I am very proud of my Congressman, Ken Calvert, of California's 44th Congressional District.  With all the "White Flag Republicans" coming out of the woodwork, I'm pleased that Mr. Calvert has remained steadfast with the President and our troops.  Here is the speech he made from the floor of the House on the 13th:

IRAQ RESOLUTION SPEECH

Given on House Floor 2/13/2007

Mr. Speaker I rise today in opposition to the resolution offered by the Majority expressing the disapproval of President Bush’s decision to deploy more than 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

This resolution is nothing but politics – opposition to a plan is NOT a plan. This resolution is using our servicemen and women in a debate that does not address policy. If this was an earnest debate about the Administration’s proposal then the Majority would have offered a bill that answers two pertinent questions - what is success and how do we achieve it?

Instead we stand here debating a bill that opposes sending reinforcements to Iraq – there are no amendments allowed and there is certainly no plan offered in this bill.

In fact this debate is incredibly ironic since many of those on the other side of the aisle were calling for MORE troops not too long ago. Once again, the debate was not about success but about opposition to the Administration’s vision.

So let’s talk about the policy.

First, nostalgic thoughts and longing for the times before the U.S. entered Iraq are not useful nor can they be used as a vision for the future. We are in this war. We must win. Anything less then an honest discussion on how to proceed forward is a disservice to this nation and our military.

Second, if our policy is to support a stable Iraq then we must employ a strategy to achieve that goal. The President and our military commanders have stated that in order to fulfill that policy objective, Baghdad must be secured. In order to secure Baghdad, the Iraqi Security Forces need more American troops to reinforce their operations. President Bush agreed to this on the condition that the Iraqi’s lead the fight and that the Iraq government take more responsibility for securing their country.

If the Majority Party disagrees with this policy objective, and the strategy to achieve it, then I ask them – what is THEIR policy objective? And how do they plan to achieve it? I have yet to hear a consensus from my friends on the other side of the aisle on what they believe our policy should be. They certainly cannot suggest that this resolution even faintly resembles a plan or vision for a successful resolution to the current conflict.

I’ll tell you what this debate is - it’s a sound bite. It’s a quick and easy way to feed the defeatists in this country. More than anything, it’s a disappointment – the Majority would rather score political points than have a real discussion on the most important question of this generation – how to win the war against our enemies and keep our country safe.

We should be asking ourselves what would failure in the Middle East mean?

Our enemies have stated that they believe that Western civilization is rotten to the core and unless we get out of the Middle East entirely and convert to Islam – we will always be their enemy. In chapter 2 of the 9-11 Report, the authors answer what the terrorists want from America:

“To the second question, what America could do, al Qaeda's answer was that America should abandon the Middle East, convert to Islam, and end the immorality and godlessness of its society and culture” (page 77)

Al Qaeda is closely watching Iraq, sending fighters and weapons, and doing everything in its power to bring about an American retreat. If we leave Iraq before it is secure, what will that do to our enemy? An enemy who has already stated that they seek to destroy us not for being in Iraq but for being in the Middle East and for being non-Muslim.

An American failure would bolster al Qaeda and every other terrorist organization in the world. It would give them a reason to believe they can win and it would give them confidence that would surely breach our shores one day. It would let them believe that their plan – a plan to destroy western culture for its “godlessness” – is right.

As 9-11 taught us, warfare is no longer limited to enemies within a region. Geographic boundaries and long distances do not keep us safe. An enemy, encouraged by a retreat in Iraq, will be close on our heels. That is exactly why must stay and confront our enemies.

So how is this enemy, who is at a military and financial disadvantage, seeking to win? They simply studied a little American history. Both Osama bin Laden and al-Zarqawi have referenced the Vietnam conflict in forming their strategy to defeat us.

Many in this body often rush to compare this conflict with Vietnam and in one respect it is very similar: both enemies understood the way to victory was through the American politician. If they can weaken the American political will they knew they could achieve victory. The Majority often invokes the number of our war dead as a reason to leave, or the fact that this conflict has gone on longer than our involvement in World War II. These arguments play right into the hands of our enemy and their propaganda machine.

What people don’t seem to understand is that we cannot fall into the trap of comparisons or we risk losing sight of what our men and women in the Armed Forces need from us. They need our support. They need a coherent policy and strategy that does not make politics the long pole in the tent.

Courage to do the right thing is not always easy. I will not abandon those who have fought and given their lives in this conflict. I will not abandon the Iraqis who long for peace. Instead, I support the President’s call for more troops. I believe it is the right thing to do. It is illogical to say you support the troops that are there but not the reinforcements that they need.

In closing I would like to remember those who have lost their lives to acts of terrorism:

Beirut embassy and Marine barracks bombings - 1983.

The bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 - 1988;

The first bombing of the World Trade Center - 1993;

The bombing of the AMIA Jewish

Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina -1994.

The bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia - 1996.

The bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania - 1998.

The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen – year 2000.

The attacks on New York City and the Pentagon -September 11, 2001.

The Madrid train bombings - March 11, 2004.

The London bombings - July 7, 2005;

Do not doubt that if they were given the chance, our enemies would come into this chamber and kill us.

This resolution is not a solution - it is nothing but doubt, fear and weakness. I urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution and stand up for victory.

It doesn't get any clearer or stronger than this...Thanks, Congressman Calvert!

RC