost 2,500 
schools, 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are 
open today. All 240 hospitals and more than 1,200 health clinics are 
open for business.
  Healthcare spending in Iraq has actually increased 30 times over its 
pre-war levels and children, listen to this, are receiving crucial 
vaccinations for the first time ever. Over 5 million children have been 
immunized for measles, mumps and rubella.
  Mr. Speaker, this is just a handful of the good that this coalition 
has brought to the people of Iraq. It is a coalition that was forged 
and preserved by our President, and I believe that it is fundamentally 
wrong to diminish the achievements of this coalition.
  Furthermore, I hope that the rhetoric of the minority party would not 
dishearten brave citizens of the 32 other nations that are giving of 
their talent, their time, and, yes, their treasure to do what they 
think is right in defending the freedom and interests of the people of 
Iraq and Afghanistan.
  I yield back to the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, and 
I thank him for giving me a little time to talk about all the good that 
is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to continue to bring that 
to the attention of our colleagues and the American people.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would like to just 
follow my colleague's comments for a second and then yield to the fine 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop), also a member of the committee.
  I am reminded that the gentleman has a military base in his area that 
is close to his hometown, Fort Benning, Georgia, the home of the United 
States Infantry.
  Just thinking about Fort Benning, I am reminded of the great troops 
who are produced by Fort Benning over the many, many years, of people 
who fought in very difficult wars and who acquitted themselves in such 
an admirable fashion.
  I am reminded of the attempts in recent years, especially in Vietnam, 
by members of the media and some Members of Congress, including Senator 
Kerry, to demean those people.
  I remember Senator Kerry's statements when he came back in April of 
1971 and appeared before a Senate committee and stated that America 
``had murdered 200,000 Vietnamese.'' He said at one point that 60 to 80 
percent of our GI's were stoned 24 hours a day. He made outrageous 
statements.
  It was that type of stereotyping and characterization that led to a 
mindset among some in this country that Vietnam veterans, that the GIs, 
the great products of the Infantry School at Fort Benning and many 
other GIs, were somehow misfits.
  I can remember when we had a mass murder that happened at a 
McDonald's restaurant in San Diego during the '70's and one of the 
anchor persons asking, was it a Vietnam veteran that did it, as if 
``Vietnam veteran'' and ``misfit'' went hand-in-hand.
  That image was, to some degree, perpetrated by Senator Kerry and 
those

[[Page 18850]]

