[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23457-23463]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Speaker for recognizing me for 
this hour. We are up here this evening because I have had a chance to 
go to Iraq recently, and some of the things that I have heard in the 
House just a few minutes ago don't ring up with what I observed when I 
was in Iraq.
  But I want to start off by saying this: When I went back home this 
past month, all over my district the main thing I heard from the people 
on Iraq, get the politics out of it and just tell us the truth of what 
you know and let us try to figure it all out together, and why don't we 
try to figure this out together instead of thinking about who is going 
to win the next election or who is going to get the next advantage in 
the political process. I kept hearing that over and over.
  I want to get up, and some of my colleagues tonight are going to talk 
about what they know. Some of them have a lot more wisdom than I do 
because they have been there more times than I have and have had more 
experiences.
  My experience is relatively limited. I have been to Iraq four times 
since I have been in Congress, the last time being late in the month of 
July. I went on a long weekend to Iraq. So I was there the first time 
right after we caught Saddam Hussein. The second time I was there was 
just before the elections took place. The third time was May a year ago 
when we were pondering what to do and there was discussion of Petraeus 
having a plan. And then recently this July.
  I can tell you that the difference between May and July is the 
difference between daylight and dark as far as the comments that I 
received from American fighting men and women and from Iraqis that I 
visited with while I was there for what was just a real long weekend.
  Soldiers are always proud of their mission and accept their mission, 
and they do their mission and duty and we should always be proud of 
them. But you didn't hear the kind of comments that we have heard now 
about the enthusiasm that our soldiers have for the fact that ordinary 
Iraqi citizens, as we say in baseball, are stepping up to the plate and 
they are taking a swing, and that swing is helping our soldiers and our 
marines as they do their duty to try to eliminate al Qaeda from being 
that thorn in the side of Iraqi freedom that is causing the ultimate 
cause of all of this violence that is going on in Iraq.
  Someone here tonight said there is brazen political maneuvers. Well, 
what I am saying has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the 
fact that within my district, I have 52,000 soldiers who reside within 
my district, all of whom have been deployed at least once and some as 
many as three times in Iraq. I have the largest military facility that 
exists in the United States, Fort Hood.
  Our guys told us a lot of good news, and I will report the bad news. 
The bad news they told us is that 15 months is tough and it is hard on 
their families and they hope we can get this mission done so we don't 
have to continue 15-month rotations.
  So I don't come back just preaching good news. Our military, our 
soldiers don't like the 15-month rotation, but they do their duty. But 
time and time again I had soldiers tell me: Man, whatever you do, don't 
pull the rug out from under us just as we are starting to see daylight. 
We are committed in blood, sweat and tears over here, and the Nation 
has committed its resources and we are seeing the light at the end of 
the tunnel. Don't pull out the rug now. If you do, don't ask me to come 
back when this place goes to hell in a handbasket. That is a quote from 
a sergeant.
  We have to think about this. We have big decisions to make this fall. 
General Petraeus is going to come over here, and he will tell us the 
truth about what is going on, and I don't think it is all going to be a 
beautiful, rosy picture. But I do think he is going to tell you what 
ordinary soldiers and ordinary marines told me, and that is, as 
compared to 6 to 9 months ago, it is substantially better. It has to do 
with the fact that we now have the necessary troops on the ground.
  I would like to correct an error that a general asked me to correct. 
The surge did not start in February of this year. The surge was 
announced. The surge started the second week in July of this year. That 
is when the entire 30,000-soldier contingency was in Iraq, and at that 
point in time the plan began to be executed.
  But the idea that we were building up troops brought good news. The 
surge is now less than 6 weeks old. That's the truth about what the 
surge is. In fact, one of the people who is in charge of bringing these 
additional forces to Iraq told me, he said: You know, I hear you are 
having votes to pull out in 2 weeks or 2 months. Well, just tell 
somebody it took us a hard 6 months to get 30,000 soldiers over here, 
and if you think you can move 160,000 out of here in 120 days, you have 
lost your mind. It can't be done.
  The reality of that war is they come over there on ships, and just 
like they did in the Second World War, they train before they go in, 
and when they are ready, they go in. And the whole 30,000 finally 
arrived in July.
  So the picture, as I see it, is good news because of Iraqi 
involvement, and we will talk some more about that. Right now I would 
like to recognize Chris Shays, my colleague who has probably been to 
Iraq more than any Member of this Congress. Congressman Shays, do you 
want to share your feelings.
  Mr. SHAYS. I appreciate you holding this very important dialogue 
about Iraq. I appreciate your taking this Special Order to share what 
many of us have seen in Iraq.
  I want to say that I go where the truth takes me, even if it counters 
something I believed and thought. I just go where the truth takes us. 
There is no question that 2003 was not a good year. When we attacked 
Iraq, there was tremendous euphoria and then we made mistake after 
mistake after mistake. Those have already been discussed. Half of 2004 
wasn't particularly good, but when we transferred power to the new 
Iraqi Government, the Iraqi people, we began to see noticeable changes.
  And then 2005 was a pretty amazing year. They had an election to 
create a government that would form a constitutional convention. They 
met the deadline to form a constitutional convention. They wrote their 
Constitution and adopted it in a plebiscite throughout Iraq, and then 
they elected a government under that new Constitution. So 2005 was a 
pretty astonishing year, a very successful year.
  They basically had 18 months of progress from the deep hole we dug in 
2003 and part of 2004, and then came 2006. It took them 4 months to 
establish a government, and then the Maliki government didn't do the 
kind of heavy lifting we were hoping they would do.

