Madam Speaker, the National Security Strategy released by the White House late last month has plenty to recommend. This administration, on paper and in its rhetoric and proclamations, clearly has a broader view, beyond the use of military force, of how to keep Americans safe.

The strategy puts a premium on diplomacy and multilateral cooperation as key tools of advancing our security interests. It discusses clean energy and a reduced dependence on foreign oil. It recognizes the threat, within a national security context, of global climate change. It expresses a commitment to nuclear nonproliferation and pledges support for fledgling democracies. It includes, under the rubric of national security, human rights, global health, and development aid. Madam Speaker, it even emphasizes the important national security implications of investing in education and human capital right here at home.

Frankly, it sounds a lot like the smart security platform that I have been advocating for the last several years. I'm glad the folks at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue are getting there, also.

And yet, Madam Speaker, I can't reconcile all of those promising ideas with the ongoing prosecution of two wars, which are bankrupting our country morally and fiscally, without reducing terrorism threats or contributing to our national security.

The situation on the ground in Afghanistan remains very tenuous. While Americans, other NATO forces, and civilians continue to shed blood, insurgents and militants continue to thrive. As we prepare to move in on the Taliban's home base of Kandahar, all evidence indicates that we weren't successful at the more modest task of driving them out of Marja this very winter. Besides, according to General McChrystal, the Kandahar offensive isn't even ready to start on time.

At the same moment, we have an unreliable partner in President Karzai, a partner who has now dismissed two of his top aides who had the best working relationship with the United States. And General Petraeus is on Capitol Hill this week to tell the Armed Services Committees that the last 15 to 18 months have been about installing the ``inputs'' in Afghanistan, and that now, finally, we are ready to reap some ``outputs.''

Well, with all due respect, Madam Speaker, and respect to the General, we are all pleased that he is fine after briefly passing out in the Senate hearing room earlier this week, but in all due respect, I think the American people feel as though they have been providing inputs for more than 8 1/2 years now. It's particularly difficult to accept this explanation when we've seen $275 billion fly out of the Federal Treasury to pay for inputs in Afghanistan. It's long past time when we can expect to see results, or outputs.

But, tragically, there will be no meaningful outputs until we make a U-turn and reverse the strategy 180 degrees. The outputs will come when, and only when, our Afghanistan policy actually adheres to the core principles offered in the administration's National Security Strategy.

So my urgent plea to the White House is to embrace its own advice. If they are serious about a new approach to defending and protecting America, let's not wait until July 2011. Bring our troops home now.