like him who came back telling these outrageous lies about the people 
who carried the flag for the United States. He did not just speak 
against the war, which was fine; he demeaned his fellow troops.
  I am reminded of another movie that was made about those great 
infantrymen who came from Fort Benning, and that is the movie that 
chronicled Hal Moore, who was a major who took on a huge number of 
North Vietnamese forces in the battle for LZ X-Ray early the war when 
he commanded the First Cavalry unit, the unit of the same First Cav in 
Iraq today.
  This movie for the first time, in which Mel Gibson starred and I 
think did a great job, characterized the true spirit of the American 
fighting man. It was the first movie that had been done for 20 years 
that was not shot through the eyes of a drug-crazed hippie in 
Hollywood, but was in fact directed and produced through the eyes of an 
infantryman, in this case Hal Moore.
  I thought one of the most moving parts of that movie was not only the 
fact that here was an Infantry leader that prayed with his troops, 
which Hal Moore did, but it also reflected the greatness of these 
military wives who were waiting back at Fort Benning as the battle for 
LZ X-Ray took place and casualty counts were coming in.
  They dreaded that knock on the door by a Western Union telegram man 
saying that your husband was KIA in this battle for LZ X-Ray, which was 
an intense battle with a lot of casualties on the U.S. side and 
enormous casualties on the side of the North Vietnamese.
  The wife of Hal Moore, having the telegram man come to her door and 
she thought this is it, Hal has been shot, he came in and said he was 
actually looking for another address up the street and she realized her 
good friend was going to get the bad news in a few minutes. She said, 
``Wait a minute, I will deliver that telegram,'' and Hal Moore's wife 
then went door-to-door delivering these telegrams and consoling the 
women whose husbands had been lost.
  That movie, for the first time in 20 years, overcame the image, the 
wrongful image, that people like Senator Kerry had produced, that was 
largely consumed by the American public. When he appeared before that 
Senate committee and said that American GIs were cutting off limbs and 
raping and robbing, I think he used the term in a manner like Genghis 
Khan, he said Genghis Kahn instead of Genghis Khan, that put together 
an image, a false image, that was not shaken for almost 20 years in 
this country.
  So I just want to thank the gentleman for representing that great 
piece of America that is truly the home of the Infantry.
  Mr. GINGREY. If the gentleman will yield further, I thank the 
chairman.
  Mr. Speaker, what the chairman was just saying is just so true. It 
came home to me in a big and tragic way in this past week. I am a 
graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. The 
president of the student body just a couple of years ago at Georgia 
Tech, my alma mater, a young first lieutenant, Tyler Brown, was killed 
leading his troops in a firefight in Iraq.
  He was an outstanding young man. Everybody said that one day Tyler 
would surely become President. I do not know about that, but I know 
that his mom and dad and his older brother Brent are suffering deeply 
now, as much as a person could possibly suffer, over the tragic loss of 
their son and brother.
  As the chairman says, Mr. Speaker, you cannot support the troops out 
of one side of your mouth and criticize them out of the other. This is 
the one thing that this family, this Brown family, has to hold on to 
for the rest of their lives, to know that Tyler, their son, who had 
such great potential, who gave his life for this country, killed in 
action, was not killed in vain.
  I really appreciate the chairman, Mr. Speaker, bringing that out 
tonight, because you cannot be for the troops and against them. You 
cannot have it both ways.
  I just felt like I needed to make that statement. I appreciate the 
chairman giving me the additional time to do that.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman and I appreciate 
