Duncan Hunter

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett).

Mr. HUNTER. The gentleman and I are good enough friends, if the gentleman will allow me to make a one-sentence answer. The answer is, not since 1776 until just a few years ago have American troops in Vietnam and Korea and World War II, in any war, had what is known as ballistic body armor. It is a brand-new thing. And we have got yet new systems that we are going to be putting into the field shortly. So they don't have the newest and they didn't have the newest. They now have 400,000 sets. But to imply that that lack of having them from 1776 to 2000 made them into some type of an unequipped force is also not fully true.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) 5 minutes.

Mr. HUNTER. Then I would say, yes, that is inaccurate. The way the gentleman stated and if he is not going to qualify it, then that is inaccurate, because we have never had body armor until this war.

Mr. HUNTER. Will the gentleman yield one last time?

Mr. HUNTER. That is inaccurate if you refer to the historic amount of body armor that our troops have had.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding, and I just wanted to address a point that my friend from Massachusetts just made. He said that we always need to have up-armored Humvees in any war that we enter into. We had at the end of the Clinton administration about 112, as I recall, up-armored Humvees, only for VIPs and for diplomats. We have today 15,000 up-armored 114s. This is the first war in our history since the beginning of this country in which we have had up-armored tactical vehicles. With respect to the SAPI vests, that is, the bulletproof vests and body armor that our troops wear, we had at the end of the Clinton administration this many, zero pieces of body armor for our troops. We have today over 400,000 sets. That is enough sets for two sets for everybody who is in theater, and everybody has them. I have said for the last several years if there is anybody who has a son or daughter who does not have body armor who is in theater, call me personally at my office. In the last 2 years, I have received zero calls. So we have, we feel, the new equipment, not just up-armored Humvees but body armor, which incidentally is very heavy and, to some degree, does result in some degradation of mobility, but we have put in hundreds of new systems, weapons and equipment systems, since the year 2000 which have accrued to the benefit of our troops. I just wanted to set the record straight. I appreciate the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. HUNTER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The point that I made----

Mr. HUNTER. I am talking about the armor issue. The point that I made is the idea of coming to the floor and implying that somehow there was bad faith in this government for not having the new body armor that our troops presently have to the tune of 400,000 sets, that somehow that was a dereliction of duty is also a disservice, not only to the former Congresses, but also to the former administrations. Because the last administration in the year 2000 had zero sets of body armor. Body armor is a new advent, it is a new system. We now have hundreds of new systems that we have injected into the warfighting theater. So the idea that we had a ragtag military moving across the berm into Iraq is also not accurate. And I would hope that the gentleman would admonish his colleagues who come to the floor who imply that our people went across that berm unequipped is also not accurate. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the gentleman. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding this time to Mr. LoBiondo. As this Member gets time in the coming debate, we owe you one.

Mr. HUNTER. I want to thank my friend, Mr. Oberstar, very much for that. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).

Mr. HUNTER. This is not an unfriendly request. I just want to note one of our Members has a relative's funeral he wants to go to. He has just a few minutes. I know my friend Mr. Oberstar is waiting to speak. Is there any chance you could yield to Mr. LoBiondo so he could get his 4 minutes in before the deadline?

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I understand at 4:30 we are going to break for some time for the Norwood resolution, which is absolutely appropriate. I just wanted to see if you could give us a split on the time, how much time we have left, we both have Members who are squeezed to get their remarks in, make sure we get an even split on time to half past the hour. I would like to work with my friend from Missouri to make sure we do that.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HUNTER. We needed to know how much time we had before the 4:30 break, Mr. Speaker, because we have folks, but if we just have one speaker there, that is fine.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, a point of inquiry.

