Iraq

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
Oct. 5, 2004

IRAQ

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, for the past several days, I have followed the remarks of the senior Senator from Massachusetts relative to Iraq and the war on terrorism. He likes to talk more about yesterday and not as much about tomorrow. He finds fault in everything that the President and his team have done to protect our lives, our liberties, and our way of life. He interprets facts to fit his dismal view of Iraq.

What bothers me the most about his many public statements condemning the war in Iraq is that he does so while we still have troops engaged in securing that country. These troops know it is vital-absolutely vital-for the long-term security of the United States and our allies that they succeed in helping Iraq become a free and democratic country.

The most recent edition of the Army Times newspaper contains a very telling survey of Active Duty, Reserve and National Guard troops on their views of Iraq and the Presidential race which bears out this point. This is the October 11th edition of the Army Times.

I ask unanimous consent that the article, which appears beginning on page 14, be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the Army Times]
THE MILITARY
(By Gordon Trowbridge)

President Bush retains overwhelming support among the military's professional core despite a troubled mission in Iraq and an opponent who is a decorated combat veteran, a Military Times survey of more than 4,000 readers indicates.

Bush leads Democratic Sen. John Kerry 73 percent to 18 percent in the voluntary survey of 4,165 active-duty, National Guard and reserve subscribers to Army Times, Navy Times, Marine Corps Times and Air Force Times.

Though the results of the Military Times 2004 Election Survey are not representative of the opinions of the military as a whole, they are a disappointment to Democrats who hoped Kerry's record and doubts about Bush would give their candidate an opening in a traditionally Republican group with tremendous symbolic value in a closely contested election.

"For a long time, Kerry thought he had a chance to win the mantle and beat Bush on the issue of who could be the better commander in chief," said Peter Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University who has written extensively on civil-military relations and the political opinions of those in uniform.

Feaver said journalists and political analyst focus heavily on the opinions of military members because of a situation the nation hasn't faced in more than 30 years: a heated presidential race amid a difficult and controversial war.

While the survey found some readers with doubts about Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, there was remarkable consistency in their views of the two candidates.

Officers and enlisted troops, active-duty members and reservists, those who have served in combat zones and those who haven't, all supported Bush by large margins. And the survey hints that Kerry's emphasis of his decorated service in Vietnam may have done more harm than good with those in uniform.

"FROM THE HEART"

"It's about honesty and integrity," said Marine Sgt. Jason Jester, who was interviewed separately from the survey.

Jester, a recruiter from Winston-Salem, N.C., voted for Bush in 2000 and plans to do so again.

"He might not always make the right decisions, but I think the decisions he makes come from the heart."

To conduct the survey, Military Times e-mailed more than 31,000 subscribers Sept. 15. They were invited to access an Internet site seeking their opinions on the presidential race and related issues. From Sept. 21 to 28, and before the first presidential debate on Sept. 30, a total of 2,754 active-duty and 1,411 reserve and Guard members took part.

The nature of the survey led experts to caution against reading the results as representative of the military as a whole.

Unlike most public opinion polls, the Military Times survey did not randomly select those to question. Instead, subscribers with e-mail addresses on file were sent an invitation. That means there is no statistical margin of error for the survey-so it's impossible to calculate how accurately the results reflect the views of Military Times readers.

The surveyed group is older, higher in rank and more career-oriented than the military as a whole. Junior enlisted troops in particular are underrepresented in the group that responded.

But as a snapshot of the careerist core of the armed services, the survey holds little good news for Kerry, revealing a group with strong Republican leanings that the Democratic challenger has not shaken. Among the findings:

Echoing previous Military Times polls and other research, the survey found a group with a close affinity for the Republican Party. About 60 percent of those surveyed identified themselves as Republicans, while 13 percent consider themselves Democrats and 20 percent independents. Among the general population, pollsters usually find voters evenly divided among Republicans, Democrats and independents.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, the caption is: "Troops sound off. Who do you choose for President and why?"

Among Active-Duty forces, 66 percent in this poll said the most important issue for them in deciding for whom to vote is the war in Iraq. In the same poll, 60 percent said they approve of the way President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq, and 72 percent said if the Presidential election were held today, they would vote for President Bush. That is quite a statement of support for the Commander in Chief and his policies in Iraq from those who are actually doing the fighting and the dirty work to bring security and prosperity to that country.