                              {time}  2030

  I took a position that I took then and hold today, that we need to 
prod the Maliki government. I believe the timeline is important, but 
not a timeline based on basically pulling the rug out from them and 
just leaving. We attacked them. They didn't attack us. We got rid of 
all their army, their police and their border patrol. We left them 
totally defenseless in a country where all their prisoners were let 
out,

[[Page 23458]]

and then we would walk away? The neighbors to Iraq said we may not have 
wanted you to go in, in fact, said we did not want you to go in, but it 
would be an outrage if you left. And so now this is where we're at. Do 
we leave now? Do we leave sometime in the future? What do we do?
  I think that what we knew we needed to do was have a new Secretary of 
Defense. That's what the American people asked. That's what some of us 
wanted to see happen, and we got someone who wasn't tied to the past in 
Mr. Gates. Then I think all of us were hoping and praying that Mr. 
Petraeus would be the general in charge to serve under Secretary of 
Defense Mr. Gates. General Petraeus who had been there three times, 
been involved in this effort, and knows Iraq cold and knows the 
insurgency concerns extraordinarily well, given that he spent a year of 
his life just studying it. He basically said, give me more people to 
see what we could do in the greater Baghdad area. It was referred to as 
``the surge.'' He said give me more troops; we need to establish some 
security, and then we'll reappraise. And now we're coming to that 
point.
  When I was there in December last year, they said we have lost Anbar 
province. We've just given up on it. We have no troops. It's totally in 
the hands of al Qaeda, and it sounded to me like a mini-Afghanistan. I 
go back in April. He said, we're winning Anbar province. I said, what 
do you mean you are winning Anbar province? You told me you'd given up 
on it. Well, the Sunni tribal leaders came to us, said we want al Qaeda 
defeated, we want your help, come on in and we will work with you.
  That's what happened. It was a model that wasn't part of the surge, 
but then when I went back in May, he said the surge is working; we're 
starting to see some progress from the full complement in July. And 
when I went back this past August, they said the story is the surge is 
continuing to go in the right direction, and we have won Anbar 
province, and we are winning some of the other Sunni provinces. The 
tribal leaders have bought in to what happened in Anbar and said we 
want the same thing.
  It's almost like, to some of my colleagues in this Chamber, that to 
say the surge is working and to say that there is progress, it's like 
they're angry and disappointed: how dare you say that. You had Mr. 
Baird, a Democrat, who voted against going into Iraq, who said what he 
saw, and he goes where the truth takes him, was that there is progress, 
and it would be a mistake to leave prematurely.
  So this is what we're going to be debating. Do we leave right now or 
leave by April of next year or do we maintain the surge a little 
longer? We know we're ultimately going to bring a good number of our 
troops home. We can't maintain that surge, and Mr. Carter's right. I 
have heard more of my constituents who serve in the military and those 
who don't, who I've met in Iraq. They said we could accept 12 months. 
Fifteen months is just too much. And I've had parents, they've come up 
to me, and they never did this in the past. They kind of put their arm 
around me. They whisper in my ear practically, and they say, my son or 
my daughter is in Iraq and they're exhausted.
  We know that we have to reduce the workload of these troops. We have 
to start to tell Prime Minister Maliki what he needs to know, and I'll 
conclude by making this point: we can lecture Prime Minister Maliki all 
we want. We can do that if we don't mind being the biggest hypocrites 
around. So why would I say that? Well, we say, why don't you Sunni, 
Shias and Kurds get your act together, and I'm thinking, Republicans 
and Democrats can't even work together on this.
  We have asked our Democratic colleagues to allow for some amendments, 
bipartisan amendments, amendments that would have support on both sides 
of the aisle. They don't want it. They have simply refused to allow any 
Republican amendment or any amendment that even their own side wants 
that would have attraction to Republican Members.
  Too many on that side of the aisle want to continue to make this a 
partisan issue when the fact is we went into Iraq on a bipartisan 
basis, two-thirds of the House of Representatives, three-quarters of 
the Senate. The only way we're going to successfully disengage in a way 
that will enable the Iraqis to stand on their own and bring our troops 
home is if we do it on a bipartisan basis. I'm prepared to vote for 
some things that I don't want if it is a bipartisan effort that will 
ultimately lead to some common ground.
  So I just want to say that it strikes me that we ask our troops to 
risk their lives. They have one request from us, that we, Republicans 
and Democrats, start working together for the common good of this 
country. That's their one request, and it strikes me that when we 
lecture Prime Minister Maliki, he's trying to run a government by 
consensus, Sunni, Shias and Kurds, all agreeing to take action. He 
could cut out the Sunnis and just simply agree with the Kurds, and they 
could run the government. The Shias and Kurds, they could get their 
more than 50 percent vote, but he is making a sincere effort to try to 
find common ground.
  I thank my colleague for having this Special Order. I'd like to 
listen to my other colleagues, maybe jump back in, but my report to 
this Congress is this surge is working. My report to this Congress is 
that the tribal Sunni leaders that have asked us to help have seen a 
tremendous benefit in their provinces, and that has benefited them. 
It's benefited the Iraqi people, and it's benefited our troops. And so 
I can't say what will happen two months from now or four months from 
now; but as God is my witness, we are seeing progress in Iraq, as much 
as some of my colleagues don't want me to say that.
  Mr. CARTER. Well, I thank my colleague for those very, very 
intelligent comments and for your experience. How many trips have you 
made?
  Mr. SHAYS. I go every 3 to 4 months, and I've been there 18 times.
  Mr. CARTER. Eighteen times. Well, my little four don't sound like a 
whole lot.
  Mr. SHAYS. Well, you've been going more recently. I got elected 
before you.
  Mr. CARTER. Well, that's true. I want to thank you and I'm sure our 
soldiers want to thank you, too.
  The trip that I was on, I had some wonderful Members of Congress who 
are here. A couple of them are here tonight. My friend Mr. Davis from 
Tennessee was there with us, and I believe that was his first trip to 
Iraq. I would like to yield to Mr. Davis.
  Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank my 
friend from Texas for yielding and thank you for giving me the 
opportunity to visit Iraq.
  Being from Tennessee, the Volunteer State, I volunteered to visit the 
men and women in uniform in Iraq. I wasn't disappointed. Our troops are 
well trained, well motivated, and successful.
  After the fall of Saddam, the Iraqi people had a choice to make. They 
have lived for decades under totalitarian rule. Over the past 4 years, 
they've been divided and, quite frankly, confused about who their 
friends and allies really are. Is it the radical extremists such as al 
Qaeda or is it us?
  During my visit to Iraq, I visited Ramadi, which until a few months 
ago was a killing field. For the past 4 years, the people of Ramadi 
were caught in a decision-making battle of which group, us or the 
extremists, offered them the best chance for a normal and free future.
  The insurgent extremist chose to win the local people over with the 
use of force, force against their American troops and against any local 
who did not support their radical agenda. Our troops, on the other 
hand, have reached out in friendship and support.
  The local people, seeing the difference, have chosen to have their 
lives returned to normal and live in freedom. Therefore, Ramadi has 
gone from a city of death and destruction to one of rebuilding and 
hope. I was able to see it firsthand during my visit in July.
  As I walked throughout the busy city market, it was very uplifting to 
see the local people interacting with our American troops in a very 
positive way. Now that the surge is under way, our troops are actually 
living in the

