National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MOORE. Madam Chair, I rise reluctantly to oppose the amendment offered by my distinguished colleague and friend, Mr. Conyers, regarding Libya.

I share the gentleman's concerns about the prospect of U.S. troops being dragged into a third war. Eight years after our ill-advised misadventure in Iraq and a decade after sending our troops to Afghanistan, we have extensive evidence of the many failings of a military only strategy to address the world's ills, including fanatical dictators bent on harming their own citizens as in Libya.

However, while I share the gentleman's concerns, I am also troubled that the amendment, as written, would have unintended consequences and would unnecessarily hamstring the use of the military for a host of non-combat purposes in Libya.

For example, the amendment would prohibit U.S. ground forces from being used to provide humanitarian aid to the Libyan people. Whether we like it or not, one of the things our nation's military is very good at is providing humanitarian aid to people in need around the world. We saw this after the earthquake in Pakistan in 2004 and again when massive floods hit Pakistan in 2010 and again in Haiti after last year's earthquake.

The U.N. has warned of a humanitarian crisis unfolding in Libya with hundreds of thousands of people lacking access or in danger of losing access to basic necessities. Unfortunately, the amendment makes clear that the only authorized reason for U.S. troops in Libya is to rescue U.S. military personnel that are in danger. Such a narrow exception unduly hampers the ability of the President to conduct a range of efforts well short of occupation that our military may be in the best position to undertake.

Additionally, under this amendment, our military could not be used to rescue allied NATO personnel, to help rescue U.S. citizens whose lives may be in danger in Libya or to conduct an airlift of U.S. citizens out of the country, or even to help provide aid to a U.N. or African Union peacekeeping mission should a political solution be found to remove Colonel Qadhafi from power.

Let's be clear. My vote against this amendment is not a vote for sending U.S. troops to Libya to fight a civil war. Having voted a number of times for resolutions and legislation to restrict the use of and/or remove our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, my record is very clear that I am not in support of occupation of foreign nations. Yet, even those efforts allowed a broad range of commonsense exceptions which I think are missing here.

If the Constitution still lives, the introduction of ground troops for the purposes of combat--which my colleagues are concerned would occur in Libya--in any nation would clearly require an authorization of war by Congress. If that were to occur, Congress should and must hold an up or down vote to either authorize the use of such troops for combat or call for their withdrawal.

The U.N. Resolution authorizing international efforts to protect civilians in Libya explicitly rules out the use of foreign ground troops. The President has made very clear that U.S. ground troops will not be sent to Libya. I will take him at his word.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source