John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I was privileged to attend the retirement ceremony of MG Arnold Punaro from the U.S. Marine Corps on September 19, 2003 at the Marine Barracks here in Washington, DC. General Punaro is known to many here in the Senate from his outstanding service of many years as staff director of the Senate Armed Services Committee and on the personal staff of Senator Sam Nunn. I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Record, at this point, portions of the remarks made at the ceremony by Gen. James L. Jones, Supreme Allied Commander, Europe and Commander, U.S. European Command.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, recently I hosted a luncheon of the American Chemical Society on nanotechnology. It was a pleasure to be in the company of so many brilliant minds, and those concerned with the technological and economic future of our Nation. Of all the areas of scientific innovation being developed today, none is more profound than nanotechnology. The ability to manipulate individual atoms is unprecedented in human history and could lead to the redesign of most products we know of today. Some have even said it could lead to the ``Second Industrial Revolution.'' Its scope is nothing other than breathtaking. In the area of national security, nanotechnology has been identified as one of the most important strategic research areas. Revolutionary applications could include: very lightweight but extremely strong armor, vastly smaller and more powerful computers, microscopic sensor systems, and tiny unmanned vehicles. These could provide vastly increased capabilities for our armed forces. Conversely, to fall behind in these new areas will present us with a critical security risk. Unfortunately, the United States is no longer the only world leader in many areas of nanoscience, as many countries have recognized its importance and are greatly increasing their funding. With stakes this high, we must pay close attention to the choices we make. I understand the stakes and stand four-square behind public-private efforts to keep America in the lead in nanotechnology. Just as we led the industrial revolution, America will lead this new scientific revolution for the benefit of generations to come.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Mikulski for joining with me in offering the amendment to address the damage done by Hurricane Isabel to military facilities, and for her help in getting that amendment adopted. I can assure you that I intend the needs of the U.S. Naval Academy and all other military facilities damaged by the storm to be fully met from the funds provided by that amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would simply say, briefly, the Secretary of Defense has issued policy guidance that covers members of the Reserve and Guard, and that guidance says they should not be subject to more than one long deployment every 6 years. That has enabled them to continue their civilian pursuits and their family lifestyles. Of course, that can be waived in times of national emergency, as it is right now. But to impose this management restriction on the President as Commander in Chief I think would severely begin to limit, for planning and other purposes, the utility of the Guard and Reserve. I remember serving under Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird when the concept of the total force was evolving, and that is that men and women of the Guard are respected and treated with equal effectiveness as those of the regular Active Forces. I think this would be a very serious step backward in what I believe has been an absolutely glorious contribution by the National Guard and the Reserve Forces for some years now in their deployments in the war on terrorism.

Mr. WARNER. When the Senator says he has experience and he understands things, I defer to that. I have a great deal of experience, and he does, too. I admire him. He knows that. But my point is we certainly have to have a degree of confidence in those who render their best judgment on the various items. The Senator raised the question, and I have a document here to refer to. If I could just pose a question, the Senator pointed out the seriousness of these vast ammunition depots. No matter how great Saddam Hussein may have been with his military--from the debriefings, they have no explanation why he put in every corner of Iraq these enormous caches of ammunition. The Senator from Delaware brings out the necessity to go in and eradicate those in various ways as quickly as possible so they do not fall into the hands of those who are acting against us. The point I wish to make is, in the document and carefully buried in the $67-plus billion for the Department of Defense is the specific item of $300 million for initiatives for battlefield cleanup. It is in there. You don't have to take it out of other portions. That is in addition to $24 billion for the Department of the Army which they are going to expend for those purposes. Has the Senator examined in detail to know that some of the items he is asking for, such as the cleanup of the battlefields, is already included?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would be happy to yield and enter into a colloquy and questions with the Senator from Delaware and to address my good friend from Arizona.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WARNER. I do add the fact that I was present and I recall being somewhat concerned, I say to my distinguished colleague, but they had only been in office several weeks. The head of the electricity board, a magnificent woman, very well-skilled in technical matters, and the head of water and sewage, a gentleman--I was so impressed with them, but they said: We have only been in office 2 or 3 weeks. We ought to add that fact to the Senator's point. I am somewhat concerned when you say Bremer padded. Do you have any evidence on this?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I, too, have traveled to the region, as has the Senator from Arizona. It was clear to me that there is a direct correlation between the efforts to repair the infrastructure in Iraq and, frankly, lowering what is in the minds of us every day: the danger to the individual men and women of the Armed Forces and the coalition forces. On every vote I cast in connection with this important measure, I have focused and faced that soldier patroling in Iraq and said: Does this help him or her, or not? I wonder how the Senator from Arizona feels about this amendment in correlation to the infrastructure and the reduction of the risk and danger of those undertaking the military mission.

Mr. WARNER. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished chairman. I say with all due deference to our distinguished colleague from New Jersey that on its face there is a very serious flaw. I am opposed to the principle of having a commission at this time examine the subject, but on its face it reads: There is established a National Commission on Development and Use of Intelligence Related to Iraq. Iraq is but one piece of a matrix of nations in that region of the world. You cannot focus on just the narrow Iraq situation without Iran, without looking at the other areas of the world which are being affected by this spread of terrorism. I say to my good friend, his intentions may well have been the best, but personally I think it is inappropriate and ill-advised at this time to usurp in many respects the responsibility of the Congress, certainly not in a way in which you just look at one small area of intelligence unrelated to the broad picture throughout that region.