[[Page 23459]]

city as trusted friends and allies. We're working with the local mayor 
and his directors to rebuild and totally rejuvenate the city. The city 
of Ramadi is located in al Anbar, a city that Chris just mentioned 
moments ago as being a lost hope at the end of the year.
  Of course, these relationships take time to develop, but the time and 
effort are worth it. Helping the Iraqi people secure their freedom 
helps us to defeat global extremists and, therefore, secure our own 
freedoms for generations to come.
  We have to be successful as well. Ronald Reagan once said, ``We win, 
they lose.'' If we choose not to succeed, that statement will be just 
the opposite: we lose, they win.
  You may ask, who are they and why does it matter to me anyway? They 
are not the Iraqi people. I had the opportunity to meet with some of 
them during my visit. The Iraqi people are really no different than any 
of us. They want to live in a secure and safe country, have a job to go 
to in the mornings, be able to clothe and feed their families, walk 
across the street without fear of being shot or blown up, find 
reasonable health care, and to worship freely. These are the same 
things that any American mother and father would want for their 
children.
  So who are our enemy in Iraq and other parts of the world? They're 
radical extremists who are willing to kill innocent men, women and even 
children to spread their ideology of hate.
  We, the American people, have been lulled into believing that this is 
the President's war on the Iraqi people. Nothing could be further from 
the truth. The Iraqi people and the Iraqi Government see us as 
liberators from an oppressive regime, but they are just now learning 
how to live as a free people. Our common enemy do not want them to live 
free and productive lives. That would go against their ideology of 
hate, an ideology that they want to spread around the world, perhaps to 
a neighborhood near you.
  We cannot let that happen. We either win and they lose, or they win 
and we lose. That is too big a price to pay. This Congress owes it to 
everyone involved to succeed, from the Iraqi people to our brave men 
and women in uniform who are serving on the frontlines of battle, to 
the American people. We cannot afford to lose. The price is too high 
and the cost is too much. Freedom isn't free. It has to be earned. It 
has to be cherished.
  We're in a fight for the generations that will come after us. This 
battle isn't about a small hot desert land somewhere in the Middle East 
that most Americans will never visit or even easily find on a globe. 
This battle is about our future and that of our children and 
grandchildren.
  We want the same things for our children that Iraqi mothers and 
fathers do for their children. We want to live in a secure and safe 
country, to have a job to go to in the mornings, be able to clothe and 
feed our families, walk across the street without having the fear of 
being blown up or shot, find reasonable health care and to worship 
freely. But our enemy, the radical extremists, want to deny us and our 
future generations those freedoms. They have proved it time and time 
again: for instance, the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 where 52 
Americans were held for 444 days, or the bombing of the Marine Corps 
barracks in Beirut where 241 marines lost their lives in 1983, or the 
first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, or the attack on the 
USS Cole claiming the lives of 17 sailors, or the deadly attack on 
September 11, where almost 3,000 Americans died.
  We can either choose to fight and win the battle now or choose to 
lose the battle now and leave it for our children to fight.
  A sentiment relayed to me by a general in Iraq was very simple, and 
it drove this point home. Our men and women in uniform are not fighting 
only for the 8-year-old Iraqi child and their security but also for the 
8-year-old American child and for their current and future security and 
freedom. We do not want them to grow up to have to fight this battle 
that we chose not to finish.
  As I mentioned, our enemy has proven they're dedicated and willing to 
shed American blood on American soil. Do we really want to tie our 
hands to the point that we encourage failure over success in Iraq in 
this global war on terror? Do we really want to live in an America 
where our future generations have to fear going to the park, going to 
the mall, going to school or to work? I don't think so and I sure hope 
not.

