Confronting our situation in Iraq with open debate at home Transcript: Congressional Record February 06, 2007

Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, we often hear from our friends on the right that when the Democrats question the war or the strategy in Iraq, we are disheartening our troops and emboldening the enemy. I guess it doesn't matter that there are many Republicans who also ask the same questions about the war. This attempt by the right to use fear and shame to quiet the administration's critics is distasteful and, I believe, hurts America.

Those on the right who take the argument further, suggesting that folks who don't agree with the administration's policies and don't keep their views to themselves are being un-American, really saddens me. It saddens me because it seems like those on the right are trying to discourage the very actions that led to the founding of our Nation, the very actions that allowed the United States to continue evolving toward the never-ending goal of a more perfect Union.

Our country derives its strength from the diversity of views and ideas that come from its people. If one idea isn't working, then someone has the freedom to suggest another idea that is different and might yield different results. In my opinion, the ability of the American people to discuss differing ideas gives our Nation great strength.

Additionally, I believe that when Iraqi people see Americans exercising their right to freedom of speech, the Iraqi people are not disenchanted by their prospects, but rather they are inspired to have a country as free as ours. They see our freedom as a beacon of hope for what their nation could become some day.

Frankly, it is the freedom we enjoy here that scares the enemy over there so much, because they know that once the people taste freedom, they will demand it for eternity for themselves. So we should not stifle our freedom here for fear that it may be negatively impacting the war over there, which I seriously doubt it is.

Furthermore, if the actions of Senators of both parties and House Members of both parties embolden the enemy, then doesn't public opinion also embolden the enemy? Since polls show a large majority of Americans disagreeing with the administration's policy in Iraq, not the war, the administration's policy in Iraq, if this is the case, then why don't we see those on the right condemning the American people for expressing their views and emboldening the enemy? It is because probably politically they know they can't criticize the American public. It is because it is easier to take pot shots at politicians than at everyday men and women in American society.

Additionally, if the actions of the Senate and the House and American public embolden the enemy, then I think we need to take a look at the administration. I quote: ``Such statements give a morale boost to the terrorists,'' Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Malaki, on remarks of the Bush administration describing the Iraqi Government as being on ``borrowed time.'' In essence, the Prime Minister of Iraq is accusing our President of emboldening the enemy by making such a statement.

I contend that the American people love America, that Democrats love America, that Republicans love America and that President Bush loves America. I contend that we all love America, and that the discussion everyone is having on Iraq right now is not an extension of their love for America, because we all want what we think is best for the country. We want success and we want security. If only we also wanted civility in Washington.

I know that once folks cross into the District of Columbia or read about something in Washington, it seems there is something triggered in their brains and our rhetoric is raised to a sensational point. We need to stop and ask ourselves, is this rhetoric helpful to the end goal, or just hurtful?

There certainly have been plenty of failures in Iraq and there is plenty of blame to spread. We should have sent in more troops, some say. We should have not disbanded the Iraqi Army. We should have kept better track of how our taxpayer dollars were being spent. We should have squashed the militias before they built a strong following, some say, and on and on.

I will tell you who has not failed: Our soldiers on the ground. The American soldiers won in Iraq. They defeated Saddam's Army, deposed a dictator and tore down the statue. They gave the country to the Iraqis.

Sadly, in my opinion and many others, the leaders in Washington have failed our soldiers because those in charge of Iraqi policy have been weak in dealing with the new Iraqi government, have not pushed them to find political solutions to the problems they face. The lack of political structure in Iraq falls squarely on the shoulders of the war planners, and I for one will not let the reputation of our fighting men and women be tarnished by the miscalculations of those in charge.

The question now must be, what are the next steps to bring success and security? That is our goal, is success and security.

The Blue Dog Coalition has drafted a resolution that can help us along our goals towards success and security. House Resolution 97 would improve our accountability in Iraq so we can make sure our taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely and going where they are needed to achieve success.

In my opinion, this resolution is the first step of many steps down the path to stability and success in Iraq. I, for one, stand with our military men and women, ready and able to walk down the path of success with them.