‘The amendment is silent on this question’



‘The supposedly groundbreaking policy shift that the Democratic Majority has been circling around is nothing more than a page and a half of vague policy proposals — an empty shell’





Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks (as prepared) on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the Levin Amendment to the Defense Authorization Act.



“The Senate will soon take up the Levin Amendment. But before we do, I think it’s important that we take a look at what it says.



“The Levin Amendment says that the Secretary of Defense shall ‘commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.’



“What exactly would this reduction involve? Ten thousand troops, twenty thousand, fifty thousand, all of them? Can we at least get a ballpark figure?



“The Levin Amendment doesn’t give us one.



“It only says that U.S. forces will have a ‘limited presence’ after this reduction. But what’s a limited presence? Does it mean limiting our presence in Al-Anbar, which everyone agrees has been a stunning success for American forces in the fight against Al-Qaeda? Does it mean limiting our presence in Baghdad? In the Kurdish areas to the North?



“The Levin Amendment doesn’t say. We’re left to guess.



“The Levin Amendment says that members of our Armed Forces will only be free to protect United States and Coalition personnel and infrastructure, to train Iraqi Security Forces, and to engage in ‘targeted counterterrorism operations against Al-Qaeda.’ But what does ‘targeted’ mean?



“The Levin Amendment doesn’t tell us.



“It says ‘the Secretary of Defense shall complete the transition of United States forces to a limited presence and missions’ by April 30. But how will we know when he’s completed the transition? And how many forces would have to be moved in order for the Secretary of Defense to comply with the bill’s mandate to complete it?



“The Amendment is silent on this question too.



“If there were more to this amendment, I might have more questions. But there isn’t. That’s it. The supposedly groundbreaking policy shift that the Democratic Majority has been circling around is nothing more than a page and a half of vague policy proposals — an empty shell.



“Do they really expect us to send this to Conference and to just see what happens? That’s wise war policy? That’s a responsible alternative to the current policy?



“That’s the alternative they give us to the Petraeus Plan, a doctrine that’s been widely acclaimed as the last word on counterinsurgency and which is showing signs of success less than a month after it was fully manned?



“Look: Democrats and Republicans voted to go into Iraq based on the same intelligence that the President had. It’s dishonest and it’s unhelpful to turn every debate on this war into a discussion of how and why we entered it in the first place.



“More than 150,000 American soldiers are there. They’re now fighting the same group that attacked and killed thousands of innocent Americans on 9/11, who attacked many others before and since, and who are plotting to kill thousands more even as we speak. There’s one thing we should be concerned about in discussing this war, and it’s the one thing we never hear about from the other side, and that’s winning the fight against Al-Qaeda.



“The President has recognized that the previous strategy failed to focus on the insurgency and Al-Qaeda. He changed course, and now we’re fighting them head on with The Petraeus Plan. At full manning, this strategy has been in place for less than a month. We’ll get a report on its progress in September. What sense does it make to short circuit that strategy now? Especially when the only alternative we’re getting from the other side is a page and a half of questions.



“Yesterday the spokesman for the multi-national forces in Iraq gave us an update on Al-Qaeda’s operations in Iraq. He reminded us that Al-Qaeda members refer to Iraq as their central front. And he told us Al-Qaeda and its affiliates are the greatest source of the spectacular attacks that are fueling sectarian violence in Iraq.



“He told us that in recent months more and more Iraqis have started to reject Al-Qaeda and its ideology and are finally fighting back. The troops are getting good, actionable intelligence from these people, which they’re using to disrupt Al-Qaeda networks and safe havens in and around Baghdad.



“He showed us a chart that illustrated some of our recent successes against the enemy. Our armed forces in Iraq killed or captured 26 high-level Al-Qaeda leaders in May and June alone. Eleven of them were emirs who were city or local Al-Qaeda leaders; seven were smuggling foreigners, weapons, and money into Iraq; five were cell leaders, and three were leaders of IED networks.



“Last month our troops uncovered an Al-Qaeda media hub near Samarra. They have concluded that between 80 percent and 90 percent of suicide attacks in Iraq are carried out by foreign born terrorists, who’ve killed some 4,000 Iraqi citizens just over the last six months.



“These are some of the concrete realities on the ground. We’re fighting Al-Qaeda head on, and we’re making progress. Would the Levin Amendment force us to turn our backs on Al-Qaeda again?



“We have no idea. It doesn’t say.



“But it could.



“And that’s something we should all keep in mind as we begin this debate, whether we’re willing to go with this or with the Petraeus Plan.”



###