Constitution Club

On Thursday, as the Senate was debated the Surrender in Iraq bill, Joeph Lieberman gave the the latest example of why is much too wise and honest to be part of the despicable party that tried to eradicate him from the political stage. Herewith are excerpts of his speech to the Senate:

ON WHAT THE LEGISLATION ACTUALLY WOULD DO

“To begin with, it means that our troops will not be able to protect the Iraqi people from the insurgents and militias who are trying to terrorize and kill them. Instead of restoring basic security, which General Petraeus has argued should be the central focus of any counterinsurgency campaign, it means our soldiers would instead be ordered, by force of this proposed law, not to stop the sectarian violence happening all around them–no matter how vicious or horrific it becomes.

“In short, it means telling our troops to deliberately and consciously turn their backs on ethnic cleansing, to turn their backs on the slaughter of innocent civilians–men, women, and children singled out and killed on the basis of their religion alone. It means turning our backs on the policies that led us to intervene in the civil war in Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the principles that today lead many of us to call for intervention in Darfur.

“This makes no moral sense at all.”

—

“This is precisely why the congressional micromanagement of life-and-death decisions about how, where, and when our troops can fight is such a bad idea, especially on a complex and changing battlefield.

“Let us be absolutely clear what this means. This legislation would impose a binding deadline for U.S. troops to begin retreating from Iraq. This withdrawal would happen regardless of conditions on the ground, regardless of the recommendations of General Petraeus, in short regardless of reality on October 1, 2007.

“As far as I can tell, none of the supporters of withdrawal have attempted to explain why October 1 is the magic date–what strategic or military significance this holds. Why not September 1? Or January 1? This is a date as arbitrary as it is inflexible–a deadline for defeat.”
——
TO COLLEGUES WHO SUGGEST THAT AL QAEADA WILL LEAVE IF WE LEAVE

“But I ask my colleagues–where is the evidence to support this theory? Since 2003, and before General Petraeus took command, U.S. forces were ordered on several occasions to pull back from Iraqi cities and regions, including Mosul and Fallujah and Tel’Afar and Baghdad. And what happened in these places? Did they stabilize when American troops left? Did the insurgency go away?

“On the contrary–in each of these places where U.S. forces pulled back, Al Qaeda rushed in. Rather than becoming islands of peace, they became safe havens for terrorists, islands of fear and violence.

“So I ask advocates of withdrawal: on what evidence, on what data, have you concluded that pulling U.S. troops out will weaken the insurgency, when every single experience we have had since 2003 suggests that this legislation will strengthen it?”

——
AFTER QUOTING HARRY REID’S STATEMENT THAT BY RETREATING WE COULD “RESTORE THE WORLD’S BELIEF IN THE GOODNESS OF AMERICA.”

“Do my friends really believe that this is the way to convince Iraqis, and the world, of the goodness of America and Americans? Does anyone in this chamber really believe that, by announcing a date certain for withdrawal, we will empower Iraqi moderates, or enable Iraq’s reconstruction, or open more schools for their children, or more hospitals for their families, or freedom for everyone?

“Mr. President, with all due respect, this is fantasy.

“Al Qaeda is not mass murdering civilians on the streets of Baghdad because it wants a more equitable distribution of oil revenues. Its aim in Iraq is not to get a seat at the political table. It wants to blow up the table–along with everyone seated at it.
In following General Petraeus’ path, there is no guarantee of success–but there is hope, and a new plan, for success.

“The plan embedded in this legislation, on the other hand, contains no such hope. It is a strategy of catchphrases and bromides, rather than military realities in Iraq. It does not learn from the many mistakes we have made in Iraq. Rather, it promises to repeat them.

“Let me be absolutely clear: In my opinion, Iraq is not yet lost–but if we follow this plan, it will be. And so, I fear, much of our hope for stability in the Middle East and security from terrorism here at home.

“I yield the floor.”