Providing for Consideration of HJ Res 124, Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the Middle Eastern tragedy in which this resolution will further entangle America is directly related to the wholly unnecessary Bush-Cheney invasion of Iraq. Having learned so little from the sacrifices of that conflict, the Congress now approves greater involvement in a Syrian civil war that has already taken almost 200,000 lives.

The administration has affirmed this very day that what it is talking about is definitely a war, a declaration of war, while it seeks to avoid this Congress declaring that war, a Congress in which too many of the people's representatives fear making a decision today on whether to declare war.

Instead, we vote on an amendment here to authorize the administration to do what it is already doing in Jordan, while declining to consider a vote on what it should not do without specific congressional authorization.

Reliance on resolutions approved by this Congress on this floor over a decade ago, in 2001 and 2002, is very instructive. First, it shows the dangers of open-ended authorizations. Resolutions such as the one we have today will not only govern the actions of President Obama but future Presidents as well.

Second, once begun, this Congress, even under Democratic control, has shown little ability to contain war. Third, despite billions expended and with courageous Americans on the ground, the results over more than a decade of trying to successfully train Iraqis and Afghans is not particularly encouraging; indeed, the reality is the American taxpayers have been compelled to pay for the arms for our enemies as well as for our allies; nor do we have any explanation today as to how taking a few Syrians for training in Saudi Arabia--a country with its own brutal history of regular beheadings, financing extremists around the world, and opposing democracy most everywhere--how that will work better than our previous training on the ground with Americans.

Rejecting the resolution today does not mean that we should do nothing. When Americans are brutally murdered, the President already has the necessary authority, which he should use forcefully, to go after these barbaric murderers. There is a significant difference between confronting the savagery of ISIS and initiating a multiyear war in the region.

With the steadily growing number of U.S. military on the ground in Iraq now approaching 2,000 and recurrent demands from the same people that led us wrongly into Iraq in the first place that we add even more on the ground, the danger of escalation is very real.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Now, with our military leaders conceding that ISIS is a regional threat, it would kill as many Americans as it could--if it could--just as is true of some of the terrorist groups today in Africa; but, with it being a regional threat, not a threat to our homeland today, the question arises of why the countries in the region--who are more directly impacted from ISIS--why aren't they providing the bulk of the resources necessary to confront it?

They are always content to have Americans kill as many of their enemies in their centuries-old conflict as we will kill. They would let the Americans do all of the bleeding and all of the paying for this conflict. A photo-op with 40 countries does not an army make.

Ultimately, this resolution, like our previous unwise invasion, will make our families less secure, not more secure, and that should be the ultimate test of our actions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source