UPDATE: Here is the video of my speech:
In a few minutes, I will be heading over to the House chamber to begin the debate on House Concurrent Resolution 63 – the resolution opposing President Bush’s planned escalation of the war in Iraq. We will try to post video of my speech on the floor later this afternoon, but before I go, I wanted to share a few thoughts with you regarding the debate that’s about to take place.
As my dear colleague the Honorable Chairman Conyers announced here yesterday, this is the week we’re finally going to make the Members of Congress take a stand on whether they are for or against President’s escalation of the war in Iraq. Unlike last week in the Senate, where Republicans were able to hide behind procedural votes to avoid confronting the issue, this week the Democratic Majority in the House will hold its first vote on the war in Iraq, that will ask every Member of the House to take a stand either for or against the President’s ill advised plan to escalate the war.
If the Republicans are going to defend Bush’s plan to escalate this catastrophic, they’re going to have to do it out loud, on the record, and in front of the entire nation.
The sectarian strife in Iraq has not abated. 67 more innocent civilians were killed yesterday in yet another bombing. And our troops have continued to pay the price of being caught in the middle of another nation's civil war. 84 troops were killed last month. 41 more have been killed in the last two weeks alone.
Every piece of available evidence suggests that the strategy currently employed by this Administration is failing in Iraq. And the only argument that can be used to support an escalation of the war there is one of faith. We are asked to have faith that this time, if we just give the President one more chance, things will be different.
The President’s strategy to escalate the war is in immediate conflict with numerous military officials of the highest ranks - individuals like General Wesley Clark and General John Abizaid - who have expressed their strong belief that increasing the number of combat troops in Iraq will not improve the situation there.
Gen. Wesley Clark (retired)
Former Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO
"Without such fundamental change in Washington's approach, there is little hope that the troop surge, Iraqi promises and accompanying rhetoric will amount to anything other than "stay the course more". That wastes lives and time, perpetuates the appeal of the terrorists, and simply brings us closer to the showdown with Iran. And that will be a tragedy for not just Iraq but our friends in the region as well."
[The Independent, 1/8/07]
Gen. John P. Abizaid
Commander of United States Central Command
"I do not believe that more American troops right now is the solution to the problem. I believe that the troop levels need to stay where they are." [Senate testimony 11/15/06; quoted in Washington Post, 12/21/06]
In fact if the House Republicans defend the President’s decision to escalate this war, it will pit them directly against a majority of the American people, two-thirds of who think that further escalating the war is the wrong path to follow.
I believe that the American people, the generals who know what war really is, and a broad majority of this Congress are tired of giving the Administration one more chance - and when it comes to this conflict, they are tired of giving this Administration their trust.
We now know unequivocally that pre-war claims made by top Administration officials about Iraq's weapons programs were at best exaggerated, and at worst deliberately distorted. The Pentagon's Inspector General recently reported that statements made by then Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith were, quote, "inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community." So why should we start trusting this Administration's assessments of Iraq now?
We know that, despite all of his rhetoric in support of our armed forces, this President has not ensured that they were given the best chance to succeed at their missions - or even to survive. A second Pentagon report released at the end of January bluntly states that in Iraq and Afghanistan, "Service members...experienced shortages of force-protection equipment, electronic countermeasure devices, crew-served weapons, and communications equipment," and were "not always equipped to effectively complete their missions."
The same story is true today. An article in yesterday's Washington Post noted that there is a, quote, "shortfall of thousands of advanced Humvee armor kits designed to reduce U.S. troop deaths from roadside bombs," end quote - the very bombs that are now killing and injuring 70 percent of our troops abroad.
So why should we expect that the troops composing the surge will have the protection they need to make it back unharmed?
The entire history of America's effort in Iraq has been marred and undermined by corruption, exploitation, and incompetence. Billions of dollars have been lost or squandered. Vital reconstruction projects necessary to rebuild Iraqi society have been handed over to private companies through no-bid contracts - companies that were paid huge sums of money and then failed to fulfill their duties. For years, this Administration treated accountability as if it were a dirty word.
So why should we expect that without a radical change of course, things will suddenly improve?
So changing a broken course in Iraq will not demoralize our troops or abandon them. To the contrary, it is the only way of truly supporting the troops in their hour of need. Changing a broken course in Iraq will not provide our enemies with encouragement, either. I would ask the President: if our strategy is not working, then why would we help our enemies by plowing ahead with our heads in the sand?
Democrats have started to insist on a new course here in Congress. We have held 52 investigative hearings since January 4th, and are holding Administration members accountable for their words and actions in ways the previous Congress never did.
This resolution – and the debate this week – is only the beginning.
Gone are the days when the President gets a free pass from a rubber-stamp Congress. This week, for the first time, the House will see its first focused, clear and full debate on the President’s plan for escalation that will result in a clear up or down vote stating where the Members of the People’s House stand on this issue. When, at the end of the week, Democrats have been successful in passing this resolution, it will be the strongest repudiation to date of the President’s conduct of the war. And I am confident this will not be the last time the House confronts this President on his policies on Iraq.
We all understand that the war in Iraq is enormously complex, and there are numerous dimensions to it that must be discussed. I want to emphasize that Congress will have many opportunities over the next several months to debate those dimensions and to present new ways forward.
In March, for example, we will consider the President’s supplemental funding request. Soon afterward, we will consider the regular authorization and appropriations bills for the war. All of these debates will be detailed and significant.
But before we go forward, we must first know where we stand. Our goal this week is to clearly establish whether Congress agrees or disagrees with the President's current approach to Iraq. If the answer is no, then we will have the basis for forcing a change in that approach.
It is my most sincere hope that the vote we take on Friday will be the first of many that will help produce a better end to the war in Iraq than the one our current course will produce.
To achieve that goal is the greatest responsibility of this House - and the most solemn duty of us, the peoples' Representatives.
Again as I mentioned at the beginning we will try to update his post by posting or linking a video of my speech later this morning. I’ve got to run now.
Thanks so much again for making me feel a member of this community. Rest assure I will do everything I can to keep fighting for accountability from this Administration on Iraq. - LMS