                              {time}  2045

  The choice is ours today. The American people, when provided with the 
facts, will choose freedom and security every time. I say, we win, they 
lose. The cost to the American family is just too great to allow any 
other outcome.
  May God bless America and keep her strong and secure for generations 
to come.
  Mr. CARTER. I thank my colleague from Tennessee. We had a great 
experience on that trip.
  One of my good buddies up here and colleagues is Phil Gingrey from 
Georgia. Congressman Gingrey has a more recent trip than the trip I was 
on in July. I believe Congressman Gingrey just got back a couple weeks 
ago.
  So he will tell us about his experience on a trip that took place 
early in August and let him tell us what he saw and how he feels about 
things.
  Mr. GINGREY. I thank the gentleman, my good friend from Texas.
  It is indeed an honor to be a part of this special leadership hour to 
share a little time with my colleagues, of course, Judge Carter leading 
the hour; Chris Shays, the gentleman from Connecticut, 18 trips to the 
Middle East, to some extent in harm's way.
  I saw a couple of years ago, maybe it was 3 years ago, just happened 
to be channel surfing, watching C-SPAN. I guess I am an insomniac. 
There was Chris Shays having a town hall meeting talking to his 
constituents from Connecticut and taking some tough, the tough 
questions about this situation in the Middle East and why it was 
important and why he supported it. He outlined tonight the fact that he 
doesn't look at these things through rose-colored glasses. He 
understands that mistakes were made. We all do, but the mission is the 
mission.
  He went on and talked about this surge and why it's so important that 
every Member on both sides of the aisle give it a chance to work. Judge 
Carter said the same thing, pointed out that this surge of 30,000 
troops wasn't even complete until the beginning of July. Yet, many of 
our colleagues, unfortunately, it seemed like most of them on the other 
side of the aisle, wanted to declare that the new way forward was a 
failure before it even started, before it had even begun.
  I remember back when I first came, I had the honor to come to this 
body with some of my colleagues that are here tonight on the floor, and 
people saying, well, you know, this mistake, the big mistake is we 
didn't put enough troops on the ground. I guess that's what General 
Shinseki had recommended. My Democrat colleagues kept pounding away, 
well, we didn't have enough troops.
  Then when the President, based really on the report of the Iraq Study 
Group, two of the most distinguished public servants in the Federal 
Government that any of us know, James Baker, Lee Hamilton, a Republican 
and a Democrat, came and said, you know, we need a surge of troops, 
that's exactly what the President did. And then my colleagues on the 
Democrat side of the aisle, most of them, not all, said, too little, 
too late.
  How do you satisfy some folks? I listened very carefully, of course, 
to my good friend and colleague, a freshman, but he seemed so much more 
experienced, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. David Davis), talking 
about if we lose, they win. He is absolutely right. That just is so 
simple but yet so profound, and I really compliment the gentleman from 
Tennessee making his first trip and having that insight, that wisdom we 
all pray for. That's what we need for us to win.
  Indeed, this is tough; it's not easy. But I heard some of my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle during the 5-minute remarks 
tonight, I heard the gentlelady from California say it was 
unconscionable that the President is

[[Page 23460]]

