Statement on HR 2956, the Responsible Redeployment From Iraq
12 July 2007
2007 Ron Paul 75:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2956 which, while a well-intended attempt
to reduce our nations seemingly unlimited
military commitment in Iraq, is in so many
respects deeply flawed.
2007 Ron Paul 75:2
I have been one of the strongest opponents of military action against Iraq. I voted against
the initial authorization in 2002 and I have
voted against every supplemental appropriations
bill to fund the war. I even voted against
the initial Iraq regime change legislation
back in 1998. I believe our troops should be
brought back to the United States without
delay. Unfortunately, one of the reasons I oppose
this legislation is that it masquerades as
a troop withdrawal measure but in reality may
well end up increasing U.S. commitments in
the Middle East
2007 Ron Paul 75:3
Mr. Speaker, this is precisely the debate we should have had four years ago, before Congress
voted to abrogate its Constitutional obligation
to declare war and transfer that authority
to the president. Some in this body were
rather glib in declaring the constitution antiquated
while voting to cede the ability to initiate
hostilities to the President. Now we see
the result of ignoring the Constitution, and we
are bringing even more mayhem to the process
with this legislation.
2007 Ron Paul 75:4
To those who believe this act would somehow end the war, I simply point to the title for
Section 3 of the bill, which states, Requirement
to reduce the number of armed forces in
Iraq and transition to a limited presence of the
Armed Forces in Iraq. However the number
of troops are limited, this legislation nevertheless
will permit an ongoing American military
presence in Iraq with our soldiers continuing to
be engaged in hostilities.
2007 Ron Paul 75:5
I also wish to draw attention to Section 4(b)(1), which mandates the President to submit
a Strategy for Iraq by the beginning of
next year. This strategy is to include:
2007 Ron Paul 75:6
A discussion of United States national security
interests in Iraq and the broader Middle
East region and the diplomatic, political,
economic, and military components of a
comprehensive strategy to maintain and advance
such interests as the Armed Forces are
redeployed from Iraq pursuant to section 3 of
this Act.
2007 Ron Paul 75:7
In other words, far from extricating ourselves from the debacle in Iraq, this bill would
set in motion a policy that could lead to a
wider regional commitment, both financially
and militarily. Such a policy would be disastrous
for both our overextended national security
forces and beleaguered taxpayers. This
could, in fact, amount to an authorization for a
region-wide surge.
2007 Ron Paul 75:8
Congress job is to change the policy on Iraq, not to tell the military leaders how many
troops they should have. I have attempted to
do this with H.R. 2605, a bill to sunset after a
six month period the authorization for military
activity in Iraq. During this period a new plan
for Iraq could be discussed and agreed. Plan
first, authorization next, execution afterward.
That is what we should be doing in Iraq.
2007 Ron Paul 75:9
In summary, Mr. Speaker, this legislation brings us no closer to ending the war in Iraq.
It brings us no closer to bringing our troops
home. It says nothing about withdrawal, only
about redeployment. It says nothing about reducing
U.S. presence in the Middle East, and
may actually lead to an expanded U.S. presence
in the region. We have no guarantee the
new strategy demanded by this legislation
would not actually expand our military activities
to Iran and Syria and beyond. I urge my
colleagues to reject this legislation and put
forth an effective strategy to end the war in
Iraq and to bring our troops home.