[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6186-6188]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, 9 months ago, 13 Senators cast their vote 
for a 1-year deadline for redeployment of most U.S. troops from Iraq. 
Our country has been waiting impatiently for Washington to find the 
right way forward for Iraq and the right policy for our troops. It 
seemed then, when those 13 votes were cast, as it does now, that was 
the only way to help Iraq and the Middle East to emerge from a 
nightmarish war that has delivered chaos where it sought order, fear 
where it promised freedom, and open-ended escalation where the 
President promised us mission accomplished. This is a war which has 
cost us dearly in just about every possible measure of American 
interest and power.
  Today, Democrats stand nearly united behind a strategy for success, a 
strategy for success that includes a deadline needed to force the 
Iraqis to stand up for Iraq. A lot has changed in the last 9 months, 
but I am more convinced than ever that a combination of serious, 
sustained diplomacy, real diplomacy, leveraged by a 1-year deadline for 
the redeployment of U.S. troops, is the best way to achieve our goal of 
stability in Iraq and security in the region.
  I listened to administration spokespeople in the last few days as 
they went on television blasting the Democratic proposal. It is 
interesting how they continue their habit of just setting up a straw 
man, putting something out there that has nothing to do with the 
reality of the program, and then knocking it down. They are fond of 
saying: a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would be just terrible to 
our interests in the region. Let's make it clear. A 1-year date from 
now, with discretion to the President to leave troops there to finish 
the training, with discretion to the President to leave troops there to 
chase al-Qaida, with discretion to the President to leave troops there 
to protect American facilities and forces, with the ability to have an 
over-the-horizon presence--a 1-year deadline from today, which would be 
entering the 6th year of this war, is not a precipitous withdrawal of 
any kind whatsoever. In fact, there are many people in the country who 
think that is not soon enough.
  The fact is, this administration wants to sow fear in Americans, so 
they choose to debate something that is not the proposal of those of us 
who have put this proposal forward. What we propose to do is change the 
strategy of our mission so we can achieve success.
  What we have seen is that this open-endedness you just kind of say we 
need to do this and we need to do that and we want the Iraqis to stand 
up and we want the police to do better and Prime Minister Maliki said 
he is going to deliver--none of that delivers anything. The Iraqi 
politicians know that as long as there is no deadline, they can take as 
long as they want to work out whatever power struggles and differences 
they have. So they are using the presence of American forces as cover 
for their own goals, for their own desires, until we in the United 
States say to them: Hey, folks, get serious. Our young people are 
prepared--obviously, because we have been doing it for 4 years--to put 
their lives on the line in order to help you have democracy, but you 
have to grab that democracy, you have to make decisions, and you have 
to go in and police your neighborhoods.
  The only way you are going to change that is by being responsible and 
demanding something.
  It provides the President the discretion to be able to complete the 
training. What else, after 5 years, would we want to be in Iraq for 
besides finishing the training and standing up the Iraqi forces and 
chasing al-Qaida and fighting the legitimate war on terror?
  This 1-year deadline is sound policy. It is based on the Iraq Study 
Group's goal of redeploying U.S. combat forces from Iraq by the first 
quarter of 2008. It is consistent with the timeframe for transferring 
control to the Iraqis that was set forth by General Casey and the 
schedule agreed upon by the Iraqi Government itself.
  Even the President has said, under his new strategy, responsibility 
for security would be transferred to Iraqis before the end of this 
year. If the President is telling us that responsibility for security 
can be transferred to the Iraqis by the end of this year, don't we have 
a right to hold the President accountable for that goal? Don't we have 
a right to hold the Iraqis accountable for that goal? If the goal is to 
transfer security to them by the end of this year, how can you resist 
the notion that you are going to leave troops there to complete the 
training, chase al-Qaida, protect American forces, but bring the bulk 
of our combat forces home so they, indeed, will be standing up for 
their own security?
  The President has said it. The Iraq Study Group has said it. The 
generals have said it. Now it is time for the Senate to put it on 
record as part of our effort to support this objective. It is long 
since time for the Iraqis to assume responsibility for their country. 
We need this deadline to leverage the Iraqis into making the hard 
compromises that are necessary.
  I might add, no young soldier from the United States or Great Britain 
ought to be dying so that Iraqi politicians can get more time to 
squabble,