Mr. WARNER. The point being, he is on the scene 14 hours a day. He is working.

Mr. WARNER. That is an important addition the Senator just made because this is a man who uprooted himself from a difficult situation here at home, volunteered to go over there, and, as the Senator knows, those living conditions are not the best.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want to address the sense-of-the-Senate resolution on behalf of men and women in the Armed Forces offered by our distinguished Senator from Kentucky. I ask unanimous consent that I be listed as a cosponsor of the resolution.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise to give strong support to this and I want to say against the background--and the other day we had a similar matter before the Senate and I rose to address that. It was a technical problem, primarily, with that resolution. This one, which I have read carefully, in a very straightforward manner, recites the history of personal decorations and theater awards and, in particular, how these matters, throughout the military history of this country, have been actions taken by Presidents upon the recommendation of the senior officers of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and, indeed, the Coast Guard. In this instance, this administration has moved to put in place those recognitions--most deserving, I would say-- of men and women who have gone to the farflung corners of the globe and accepted the risks, together with their families, of going to those areas for the cause of freedom and to protect the security interests of the United States of America. That region of Iraq is very much in our hearts and minds every day. I have had the privilege, as have many in this body, to go there and visit with our troops. Likewise, I have had the privilege to go and visit with our forces in Afghanistan. Most recently, I went to Liberia, where the strike task force--largely composed of U.S. marines but under the control of a very fine Army officer--performed extraordinary duties on behalf of the people of Liberia, who have suffered a decade-plus of civil war turmoil. I could go on and on, but others are anxious to address this. The point I wish to make is these decorations are proudly worn on the uniform of the men and women in the Armed Forces. They are coveted items of families for generations. In my office, I have proudly displayed the decoration earned by my father who volunteered as a young Army doctor in World War I to go to France where he served in the trenches. I remember as a young person of his telling stories to me about life in the trenches, the extraordinary devastation he witnessed, the loss of life, and the carnage. But there on the wall was his World War I Victory Medal. It had on it three bars of the three major conflicts. He was proud to wear it on the uniform of the United States when he saw service. It is a carefully thought through process that we cannot award a separate medal for every conflict. We have to recognize the theater of operations. For example, in World War II, it was the European theater and it was the Pacific theater. There was a medal given to those in the continental limits in training commands. There were three basic theaters of operation, and then stars were awarded for the major conflicts in the theaters of Europe or the Pacific. It is not a wise course of action to award a separate medal of decoration for each of the many theaters we are engaged in today. Rather, there should be just the principal decoration which, as we say in the final paragraph of this resolution, and I will read that: It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense should, on an expedited basis, issue the necessary regulations to implement these awards and ensure that any person who renders qualifying service to the Armed Forces in those phases of the Global War on Terrorism, including Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Noble Eagle should promptly receive these awards. That is a category of awards given primarily for Iraq and Afghanistan and contiguous areas where the men and women of the Armed Forces are serving actually in the front lines or, indeed, in a support phase. I strongly urge the Senate adopt this amendment. I hope there are 100 votes in recognition of this course of action. To those who, with the best of intentions, have recommended specific theaters, specific zones, such as Iraq, we then have to think of Afghanistan, we have to think of Liberia, although, fortunately, that was an operation that was successfully performed in a relatively short period of time. I could go throughout the world. It is better there be theater-of-operations awards and individuals singled out. I know, for example, if I may say, when I was Secretary of the Navy and heavily involved in the subject of awards, I remember so much working with the father of the distinguished Senator from Arizona who was commander in chief of all military forces in the Pacific, ADM ``Jumpin'' Jack McCain. I remember him well. I learned a lot from him. The Senator from Arizona will recall from his earlier experience how theater recognition is given and then the star to recognize those engagements in which one participated. That is a process carefully supervised by the senior military, primarily the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I am quite interested in the views of the distinguished Senator from Arizona on this subject. I yield to the Senator.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator is very correct in the recitation of the facts. I add one other perspective, and that is how well the Senator from Arizona understands with his distinguished career the identification of the families with the serviceperson, and should a special award be made for Iraq, think of the families of those who served in Afghanistan, particularly who lost life and limb. They would think: Why is not the sacrifice of our family in every respect equal to the sacrifice of the other families in the Iraqi situation? Yesterday, or today, the Senator from Arizona and I took to the floor together in a similar colloquy to urge colleagues to let the system work because it is working and it is working in the traditions of our military. It is working in a manner that is equitably recognizing the performance in this area.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, no. Our committee does have jurisdiction over these matters. It was not brought to the attention of myself. I saw momentarily the ranking member. I do not see him at the moment. To the best of my knowledge, he did not have knowledge of it aforehand.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank our distinguished colleague. I have known the McCain family. I served with the Senator's father and have followed the distinguished Senator's career, and it stands in parallel to the finest careers of those who have served in this body in years past, today, and who will serve in the future, who have worn the uniform of this country. So I value greatly the views of the Senator from Arizona and I thank him.

Mr. WARNER. I do not think the Senator was eligible then and he is not eligible now. I think it is likely the Senator will never be eligible.

Mr. WARNER. I do not know. I fail to count the number of years. It is 30 plus. But I thank the Senator for his kind remarks. My career is so inconsequential in the U.S. military compared with his. I do believe I received the good conduct medal. To the best of my knowledge, the Senator never received that; did he?

Mr. WARNER. It should not take very long.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer.

Mr. WARNER. Will the Chair recount, for the benefit of the Senate, the order that has just been accepted.