[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11442-11443]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              SMART SECURITY AND THE NEED FOR AN IRAQ PLAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to take a good, 
hard look at the role the United States is playing in Iraq and whether 
or not it is in our national interest to maintain a military presence.
  We need to acknowledge the fact that Iraq's insurgency is growing in 
strength, not diminishing, and that the very presence of 150,000 
American troops on Iraqi soil appears as though they see us as 
occupiers that actually unites the growing collection of insurgent 
forces.
  Since our military presence actually encourages further fighting, 
this war will continue as long as U.S. troops remain in Iraq. That is 
why Congress must accept the fact that we cannot possibly bring our 
involvement in Iraq to any kind of successful conclusion through 
military means.
  Yesterday, during consideration of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2006, I offered an amendment urging the President 
to develop a plan for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Surprisingly, 
this was the first time the House has formally debated the possibility 
of withdrawal from Iraq. We were allotted only 30 minutes for the 
debate: 15 minutes on my side, 15 minutes on the side opposing my 
amendment. But it is no surprise, of course, the amendment was 
defeated. But in spite of that, it is clear that the Congress is 
starting to get serious about a plan for leaving Iraq. 128 Members, 
including five Republicans, voted for this amendment.
  But there is much more work to do, Mr. Speaker. The Iraq war has now 
raged on for more than 2 years, and we are no closer to winning this 
conflict than we were when President Bush declared an end to major 
combat operations under an arrogant banner declaring ``Mission 
Accomplished.''
  Despite this lack of progress, the war has exacted a deeply troubling 
human and financial toll. In just over 2 years of war, more than 1,600 
American soldiers and an estimated 25,000 Iraqi innocents have been 
killed. The Pentagon lists the number of Americans wounded as just over 
12,000. But that does not take into account even the invisible wounds 
many of our soldiers

[[Page 11443]]

will be bringing home and have already brought home, the painful mental 
trauma they have contracted from months and years of fighting. When 
accounting for these psychological injuries, the number of wounded 
jumps to nearly 40,000.
  To date, Congress has appropriated more than $200 billion for 
military operations in Iraq, despite little to no oversight as to how 
these funds are going to be spent, which has allowed $9 billion in 
reconstruction funds to just vanish from the coffers of the Coalition 
Provisional Authority, which was the American governing body that 
managed Iraq until the year 2004.
  Given what is at stake here, do the American people not deserve a 
plan? Do our brave men and women, who are selflessly sacrificing their 
lives, not to mention their arms, legs, for a war that we should not be 
in in the first place, not deserve a plan?
  Let us not forget that the legislative branch is constitutionally 
mandated to oversee expenditures from our National Treasury. Instead of 
allowing fat-cat war profiteers like Halliburton and its subsidiary, 
Kellogg, Brown and Root, to line their pockets as war profiteers, it is 
time Congress started fulfilling our responsibility.
  We must develop a smarter agenda. We must develop an agenda that will 
help Iraq, and we will then be able to reduce our military occupation. 
We must insist on planning by the Bush administration. This 2-year war 
has left us disturbingly weak against the true security threats we 
face. Let us not forget that Osama bin laden is still at large and al 
Qaeda continues to recruit new members in Iraq as well as the rest of 
the Middle East.
  Fortunately, there is a plan that would secure America for the 
future: the SMART Security concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 158, 
which I recently reintroduced with the support of 49 of my House 
colleagues. SMART is a Sensible, Multilateral, American Response to 
Terrorism for the 21st Century. It will help us address the threats we 
face as a Nation. SMART Security will prevent terrorism by addressing 
the very conditions which allow terrorism to take root: poverty, 
despair, resource scarcity, and lack of educational opportunity. 
Instead of rushing off to war under false pretenses, SMART Security 
encourages the United States to work with other nations to address the 
most pressing global issues.

                          ____________________