[[Page 6187]]

more time to try to strike a better deal for themselves. We ought to be 
working overtime in order to bring about a compromise that is 
ultimately the only solution to what is happening in Iraq today.
  Even now, we keep hearing the Iraqis are close to a deal on sharing 
oil revenues. But we still have not seen the final agreement ratified. 
Without a real deadline to force a deal, there is no telling how long 
it will take. But we do know that as long as there is no deadline, the 
Iraqis will believe they can take as long as they want.
  We also know American soldiers and Iraqi civilians will continue to 
die and be maimed while those politicians continue to use the presence 
of American forces as a cover for their other objectives. We saw that 
again last weekend, when Iraq's neighbors and key players from the 
international community finally got together at a conference in 
Baghdad. The conference was a welcome development. We have been calling 
for it for several years. It was long overdue. But nothing tangible 
came out of it because, of course, no preparations and no diplomacy had 
been carried out leading up to it in order to get something substantive 
to come out of it. That is precisely why a deadline is so critical and 
essential, to force everyone to focus on the urgent need to reach a 
political solution.
  The debate--this debate, a debate the Senate needs to have--offers a 
very clear choice, a choice between a new way forward and the old way 
that has taken us backward.
  I might add, yesterday we saw a little more of that old way as the 
rhetoric escalated. The Vice President said yesterday, ``When Members 
speak not of victory but of time limits, deadlines, and other arbitrary 
measures, they are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock and wait 
us out.''
  First of all, there is nothing arbitrary about a date for next year. 
The Iraq Study Group put it forward, the President said security 
responsibility could be transferred by the end of this year, and the 
generals put it forward. But more importantly, the Vice President of 
the United States must be the last person in America who believes the 
enemy is waiting or watching the clock. It is Iraqi politicians who are 
watching the clock. They are the ones who are delaying and squabbling. 
The enemy is busy doing what the enemy has been doing.
  Moreover, the Vice President lumps things together in the word 
``enemy'' here in a very strange way. Yes, the enemy is al-Qaida, and 
we are focused on al-Qaida. But the fact is that this war in Iraq is 
fundamentally a civil war now. It is a struggle between Sunni and Shia, 
and the last I knew, they are Iraqis and they are not our enemy. They 
are fighting amongst each other for the power and the future of Iraq.
  With each day, this administration becomes more detached from the 
realities.
  I believe if you look at the figures, this is not a temporary surge. 
This weekend, we learned that the President's escalation is going to 
involve nearly 5,000 more troops than the 21,500 that was initially 
announced and the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the total 
could eventually reach 48,000 additional troops total. The original 
cost estimate was about $5.6 billion but the CBO tell us the final 
amount could reach nearly five times that much. And it looks more and 
more like the troop increase could last well into next year.
  We also see that most people understand that when the Vice President 
talks about undermining the troops, there is not one of us here who is 
not outraged by what has happened to the troops with respect to the 
lack of adequate armor, the lack of adequate humvees, the lack of 
adequate support, numbers of personnel and planning, and, most 
importantly, the treatment of those soldiers when they have come home--
a VA budget that is inadequate, a disability system that is 
dysfunctional, and obviously the treatment we saw recently at Walter 
Reed.
  The Vice President needs to focus on how you really support the 
troops. The way you really support the troops is to get the policy in 
Iraq right. We have a policy for success. They have had a 4-year policy 
of failure that has made Iran stronger, North Korea stronger, Hamas 
stronger, Hezbollah stronger, weakened our relations in the region, and 
has certainly not served the interests of our national security.
  It is time for the Senate to do what this administration has 
stubbornly refused to do to recognize that we should honor lives lost 
with lives saved. That starts by putting aside the hollow rhetoric and 
straw men that have undermined a real debate for far too long and 
support a strategy that preserves our core interests in Iraq, in the 
region, and throughout the world. That is how we support the troops.
  Mr. President, we can do better. This resolution we have submitted is 
a way to do better.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise, first, to offer strong words of 
support for the statement that was just offered by the distinguished 
Senator from Massachusetts. I also rise today to speak in support of 
the Iraq resolution the Senate will consider tomorrow.
  The news from Iraq is very bad. Last week, a suicide bomber stood 
outside a bookstore and killed 20 people. Other attacks killed 118 Shia 
pilgrims. On Sunday, a car bomb went off in central Baghdad, and more 
than 30 people died. The road from the airport into Baghdad is littered 
with smoldering debris, craters from improvised explosive devices, and 
the memories of our sons and daughters.
  The civil war in Iraq rages on. The insurgents have started to change 
their tactics. They hide in buildings and along the streets and wait 
for our helicopters. They have shot down at least 8 U.S. helicopters in 
the last month. More of our soldiers are dying or coming home with 
their bodies broken and their nerves shattered to a VA system 
completely unprepared for what they need to rebuild their lives.
  It is not enough for the President to tell us victory in this war is 
simply a matter of American resolve. The American people have been 
extraordinarily resolved. They have seen their sons and daughters 
killed or wounded in the streets of Fallujah. They have spent hundreds 
of billions of dollars on this effort--money they know could have been 
devoted to strengthening our homeland security and our competitive 
standing as a nation. The failure has not been a failure of resolve. 
That is not what has led us into chaos. It has been a failure of 
strategy, and it is time that the strategy change. There is no military 
solution to the civil war that rages on in Iraq, and it is time for us 
to redeploy so that a political solution becomes possible.
  The news from Iraq is very bad, and it has been that way for at least 
4 years. We all wish the land the President and the Vice President 
speak of exists. We wish there were an Iraq where the insurgency was in 
its last throes, where the people work with security, where children 
play outside, where a vibrant new democracy lights up the nighttime 
sky. We wish for those things, but there is no alternative reality to 
what we see and read about in the news, to what we have experienced 
these long 4 years.
  I repeat, there is no military solution to this war. At this point, 
no amount of soldiers can solve the grievances at the heart of someone 
else's civil war. The Iraqi people--Shia, Sunni, and Kurd--must come to 
the table and reach a political settlement themselves. If they want 
peace, they must do the hard work necessary to achieve it.
  Our failed strategy in Iraq has strengthened Iran's strategic 
position, reduced U.S. credibility and influence around the world, and 
placed Israel and other nations in the region that are friendly to the 
United States in greater peril. These are not signs of a well-laid 
plan. It is time for a profound change.
  This is what we are trying to do here today. We are saying it is time 
to start making plans to redeploy our troops so they can focus on the 
wider struggle against terrorism, win the war in Afghanistan, 
strengthen our position in the Middle East, and pressure the Iraqis to 
reach a political settlement. Even if this effort falls short, we will

