[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 15]
[House]
[Page 20211]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        THE COST OF AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ SOON TO BE $1 TRILLION

  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, I would like to thank Congressman Walter 
Jones for his 5-minute speech. That was a perfect lead-in to my remarks 
tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, last week I stood in the House to mark two tragic 
milestones. I said that July had become the deadliest month for our 
soldiers in Afghanistan since the conflict began, and I reported that 
the number of American troops who have died in Afghanistan and Iraq had 
gone over the 5,000 mark.
  Today, I rise to warn the House that a third tragic milestone is 
coming up. According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, 
Congress has approved $941 billion in war-related spending since 9/11. 
If Congress approves the administration's request for the next fiscal 
year, funding for Afghanistan and Iraq will go over the $1 trillion 
mark. And that is just for direct military operations, Mr. Speaker. The 
$1 trillion figure doesn't include the indirect costs, such as health 
care for our wounded veterans. Many of our veterans will need care for 
the rest of their lives. Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel-winning economist, 
has estimated that when you add it all up, the occupation of Iraq alone 
will cost us over $3 trillion.
  Tragically, all that spending has not made us any safer. Violent 
extremists have launched more attacks around the world since 9/11 than 
before 9/11. The war spending hasn't made us any richer either. It has 
contributed to our economic crisis, exploded the lid off our national 
debt, and diverted funds from desperately needed domestic priorities.
  Besides Iraq and Afghanistan, Congress has also approved spending for 
a third war called the global war on terror. That war has been a big 
mistake, too. As the Rand Corporation has pointed out, when you use the 
word ``terrorist,'' you elevate them. You elevate them to the status of 
holy warriors and it encourages them to conduct holy war against the 
United States.
  We need to call terrorists what they really are, criminals and 
violent extremists. To stop them, we need good intelligence and good 
police work in the communities where they hide, not massive military 
occupations that don't get the job done and bleed our Treasury dry.
  I am glad that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have 
stopped using the phrase ``war on terror.'' That is a good first step. 
But now we need to take several more steps. We must speed up the 
withdrawal of our troops and military contractors from Iraq. We must 
change our mission in Afghanistan to emphasize economic development, 
humanitarian aid, education, jobs, and better government.
  This is the kind of help that the people of Afghanistan want and need 
from the United States. This is the kind of help that will give the 
Afghan people real hope for the future and a reason to reject 
extremism.
  And throughout the world, we must replace military power with the 
tools of smart power, such as diplomacy, multilateral action, and 
nuclear nonproliferation. I have offered a ``SMART Security Platform 
for the 21st Century'' which could put these tools to work and make the 
world a safer place.
  Mr. Speaker, America cannot afford to keep using military power as 
our only option. It is dumb foreign policy, dumb military policy, and 
dumb fiscal policy. Smart power will save lives and money and build a 
more peaceful world for our children and their children.

                          ____________________