playing politics with the war in Iraq; yet she, as a cofounder of the 
Out of Iraq Caucus, and many of her colleagues voted in favor before 
the August recess of every one of these, let's see if we can tie 
General Petraeus' hands behind his back.
  So, surely they don't want us to do poorly in Iraq. Surely not. I 
don't suggest that. But I just remind them that this Commander in 
Chief, I may not agree with him on every single thing. I think the 
issue of stem cell research is something I support him on. Some of my 
colleagues on this side of the aisle do not. His thoughts about a 
comprehensive immigration reform that includes what I think is amnesty, 
I don't support him on. Some of my colleagues on this side of the aisle 
do. But I can I think in the final analysis, this President, it may 
take 25 years, it may take 50 years, but I believe people will look 
back and say thank God that this man was in this place at this time 
after 9/11 and had the courage to stand up to finally say, you know, 
double-dog daring and triple-dog daring doesn't work.
  Mr. Davis talked about the marine barracks and the USS Cole and the 
hostages in Iran for the 400 and something days, the 52 hostages. This 
President, this Commander in Chief had the courage to stand strong.
  Now, my colleague just mentioned I had gotten back from Iraq, my 
fourth trip. I will probably never catch Mr. Shays. But each and every 
trip, honestly, I think I learn more and more. I want my colleagues to 
understand that. These trips, I hope the American people will listen. 
These trips are bipartisan. We go and, you know, we hear the facts. And 
the old saying, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not 
entitled to your own facts.
  But I feel very strongly that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker 
are going to come back and come to us as required by law, which we 
insisted on September 15, at least by that date, maybe a little bit 
before that date, and give us an accurate, fair, balanced report.
  They are not going to try to paint this picture too bright. They are 
going to be accurate. I have said all along, we need to wait for that 
report before we all try to become 535 commanders in chief, many of us, 
including myself, who are not even veterans.
  So I was very encouraged, I said to my colleague, Representative 
Carter, on my trip, I think the troops are strong, absolutely. As 
Representative Shays said, they get weary, the families get weary. The 
American public is a little impatient. I understand that. War fatigue 
does set in. But this is not the time to give up. This is the time to 
be tough, stand strong and give victory a chance, because Mr. Davis 
said, if we don't, they win. The consequences of that are unfathomable.
  As I conclude my remarks, I also want to say to a group of marines 
from my district, NAS Atlanta, deployed this morning, some of them for 
the third time. This is the ``Red Dogs'' HMLA-773, a squadron of 255 
marines. They are helicopter guys, Mr. Speaker, and they are light 
attack helicopters. They are going to be in a situation there at the al 
Assad Air Base. The President just made the trip over Labor Day weekend 
to meet with the troops. That's where they are going.
  I saw them with their families, with their wives, with their little 
infant children. In one case, a little baby 2 weeks old was there in 
his mother's arms. There were cousins, there were aunts, there were 
uncles, and there were brothers and sisters and grandparents. It 
humbled me to stand among these heroes as I talked with them and told 
them how much, how deeply I think Members on both sides of the aisle 
appreciate their dedicated service to this country.
  I wish them Godspeed and hope they will come back safe and sound to 
their loved ones.
  But not one of them wavered, even though this may have been their 
second or third deployment. They are still strong, and that's the same 
thing that I saw when I went to Iraq on this recent trip.
  God bless them. Let's hang in there for a little while longer. Then 
we are going to hear from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker on 
September 15, and it will be an encouraging bit of news.
  Mr. CARTER. I told everybody about that trip to Iraq. The man who led 
that trip to Iraq is here, Congressman Mike Burgess, one of my 
classmates, came into Congress with me. He is from the great State of 
Texas, the northern part of our State, from the Dallas-Ft. Worth-Denton 
area.
  Congressman Burgess was the leader of our group that went over for 
our long weekend. Congressman Burgess may tell us about the trip and 
has pictures to look at.
  Mr. BURGESS. Let me respectfully point out we call that the Dallas-
Ft. Worth area back where I come from.
  I am going to reiterate many of the points that have already been 
made tonight. It's hard to not cover ground that's already been 
covered.
  This was my sixth trip to the country of Iraq. I was there a year 
ago. We went in July, toward the end of July, a weekend trip, as Mr. 
Carter already pointed out. I didn't know it was possible to do a 
weekend trip to Baghdad but, indeed, it is if the circumstances are 
correct.
  The year before I was there and heard about some of the things that 
were happening in a hospital, a little town called Ramadi. General 
Peter Chiarelli, as I recall, said, I am not sure what this means and 
probably too early to talk about it, but it seems as if we have been 
invited into the hospital, which was one of the main headquarters of 
the insurgents, the Sunni insurgents there in Ramadi, and the building 
was turned over without firing a shot.
  A year later, the situation is completely reversed, and Ramadi was so 
stable that not only could we talk about visiting it, we, indeed, did 
visit. It is that trip that really embodies the success that has 
occurred and, largely, the success that has occurred since beginning 
the additional troop strength in February and, of course, the ascension 
of General David Petraeus to be the commander of the forces in Iraq.
  The fact is, I don't think you can deny that significant successes 
have been made and they continue to occur on an ongoing basis, 
returning control of the country to the Iraqi Government and to its 
people and delivering it out of the hands of criminals and murderers. 
But I don't think any of us would disagree. It's still a very dangerous 
situation and the sacrifice that's being made by all participants in 
the country is very, very real.
  It is my opinion, and I spoke on the floor of this House right before 
we had the decision to support the President on the surge, it is my 
opinion that it is in America's broad interest that we be successful in 
this endeavor. It is also my opinion that it is, indeed, possible for 
us to be successful.
  Nothing that I saw on this trip would discourage me from either one 
of those points. It is my opinion that a stable country in Iraq, with a 
representational government that's able to act as a partner in peace in 
the Middle East, would be vastly preferable to a lawless land ruled by 
terrorists, criminals, with sources and training capabilities where 
they would be able to expand their activities, not just to other areas 
of Iraq but, indeed, to other areas of the Middle East and, indeed, to 
other areas of the world.
  Almost without question, the divergent future, the potential 
divergent future of that country was on the minds of almost everyone we 
encountered during that very brief 2-day trip. Certainly America's 
interest is going to be best served by stability in the country and 
their active participation in quieting a very troubled region.
  In July of 2006, there was no way that we could have taken a 
congressional delegation into Ramadi. It would have been too dangerous, 
and we would have been turned down had we asked. But this time we got 
off of the C-130 in Baghdad and loaded onto the Black Hawk helicopters, 
and we were taken to Ramadi.
  We met with the soldiers there. We met with the soldiers of the II 
Marine Expeditionary Force, which are part of the surge. General 
Gaston, who I believe is on the pictures with President Bush over the 
weekend, was part of that briefing that we had there, met the mayor, 
met the health minister.

