The War On Terror

The War On Terror -- (House of Representatives - June 15, 2004)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I also am impressed by the words of our colleague from California [Mr. HUNTER]. His observations, his analysis, I think as always are incredibly insightful and important. I wish every single American could have heard this discussion of the history of our involvement, the political nature of the debate we are having about our involvement and exactly what is at stake. Because I do not think I have ever heard it put better and more succinctly.

The gentleman suggests that the issues that we are attempting to pursue and are involved with in our efforts in Iraq are broad and honorable and they are. His description of what it is we are trying to accomplish, the kind of government we are trying to put in place in Iraq is accurate. Also, his analysis of how difficult this is going to be is important for us to focus on for a moment. And if we do not think for a moment, if we do not think that what we are doing is right and that, in fact, the seeds of democracy that we are attempting to implant in that area of the world, a place, of course, where these seeds have never been planted before, certainly never have sprouted before, if we do not think that that is a threat to the rest of the world, the Arab world especially, the fundamentalist Islamic world, then we should only look to what is happening tonight.

As we speak here, reports are now coming through that the Iranians are massing troops, perhaps four divisions, on the border with Iraq. Their intentions we, of course, are not sure of but they are not good, we are sure of that. Whether or not they are intending to move quickly before some change of power occurs there or whether or not they intend to, in fact, take advantage of what may be a chaotic situation at the point that a change in power and authority occurs, we are not sure.

But they are there for a reason.

Much of the problem we are having in Iraq, much of the destruction, much of the terrorist activity is as a result of Iranian aggression in the area. They have, as you know, supported insurgencies in Iraq. They have themselves supported both financially and morally the development of the most extreme mosques and the most extreme Imams, pushing them into Iraq and the Shia areas.

My own guess is that they are looking for an opportunity that as we approach the time that we are going to turn over the government of Iraq to the Iraqis this is a volatile and very precarious situation that exists and they are going to make it even more volatile and even more precarious. Why? What is their purpose? Again, we can only speculate right now, the three of us here, I am sure there is a great deal more information available to other people, certainly to the chairman, but we at this point in time can only assume that they are afraid that it will work, that Iran is afraid that what we are trying to do in Iraq will work and that we will, indeed, create a democratic government, the tentacles of which may spread throughout the area.

This is something that, in fact, they cannot abide. It is a threat to their existence. It is true because it is a totalitarian dictatorship that as we know now even the IAEA agrees that they are in the process of developing a nuclear weapons program. Even the Europeans are now saying, golly, there is something happening in Iran we have to be aware of and concerned of. There is no doubt that the Iranians, that the mullahs in Iran, in Tehran, are frightened by the prospects of freedom in Iraq.

Again, what should that tell us about our own efforts and about whether or not this policy is sound? There are, of course, Iranian dissidents in the United States. There are folks who have been driven out of Iran who are on the border now in Iraq. They are being protected by the United States. I know that the Iranian government has demanded many times that they be turned over to Iran, the dissidents that now form the MEK. And although now the MEK in many respects, historically speaking, we can be concerned about their actions, the fact is they are pressing for a secular government in Iran, a government that would allow freedom of religion, press, and speech. I worry of course about their safety, the safety of the people in Iraq. I worry about our willingness, what may be our willingness to surrender them. I hope that does not occur. Because I hope they can be valuable, and I hope that as they have been valuable allies over the last several years.

They are the ones that, as a matter of fact, have given us the information, much of the information that we have, the reliable information we have about Iraq's program of nuclear weapons development. But it is important for us to realize that this fight is enormous in its scope. It is not just for the security of Iraq and the freedom of Iraq. It is for the security of the entire Middle East and for the freedom of the entire Middle East. And this is the greatest threat to fundamentalist Islam. Our existence, our way of life, what we believe to be the way in which people can exist on this planet, that is the threat that they face because they cannot coexist with that. A totalitarian dictatorship, a theocracy of that nature cannot exist in a modern world where people are allowed to make decisions about themselves and about their creator and choose religions based upon their consciences and not forced upon them by any authority.

This is not a world in which they can live, nor will they, and they will fight and they will threaten and they will bluster. But it is an indication to me that we are in fact doing what is right in Iraq. We are creating an environment that is threatening to the rest of the fundamentalist regimes in the area. This is an honorable goal on our part, but it is worrisome to the extreme. We do not know what they will do, nor what they have to do it with.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman for his remarks.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

END