Congressman Pete King

Iraq

The war in Iraq has been painful and difficult. Every loss of American life on the field of battle was tragic and the brave men and women of our armed forces endured great sacrifice, as did their families. I voted for this war in 2002, however, and continued to support it when it became unpopular because I clearly believed it was in our national interest. We cannot hope to defeat Islamic terrorism until the Middle East is stabilized and that could never be done until Saddam Hussein and his capacity for weapons of mass destruction were removed.

Having been to Iraq on several occasions, I knew –even during the dark days of 2006—that the media were not accurately reporting the progress that had been made. I also believed, however, that it was important to revise our military strategy going forward. That is why in 2007 I supported the “surge” policy of General David Petraeus and voted against the misguided attempt to reduce funding to our troops (H.R. 1591).

The surge strategy of General Petraeus worked. During my visits to Iraq, I met with America’s military commanders and with rank and file troops including National Guard and reservists from New York and Long Island. I saw firsthand the extraordinary effort made by our troops in defeating al-Qaeda, putting down the Sunni insurgency and creating meaningful governmental institutions. As President Obama stated: "Under tough circumstances the United States military has succeeded beyond any expectation."

It is in America's national interest to have Iraq be a sovereign and stable nation because the future of Iraq is closely linked to the future of the Middle East – which is now facing massive civil unrest. That is why I opposed President Obama’s decision to withdraw all our troops from Iraq. At least 20,000 troops should have remained to maintain stability and deter Iranian influence. The President’s policy runs the real risk of undoing many of the gains our troops fought so hard to achieve.