[[Page 23461]]

  The mayor of Ramadi sounded like a mayor in any one of the 60 cities 
that are in my district. He said, I need more Federal money. By the 
way, if you come back and visit next year, this place is really going 
to be something, so plan on coming back and spending some money when 
you get here. He sounded like a combination mayor and chamber of 
commerce guy, but he really believed in what he was doing.
  I guess, of all of the things that I didn't expect to find when I got 
to Iraq this time, it was that slow building of the institutions of 
local government, which previously had been lacking, that building of 
the institutions of government at the local level, which heretofore I 
had not witnessed on any of the trips that I had made to Iraq. That was 
the thing that probably gives me the most hope for what the overall 
future for that country may entail.

                              {time}  2100

  When we got to Ramadi, we had our briefings. We had our visits with 
the health director and the mayor. And then we went downtown. We went 
to an area that previously was involved in very, very heavy ground fire 
and ground fighting for the control of that city.
  Remember, Ramadi is a city about the size of Fort Worth, Texas. It's 
about 400,000 to 500,000 people. It was designated to be the provincial 
capitol of the resurgent caliphate in western Iraq.
  Well, we walked through the market, and it looks like a very normal 
market in a Middle Eastern country. And you can see the look on the 
faces of the people there. They're curious about people walking through 
their market. Clearly, we did not look like we were typical shoppers. 
But you see the faces of the children there, inquisitive and friendly.
  A lot of stuff available for sale there, much more than I would have 
thought in an area that had been recently so hard pressed.
  One of the very striking things to me again is the faces of the 
children, very energetic, very engaged, very trusting. These two young 
men came right up to us. I think they were interested in if we had any 
pens or quarters. Clearly, the close association with the American 
military has taught them a few things about life in this country.
  But clearly, a very different picture on the street in Ramadi than 
you would have encountered a year ago.
  From a military perspective, there's no question that success has 
been made and continues to be made on a near daily basis. The primary 
enemy, which is al Qaeda in Iraq, has not only been beaten but they've 
been vanquished every time there is an encounter. Al Qaeda has now 
about three options: they can move, communicate, or shoot. And if they 
do any one of those three things, they are met by our military, and 
they are dispatched.
  Because of the increased military presence of our troops in Iraq, the 
confrontations are more frequent, and you see that reflected in 
statistics coming out of that country.
  From the government perspective, there's not a Sunday morning that 
goes by that we don't hear someone complain about the government in 
Iraq, and I'll do the same thing. It's astounding to me that a country 
that young, a government that young can already have entrenched 
bureaucracies that exist within it. Iraq has a very centralized 
government.
  But, again, I would stress the building up of the work that's going 
on currently of that sort of bottom-up work of building governments 
does seem to be a cause for some optimism.
  Probably this conflict, unlike any other in our Nation's history, 
there are data points which are distributed all over the map. And 
anybody can take a handful of those data points and make whatever 
conclusion, draw whatever conclusion they have in their mind to make. 
It is going to take a lot more discipline for this body to look at the 
trends, analyze the data trends, look at the trend lines. But that's a 
discipline that we just have to undertake. There are people in the 
field who are counting on us to be able to make that rational, 
dispassionate assessment of trend lines; and it is the obligation of 
Congress to follow through on that.
  There have been two or three years of serious brutality at the hands 
of al Qaeda, and this population now sees Americans as helpers and 
protectors. The tribal leaders that originally feared that the 
Americans would be occupiers quickly came to understand that the 
Americans have no such interest, but the same could not be said for the 
al Qaeda interests. Their clear intent was to hold territory for their 
own purposes for the foreseeable future.
  The point was made over and over again on our trip that there is no 
easy, there is no overnight solution to the problems that confront us 
in Iraq. Unfortunately, leadership cannot be bought, and it has to be 
grown. It has to be part of an evolutionary change. But it can occur if 
the right environment is provided and appropriate, but not indefinite, 
time is given to develop those institutions of government.
  Everything we have asked of our military they have delivered, they 
have produced for us. What we have asked of the Iraqi Government is 
still a work in progress, and we've set a pretty high bar. And it's a 
much shorter time frame than even our own country had available to it.
  I think of the Articles of Confederation that ultimately led up to 
the Constitution. What if someone had said to us, time's up, and you've 
just got to get it done?
  With continued pushing on the Iraqi Government and the recognition 
that there are cultural challenges before them, I am hopeful that it 
can mature into a stable partner for peace in the Middle East.
  My opinion, my conclusion is that our presence in Iraq is still 
necessary. It's necessary for America's interests, not for Iraq's 
interests. I've said, and I think everyone in our group said every time 
we'd sit down with representatives from one of the ministries, you've 
got to show some evidence of success. You've got to achieve some 
benchmarks.
  I think when we met with Dr. Sharistani, the oil minister, it's 
probably most evident. They've got problems in trying to achieve these 
benchmarks. Not every country that surrounds them is interested in Iraq 
being successful. Yeah, we all know about Iran and their influence; 
read more about it today. We all know about Syria and their influence.
  But what about the Saudis? Do they have an interest in perhaps not 
getting that oil revenue sharing law passed? Well, this was brought up 
to us. It would have never occurred to me that this might be an 
obstacle to getting that law passed and enacted, but apparently there 
are some forces, and maybe even just some media forces within that 
country that work in a detrimental way to that kind of progress. But 
progress has to come and it has to be clearly evident for those on the 
outside. We perhaps have asked them to achieve the impossible in such a 
short time frame. But, again, many of us here tonight have made 
multiple trips to Iraq. Every trip I've made, I have seen progress, 
evidence of significant progress since the trip before. And I have no 
doubt that that progress has continued since our trip there the latter 
part of July.
  Again, my opinion: it is in America's interest that we be successful. 
And to answer the question, is success still a possibility, I don't 
think there's any question after this last trip. The answer to that is 
a resounding yes.
  I'll yield back to the gentleman from Texas, and I truly appreciate 
him calling this Special Order tonight.
  Mr. CARTER. I thank my friend for his comments tonight. He led a 
really great congressional delegation over there.
  My friend from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany) is here. He just came in. And 
I would like to hear what he has to say about his experience in dealing 
with this issue of the war in Iraq. I yield whatever time he may 
consume.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Texas, for 
yielding time.
  Let me start by saying, first, I want to thank our troops, our 
embassy personnel, State Department personnel and all their families 
for the sacrifices