Mr. HUNTER. My point is to the gentleman.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) for 5 minutes.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Speaker, in my office I keep a photo of about a dozen Kurdish mothers whose bodies are strewn across the hillside in northern Iraq, holding their babies, killed in mid-stride where they were gassed to death by Saddam Hussein. As I listened to some folks in this debate talk about what they consider to be an immoral war, an illegal war, an occupation that is not consistent with morality, I harken back to that picture and the thousands of people that it represents, and I harken back also to the exhuming of mass graves with, again, mothers shot in the back of the head with a .45-caliber pistol by Saddam Hussein's executioners and with their little babies similarly with holes in the back of their skulls. Mr. Speaker, this operation in Iraq is indeed a moral operation. It represents the goodness of the American people. I am also reminded of something that lots of folks and the Vice President talked about, and that is the goodness that we have brought with the 3 million-plus babies who have been vaccinated, with the hundreds of schools and hospitals that have been built, and with all those expectant mothers that were given prenatal care by the Americans so that their children would be born in a healthy fashion. But, Mr. Speaker, I recall that in 1984 Ronald Reagan very eloquently asked the American people to support him in bringing freedom to the people of El Salvador. I remember his speech; and in his speech, he harkened back to another American who had appealed to us in bringing freedom to another part of the world, which was at that time endangered, and that was Greece in 1947. The communists were very close to victory in Greece, and Harry Truman appealed to the American people in a joint session of Congress. He said the free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms. If we falter, we may endanger the peace of the world, and we shall surely endanger the welfare of this Nation. Now, we have no guarantee of victory in Iraq. There is no battle plan that comes with a guarantee of victory, but I will tell one thing that is very clear: what is happening in Iraq and our efforts in Iraq are connected and are watched by every terrorist in the world, and that connection is established and travels as fast as the speed of electrons in this age of television and technology and high-paced, fast media and the Internet. They see what we are doing. And that connection, Mr. Speaker, was made when the Beirut bombings occurred against the Marines in the Marine barracks in Beirut. In fact, I think Mr. Skelton was with me. We were over there very shortly before those bombings occurred. They are connected and the terrorist world watched very closely when there was no response to that. They watched very closely when there was no response in the Khobar Towers, with respect to the Cole and extremely anemic response with respect to the bombings in the embassies in Africa. Now we are undertaking an important and difficult mission; and, Mr. Speaker, I pointed out before that at least one brigade of the 82nd Airborne is already in place in Baghdad, now engaged in the operation, and we have a brigade of the Big Red One moving now toward the theater. I believe we have right at 4,000 members of the 82nd Airborne now in country in Iraq, and we have Iraqi soldiers and Americans engaged in the nine sectors of the city already undertaking this operation and this plan that has been developed by our warfighting commanders. The idea that we are here, poised to retroactively condemn an operation that our soldiers are already carrying out, is, to my mind, remarkable. There is not going to be any force in effect with respect to this vote that will take place shortly that will do anything but send the wrong message to America's allies, and I think you have seen comments by some of our allies over the last several weeks with respect to the message that we send out. We are interesting people are we not, Mr. Speaker. We send out messages with all the electronic gadgets in the world to convey the messages to the entire world, and then we say, you know, we really did not mean what you take our statements to mean and we really did not intend to give anybody the wrong message that we still support the troops. Well, Mr. Speaker, we have got a number of great members of the Armed Services Committee that I want to yield to, and I want to come back later and talk a little bit later about this war against terror and the centerpiece that is Iraq and the centerpiece of that which is as planned. You know, I was thinking there was a statement once that in a little hut in Central America when we were standing up to the Communists and we were providing a shield for El Salvador, while that fragile democracy stood up, there was a hut in El Salvador which reportedly had the writing on it, Thank God for Ronald Reagan. I am wondering if some trooper in the 82nd Airborne, in the 2nd brigade of the 82nd Airborne may write on a wall in Baghdad, maybe on Friday when we take this vote, This is the day in which the American Congress condemned the mission that we are carrying out today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself just 30 seconds, and I would like to just make one note. That is, if we add the 21,500 troops that are already partly in Iraq, these reinforcements to the 138 who existed before the movement started, and we allow for the troops who are rotating home, we will have fewer; we will have 157,000 troops in Iraq, according to DOD. That is fewer than the number of troops that we had a year ago in December. That is the state of this so-called surge; fewer troops than we had last year. Mr. Speaker, at this point I would yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) who, for a number of years, chaired the Terrorism Subcommittee and is now the ranking member.

Mr. HUNTER. Would the gentleman yield briefly?

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I understand we have until 12 o'clock to complete this part of the debate?