Patrick Leahy on Iraq

The War in Iraq

Remarks Of US Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT)

t r u t h o u t Statement

Thursday 15 February 2007


Mr. President, a week ago the distinguished Majority Leader tried every which way to provide the Senate with an opportunity to debate a bipartisan resolution on Iraq. That effort failed because it was blocked by some in the Minority party, who insisted on a separate vote that was nothing more than a political ploy. Instead of a debate on the President's policy, they wanted the debate to be about who "supports" the troops.

As has so often been the case when anyone has asked a question, expressed reservations, or outright opposed the President's failed policy in Iraq, his defenders accuse his detractor of not being patriotic or of not supporting the troops.


As one who for years has fought for veterans benefits, for fair treatment for the National Guard, for armor for our troops who were sent into battle unprepared, and for replacing the depleted stocks of essential equipment that our troops need and depend on, the absurd accusation that it is unpatriotic to disagree with a policy that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers and created a terrorist haven in a country that before posed no threat to the United States, has worn thin.


It reminds me of my days as a prosecutor. When a defendant was caught red-handed, the predictable response was to attack the accuser. That is what has been going on here since President Bush, Vice President Cheney and former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, ignoring all advice to the contrary, led us into this costly fiasco. These flawed policies have thrust our troops into the maw of a bloody civil war. Our troops are not responsible for the mistaken policies they have been asked to implement. Policymakers in Washington are responsible for that. And only decision makers in Washington can change those policies.

The polls show unmistakably that a majority of the American people wants the Congress to debate and vote on the President's policy in Iraq. They know that Iraq is the key issue of today, they see that it is a widening civil war, and they want their sons and daughters out of there, in as sensible a timeframe and as sensible a plan as we can muster. It is that simple, and that is what we should be debating.

The costs of this misadventure have not just been onerous; they have been catastrophic. More than 3,000 Americans killed, and more than 20,000 wounded. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have lost their lives. In material terms we are fast approaching the one trillion dollar mark, throwing money out the door at a rate of more than $2 billion per week to fund this war. Our international reputation and the influence it brings, including among our allies, has been badly tarnished and diminished.

Where are we in Iraq? We are in the midst of a civil war among religious and ethnic factions, an insurgency that shows no sign of diminishing, and out-of-control organized crime. It is hard to say that we have made any real progress toward the larger objectives of bringing democracy to Iraq or the Middle East. It is time we face the grim reality, and it is time we deal with it. Our soldiers' lives are in the balance.

I made a brief statement on Tuesday about an column in last Sunday's Washington Post by retired Lieutenant General William Odom. General Odom has one of the most distinguished military intelligence careers, and he continues to provide powerful insights on national security. In his piece entitled "Victory in Not an Option," he outlines how this Administration's entire policy on Iraq, including the so-called surge strategy, is based on a self-defeating inability to face reality.

The reality, according to the general, is that we are not going to make Iraq a democracy and that the longer we stay, the more likely Iraq will be anti-American at the end of our intervention.

Our invasion made civil war and increased Iranian involvement in Iraq inevitable, and no amount of military force - especially after so many errors of judgment - will prevent those outcomes.

Meanwhile, our presence is only stoking al Qaeda's involvement in Iraq. The reality is that supporting our troops does not mean keeping them there to carry out a failed strategy. It means pursuing a course that protects the country's interests and prevents more Americans from dying in pursuit of an ill-defined, open-ended strategy that cannot succeed.

General Odom knows that we need to begin an orderly withdrawal from Iraq. He argues that we should join with other countries in the region - those whose input this Administration has often ignored - and seek to stabilize the region through sustained, high level diplomacy.

These views are in line with those of some our senior military officers, other national security experts, many of us in Congress, and a majority of the American people.

Yet look at what the Administration and it defenders in the Minority party offer instead. We get filibusters that stymie a debate on our Iraq policy. We get the same old rhetoric about not supporting the troops. And we get a bill from the President for another $100 billion to send 20,000 more troops and continue the war.

If the President cannot face the reality that even members of his own party increasingly have come to accept, then it is our responsibility, our patriotic duty, our moral duty, to act. A non-binding resolution that sends a clear message in opposition to an escalation of troops is better than years of the silence of a rubberstamp Congress. But we know the President will ignore it; he has already said so. It is only a first step.

I support binding legislation by Senator Obama and Senator Feingold to begin a phased redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. It is not our role to choose sides in a civil war. It is not our troops' role to die trying to force these warring factions to settle their age-old differences.

We need to continue to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We need to deploy sufficient forces and intelligence assets to track down international terrorists around the world. We need to do a lot better job of policing our borders without denying entry to innocent people who are fleeing persecution.

General Odom is right. Keeping our troops in Iraq is not making us safer. We should begin bringing our troops home. Congress has it in its power to force the President to change course. That is what the American people want, and that is what we should be debating.


....and the truth shall set us free.