[[Page 23462]]

that they've dealt with as we've dealt with this problem in Iraq, this 
challenge that we're faced with.
  I've come away from a trip just this past week and recognize that I 
truly believe that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker are going to 
come forward with a very independent, unvarnished report about what's 
going on in Iraq. We're going to see what's working and what's not 
working, and I appreciate that. And I think that's going to be the most 
important report that this Congress will look at to determine how do we 
move forward; what steps should we take as a Congress with this 
situation in Iraq.
  With that having been said, this past year was very difficult. We saw 
a lot of violence. I know at the beginning of 2006, Iraq was really 
threatening to spiral out of control with violence. Some described it 
as anarchic fragmentation, which was really a very visual term for what 
was potentially going to happen in Iraq.
  And when the President announced his surge strategy back in I think 
it was late December, I have to say I was very skeptical because I kept 
thinking, what's next? A surge is fine. We can get more troops in. The 
Iraq Study Group actually agrees that this could be a temporary measure 
to gain security. But what do we do following that to get political 
gains in Iraq? What can be done to help develop the economy in Iraq? 
These were the key issues to me.
  Then it became clear, subsequently, that our State Department was 
working on a plan to deal with this. And it was unclear as to what 
exactly the steps were; but as things have unfolded, we have seen 
significant success over the past year.
  And this was highlighted by my recent trip when I walked through the 
streets of Fallujah with three other Members of Congress. And I would 
have never thought that just even a month ago or two months ago a 
platoon of marines could even walk through the streets of Fallujah, 
much less four Members of Congress.
  So as we walked through the streets, we saw shops that were open. 
Shop keepers were smiling, children were playing in the streets. There 
was a volleyball game going on on one block. Another block I saw some 
children playing soccer. There were families strolling through the 
streets and talking. And this clearly was a major change, a major 
departure from what we had seen just months ago in Fallujah.
  And what we found out was that an Iraqi solution was being brought to 
bear in Fallujah, an Iraqi solution for security, which has allowed for 
security to grow throughout the city of Fallujah, creating an 
environment that's now allowing economic activity in that city.
  Children are now back in school. We're seeing shops that are open, 
microlending programs are ongoing, and this is just tremendous success. 
And the hallmark of the plan that has been implemented by General 
Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker is that you look at the circumstances 
in a particular local in Iraq, like Fallujah, or perhaps Ramadi or 
Tikrit, and work with the circumstances on the ground and make those 
institutions that are available work for the positive.
  And what I mean by that is, what we have is a situation where, after 
getting security and working with the Iraqis to set up these joint 
security stations throughout the city of Fallujah, now we've got a 
provincial reconstruction team working in Fallujah. This is a team of 
civilians and military who are working on the political side of things, 
working to help build the political infrastructure from the ground up.
  And now what we're seeing is tremendous success with this, with a 
sort of a grass roots movement. And I've said over and over, the most 
difficult thing is going to be to get the Iraqi central government to 
come to reconcile and to come to terms, because it's been a country 
that's been fraught with division. But it's going to be an Iraqi 
solution that will bring that together. And as this grass-root 
development happens in Fallujah, in Ramadi, in Tikrit and Mosul and 
other cities throughout Iraq and our communities throughout Iraq, we 
will see a coalescence of political activity which will put pressure on 
those central politicians to come forward. And that's part of the whole 
political process.
  The Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, the Sunni Deputy Prime Minister, 
his name is Salaam as Zobadaei, told us that you can look at the fruit, 
but the fruit will not come until you grow the tree. And that was a 
very, very, precise and visual way of describing what needs to happen. 
We need to see Iraqi institutions growing from the ground up, because 
then you'll have a sustainable government. To have an Iraqi Government 
impose from the top and to try to force it down is not sustainable. So 
I'm encouraged that this plan is working. We're seeing positive signs, 
and we need to give it further time.
  These provincial reconstruction teams are doing an outstanding job. 
There are some 10 or 14, I believe, just in the Baghdad and Anbar area, 
and then one in each other province. And I think our State Department 
deserves tremendous credit for working under very difficult 
circumstances and putting these provincial reconstruction teams 
together to make this sort of political grass-roots movement occur.
  And on the broader diplomatic front, we now know that the Saudis are 
looking at putting an embassy into Baghdad. Recently, the French 
Foreign Minister was in Baghdad and they expressed that the French want 
to play a bigger role. We need to have continued vigorous diplomacy to 
move forward to get debt relief on the Iraqi Government. And I believe 
if we move along on the diplomatic front, as I mentioned, on continuing 
to build this grass-roots political development internally in Iraq, 
economic development with microlending programs, all because we managed 
to get security, we're going to see a successful outcome in Iraq. And I 
think in short order we should be able to draw back down on our combat 
troops and offer more of a supportive role.
  Mr. SHAYS. I wonder if the gentleman would yield a second.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. I'd be happy to yield to my friend.
  Mr. SHAYS. Just to point out to him that what you're encountering is 
significant. When the Iraqis say to us, be patient, give us more time, 
what I encountered early on was they were constantly blaming the other 
groups. The Shiias would blame the Sunnis, the Sunnis would blame the 
Kurds, and so on. But what they're starting to do is they're trying to 
say, we're trying to work out our differences; give us more time to 
work together. And that's a significant change.
  I likened this to a sixth-grade dance when they first started out. 
They didn't know how to interact with each other. But they're starting 
to learn how to interact. They're starting to be defensive of Iraq and 
speaking more with one voice; and I think it's not an insignificant 
event that's taking place.

