Thank you, Mr. Meeks, and also let me thank my colleagues across the aisle for the solemnity of the debate that has taken place over these last several days. I think it is so important to the constituents that we are sworn to serve, and…
Thank you, Mr. Meeks, and also let me thank my colleagues across the aisle for the solemnity of the debate that has taken place over these last several days. I think it is so important to the constituents that we are sworn to serve, and they deserve to hear the voices that reside within the people's Chamber.
This debate, in so many ways, is an echo chamber for what Americans already know. They have found their voice and expressed it in several manners and several forms, most notably in last November's election, where they called for a new direction for this country, not the staying of the course that it is currently on.
It is long overdue then that the Congress find its voice as well. Past is prologue, and we must go back to June of 2002 when the President enunciated the Bush doctrine, the doctrine of preemption and unilateralism that has placed us in this situation that we have today in Iraq.
He was warned, most notably by people like Scowcroft, Eagleberger, Baker, and Colin Powell about the folly of this effort. It was not Kennedy or Berg or even Larson or other people that spoke out as eloquently as those former members of Bush the Elder's Cabinet.
I traveled with Jack Murtha in the buildup to the war, and we met with our ambassador in Saudi Arabia, Robert Jordan, who I said to him, Ambassador, you have a gathering storm here in Saudi Arabia, with all the tensions in the Middle East. And he said, Congressman, you are from New England. Gathering storm, he said? What we have here is the making of a perfect storm.
And if we unilaterally invade and attack this toothless tiger, Saddam Hussein, we will unwittingly accomplish what bin Laden failed to do: we will create a united Islamic jihad against the United States.
Professor Gram Ellison wrote that ``this occupation has diverted essential resources from the fight against al Qaeda, allowed the Taliban to regroup on Afghanistan, fostered neglect of the Iranian nuclear threat, undermined alliances critical to preventing terrorism, devastated America's standing with every country in Europe and destroyed it in the Muslim world.''
Instead of following the wisdom of Scowcroft and Eagleberger and Baker, Powell, this administration embraced Ahmed Chalabi with all the hubris and arrogance of staying the course.
And so we find our troops today in the midst of civil war, in the midst of sectarian, religious, and tribal conflicts that are more about settling old scores that seek revenge over the centuries than about creating a democracy. And it is into that caldron that we wish to send more troops, more troops that 87 percent of the Iraqi public says they want a time line for us to be out of there, and over 50 percent of them think that it is okay to kill Americans.
Our troops need leadership that is worthy of their sacrifice. It is important that this Congress on both sides of the aisle, as it has done, understands the difference between the war and the warriors.
I conduct hearings back in my district; I listen to what my constituents have to say. And, most earnestly, to those parents, those men and women who come to these hearings and talk about their children in harm's way: Carol Tripp of Bristol said it best, a woman with three of her sons and her
husband stationed in Iraq, who hasn't shared a holiday dinner with their entire family since 2001.
I define success by being able to look into their eyes and tell them that the best path forward is the safe, secure, and strategic redeployment of our troops so that our Army can regroup and restore itself and proceed after the people who took the towers down in systematic fashion to go after al Qaeda and continue to regroup.