the fact that he represents that great home of the Infantry.
  I would like to yield at this time to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Bishop), also a very articulate member of the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I agree, Mr. Chairman, with that concept that we 
have a great many men and women who are serving nobly and have in the 
history of this great country.
  Mr. Speaker, in the words of that great philosopher, Dan Quisenberry 
of the Kansas City Royals, he once said, ``I have seen the future. It 
is just like the past, only longer.''
  Well, Mr. Speaker, I am just an old history teacher who believes that 
if we do not view our past, we fail to clearly view our future, and 
that history illustrates there are several principles which have made 
this a great country.
  I would like to talk about two of those principles in relationship to 
Iraq that I think are characteristics that have built this great 
country. One is patience in the face of adversity, and the second is a 
feeling of charity that Americans have always displayed to other 
people.
  Sometimes I think we live in a society that venerates speed. 
Everything has to be done quickly. Our dialogue, our actions, sometimes 
illustrate that impatience that we have.
  I would like at times to go back to the days of Williams Jennings 
Bryan when he would go along the Chautauqua circuit, and he could speak 
for 2 or 2\1/2\ hours to an audience, totally mesmerizing them.
  I realize that some of the speeches that are given on this floor feel 
as if they are going 2 or 2\1/2\ hours and we are not always that hot 
in the mesmerizing category, but, nonetheless, it does have a 
precedent.
  In Berlin in 1948, when the Soviet Union decided it was going to push 
us out of that city, we made a commitment that lasted over 15 months 
that every day, every 3 minutes, another plane landed to defend that 
particular city. It was our commitment, our patience and persistence in 
the face of adversity.
  Even in the 1960s, if you were a politician, the average sound bite, 
the average response someone had on the media, was about 45 seconds, 
which does not sound like much, but it is a long time if you think of 
what you can explain in 45 seconds.
  Today, in contrast, we live in a world where kids watching children's 
programs will find that the visual will change every 10 seconds so they 
do not lose interest; that we have a sit-com mentality that thinks that 
all problems in the world have to be solved in 22 minutes plus 
commercials; and we are frustrated when we do not quickly have results. 
Instead of 45 seconds for a response, today in the media if you cannot 
give a response in 8 seconds or less, which is the average, it just 
does not happen.
  All this contributes to a rush of judgment where we consider the 
situations we are in today unique, and we fail to learn what I think is 
important lessons from the past, and it is critical, in light of what 
is happening in Iraq.
  We have people that believe since we are trying to reform a country 
and create a democracy in an area that has no tradition of that, that 
is a task that is too daunting, and if we cannot transform that society 
overnight, then it is a task that is too frustrating. And an enemy that 
is comprised mostly of non-Iraqis are there to try and test our 
patience in the face of adversity.
  Now, what I would like to say is if you look at history, this 
situation is not unique or unusual. After World War II, we went into 
Japan, a country that had absolutely no tradition of democracy, and yet 
by 1952 we had created or helped to create and establish a stable 
democracy that is one of the major forces of the world today. But we 
fail to remember that that took 7 years of effort to reach that point.
  In Germany, at the same time, we created a new constitution that is 
still in use, the ``Basic Law,'' the Federal Republic, which is a 
strong republic, but we fail to remember that took us 4 years to reach 
that particular point.

