[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 27245-27247]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, as we look out the window in most of our 
great country, we can witness the season change, the change in the 
season, and we can feel it. The air has become crisp with autumnal 
chill. The leaves on the trees change their color; from the exuberant, 
green lushness of the summer months to the tired, brown, yellow, and 
red of the autumn, much like the graying hair of a man advancing in 
age.
  Nature can sometimes mimic human events with a subtlety that no words 
can quite convey. As our country heads into the season that is 
celebrated with the love of family and the love of home, Americans 
should also look across the landscape of America and reflect upon the 
loss of so many young Americans in the 12 months since autumn last fell 
upon us.
  Think about it. In the past year, more than 820 servicemembers have 
lost their lives in Iraq.
  The evening news features pictures of American troops who have 
perished in service to our flag, in service to our country. I am struck 
by these colorful mosaics of these troops, amen; the green and blue of 
their uniforms set against the background of the bold colors of our 
flag, Old Glory, Old Glory. Each of these proud troops holds an 
expression of pride and courage, even though many of them appear to be 
so young. Note their ages--18, 19, 20, 21--just starting out in life, 
having one full glance of what is around them.
  I can only imagine the grief of their loving families during this 
time of the year, as the somber tones of fall contrast with the joy of 
being with family during the upcoming holidays. I pray that God, 
Almighty God, will comfort those who have suffered losses, that He will 
bless the fallen in their everlasting life, and that His hand will 
protect those who still serve in harm's way.
  That so many have sacrificed during this war in Iraq is reason enough 
to ask questions about our Government and about our Government's policy 
in that faraway land. Our troops continue to shed their blood, and our 
Nation continues to devote enormous sums of our national wealth to 
continue that war.
  The Constitution protects the American people from unjust laws that 
seek to stifle the patriotic duty to question those who are in power. 
But it is the courage of the American people that compels them to 
actually speak out when those in power call for silence. If anything, 
attacks on patriotism of freedom-loving Americans may result in even 
more Americans fighting against attempts to squelch the constitutional 
protections of freedom.
  Since our country was sent to war on March 19, 2003, 2,073 American 
men and women have been killed. Yes, 2,073 Americans have died. Nearly 
16,000 troops have been wounded.
  Our military is straining under the repeated deployment of our 
troops, including the members of the National Guard. They come from all 
walks of life. They are lawyers. They are teachers. They are preachers. 
They are coal miners. They are farmers. More than $214 billion has been 
spent in Iraq and the end is not in sight. More than $214 billion spent 
in Iraq and the end is not in sight. Urban combat takes place each day, 
every day, in Baghdad, all day long. Every day and night.
  Veterans hospitals in our own country are threatened by budget 
shortfalls, and yet Americans are still left to wonder, when will our 
brave troops be coming home? When?
  I opposed this war in Iraq from the outset. From the beginning I 
spoke out against our entry into this war. I pleaded with my 
colleagues. I pleaded with the White House. I asked questions that have 
not been answered. I spoke out against the invasion of a country which 
did not pose an imminent threat to our national security. I said so 
then--and I was right. I opposed the war in Iraq from the outset. From 
the word go, I opposed it. But our troops were ordered to go to Iraq 
and they went.
  The question is, now, when will they come home? The administration 
has so far laid out only a vague policy, saying our troops will come 
home when the Iraqi Government is ready to take responsibility for its 
country. When our troops are no longer needed, when the job is done, 
they will come home. We will not stay a day longer than we are needed.
  That sort of political doublespeak is small comfort to the mothers 
and the fathers of our fighting men and women, the mothers and fathers 
who turn and toss upon their pillows, whose tears wet the pillows, 
whose prayers break the silence of night. Oh, when will they come home? 
Bring my boy home. Oh, God, this awful war.
  Wednesday evening the Vice President of the United States, even 
claimed that criticism of the administration's war in Iraq was 
dishonest and reprehensible. Did you hear that? Hear me, now; let me 
say that again: On Wednesday evening the Vice President of the United 
States, the man who is within a heartbeat of being the President of the 
United States, the Vice President of the United States, even claimed 
that criticism of the administration's war in Iraq was ``dishonest and 
reprehensible.''
  Since when are we not to lift our voices? Are the American people not 
to lift their voices in criticism of the administration's war in Iraq? 
Is it dishonest on the part of the American people to do that? Is it 
reprehensible on the part of mothers and fathers of sons and daughters 
who were sent to that most dangerous country in the world? Is it 
reprehensible? Did the Vice President measure his words? The Vice 
President's comments come on the heels of comments from President Bush, 
who said:

       What bothers me is when people are irresponsibly using 
     their positions and playing politics. That's exactly what is 
     taking place in America.

