John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. The amendment has been here for some time. I have had an opportunity to examine it. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WARNER. Yes, out of respect for our distinguished colleague.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I say to my good friend, we have now spent 30 minutes working out this time arrangement.

Mr. WARNER. As amended.

Mr. WARNER. Has the Chair announced the acceptance of the unanimous consent request?

Mr. WARNER. All right. We have the opportunity, Senator. Is there anything you wish to ask of me? And I will ask a few of you.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it might be the case, but I would be willing to make a modest wager with you that if you got this conference under way, the first thing that they would ask would be to suspend this timetable of July 1, 2007.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I think I have the floor.

Mr. WARNER. I am trying to accommodate Senators. I ask my friend, if he desires to speak, can he advise the manager of the bill how much time he would like?

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Chair.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I simply wish to acquaint Senators with the fact that we are beginning a 5-hour debate on the Levin amendment; is that correct?

Mr. WARNER. And within that period of time, speaking for my time, I will manage the time, but I would be anxious to have those colleagues who wish to participate to indicate to me the periods which would be most convenient for them, and I will do my very best to accommodate all of the speakers.

Mr. WARNER. I see the principal cosponsor, the Senator from Rhode Island, a member of our committee, is waiting to speak. I would just like to inquire the following of my colleague. I have found in our many years in this body that the most effective means to convey a message, the most effective way for the persons beyond this Chamber to follow proceedings on the floor, is often through a colloquy where we not just read speeches but we begin to exchange interpretations of what is before this body by virtue of your amendment and get the responses. Might I inquire of my colleague of his willingness to permit the Senator from Virginia, at such time as the Senator from Rhode Island has completed, to get up and propound questions chargeable to my side and responses that you wish to make, to the extent you wish to make them, chargeable to your side? Is that a procedure about which I can be persuasive to my colleague, which I find to be a very effective way to deal with this?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would have to respectfully disagree with what is usual. Time and time again, Senators get up and allocate between themselves the question and answer. I have to take it we are confined primarily, I imagine, to the reading of speeches by individuals and limiting the ability to have a colloquy.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator has made clear his statement. I yield the floor as a courtesy to the Senator from Rhode Island.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, let me inquire of colleagues on this side who wish to speak. We started this morning by according the Senator from Michigan and the Senator from Rhode Island their opportunities. I have spoken on this side. I know Senator McCain has just arrived, and Senator Cornyn. So I say to Senator McCain, I think you were the first on the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask that Senator McCain follow me, and then we will rotate to this side and back to Senator Cornyn. So at this time, I yield the floor and ask unanimous consent that recognition be given to the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. WARNER. Why don't you designate someone?

Mr. WARNER. Following that, Senator Cornyn will speak.

Mr. WARNER. He would follow Senator McCain and the distinguished Senator from New York and the Senator from Texas.

Mr. WARNER. Then the Senator from Colorado.

Mr. WARNER. You designate that Senator. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we grant 12 minutes to the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I yield myself just a minute or two. I listened carefully, as I do to all the comments made by my colleagues, and I believe I heard my distinguished colleague from California say that the most costly war ever is the one we are engaged in. I would like to remind my colleague and all those listening and all in America--we deeply grieve the 2,500 lives we have lost thus far and the 18,000 wounded--but I remember so well when I was but 17 or just turned 18. I was in the Navy during the last battle of World War II; just one of those battles in World War II. I was in the training command at that time awaiting my orders to go to the Pacific. It began on Easter Sunday morning, and it ended 81 days later. One battle, 81 days, in 1945. Let me tell my colleague what America suffered. Twelve thousand men, and I expect some women, were killed or missing and never accounted for; 38,000 were wounded, 763 aircraft were lost, 368 U.S. naval ships either sunk or were severely damaged. We have to be cautious and put this conflict in context with the sacrifices that Americans have made. That was just one battle in World War II. The casualties eventually went over a half a million. That was only one battle. As we look at this conflict, yes, we grieve the losses, but we have to maintain this steadfast commitment, as we did in World War II, to put an end to this tyranny of terrorism. If not, we will not see casualties like Okinawa in any military conflict in the years to come between soldiers, sailors, airmen, and their counterparts, but we could see those casualties here at home if these terrorists acquire weapons of mass destruction or are given places in the world to have their training camps, and if they perceive that this Nation is in any way wavering its commitment to fight terrorism in every aspect we can. So I would say to my dear colleague, I don't think this is the most costly war ever, as I believe the record will reflect.

Mr. WARNER. I yield the floor.