[[Page 18851]]

  In the Philippines after the Spanish-American War, it was 6 years of 
bloody violence before peace was brought and you could even start the 
reconstruction of that island nation.

                              {time}  2215

  In Iraq, which we have been in about the same time as the Berlin 
airlift used to break the Soviet determination to destroy that 
beautiful city, we have established a constitution, a new government, 
planned for elections, have a police force and an armed forces that are 
increasing every day. That is a phenomenal success in a short period of 
time. I guess we are doing things quickly today, but it is very 
positive. And that success will only come if we still maintain that 
value we have always had of patience in the face of adversity.
  History says it is possible. History says that this country is best 
suited to be successful, and I believe that we can, in part because of 
the quality of our people.
  If I could just very quickly talk about that other characteristic, 
which is the charity that we have always had to other people, by 
mentioning two people who have characteristics in common. One is they 
have great hearts; the other is they happen to be Utahans. If I could 
mention the name of Jared Kimber from Tremonton, a chief warrant 
officer, who emulated a former Utahan, a neighbor of his, Gail 
Halverson, known as the candy bomber in that Berlin airlift area of 
time.
  But Jared, who flies a Black Hawk for the 82nd medical company, 
flying over the area, noticed that there were kids who just simply had 
nothing with which they could play. One day he noticed a bunch of kids 
trying to play soccer with a ball that deflated. So that day, he went 
to the PX. He bought candy. He bought soccer balls. He bought Frisbees, 
and as he was flying over, he distributed that from his helicopter. 
Every day he did that.
  So, by June, he was getting packages from home weighing 60 pounds of 
stuff. A lady donated all of her stuffed bears for the kids of Iraq. 
The 9-year-olds in his community organized, and they got 300 balls of 
very different kinds so that the kids in Iraq could play with them, and 
those became Jared's kids for whom he sacrificed out of the goodness 
and the charity of his heart.
  Another Utahan by the name of Paul Holton, a chief warrant officer in 
the Utah National Guard, a man that was mentioned by the President in 
his February National Prayer Breakfast is known now as Chief Wiggles 
over there, taking on something called Operation Shoe Fly where 
soldiers got shoes for needy families in Afghanistan. He recognized a 
problem in Iraq and gave it a new name called Operation Give in which 
clothing, dental supplies, toys and books are used for needy people.
  In talking to students in Utah, Mr. Holton said, ``War is 
challenging, sometimes a kill-or-be-killed kind of thing, and you are 
in a strange place, and it is dangerous. But what is missing? Well, it 
is the people.'' Holton said he was sick of hearing about all the bad 
stuff when there are so many good things that are also happening in 
Iraq.
  He said the media makes it look like all Iraqis are hostile and want 
U.S. troops out. He realized it was important not only to help them 
establish freedom in their country but to reach out to them and address 
them on a personal level. He showed students pictures of friendly Iraqi 
children who benefited from this project as well as the families who 
welcomed the soldiers with open arms.
  They are just like us in many ways, but they have lots of needs. 
Project Give or Operation Give helps let them know that we are not your 
enemy, we are here to help you and to give you freedom.
  With that, he established a warehouse in Baghdad in an effort to try 
and help those who are from the poorest schools in the poorest segment. 
In the spring of last year, he went to the high schools in Utah and 
said, as you are cleaning out your lockers, instead of throwing away 
all of your notebooks and supplies and pencils and crayons and 
everything, put them in a box. He gathered them together to make part 
of his trip to take them back to the poorest schools who, even though 
they have schools, do not have the supplies they need.
  This is Operation Give, and this is the quality of people that we 
have working and leading and fighting and leading in Iraq.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not know if it is against the rules if I mention 
that people can find out about Operation Give if they look up 
operationgive.org or www.chiefwiggles.com, because I certainly would 
not want to break the rules in letting people know about 
operationgive.org or chiefwiggles.com, so I hope if I say that, it is 
in the rules.
  But I also recognize that we have within Iraq a situation that is 
going to be fraught with challenges, but we can meet those challenges 
because of the quality of people that we have and the history of 
success we have if we only keep our charity and our patience in the 
face of adversity.
  As Patrick Henry once said, ``I have but one lamp by which my feet 
are guided, and that lamp is experience. I know of no way of judging 
the future but by the past.'' We have a great past to guide us.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity of being here and sharing 
this time.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much. I am 
reminded, when the gentleman talks about the goodness of American GIs, 
that our country is good, and those GIs are good because they come from 
families where giving and helping other people is part of their 
character and part of their values.
  I myself have a chief of staff who, with another member of the staff, 
have formed a group called Rescue Task Force, and even shortly after we 
had taken Iraq, this chief of staff Wendall Cutting, who himself had 
cancer for a long period of time, moved into Iraq with the help of 
other international organizations and built medical facilities for the 
people of Iraq. And when we were operating in Kosovo, and Albania was 
an area in which we had many refugee camps, Mr. Cutting and another 
staff member, Gary Becks, were the first people into those refugee 
camps with 40,000 of what they call ``love boxes'' from the people of 
the United States. And those were little shoe boxes that would hold 
scissors, combs, some medical things. It would help people, maybe a 
pair of socks, things that people who had to leave their house 
immediately, as a lot of the people who were forced out of Kosovo had 
to do, would need.
  And along with those boxes containing immediate convenience items, 
they brought in ultimately millions of dollars worth of medical 
equipment and food to those refugee camps. And the first camp they went 
into, they mentioned that every child in the camp was ill because they 
did not have a good water supply.
  I am reminded that, when I talked about helping them to raise money 
for this organization, my chief of staff Wendall Cutting, who himself 
has cancer, said, that will be great, because we have about $1 million 
worth of supplies ready to go in to the people who suffered from the 
hurricanes in the southeast. And even as we talk, they are moving to 
take those supplies to those very needy people.
  So, Mr. Speaker, Americans are good, and the American people are 
good. And they have infused and embedded those values and that virtue 
in their sons and daughters who right now are serving in Iraq. And that 
is a message that I think is not lost on the world.
  Mr. Speaker, a lot of the noise that we hear in the world is 
something that is manufactured. It is not genuine. A lot of the 
criticism of the United States is not genuine. I am reminded of the 
time that my mother and father were in the Philippines, visiting the 
Philippines. And they were near the embassy in Manila, and there was a 
long line of people waiting to get visas at that embassy, as there are 
every day I might add. And they had at the same time an anti-American 
demonstration in the town square there next to the embassy in Manila. 
And the demonstrators had big, well-made signs that said: ``America out 
of the Philippines''; ``Uncle Sam, go home'';