  Listen to that. The President and the Vice President need to reread 
the Constitution, take another look at that inimitable document. Asking 
questions, seeking honesty and truth, and pressing for accountability 
is exactly what the Framers had in mind. What would George Washington 
say? What would Alexander Hamilton say? What would James Madison say? 
What would

[[Page 27246]]

Gouverneur Morris say? What would James Wilson say?
  Questioning policies and practices, especially ones that have cost 
this Nation more than 2,000 of her bravest sons and daughters, is the 
responsibility of every American and is also a central role of Congress 
as our duty as the elected representatives of a free people. We--you, 
you, you and I--we are the elected representatives of the American 
people, the people all over this vast land, its plains, its prairies, 
its mountains, it valleys, its lakes, its rivers, its seas. Yes, we are 
the men and women who are tasked with seeking the truth. Is that 
irresponsible to seek the truth?
  But instead of working with the Congress, instead of clearing the 
air, the White House falls back to the irksome practice of attack, 
attack, attack; obscure, obscure, obscure; attack. The American people 
are tired of these reprehensible tactics. If anything is reprehensible, 
it is these tactics.
  Circling the wagons will not serve this administration well. What the 
people demand are the facts. They want the truth. They want their 
elected leaders to level with them. And when it comes to the war in 
Iraq, this administration seems willing to do anything it can do to 
avoid the truth, a truth I believe will reveal that the Bush 
administration did, indeed, manipulate the facts in order to lead this 
Nation down the road to war. War. War.
  The administration claims that the Congress had the same intelligence 
as the President before the war and that independent commissions have 
determined there was no misrepresentation of the intelligence. But 
neither claim is true. The intelligence agencies are under the control 
of the White House. All information given to the Congress was cleared 
through the White House. And the President had access to an enormous 
amount of data never shared with the Congress. There was a filter over 
the intelligence information the Congress received. That filter was the 
administration, which is actively engaged in hyping the danger and 
lusting after this war, this terrible war in Iraq.
  Remember the talk of weapons of mass destruction? Remember the talk 
of mushroom clouds? Remember? Remember the talk of unmanned drones? The 
so-called proof for war was massaged before it was sent to Congress, to 
scare Members, and leaked to reporters to scare people.
  No independent commission has stated that the case for war was 
indisputable. Commissions have looked at how the intelligence fell 
short, but none have yet examined possible political manipulation.
  Even the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence slowed its 
examination, stalled its examination of possible White House 
manipulation. My colleague from West Virginia, the ranking member of 
the Intelligence Committee, Senator Jay Rockefeller, is rightly 
pressing for answers.
  Right now we are engaged in a mission with no definition. That is 
troubling because without a clearly defined mission, it is impossible 
to determine when our effort is truly accomplished.
  This week, the Senate had the opportunity to establish some very 
basic benchmarks for progress in Iraq, benchmarks that would have 
clearly outlined goals and provided accountability in meeting those 
goals. The proposal, offered by the senior Senator from Michigan, 
Senator Carl Levin, was a modest, flexible approach that would have 
given our troops, their families, the American people, and the Iraqi 
people some basic guidepost. Unfortunately, the Senate turned its back. 
It could not see the wisdom of this approach. It could not bring itself 
to see the wisdom of the approach.
  So, my fellow Senators, it is vital that we have benchmarks against 
which to gauge our progress. That is how we can measure effectiveness 
and, most importantly, how we know when the job is done. The 
administration's strategy of keeping our troops in Iraq for as long as 
it takes--have you heard that before? Keeping our troops in Iraq for as 
long as it takes?--that is the wrong strategy. Who knows how long it 
will take for the Iraqi Government to institute order in that 
fractured, unhappy, miserable country?
  Unfortunately, the questions that the American people are asking 
about the missteps and the mistakes in the war in Iraq are not being 
answered by this White House, not being answered by the administration. 
Vice President Cheney has dismissed these important questions as 
``making a play for political advantage in the middle of a war.''
  Now, listen to that. The Vice President of the United States has 
dismissed these important questions as ``making a play for political 
advantage in the middle of a war.'' How about that?
  Perhaps the Vice President should question White House aides about 
using war for political advantage. For example, on January 19, 2002, 
the Washington Post reported that Karl Rove--get this--advised 
Republicans to ``make the president's handling of the war on terrorism 
the centerpiece of their strategy to win back the Senate and keep 
control of the House in this year's midterm elections.'' Does the Vice 
President have anything to say about that?
  Let me say that again. On January 19, 2002--I read about it at the 
time; I did not miss it--the Washington Post reported that Karl Rove 
advised Republicans to ``make the president's handling of the war on 
terrorism the centerpiece of their strategy to win back the Senate and 
keep control of the House in this year's midterm elections.'' That was 
said on January 19, 2002. That was quoted in the Post on that date. 
Yes, does the Vice President have anything to say about that?
  The Vice President also lashed out at those who might deceive our 
troops:

