What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
WHO RULES: THE ISRAEL LOBBY
OR UNCLE SAM?
The answer
at last! Uri Avnery, former Knesset member, assesses the Lobby's
power. "If the Israeli government wanted a law tomorrow
annulling the 10 Commandments, 95 U.S. Senators (at least) would
sign the bill forthwith." But, yes, in the end the dog wags
the tail.Fifty
years ago Allen Ginsberg's "Howl" blew the cobwebs
out of millions of young minds and drove a stake through the
heart of Eisenhower's America. Lenni Brenner remembers Ginsberg
in the East Village.Dr Mengele died in exile, in disguise. Dr Ishii
died rich and recognized, in his own Tokyo home. Christopher
Reed on Japanese WW2 medical tortures and how the U.S. covered
them up.CounterPunch
Online is read by millions of viewers each month! But remember,
we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition
of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription
to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find
anywhere else, or by making a donation for the online edition.
Remember contributions are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
Remarks delivered on the Senate
floor, May 2, 2006.
Our country desperately needs a new
vision for strengthening our national security, and it starts
by redeploying U.S. forces from Iraq and refocusing our attention
on the global terrorist threats that face us. I have filed an
amendment that requires the redeployment of U.S. forces from
Iraq by December 31st, 2006.
Unfortunately, the Senate will not be given the opportunity to
vote on this amendment if we invoke cloture on the emergency
supplemental bill that we will be considering shortly.
This body has failed time and again to debate the direction of
our country's policy in Iraq. Three years ago the President landed
on an aircraft carrier and declared "Mission Accomplished"
in Iraq. Today, with thousands of lives lost and billions of
dollars spent, we are still no closer to a policy that lifts
the burden from our troops and taxpayers, and that actually makes
our country safer from the terrorist networks that seek to hurt
us.
By failing to discuss alternatives to the Administration's failed
Iraq policy, we have let down this institution and our constituents.
We simply cannot continue to avoid asking the tough questions
about Iraq. We should not be appropriating billions of dollars
for Iraq without debating--and demanding -- a strategy to complete
our military mission there. Not when the lives of our soldiers
and the safety of our country are at risk.
Our military has performed heroically in Iraq, but the continued
and indefinite presence of large numbers of U.S. forces there
significantly weakens our ability to fight the global terrorist
networks that threaten us today.
That is why I filed an amendment
requiring the Pentagon to draw up a flexible timeline for redeployment
of U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of this year. The President
has repeatedly failed to spell out for the American people when
we can expect our troops to redeploy from Iraq. He has refused
to provide a vision for ending our military mission in Iraq,
and as a result a growing majority of Americans have lost confidence
in our purpose, our direction, and our presence in Iraq.
Last August, I proposed a target date for withdrawal when I suggested
U.S. troops leave Iraq by the end of 2006. This amendment in
part reflects the fact that the Administration has made no progress--no
progress whatsoever--in developing a clear vision for ending
our military mission, redeploying U.S. troops from Iraq, and
refocusing on the real national security threats that face our
country.
My amendment spells out what an increasing number of military,
intelligence, and diplomatic officials have been saying for some
time--that a massive and seemingly indefinite U.S. presence in
Iraq is destabilizing and potentially damaging to Iraqi efforts
to rebuild their government and their country. Our presence is
generating instability in Iraq, and unless we make it clear that
our intent is to leave, and to leave now, our presence is more
harmful than it is helpful.
More important, though, is the fact that our current Iraq policy
is making the United States weaker, not stronger. We need to
redeploy U.S. forces from Iraq because, as a result of our current
costly and burdensome presence in Iraq, we are unable to direct
our resources worldwide to defeat the wide and growing network
of terrorist organizations that seek to harm Americans.
This Administration has compounded
its misguided decision to wage war in Iraq by refusing to recognize
the consequences of its actions--the tremendous cost to our brave
troops and their loved ones, the drain on our financial resources,
and the burden on our nation's national security resources and
infrastructure, which are unable to focus on new and emerging
threats to our country.
I don't have to point very far to show how imbalanced and burdensome
our policies in Iraq are. While we have spent, according to the
Congressional Research Service, upwards of $6 billion dollars
per week during Operation Iraqi Freedom, and $1.3 billion per
week during Operation Enduring Freedom, we are spending a little
more than $2 million annually--not weekly -- in Somalia, a known
haven for terrorists and criminals and a true threat to our national
security. This supplemental appropriation, if passed, will increase
the cost of this war to $320 billion and rising. Mr. President,
this is simply unsustainable, and because the President has failed
to provide us with any semblance of a vision for when our troops
will be redeployed, we can expect more of the same for years
to come. That is, unless the Congress finally requires the Administration
to develop an Iraq strategy that includes a flexible timeline
for redeploying our troops by the end of 2006.
My amendment recognizes the need to maintain a minimal level
of U.S. forces in Iraq beyond 2006. Those forces will be needed
for engaging directly in targeted counter-terrorism activities,
training Iraqi security forces, and protecting essential U.S.
infrastructure and personnel.
It is time for Members of Congress
to stand up to an Administration that continues to lead us astray
in what has become an extremely costly and mistaken war. We need
to hold this Administration accountable for its neglect of urgent
national security priorities in favor of staying a flawed policy
course in Iraq. And we need to tell the Administration that they
it can't continue to send our men and women in uniform into harm's
way without a clear and convincing strategy for success.
Some have suggested that we
should tie our military presence in Iraq to whether or not Iraqis
are able to form a unity government. While I share their frustration
with the status quo, decisions about our troop presence should
be based on what is best for our country's national security.
Making decisions about our troop levels contingent on a political
solution in Iraq doesn't make sense--our troops should not be
held hostage to the failure to bring about a political solution
in Iraq.
Here's the bottom line: We need to refocus on fighting and defeating
the terrorist network that attacked this country on September
11, 2001, and that means placing our Iraq policy in the context
of a global effort, rather than letting it dominate our security
strategy and drain vital security resources for an unlimited
amount of time. The President's Iraq-centric policies are preventing
us from effectively engaging serious threats around the world,
including Iran, global terrorist networks, and other emerging
threats. We must change course in Iraq, and we must change course
now. It is in this spirit that I filed this amendment to this
supplemental spending bill. And, if I am not allowed a vote on
my amendment to the supplemental, I can assure my colleagues
that I will be looking for the next opportunity to bring this
amendment to the floor for debate and a vote.
My colleagues are entitled to disagree with my approach. I welcome
their suggestions and their advice. But what I really want is
for the Senate to live up to its responsibility and engage in
a serious debate about the topic that's on the mind of every
American--how to put our Iraq policy right and our national security
policy right.
Now
Available
from CounterPunch Books!
The Case
Against Israel
By Michael Neumann
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.