By: Rep. Everett
Ignoring the pleas of America's commanding general in Iraq to give him sufficient time to conduct the troop surge, the U.S. House has once again voted to begin a military retreat from that nation. This comes despite congressional agreement in June to allow current military operations to continue at least until September. This reversal on the part of the liberal-majority House is politically motivated and places America and our troops at greater risk.
Ironically, the liberal Washington Post, which also continues to be critical of the Administration's war policy, highlighted Congressional liberal flip-flopping on Iraq in an editorial last Wednesday. "It seems like just weeks ago, because it was, that Congress approved funding for the war in Iraq and instructed Gen. David H. Patraeus to report back on the war's progress in September. Now for reasons having more to do with American politics than with Iraqi reality, September isn't soon enough."
The Post goes on to suggest that "Before Congress begins managing rotation schedules and ordering withdrawals, it should at least give those generals the months they asked for to see whether their strategy can offer some new hope."
Last Thursday, the House voted 223 to 201 on a resolution to begin redeploying U.S. troops out of Iraq within 120 days, to be completed by April 1, 2008 with only a "limited presence" after that. Furthermore, the retreat of U.S. forces would be combined with a mandate that the president provide Congress with a "comprehensive U.S. strategy for Iraq." I voted against this severely flawed bill which places our troops in increased harm, would lead to the collapse of order in Iraq and give terrorists a new base from which to plan attacks against the nation.
It is interesting political theater in the House. On the one hand, the liberal majority demands a withdrawal of troops from Iraq with no strategy whatsoever for dealing with the chaos in the region and the increase in danger to our nation that such an action would create. And on the other, they are blocking consideration of urgent legislation to allow the U.S. to monitor foreign terrorists who pose a continued risk to the homeland.
There is no doubt that the pace of progress is tediously slow in Iraq. The Iraqi government has not yet met all of the benchmarks set forth by the U.S. and terrorist attacks against American troops and Iraqi civilians continue. Yet, we cannot prevail against a determined enemy by showing a lack of resolve to abide by our own commitments or a willingness to win. Al Qaeda has shown it is determined to exploit any weakness in our democracy, especially a lack of political will to remain in the fight to win against terrorism.
A statement last week from the national commander of the American Legion says it best. "This is not a war without end. Our men and woman can be victorious. And there is no greater way to honor our fighting men and women in uniform than by ensuring they have the resources, time, patience and support of the American people as they complete this mission."
What is most disturbing about last week's House vote is that it seems to be driven by pure politics and not what is best for the nation. If there is any good news, it is that the vote margin was not sufficient to withstand a presidential veto. So, it will not see the light of day.