[[Page 6188]]

continue to try to accomplish what the American people asked for last 
November.
  I am glad to see, though, that this new effort is gaining consensus. 
I commend Senator Reid for his efforts. He took the time to listen to 
so many of us from both Chambers of Congress to help develop this plan.
  The decision in particular to again begin a phased redeployment, with 
the goal of redeploying all our combat forces by March 30, 2008, is the 
right step. It is a measure the Iraq Study Group spoke of, an idea I 
borrowed from them, an idea that, in a bill I introduced, now has more 
than 60 cosponsors from the House and Senate and from both sides of the 
aisle. They have supported this plan since I announced a similar plan 
in January.
  The decision to allow some U.S. forces to remain in Iraq with a clear 
mission to protect U.S. and coalition personnel, conduct 
counterterrorism operations, and to train and equip Iraqi forces is a 
smart decision. President al-Maliki spoke at a conference and warned 
that the violence in Iraq could spread throughout the region if it goes 
unchecked. By maintaining a strong presence in Iraq and the Middle 
East, as both my bill and the leadership bill does, we can ensure that 
the chaos does not spread.
  I should also add that the decision to begin this phased redeployment 
within 120 days is a practical one. Our military options have been 
exhausted. It is time to seek a political solution to this war, and 
with this decision we send a clear signal to the parties involved that 
they need to arrive at an accommodation.
  While I strongly believe this war never should have been authorized, 
I believe we must be as careful in ending the war as we were careless 
getting in. While I prefer my approach as reflected in my bill, I 
believe this resolution does begin to point U.S. policy and Iraq in the 
right direction. An end to the war and achieving a political solution 
to Iraq's civil war will not happen unless we demand it. Peace with 
stability does not just happen because we wish for it.
  It comes when we never give in and never give up and never tire of 
working toward a life on Earth worthy of our human dignity. The 
decisions that have been made have led us to this crossroad, in a 
moment of great peril.
  We have a choice. We can continue down the road that has weakened our 
credibility and damaged our strategic interests in the region or we can 
turn toward the future. The road will not be smooth. I have to say 
there will be risks with any approach, but this approach is our last 
best hope to end this war so we can begin to bring our troops home and 
begin the hard work of securing our country and our world from the 
threats we face.
  The President has said he will continue down the road toward more 
troops and more of the same failed policies. The President sought and 
won authorization from Congress to wage this war from the start. But he 
is now dismissing and ignoring the will of the American people who are 
tired of years of watching the human and financial tolls mount.
  The news from Iraq is very bad, but it can change if we in this 
Chamber say ``enough.'' Let this day be the day we begin the painful 
and difficult work of moving from the crossroad. Let this day be the 
day we begin pulling toward the future with a responsible conclusion to 
this painful chapter in our Nation's history. Let this be the day when 
we finally send a message that is so clear and so emphatic that it 
cannot be ignored.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Iowa.

                          ____________________