[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9933-9935]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           FIGHTING TERRORISM

  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, on another matter, the Senate has been 
discussing the need to respond to terrorist threats within our own 
borders. To recap, this isn't about people traveling from the United 
States to the Middle East and returning or people coming from the 
Middle East to the United States. It is about that, but primarily what 
we are worried about in Orlando is the radicalization of an American 
citizen by propaganda, poisonous propaganda being issued by the Islamic 
State, and that falls in a fertile field with particularly susceptible 
individuals like the shooter in Orlando.
  That is one reason it is so important we complete our work on the 
Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill. It keeps many of our 
counterterrorism efforts going by funding those who are on the 
frontlines, such as the FBI and other law enforcement. I hope we can 
get that legislation completed, too, and in so doing underscore our 
commitment to those public servants who defend the homeland.

[[Page 9934]]

  We can't lose sight of the heart of the problem: a lack of any 
coherent plan to defeat ISIS and a foreign policy missing direction and 
leadership from the Commander in Chief, the President of the United 
States.
  Over the past few days, it has become even clearer that not even 
those in the Obama administration are onboard with his short-sighted 
and reckless policies. First, more than 50 diplomats sent an internal 
protest memo to harshly criticize the President's Syria policy. You can 
find that draft version of the memo online. It is four frank pages, 
decrying Obama's failed wait-and-see-approach to Syria, from some of 
those who have been most involved with the policy.
  The New York Times was forced to admit the number of signatures on 
it, 51, was ``extremely large, if not unprecedented.'' I wish I had 
time to read the full memo aloud here, but let me quote from a few 
paragraphs--actually, from the final paragraph. It says:

       The status quo in Syria will continue to present 
     increasingly dire, if not disastrous, humanitarian, 
     diplomatic, and terrorism-related challenges. For five years, 
     the scale of these consequences has overwhelmed our efforts 
     to deal with this conflict; the United States cannot contain 
     the conflict with current policy. . . . [W]e firmly believe 
     it is time the United States, guided by our strategic 
     interests and moral convictions, lead a global effort to put 
     an end to this conflict.

  What an indictment of the leadership of the White House by people who 
are part of the Obama administration. I am grateful that these 
diplomats opted to stand up and be counted and tell the truth for our 
own security as well as those in the Middle East who are suffering so 
much. The administration's policies--really, their inaction--have 
languished for 5 years with all signs pointing to a much needed course 
correction. Still, even after the redlines were crossed by Syria's 
murderous dictator and as the supposed JV team of terrorists are 
exporting deadly violence into our own country, the White House views 
its policies in a positive light. It is not just these diplomats 
working in the State Department of President Obama who are raising red 
flags.
  Recently the CIA Director agreed with them while testifying before 
the Senate Intelligence Committee. He admitted we are further away from 
a diplomatic solution in Syria than a year ago, largely because of 
Russia's involvement in propping up the regime of Bashar al-Assad. He 
confirmed that ISIS, the Islamic State, is preparing to conduct further 
attacks, in part by training and encouraging its followers to carry out 
attacks in their home countries, such as the United States of America.
  Contrary to the narrative the White House is selling, Director 
Brennan called ISIS a ``formidable adversary'' that is building a 
global terror network. He stressed that Libya, in particular, is a 
growing hotbed of Islamic extremism.
  Recently I traveled to Tunisia with members of the House Homeland 
Security Committee, and we met with the Libyan country team--the U.S. 
Ambassador to Libya and the other members of that country team who had 
not even been able to go to Libya because it was so dangerous. They 
were actually working in exile in Tunisia next door.
  Director Brennan called the ISIS offshoot in Libya the most developed 
and most dangerous branch of the terrorist group. How did we get here? 
President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed in their 
efforts to stabilize the country after toppling Qadhafi. Didn't we 
learn anything in Iraq? Apparently, the Obama administration did not. 
They had no plan for what to do once Qadhafi was gone. Evidently, 
President Obama opted to lead from behind during the military campaign 
and then not lead at all after Qadhafi fell.
  Unfortunately, recent testimony from the President's nominee to head 
the U.S. forces in Africa, or AFRICOM, suggested the administration 
hadn't learned any lessons after this disaster. When asked whether 
there was a strategy in place for dealing with all the threats 
emanating from Libya, the nominee, the Marine Corps general who was 
testifying, said he wasn't aware of any strategy, even though he agreed 
that ISIS has a significant presence in Libya and constitutes an 
imminent threat to our country here at home.
  Just a few days ago, an article in the Washington Post highlighted 
the difference between what our military leaders believe is necessary 
to accomplish the mission and what the White House begrudgingly agreed 
to give them, which is less than what they need. According to the 
article, U.S. commanders on the ground in Iraq are readying a request 
to the White House for more troops so we can help the Iraqi Army secure 
Fallujah and eventually take back Mosul.
  The article also notes that military leaders have been regularly 
highlighting the need for more troops in the region--and quickly--but 
are concerned the administration will be reluctant to commit more. That 
is because the President has instituted an artificial troop cap for 
Iraq and Syria--it is about the numbers, it is not about the mission--
just like he did in Afghanistan, and he doesn't want to add to that no 
matter what happens.
  Apparently, the foolish campaign promises the President made when he 
was running are more important to him now than actually defeating ISIS 
abroad. As it stands, his legacy will be leaving Iraq more unstable and 
more dangerous for U.S. interests than it was when he came into office.
  This should be a no-brainer. We don't succeed on the battlefield when 
we ignore the counsel of the experts, our uniformed military leaders, 
and we can't succeed on the ground in Iraq when the President will not 
provide the resources necessary to carry out the operations he has 
asked them to perform. We don't need a bandaid. We don't need more 
calls for diplomacy and other hollow talking points in Libya. What we 
and the world need is American leadership and a commitment from the 
White House to root out and annihilate ISIS where it lives and 
breathes.
  I doubt the Orlando shooter would have pledged allegiance to the 
leader of the Islamic State if we had done what our military leadership 
believes we should have already done, which was to crush ISIS and 
defeat it. I doubt the Orlando shooter would have pledged allegiance to 
a leader whose movement had been crushed and destroyed, but he did it 
because he felt they were winning.
  When the watching world sees we lack the will to defeat ISIS, ISIS 
sympathizers around the world sense weakness, and they are emboldened 
in their plan to carry out attacks, including on U.S. soil. There is a 
direct relationship between the battlefield in Iraq and Syria and our 
neighborhoods and communities here in America. What happens there 
matters here.
  When the request from our military leadership arrives at the 
President's desk asking for more resources, he should remember Orlando, 
and he should grant the request. If he refuses or dithers, any 
resulting failure in Iraq and Syria or further attacks on the homeland 
will be part of his lasting legacy. From our diplomatic corps to our 
intelligence community, to the leaders of our military, all have 
directly or indirectly challenged the President's foreign policy in 
just the last few days.
  If you think about it, it is remarkable. It takes courage and real 
strength of conviction to buck the leader of your political party or of 
the administration. I hope the President listens to them because they 
are trying to help him make the right decision, and they are the real 
experts here.
  If the President will not act decisively against our adversaries 
abroad, Congress must do all it can do to guard against the enemy here 
at home. Passing appropriations bills that provide the resources for 
Federal, State, and local law enforcement is part of our 
responsibility. We need to make sure our first responders and law 
enforcement community have the resources they need, and I hope we get 
that done soon.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.

[[Page 9935]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________