Before
the US House of Representatives, March 17, 2004
Mr. Speaker,
today, in the floor debate on H. Res. 557, the Iraq resolution,
though a member of the Committee on International Relations, I
was unfortunately denied time to express my dissent on the policy
of preemptive war in Iraq. The fact that the Committee on International
Relations held no hearings and did not mark up the resolution
further challenges the fairness of the process.
Mr. Speaker,
I now rise to express my opposition to H. Res. 557, obviously,
not because our Armed Forces do not deserve praise, but rather
because our policy in the Persian Gulf is seriously flawed. An
effort to commend our forces should not be used to rubber-stamp
a policy of folly. To do so is disingenuous. Though the resolution
may have political benefits, it will prove to be historically
incorrect.
Justifying
preemption is not an answer to avoiding appeasement. Very few
wars are necessary. Very few wars are good wars. And this one
does not qualify. Most wars are costly beyond measure, in life
and limb and economic hardship. In this regard, this war does
qualify: 566 deaths, 10,000 casualties, and hundreds of billions
of dollars for a victory requiring self-deception.
Rather than
bragging about victory, we should recognize that the war that
rages on between the Muslim East and the Christian West has intensified
and spread, leaving our allies and our own people less safe. Denying
we have an interest in oil and that occupying an Islamic country
is not an affront to the sensitivities of most Arabs and Muslims
is foolhardy.
Reasserting
U.N. Security Council resolutions as a justification for the war
further emphasizes our sacrifice of sovereignty and Congress's
reneging its constitutional responsibility over war.
This resolution
dramatizes our forgetfulness that for too long we were staunch
military and economic allies of Saddam Hussein, confirming the
folly of our policy of foreign meddling over many decades. From
the days of installing the Shah of Iran to the current worldwide
spread of hostilities and hatred, our unnecessary involvement
shows so clearly how unintended consequences come back to haunt
generation after generation.
Someday
our leaders ought to ask why Switzerland, Sweden, Canada, Mexico,
and many others are not potential targets of an Islamic attack.
Falsely believing that the al Qaeda was aligned with Saddam Hussein
has resulted in the al Qaeda now having a strong presence and
influence in Iraq. Falsely believing that Iraq had a supply of
weapons of mass destruction has resulted in a dramatic loss of
U.S. credibility, as anti-Americanism spreads around the world.
Al Qaeda recruitment, sadly, has been dramatically increased.
We all praise
our troops and support them. Challenging one's patriotism for
not supporting this resolution and/or policy in the Persian Gulf
is not legitimate. We should all be cautious in endorsing and
financing a policy that unfortunately expands the war rather than
ends it.