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. BOUSTANY. I think the gentleman is absolutely correct. And if you 
look at Iraq, there were 27 ethnic groups in Iraq, hundreds of tribes, 
and this was all held together artificially under Saddam Hussein's 
reign of terror, so to speak. And now that is gone and they are trying 
to figure out how to reconcile all of this.
  And there are signs that there is Iraqi nationalism. Look at what 
happened recently with their soccer team, which was a phenomenal event 
where everyone was celebrating in the streets. It truly showed that 
they have that sense of nationalism and pride in their country.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CARTER. I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.
  Mr. SHAYS. The Iraqis would say to me, How dare you say we are not a 
country. We are the Fertile Crescent where two great rivers have met. 
We have been the center of Western civilization. And for us to say they 
are not a real country, for them they find it very insulting.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. That is absolutely true. They are a proud civilization.
  And I am not at a point now where I am ready to preemptively declare 
defeat in this, and I do believe we need to

[[Page 23463]]

give it time. I believe the plan is working. And for the first time 
since I have been in Congress, I have got a level of comfort that I 
believe we are on the right track. So I would urge patience in this. I 
do believe we will draw down some of our combat troops in the short 
term, and I am guardedly optimistic.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, as I was listening to 
everybody talk here and listening to people talk earlier today, I get 
struck by the history of this Chamber. And as I was sitting here, I 
wondered how often this debate had occurred during my lifetime or did 
it occur during my lifetime. I would like to think I am a student of 
history, but I will admit that my concentration on history from the end 
of the Second World War until I was in high school, there is a gap 
there where it is only kind of the history of me and not the history of 
the United States. So I don't know a lot about it, but I was thinking 
the Second World War in Europe ended in 1944. Germany was divided into 
zones, I believe, until 1952. So we actually were the government of a 
zone, as were Britain and France, from 1944 to 1952. I wonder if this 
debate took place in this Congress during that period of time: Bring 
our troops home. Why don't those people stand up a government over 
there? Why can't they get their act together? I wonder if that debate 
took place. I don't know. I might go look it up and try to find out.
  Japan we defeated in 1945, unconditional surrender. And yet MacArthur 
established the occupation of Japan and, in fact, was heavily 
criticized when the Korean War broke out for still being the czar of 
Japan. And occupation forces remained in Japan until some time in the 
mid 1950s. I wonder if that debate went on about Japan. The last time I 
checked, which was the day before yesterday when I was talking to some 
soldiers at Fort Hood, we still have troops in Korea, and that war 
technically ended in 1954 I believe it was, 1952 or 1954, and we still 
have troops there. And I don't know if during the 1950s we had debates 
about why can't those people get their act together? Why do we have to 
defend that country? Why do we have to defend them? I don't hear that 
debate anymore, and there are still American soldiers standing watch in 
Korea.
  I am not saying that we are going to occupy for this period of time, 
but where is our commitment to the commitment that our soldiers have 
given us? That deeply concerns me. I worry about it. And I can tell you 
our fighting men and women worry about it too.
  So I guess that is why we get up here on the floor of the House and 
we want to let the American people know what we saw and what we heard 
and what we experienced. And I know the fighting generation that are 
living today; those soldiers are a great generation. The question is, 
will we be also ranked as a great generation, the people back home, for 
standing behind this great generation as they have done an outstanding 
job in defeating our enemy.

                          ____________________