[[Page 18852]]

``America, get lost.'' And interestingly, the organizers of the 
demonstration against America were going over to the visa line where 
Filipinos were waiting to get visas to come into the United States, and 
they were hiring people out of the visa line to come hold these 
demonstration placards that said, ``We hate America.'' So it is very 
clear that many of the anti-American demonstrations around the world 
are not genuine.
  The people in almost every country know the goodness of Americans. It 
is interesting, a friend of mine remarked today that with all of the 
talk about what we can do to make the Muslim world understand the 
goodness of America, I was reminded that the last several wars that we 
have fought have been on behalf of Muslim nations. That is, we freed 
Kuwait from the occupation of Saddam Hussein, and we saved Saudi 
Arabia, because Saddam Hussein's tanks were in third gear at the moment 
that we stopped his armored divisions dead still with the insertion of 
American combat troops. And we saved people in Bosnia who were being 
brutalized. And we have helped Muslim people around the world.
  The message of America is that goodness prevails, and our people are 
good. Our GIs are great ambassadors of that goodwill, and all of the 
projects that the gentleman from Georgia and the gentleman from Utah 
talked about that are being undertaken in Iraq are real projects. They 
really help people. Those inoculations really do save babies, and it is 
something that we can be very proud of.
  I would like to yield to the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. McCotter.
  Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on Armed Services for recognizing a lowly member of the 
Committee on International Relations.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I would just tell the gentleman that he is a 
very articulate member of the Committee on International Relations. We 
would not think of not recognizing him.
  Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, hopefully, we do a better job of talking 
so my colleagues have to do less cleaning up of our messes.
  I just wanted to take a moment to talk about the President's speech 
in front of the United Nations, especially in relation to the horrific 
events that we have seen in Iraq. I think it is very important that we 
see that we have two messages, deeply distinct, that are being aimed at 
the hearts of the world and our fellow Americans. On the one hand, we 
have the President of the United States standing in front of the United 
Nations General Assembly and reaffirming this Nation's commitment to 
democracy, to liberty and to hope throughout the world. On the other 
hand, we have terrorists who, despite whatever political rationale they 
put forward, are nothing short of murderers who offer a perpetuation of 
evil and horror for their fellow human beings.
  It would seem to me today that nothing could more show the stakes in 
Iraq, because, despite the panaceas that are proffered by many 
politicians, Iraq has two futures. Iraq will be a democracy, or Iraq 
will belong to Zarqawi. No amount of international support that is 
promised will materialize. It is up to the Iraqi people and America's 
coalition partners to ensure that Iraq remains free from any tyrant, 
especially the tyrants of terror that are currently exerting their will 
in some pockets of the country.
  I bring this up because it is important for us here at home to 
realize that the gravest threat to the United States of America in the 
battle for Iraq is our resolve, as the President has rightly said. For, 
as it has been noted often, the war on terror is fought as much on a 
map as it is on your mind as a civilian. The images that we see, the 
actions that are put forward are designed to terrorize us. And they are 
designed to terrorize us so that we can no longer think clearly or 
rationally about the situation in Iraq. It is designed so that a 
handful of evil people can try to obscure the fact that tens of 
millions of Iraqi people are living daily lives and are trying to build 
a country and a better future for themselves.
  Mr. Speaker, a terrorist attack by one suicide bomber that blows up 
47 people standing in line to join in the defense of their country and 
the promotion of their future, the story there is not the terrorists, 
the suicide, the foreign terrorists destroying innocent life; it is 
over 47 people in Iraq were killed to stand in line to defend their 
freedom, to fight for a better future for themselves and their 
children. And they will keep standing in line, and they will keep 
coming. That is the story. It is the resiliency of the Iraqi people, 
not the evil of the terrorists who wish to subjugate them once again 
and turn Iraq back into a haven for terrorists.
  It is the terror that will preclude us from seeing that stark 
reality, the reality that we need to see, the reality that the 
gentleman from Georgia talked about, the historical examples that have 
been put forward by the gentleman from Utah, the rational thought that 
is required of us as policymakers and as people of this Nation to 
understand not only the stakes but the situation.
  As we go forward and as the world looks and has a chance to reflect 
upon the message of the terrorists or the message of our President at 
the U.N., I think it is also necessary at this time for me to point out 
that, at the United Nations, many of those people in that General 
Assembly would not be sitting in those seats if their countries were 
free and democratic. So to all of those nations, be they free or 
democratic in the United Nations, regarding Iraq, I would just like 
them to ponder one thing. History may commend them for a reluctance to 
wage a war, but history will condemn them for their refusal to win the 
peace. And right now, those are the stakes.
  I appreciate the opportunity to talk on this issue.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his very eloquent 
remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, before I wrap up here, I would like to go over the 
rotation of U.S. forces in Iraq because, once again, the presidential 
candidate Senator Kerry has alleged that there is some secret plan to 
bring up a lot more people after the November elections, and I have a 
letter from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Myers, that says 
that there is no secret plan.

