| WASHINGTON - Congressman Vernon J. Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids, Thursday announced his opposition to H. Con. Res. 63, a resolution opposing the plan for moving forward in the military conflict in Iraq. The following is Congressman Ehlers’ statement, delivered during debate on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives:
Madam Speaker,
I rise, reluctantly, in opposition to this resolution. I say reluctantly because I had hoped to be able to vote in favor of something positive – a fresh perspective, a new idea, a new pathway to success – anything to encourage and foster a positive outcome in the Iraq conflict. But this resolution offers none of these things. It is a simple, almost meaningless, statement of disapproval that provides no constructive resolve on this daunting, yet critical, mission.
My opposition is both procedural and substantive. I am extremely disappointed that we only have this one simplistic, inadequate statement before us for consideration – no alternatives, no other ideas, no solutions. The situation in Iraq is complicated, and the American people deserve far more from Congress than a resolution that essentially calls for the status quo. The resolution opposes the troop surge called for by the Commander in Chief, but fails to offer – or even allow for consideration of – any alternatives aimed at achieving success in Iraq, nor does it offer an alternative aimed at a reduction of troops.
There are other ideas out there worthy of consideration and discussion, yet we are not debating those, including those suggested by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. For example, the study group concluded that there is no single action that the military can take that, by itself, can bring about success in Iraq. I agree with that assessment. Regardless of a troop surge, I believe a positive outcome in Iraq requires regional cooperation and positive engagement with all of Iraq’s neighboring states. A case can be made for a troop surge, but, even more, we need a “surge” in diplomacy to create an environment conducive for a lasting peace throughout the Middle East. The history of the region is too diverse, too complex and too tumultuous to expect progress without an integrated diplomatic effort and multinational support. Of course, this simple resolution before us offers no perspective on these matters.
In a few weeks, this body will have the opportunity to vote on funding for on-going operations in Iraq. Forget today’s resolution; the vote on the supplemental funding bill is where the real debate will occur and the policies will be laid forth. Make no mistake: a cut-off of funds and a premature withdrawal of troops from Iraq will produce even greater sectarian violence, further deterioration of security conditions, and would foment a terrorist breeding ground for radical Islamists. We, the members of Congress, must give our troops the resources they need to carry out their critical mission to a successful conclusion.
In closing, let me say that we all unequivocally support the troops who are serving and who have served in Iraq, and we all deeply appreciate their efforts to carry out their duties. Every day, I think about the 3,000-plus American troops who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I pray for their families, as well as for our troops that are there now. I think about the thousands more who have been injured and the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens who have been killed or injured as a result of this conflict. We must do all we can to ensure that those casualties were not suffered in vain. Above all, we must seek to end this conflict and stop the casualties.
Simply put, the resolution we are debating offers no path to success, and that is why I oppose it.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. |
