March 16, 2006
The amendment to H.R.4939, the administration’s $91 billion supplemental request for Iraq, Afghanistan and Katrina relief, was approved by a voice vote. Lee, who last year introduced H.Con.Res. 197, to make it “the policy of the United States not to enter into any base agreement with the Government of Iraq that would lead to a permanent United States military presence in Iraq,” gave the following statement on the House floor:
“This amendment is not about the war, though I offered an alternative to keep us out of Iraq. This amendment is not about bringing our troops home, though I believe we should. This amendment is not about holding the President accountable for misleading us into an unjust and unnecessary war, though we should.
“Mr. Chairman, the amendment we are offering is very simple: it would provide that no funds be used under this bill to enter into military base agreements between the US and Iraq. Stating this will clearly indicate that the U.S. has no intention of making military bases permanent.
“Mr. Chairman, can’t we all agree—right here and right now—that we should not be in Iraq permanently. Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the administration’s position is unclear.
Mr. Chairman, the President shares our view and has said as much. April 13, 2004 the President said, ‘as a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation, and neither does America.’
“But just yesterday, General John Abazaid, the Army general in charge of the US troops in Iraq, told the House Defense Appropriations committee that the U.S. could end up having permanent bases in Iraq.
“Mr. Chairman, we need to be clear. The aim of our amendment is to simply codify the sentiment that the President, many of our constituents, and many of us strongly believe.
“As we stand here today, the United States has renewed a bombing campaign against the insurgents; the largest assault since the invasion. And this is taking us in the exact wrong direction. Destroying villages in the hopes of routing out insurgents will only create more.
“In adopting this amendment we can take the target off our troops’ backs by sending a strong and immediate signal to the Iraqi people, the insurgents, and the international community that the United States has no designs on Iraq.
“Mr. Chairman, this very point is supported by a poll conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) earlier this year. PIPA found that 76 percent of Iraqi’s believe that US will maintain bases in Iraq permanently, even if the newly elected government asks the US to leave Iraq.
“Congress needs to be on record. We must not have permanent military bases in Iraq.”
###
Barbara Lee Amendment on Permanent Bases Approved in Debate on Iraq War Supplemental Spending Bill
(Washington, DC) – Today, during debate on the to an emergency spending bill for the War in Iraq, the House approved an amendment introduced by Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) that will prohibit the use of funds to enter in to basing agreements that would lead to a permanent military presence in Iraq.The amendment to H.R.4939, the administration’s $91 billion supplemental request for Iraq, Afghanistan and Katrina relief, was approved by a voice vote. Lee, who last year introduced H.Con.Res. 197, to make it “the policy of the United States not to enter into any base agreement with the Government of Iraq that would lead to a permanent United States military presence in Iraq,” gave the following statement on the House floor:
“This amendment is not about the war, though I offered an alternative to keep us out of Iraq. This amendment is not about bringing our troops home, though I believe we should. This amendment is not about holding the President accountable for misleading us into an unjust and unnecessary war, though we should.
“Mr. Chairman, the amendment we are offering is very simple: it would provide that no funds be used under this bill to enter into military base agreements between the US and Iraq. Stating this will clearly indicate that the U.S. has no intention of making military bases permanent.
“Mr. Chairman, can’t we all agree—right here and right now—that we should not be in Iraq permanently. Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the administration’s position is unclear.
Mr. Chairman, the President shares our view and has said as much. April 13, 2004 the President said, ‘as a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation, and neither does America.’
“But just yesterday, General John Abazaid, the Army general in charge of the US troops in Iraq, told the House Defense Appropriations committee that the U.S. could end up having permanent bases in Iraq.
“Mr. Chairman, we need to be clear. The aim of our amendment is to simply codify the sentiment that the President, many of our constituents, and many of us strongly believe.
“As we stand here today, the United States has renewed a bombing campaign against the insurgents; the largest assault since the invasion. And this is taking us in the exact wrong direction. Destroying villages in the hopes of routing out insurgents will only create more.
“In adopting this amendment we can take the target off our troops’ backs by sending a strong and immediate signal to the Iraqi people, the insurgents, and the international community that the United States has no designs on Iraq.
“Mr. Chairman, this very point is supported by a poll conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) earlier this year. PIPA found that 76 percent of Iraqi’s believe that US will maintain bases in Iraq permanently, even if the newly elected government asks the US to leave Iraq.
“Congress needs to be on record. We must not have permanent military bases in Iraq.”