About Us


Contact Information


How You Can Make a Difference


Issues


Legislative Action Center


Links


Policy Information Center


Press
Releases


Religious Liberty


Send Me
More Information

 

 

 

Capital Hill Watch Alert

Disapproving of the Decision of the President Announced on January 10, 2007, to Deploy more than 20,000 Additional United States Combat Troops to Iraq. (H.Con.Res. 63)

The House of Representatives began debate on Tuesday, February 13, 2007, on Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq (H.Con.Res. 63) [ Full Text of Legislation ] with a vote expected on Friday, February 16, 2007.

This nonbinding resolution says that Congress “disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush…to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.”  Also, it says that “Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States armed forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq.” 

Empowering al-Qaeda  

Such a resolution only empowers al-Qaeda and unwittingly encourages terrorism.  It inadvertently provides an incentive for terrorist attacks.  Furthermore, such actions only fuel the efforts of the anti-American and anti-war media to continue their criticism of the Iraqi war.  On many occasions al-Qaeda leadership has said that a battle in the media is more than 50 percent of the battle against America.  Also, the Islamofascist terrorist is emboldened by the media and Congress denigrating America and the war against Islamfascism in Iraq which is seen as an indictment of America.  The continued attacks on the war in Iraq comfort the enemies of America. 

Democrats, as well as some Republicans, are politicizing the war effort in Iraq.  For example, General David Petraeus' nomination as commander of multinational forces in Iraq was confirmed by a 81-0 Senate vote and has called the additional forces “essential.” 

Extreme Consequences  

Doing nothing more than promote retreat and defeat are the alternative strategies being put forth regarding Iraq by the Democrats.  The consequences for the region and the U.S. will be extreme if the Democrat leadership in Congress takes steps to weaken the U.S. military in Iraq which includes a retreat before the nation is stabilized.  A destabilized Iraq will only empower and embolden Iran. Iranian intelligence agents are actively seeking to thwart progress in Iraq, and Iran's bellicose involvement in the war in Iraq is undeniable. Iranian arms and equipment are being used to kill U.S. troops by Islamofascist terrorists in Iraq.  Iran would likely attempt to seize control of the government and Iraq's oil fields if the U.S. fails there. As Iran attempts to dominate the Middle East, this would increase the threat towards its neighbors. Also, to further their political objectives in Lebanon and Israel, Iran would continue conducting proxy wars, utilizing Islamofascist terrorist organizations. 

Other neighboring nations may be compelled to interfere in a failed Iraq. To prevent Kurdistan's independence, Turkey may choose to deploy troops into northern Iraq. And to protect the Sunni population, Saudi Arabia and Egypt may decide to deploy troops into Iraq. In an effort to reinstate a Ba'athist regime in Iraq, Syria (state sponsor of terrorism) most likely will increase its support. Throughout the Islamic world a fractured Iraq would provide the distinct possibility of a Sunni– Shi'ite war. For the region and American national security interests, this would be disastrous. 

Furthermore, as a fertile breeding ground to sow the seeds of hatred and extremism throughout the Middle East, a failed Iraq would serve for terrorist recruitment and training. An enormous victory for Islamofascism globally would be a failed Iraq and would dramatically increase the risk of terrorist attacks in America as well as globally. And to help stabilize the Middle East, America would have no choice but to once again intervene militarily.

Congressional Intervention Constitutionally Questionable 

The Constitutional Framers gave the President both the power and responsibility to run this nation's wars. The President is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces and is responsible for tactical, operational and strategic decisions involved in fighting a war under Article II of the Constitution. 

On the other hand, Congress has the authority to declare war, prescribe rules governing military discipline and regulate the capture of enemy property and appropriate funds for the military under Article I of the Constitution. 

Therefore, it is constitutionally questionable for Congress to impose timetables, benchmarks or tactical decisions on the commander in chief or troops in the battlefield although Congress does have a role in formulating military policy.

Key Successes

In the war against al-Qaeda in Iraq, the U.S. military has reported Sunni tribal participation. In the Anbar province along the borders with Jordan and Syria, the U.S. military on February 8, 2007, launched a counter insurgency drive in Baghdad and won the cooperation of several Sunni tribes. In parts of Anbar particularly along the Syrian border, tribal fighters have eliminated al-Qaeda strongholds. 

A senior U.S. general said Iraqi troops have passed a key test by showing up at 70 percent strength or better for President Bush's “surge” in Baghdad. In a United Press International report on February 14, 2007, Lieutenant General Martin Dempsey,  commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Commander-Iraq said, “This movement of these three brigades and two separate battalions into Baghdad to our way of looking at it has gone very well. We've also learned more lessons from this one, and in future deployments, we'll make it even better.” 

Troop Betrayal 

Cal Thomas wrote in The Washington Times on February 14, 2007, that a soldier friend of his sent him an e-mail. In the article he stated that “Army Sergeant Daniel Dobson, 22, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, is on his second tour in Iraq.” Mr. Thomas asked the soldier what he thought of the growing opposition to the war.  He said, writing from Mosul, Iraq that he appreciated the freedom Americans have to protest, but added; “The American military has shown a stone-cold professional veneer throughout the seething debate raging over Iraq. Beneath that veneer, however, is a fuming visceral hatred. We feel as though we have been betrayed by Congress.” 

The military is hamstrung against an enemy with no reservations or restrictions believes Sergeant Thompson: “It is our overwhelming opinion that we have not been allowed to conduct the war to the fullest of our capabilities; neither do we feel that we should pull out because of lack of ‘results.' War is not a chemistry set with predetermined outcomes or complications. With a great army matched with an equally cunning enemy, we find ourselves in a difficult but winnable flight. We do not seek results; rather, we seek total an unequivocal victory.”

No Substitute for Victory 

Unfortunately, the Democrat leadership in Congress does not realize that in war there is no substitute for victory. The inappropriate behavior that is being exhibited in Congress by Democrats as well as some Republicans should reflect on the words of President Abraham Lincoln who said, “Congressmen who willfully take action during wartime that damage morale and undermined the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled,  or hanged.” The actions of those in Congress are discouraging the troops and emboldening America's enemies. Iraq is just one front in the global war against Islamofascism and too many Americans and the leadership in Congress do not realize this.

What Can You Do?  

Urge your representative to NOT SUPPORT  Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.  (H.Con.Res. 63).

Contact Information:  

Capitol Hill Switchboard Numbers: 202-225-3121 or 202-224-3121 (Those numbers will direct you to the Capitol Hill operator. Ask for your representative's office.)

To go to your representative's website, find his E-mail or to find out who your representatives are... http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html

To electronically mail your U.S. House of Representative, go to http://www.house.gov/htbin/wrep_findrep.  

Addressing Correspondence:  

The Honorable (full name)
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515    

Dear Representative (last name):  

Back to the American Voice Institute of Public Policy Home Page