Date: 2007-02-16
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker. the manner of our withdrawal from Iraq will dramatically affect the credibility of American foreign policy. Our actions must not lead to antiSemites masquerading as the President of Iran with the misimpression that his thirst for nuclear weapons can ever end with the realization of his dream of nuclear holocaust. this time engulfing the Jewish national homeland. In the larger geopolitical context. like it or not. credibility is the currency of a global Superpower. The argument has been made on this floor that our engagement in Iraq has had the effect of diverting our attention from other threats to our security interests such as a nuclear North Korea or the military buildup of China or even a resurgent Russia. The recent glimmer of hope from the multiparty talks with the hermit kingdom demonstrates that it is possible for our Nation to. yes. walk and chew gum at the same time. The war in Iraq has not come at the cost of disengagement. However. perhaps more importantly. we cannot avoid the fact that the manner in which we turn control over their country to the Iraqis will send a message across the globe to friend and foe alike of whether we are a reliable ally and a predictable adversary. It is simply not possible for us to divorce our role in the world from our credibility as a Nation. The stakes are great for Iraq. but. they are just as great. if not greater. for those of us in the United States. for those of us presently in the United States and for our children and our grandchildren. Although everyone including the President has acknowledged the fact that things have not gone as planned in Iraq. this should not lead us to overlook the fact that the Iraqi people have cihosen their Nations leadership in democratic elections. three in a row. with more and more people participating. larger percentages of the population participating. in numbers and percentages that frankly would embarrass our country when you look at the turnout we have for elections. Sometimes we explain the low turnout in our elections because of bad weather. Their bad weather was not the question. It was the threat of death if they participated in elections. and yet they went forward to do so. They ratified a Constitution that represents a dramatic departure from the rule of one of the most repressive regimes of the globe. and we sort of slide by that and say. well. we got rid of Saddam Hussein. but look at the mess those people are in over there. It is a difficult proposition. This President warned us after 9/11 it would be a difficult proposition. it would take foYtitude. it would take persistence. it would take resolve. At the same time. however. -it is this very hope of democracy that -has led those extremists who fear such a prospect to lash out in a wave of violence. In this regard. we must not fall prey to the error of failing to hold those responsible for violence accountable for their murderous actions. The idea that we are somehow responsible for violence in Iraq is both preposterous and the crassest form of moral ignorance. Those who commit the murders. those who drill holes in peoples brains. screw fellow human beings to walls and consider decapitation a form of religious expression. they are the ones who are responsible for the atrocities and massive human rights violations concerning the people of Iraq. Charles Krauthammer aptly captures such moral illogic with the query of whether the police in America are somehow responsible and have on their hands the blood of the 16.000 murders they failed to prevent last year. The tragic irony of such logic is that it suggests that those who murder in order to manipulate the Western media and public opinion by the spectacle of mangled bodies and bloodstained streets should be able to realize their aim of driving us away from the scene of their crime. We must not reward these thugs by giving them what they want. We are in Iraq to protect the Iraqi people. and the blame for the violence should be placed where it belongs. As Prime Minister Blair so eloquently stated the proposition: "Here is where we have to change radically our mindset. At present. when we are shown pictures of carnage in Iraq. much of our own opinion sees that as a failure. as a reason for leaving. Surely." Prime Minister Blair says. "it is a reason for persevering and succeeding. What is the purpose of the terrorism in Iraq? It is to destroy the prospect of democratic progress. In doing so. they hope to deal us a mortal blow. They know victory for them in Iraq is defeat not just for Iraqi democracy but for democratic values everywhere." The challenges before us relate to the formulation of policy. but this should not be considered in a vacuum. The most important asset of the United States in Iraq is the quality of the men and women of our Armed Forces. It is in this regard that the person in charge of the responsibility of implementing our new policy. General David Petraeus. is wellsuited to perform such a task. In addition to his experience in the area around Mosul. he is the coauthor of the recently released Military Field Manual on Counterinsurgency Doctrine. History provides us with examples where military commanders have been brought into a theater of operations in order to turn around what seemed at the time less than promising. as illustrated by the appointments of General Grant. or even General Patton. to name just two examples. If there ever was a need for such leadership in Iraq it is now. General Petraeus is a critical component to our prospects for progress. E 1300 And I know everybody says they support General Petraeus. they support our troops. But it does seem odd that .when the other body confirmed General Petraeus unanimously. they followed it up by suggesting what he was going about was a fools errand. And I know everybody here supports our troops. but listen to what you are saying. On the one hand you say. "Godspeed. General Petraeus." and on the other hand you say. "You are doomed to failure." The need to meet the challenge of stabilizing Iraq. primarily in Baghdad and Anbar Province. is essential to the orderly withdrawal of American forces. Any precipitous action which fails to accommodate this concern would likely have untold consequences for Innocents within Iraq. the broader Middle East. and ultimately the security of the American people. Again. however. it must be emphasized that the longterm success or failure of democracy in Iraq rests with the Iraqis themselves. As Faoud Ajami of Johns Hopkins University has pointed out. we have given the gift of freedom to the Iraqi people. which. by nature. entails the conclusion that their future is in their own hands. This new strategy. and I stress it is a new strategy. recognizes that our remaining days in Iraq must be dedicated to making this transition to a new political order possible. not just getting out. but getting out as we succeed in our effort to establish a stable democracy in Iraq.