[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 43, Number 18 (Monday, May 7, 2007)]
[Pages 558-560]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on Returning Without Approval to the House of Representatives 

the ``U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq 

Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007''

May 1, 2007

    Good evening. Twelve weeks ago, I asked the Congress to pass an 
emergency war spending bill that would provide our brave men and women 
in uniform with the funds and flexibility they need. Instead, Members of 
the House and the Senate passed a bill that substitutes the opinions of 
politicians for the judgment of our military commanders. So a few 
minutes ago, I vetoed the bill.
    Tonight I will explain the reasons for this veto and my desire to 
work with Congress to resolve this matter as quickly as possible. We can 
begin tomorrow with a bipartisan meeting with the congressional leaders 
here at the White House.
    Here is why the bill Congress passed is unacceptable. First, the 
bill would mandate a rigid and artificial deadline for American troops 
to begin withdrawing from Iraq. That withdrawal could start as early as 
July 1st, and it would have to start no later than October 1st, 
regardless of the situation on the ground.
    It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start 
withdrawing. All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars 
and gather their strength and begin plotting how to overthrow the 
Government and take control of the country of Iraq. I believe setting a 
deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would 
encourage killers across the broader Middle East, and send a signal that 
America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal 
is setting a date for failure, and that would be irresponsible.
    Second, the bill would impose impossible conditions on our 
commanders in combat. After forcing most of our troops to withdraw, the 
bill would dictate the terms on which the remaining commanders and 
troops could engage the enemy. That means American commanders in the 
middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from

[[Page 559]]

politicians 6,000 miles away in Washington, DC. This is a prescription 
for chaos and confusion, and we must not impose it on our troops.
    Third, the bill is loaded with billions of dollars in nonemergency 
spending that has nothing to do with fighting the war on terror. 
Congress should debate these spending measures on their own merits and 
not as a part of an emergency funding bill for our troops.
    The Democratic leaders know that many in Congress disagree with 
their approach and that there are not enough votes to override the veto. 
I recognize that many Democrats saw this bill as an opportunity to make 
a political statement about their opposition to the war. They've sent 
their message. And now it is time to put politics behind us and support 
our troops with the funds they need.
    Our troops are carrying out a new strategy with a new commander, 
General David Petraeus. The goal of this new strategy is to help the 
Iraqis secure their capital so they can make progress toward 
reconciliation and build a free nation that respects the rights of its 
people, upholds the rule of law, and fights extremists and radicals and 
killers alongside the United States in this war on terror.
    In January, General Petraeus was confirmed by a unanimous vote in 
the United States Senate. In February, we began sending the first of the 
reinforcements he requested. Not all of these reinforcements have 
arrived in Baghdad. And as General Petraeus has said, it will be the end 
of summer before we can assess the impact of this operation. Congress 
ought to give General Petraeus's plan a chance to work.
    In the months since our military has been implementing this plan, 
we've begun to see some important results. For example, Iraqi and 
coalition forces have closed down an Al Qaida car bomb network; they've 
captured a Shi'a militia leader implicated in the kidnaping and killing 
of American soldiers; they've broken up a death squad that had 
terrorized hundreds of residents in a Baghdad neighborhood.
    Last week, General Petraeus was in Washington to brief me, and he 
briefed Members of Congress on how the operation is unfolding. He noted 
that one of the most important indicators of progress is the level of 
sectarian violence in Baghdad. And he reported that since January, the 
number of sectarian murders has dropped substantially.
    Even as sectarian attacks have declined, we continue to see 
spectacular suicide attacks that have caused great suffering. These 
attacks are largely the work of Al Qaida, the enemy that everyone agrees 
we should be fighting. The objective of these Al Qaida attacks is to 
subvert our efforts by reigniting the sectarian violence in Baghdad and 
breaking support for the war here at home. In Washington last week, 
General Petraeus explained it this way: ``Iraq is, in fact, the central 
front of all Al Qaida's global campaign.''
    Al Qaida's role makes it--the conflict in Iraq far more complex than 
a simple fight between Iraqis. It's true that not everyone taking 
innocent life in Iraq wants to attack America here at home, but many do. 
Many also belong to the same terrorist network that attacked us on 
September the 11th, 2001, and wants to attack us here at home again. We 
saw the death and destruction Al Qaida inflicted on our people when they 
were permitted a safe haven in Afghanistan. For the security of the 
American people, we must not allow Al Qaida to establish a new safe 
haven in Iraq.
    We need to give our troops all the equipment and the training and 
protection they need to prevail. That means that Congress needs to pass 
an emergency war spending bill quickly. I've invited leaders of both 
parties to come to the White House tomorrow and to discuss how we can 
get these vital funds to our troops. I am confident that with good will 
on both sides, we can agree on a bill that gets our troops the money and 
flexibility they need as soon as possible.
    The need to act is urgent. Without a war funding bill, the military 
has to take money from some other account or training program so the 
troops in combat have what they need. Without a war funding bill, the 
Armed Forces will have to consider cutting back on buying new equipment 
or repairing existing equipment. Without a war funding bill, we add to 
the uncertainty felt by our military

[[Page 560]]

families. Our troops and their families deserve better, and their 
elected leaders can do better.
    Here in Washington, we have our differences on the way forward in 
Iraq, and we will debate them openly. Yet whatever our differences, 
surely we can agree that our troops are worthy of this funding and that 
we have a responsibility to get it to them without further delay.
    Thank you for listening. May God bless our troops.

Note: The President spoke at 6:10 p.m. in the Cross Hall at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to Gen. David H. Petraeus, USA, 
commanding general, Multi-National Force--Iraq; and Qais Khazali, 
member, Khazali network, and Shi'a extremist leader. He also referred to 
H.R. 1591.