       The saddest part is that our people in uniform have been 
     subjected to these cynical and pernicious falsehoods day in 
     and day out.

  Now, listen to that. Was the Vice President trying to clarify some of 
his past statements on Iraq? Was he?
  On March 24, 2002, the Vice President said that Iraq ``is actively 
pursuing nuclear weapons at this time.'' There was no doubt about it, 
to listen to the Vice President--no doubt.
  On August 26, 2002, the Vice President said:

       Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now 
     has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is 
     amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, 
     and against us.

  Let me go back and read the quote. Let me repeat it.
  On August 26, 2002, here is what the Vice President said:

       Simply stated, there is no doubt--

  Get that--

       Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now 
     has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is 
     amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, 
     and against us.

  That is the end of the quotation.
  On March 16, 2003, the Vice President said:

       We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.

  Do you remember that?
  On March 16, 2003, there it is, the Vice President said:

       We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.

  Are these the ``pernicious falsehoods'' that the Vice President 
believes our troops have been subjected to? That is, of course, a 
rhetorical question. Far from questioning his own statements about the 
war in Iraq, the Vice President's comments are a ham-handed attempt to 
squelch the questions that the American people out there are asking 
about the administration's policies in Iraq. The American people should 
not be cowed. They should not be intimidated. And Senators should not 
be intimidated by these attempts to intimidate. The American people 
should not allow the subject to be changed from the war in Iraq to 
partisan sniping in Washington.
  Instead, the American people must raise their voices--hear us--the 
American people should raise their voices--hear us, listen to us--the 
American people must raise their voices even louder to ask the 
administration the same simple questions: What is your policy for Iraq? 
Answer that. What is your policy? Is it stay the course? When will the 
war be over? How many more lives will this war cost? When will our 
troops return home?
  Mr. President, the holiday season is almost upon us. Americans will 
soon

[[Page 27247]]

sit down at their Thanksgiving tables. They will gather together to 
give thanks to Almighty God, give thanks to Him for the blessings that 
have been bestowed upon America's families. As we gather, there will be 
an empty seat at many tables. Some chairs will be empty because a 
service member is serving his or her country in a faraway land. Other 
seats will be empty as a silent tribute to those who will never, never 
return.
  Each of these troops has fought to protect our freedoms, including 
the freedom of Americans to ask questions--yes, the freedom to ask 
questions. Our troops have fought for that freedom--people back home, 
their families, might ask questions, their friends might ask 
questions--the freedom to ask questions of their Government, the 
people's Government.
  The whole picture, the truth is that the continued occupation of Iraq 
only serves to drive that country closer to civil war. They do not want 
us there. They do not want us there.
  How would you feel, Senators, how would you feel if our country were 
invaded by another country? You would want them out. You would do 
anything you could to get them out. American troops are now perceived 
as occupiers, not as liberators. The longer we stay, the more dangerous 
Iraq becomes, and the more likely it is we will drive the future 
government further from a democratic republic and closer to religious 
fundamentalism and, not insignificantly, the more American and Iraqi 
lives will be lost--forever.
  I, for one, believe that it is time to say ``well done''--``well 
done''--to our brave fighting men and women. May God bless them one and 
all. Let us say, job well done, and start to bring the troops home.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burns). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________