Media Center

Congressman Scott (GA-13) joined House Democrats to launch a serious debate on the President’s plan to increase troop levels engaged in combat in Iraq.  Scott delivered the following remarks on the House Floor yesterday: 

 Click here to watch Congressman Scott’s Iraq Statement on NBC's "Nightly News with Brian Williams"

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. It is indeed an honor to stand before this House as a very proud member of our Foreign Affairs Committee under our distinguished Chairman Lantos and also to stand as our co-chair of our Democratic Group on National Security, as well as a voting member of the NATO parliament.

I have been to Iraq. I have been to Afghanistan, been to Pakistan, been to Kuwait.  I have been there with our soldiers and our generals, and what I am about to say is based upon my experience in this whole arena.

Now, a lot has been said and I think it has been misguided, very unfortunate. So allow me, if I may, to state for the record exactly what this resolution does.

There has been talk up here about this resolution is here to cut funds. Nothing could be further from the truth.  There is no Democrat in this Congress who would dare cut the funds from our soldiers who are in harm's way, and any Member that continues to say that is doing a disservice to this Congress and to the people of the United States.

This resolution does not say we are pulling out troops. We know the situation in the Middle East. We know this region is vital to our interests.  The issue here is not pulling out troops. The issue here is a vote, up or down, on a policy that says two things, 57 words. Allow me to read them to you.

It says that the ``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.''

Then it says: ``Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.''

That is what it says.  Those two things.  Let us not mislead the American public anymore, certainly not on what we are going to vote on here today.  I stand as a proud member who has cosponsored, who supports this resolution 100 percent because of four important reasons.

The first reason is that this 21,500-man escalation, number one, is deceiving in and of itself, when we know from the CBO account that it is not 21,500. It is more like 48,000 when you put the support troops involved.  I am here to tell you, this is a dangerous strain on an already overstrained military.

Let me share with you what the National Security Advisory Group is saying.  It says this: nearly all of the available combat units in the U.S. Army, Army National Guard, Marine Corps, have been used in the current operations.  Every available combat brigade from the active duty Army has already been to Afghanistan or Iraq at least for a 12-month tour, and most are now in their second or third tours of duty.  There is a strain here, and some are on their fourth tours of duty.

Approximately 95 percent of the Army National Guard's combat battalions and special operations units have been mobilized since 9/11, and there is very little available combat capacity remaining in the Army National Guard.

All active duty Marine units are being used on a dangerously tight rotation schedule, but here is another.

We often forget that these are soldiers with families, with mothers, with fathers who are out there, separated from their children.  Listen to this.  This is why we are against this 21,500, or 48,000, surge.  Between 2001 and 2004, divorce rates among active duty Army officers have tripled, and rates among Army enlisted soldiers have gone up.

Let me conclude by saying this: on the bleached bones of many great past nations and civilizations are written those pathetic words, ``too late.''  They moved too late.  The American people are watching us and they are hoping and they are praying that we not move too late, and let us get our young men and women out of this crossfire of a civil war.