Even more significant are the results from the Reserve and National Guard troops who have been called to active duty and deployed to Iraq. Among this group, 72 percent said the most important issue for them is the war in Iraq; 63 percent approve of the President's policies in Iraq; and a full 76 percent of the Reserve and National Guard soldiers who have actually been deployed to a combat zone said they are planning on voting for President Bush. These are amazing figures from both our Active Duty and Reserve Forces that tell us much more about what is going on in Iraq than just the reports of the bombings and kidnaping.

Listening to the assessments from my colleague from Massachusetts begs the question: Why do the vast majority of our soldiers and marines engaged in ground operations in Iraq appreciate the importance of our mission there and believe they are engaged in a historical struggle that will lead to a better world and a safer America when a senior Senator cannot see the same thing? Are they right or is he right?

As I reflect on the words of the Senator from Massachusetts, I am reminded of that famous quotation made by McLandburgh Wilson:

Twixt the optimist and pessimist,
The difference is droll:
The optimist sees the doughnut,
But the pessimist sees the hole.

When it comes to Iraq and the war on terrorism, my colleague from Massachusetts sees the hole, when he should be seeing the doughnut.

I suspect that nothing we say in this Chamber will change his views on the issue. Nevertheless, I feel obligated to make some remarks about why our troops are fighting in Iraq, and why some are giving the ultimate sacrifice for our country. It is important for our troops and their families to know that not all Senators only see the "hole."

Our policy in Iraq should not be viewed in isolation. The issue is far more complex than that. It is important to understand the linkage between the Islamic terrorists who want to destroy us and the totalitarian regimes under which so many of them were raised. People who have such a deranged view of a Supreme Being that they believe their religion sanctions their own suicide, while killing innocent people, and do not come from free, open, and democratic countries and societies.

Let me explain how I look at Iraq and the war on terrorism. If we look at each incident individually, each bombing, each hostage taking, each killing, et cetera, we get one impression of these events. What we should do instead is put ourselves in the place of an eagle soaring high and looking down on everything that is going on inside of Iraq.

When we take the eagle's view, this is what we see: Iraq is no longer a sanctuary for terrorists, it is no longer a country that threatens its neighbors, and it is no longer a threat to world peace and order.

The insurgency in Iraq is confined to 3 of the 18 provinces, and the country is preparing for its first democratic election only 4 months from now.

Iraqi leaders, Iraqi soldiers, and Iraqi policemen are stepping forward in the thousands to take back their country from the terrorists.

All we have to do to see what progress is being made in this area is to look at the success we have had just over this weekend. It was not just American troops who had success in Samarra, one of the most violent places inside of Iraq; it was the now-trained Iraqi security police who fought side by side with the American troops, who received the praise of the American troops for the training, preparation, and the great job they did in not just helping secure the peace but driving the insurgents out of that town and providing a safer and more secure community in which the people could live.

America, along with many other countries, remains firm and will not be deterred from achieving the goal of seeing a democracy in Iraq.

There is a realistic understanding of the difficulties and dangers in Iraq, but there are also visionary, optimistic leaders in Iraq and in the many countries that make up the multinational force who are determined to see the insurgency fail.

There have been many references to the July 2004 National Intelligence Estimate, or the NIE. In fact, Senator Kennedy said in this Chamber on 29 September 2004 that the best case scenario in that NIE was that violence in Iraq would continue at current levels, with tenuous political and economic stability. Regardless of what this classified NIE actually said, I do know it was based on information that is but a snapshot in time and that time continues to move on.

There are many things visible today that were not clear when that NIE was written. The character of the Iraqi leadership was unknown last June, but no one who heard Prime Minister Allawi speak to the Joint Session of Congress recently could be anything but impressed with his enthusiasm, his intellect, and, most importantly, his determination to see a free and safe and democratic Iraq.

Lieutenant General Petraeus has been working assiduously to build up the Iraqi security forces. Last June, when the NIE was written, very few of those forces had completed their training. Now trained and competent Iraqi Army and police units are on duty and are assuming the major role in restoring security in their own country, and the training continues, so we can expect even more Iraqi security forces to assume their duties every month, just as they did in Samarra this past weekend.

We are engaged in an enormous struggle of historic proportions to see freedom and democracy spread throughout the Islamic world, and this will set the foundation for a final peaceful solution between Israel and Palestine. It will also, in the long term, eliminate the politically oppressive environment and poor economic conditions that have been the breeding grounds for terrorists to find new recruits.

I want to say to our military personnel and their families that your role in this historic and important struggle is the key to its success. You will look back with pride on your contributions and your sacrifices to make our country and the world safer. When you see what you have accomplished from an eagle's view, you will not see the hole that a pessimist sees.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.