                              {time}  2230

  He states that there has been no deferences of any notices of the 
rotations in Iraq as a function of pressure from anybody. Once more, 
let me go over the units that have moved in on the last rotation and 
the units that will move in on the next rotation.
  We had the First Airborne Division or the 101st Airborne Division in 
Northern Iraq, that has been replaced now by the First Striker Brigade 
up in the Mosul area. We had the Fourth Infantry Division in eastern 
Iraq centered in the Tikrit area. And that Fourth Infantry Division has 
been replaced by the First Infantry Division.
  We had the 82nd Airborne in the western area of operations that goes 
all the way to the Syrian border. That has been replaced by the First 
Marine Expeditionary Force, made up primarily of the First Marine 
Division.
  We had the First Armored Division in Baghdad. Part of its elements 
have been replaced by the First Cavalry Division. And we are going to 
be going to a new rotation that was briefed to us in July with plenty 
of time, plenty of advance notice and plenty of publicity to the world. 
I do not know if Senator Kerry saw it, but it certainly was not secret. 
It was on national television, and that rotation is manifested in the 
second chart.
  That shows the Striker Brigade that is in northern Iraq presently 
being replaced by another Striker brigade. It shows the First Infantry 
Division in the eastern sector being replaced by the 42nd Infantry 
Division. It shows the First Cav and the First Armored Division being 
replaced by the Third Infantry Division, and the Tenth Mountain 
Brigade, and it shows the First Armored Division moving out and the 
First Cavalry Division moving out.
  So that is the rotation with respect to Reserves. The ratio of 
Reserves to active forces will remain in the 35 to 40

[[Page 18853]]

percent range, and there are 5,600 members of the individual ready 
reserve. That number has already been laid out by the Pentagon and 
those people are in particular specialties, 800 of them have been 
called up. More will be called up as time goes on. And in November or 
December there will be another blue print because there is a blueprint 
laid down every 180 days, and it will maintain approximately the same 
number of people, 135,000 to 140,000 personnel in Iraq. And it will 
maintain approximately the same Reserve to active duty proportion.
  So that is the game plan that has been laid out in front of the 
entire Nation by DOD. There has not been any attempt to hide it, to 
delay it, to wait for the election before they laid it out. And in 
another 4 or 5 months they will lay out the next 180-day plan, and 180 
days from then they will lay out the next plan.
  That is the means of notifying the country so that units and 
individual families and personnel in the armed services can have plenty 
of notice.

                          ____________________