Continuing Resolution and ISIL

Floor Speech

Mrs. BOXER. Thank you so much, Madam President.

I am here because I want to respond to the colloquy that was held on the Keystone Pipeline, but before I go there, I do want to make remarks about the very important vote we are going to be taking today both to keep the government open and to give the President the ability to train and equip vetted Syrian moderates so they can help us take the fight to ISIL.

It is my privilege to serve on the Foreign Relations Committee. I have served on it for a very long time, and yesterday we had an important hearing where the Secretary of State laid out the President's plans for how we are going to meet this threat posed by ISIL.

I have to say, before I explain the three options you have as an American as far as which option you embrace, I think I need to lay out the view of this organization ISIL or ISIS. There are different ways to describe them. They are an outgrowth of Al Qaeda in Iraq, which came about because of the catastrophic Iraq war that was based on false premises, that put us in the middle of a civil war, and created the worst sectarian tensions. One of my proudest moments was voting no on that.

Then the Bush administration said Saddam Hussein was involved with 9/11, that he had nuclear weapons, and none of it was so. None of it was so. As a result we got in the middle of this war.

We were told it would last 6 months, and then a year went by, another year, years, years, years, and it became one of our longest wars, and 4,000-plus Americans dead, tens of thousands wounded, some with very serious wounds--they will never get over them--and I would say well over $1 trillion that drew us into a terrible recession when we had previously had surpluses. What a nightmare. So that is the beginning of ISIL, an outgrowth of Al Qaeda.

There were two authorizations for the use of military force that I got to vote on. One of them was right after Ð9/11 when I voted to go after bin Laden and Al Qaeda and any other affiliate organization that would come out of Al Qaeda. That is one I voted for. That is why I believe the President has the authority, based on that document, to move forward and take the fight to ISIL.

The other authorization for use of force was permission to go into Iraq and go after Saddam Hussein. I voted no on that.

I think it is important to the American people to remember why we are facing trouble, but it is what it is. There are some who say--because there are three approaches here--do nothing. There are some who say do nothing. My view is: How can we possibly do nothing in the face of a group that has beheaded two innocent freelance journalists? How can you do nothing in the face of a group that sells 14-year-old girls as slaves? How can you do nothing in the face of a brute, ISIL, who, if they don't sell a 14-year-old as a slave and they let her live, give her to a warrior as a reward? How do we sit back and do nothing?

We saw what they did to minorities, the Yazidis. They said: Either you convert, flee, or we will kill you.

We cannot sit back. They did it to Christians, Yazidis. They did it to Turkmen. They have taken hostages including more than 40 Turkish hostages. We don't even know the count or what are the nationalities, but we know their intent. This is a quote from them, that they are going to make sure their thirst for American blood is quenched. This is a sick situation, and to the people who say do nothing, I say to them: I understand your concern for unintended consequences, but don't count me in your camp, because I cannot do that.

I am so cautious when it comes to voting to go to war. I know it is not easy. We don't know every single thing that can happen, what can go wrong. Things do go wrong. But my view is in this case if I were to sit back and say I am too afraid, I am too nervous, that is exactly the wrong signal to send a group of terrorists such as this. I have never seen a group like this. So one path is to do nothing.

The other path is to start up the Iraq war all over again. Colleagues in this Chamber, pounding the table: Troops on the ground. Send our American troops back. No way, no way. I am not going to send our troops back to the middle of a civil war. What we are going to do is another way--President Obama's strategy, which is the moderate strategy here. It is to take our intelligence, our strategy, our Air Force assets, and make sure those in the region who have the most at stake--remember, ISIL has killed more Muslims than anybody else--that they will be the boots on the ground. We see that strategy is working in Iraq.

It is early. We don't know how it is all going to go. But we have started this strategy where they will take back key pieces of territory--a dam, very important--and we seem to be able to coordinate well with the Kurds and the Iraqi forces.

Clearly our President is right when he says this is about the whole world. The whole world has to care about this, because this is about, truly, civilization, and every civilized person has to stand up against this. What the President is doing with the Secretary of State and our Vice President is they are building coalitions. For the first time we see the Arab nations coming forward.

So when I vote today for the continuing resolution, I want it to be clear to my constituents--and they are not all going to agree with me, I know that--that I am in favor of this strategy. I am in favor of training the moderate Syrians to take the fight to ISIL on the ground. And I can tell you because I was in Turkey in August--I had the privilege of meeting with the head of one of the moderate Syrian organizations. His comments were very strong that ISIL is absolutely going against the moderate Syrians. So it is very important that the moderate Syrians are able to fight back against ISIL. That is what we are voting for today, to allow the President to vet, train, and arm the moderate Syrian opposition to the Syrian President and also in that regard go after ISIL.

I know everything is complicated in life and nothing is the perfect solution, but if I could say rhetorically, what is wrong is to do nothing. What is wrong is to go back into the Iraq war. What is right is to organize the world through a coalition, use the American assets--because no one can do what we can do--but on the ground in the combat mission, utilize the regional forces.

I wanted to be clear today where I stand. There are three choices, and I choose the path President Obama has put together. I think the vote in the House was a very important vote yesterday because it showed there is a majority of Democrats and Republicans who can come together.

Following that, we were in the House this morning to hear the President of Ukraine. It was very touching and very moving. President Poroshenko laid out in the most beautiful language, I thought, because of its simplicity, the beauty of freedom and what they are fighting for. What I loved so much about it was the fact that his speech united everybody in the room. There wasn't one group that sat down or didn't stand up to express their appreciation for what his countrymen are going through.

I hope we can get behind this President in this fight against the terror group that is probably the best-funded terror group ever in existence, the most barbaric I have ever seen. I hope there will be a good vote today. I think that would send a very important message that we are sincere and will bring more people to our coalition.

Source