Real Security in a Dangerous World

Real Security in a Dangerous World

I am proud to be introduced by Medal of Honor winner Paul Bucha; he defended our freedom on the battlefield, and he has continued to fight for what is right in America.

I appreciate your invitation to address some of the important national security challenges facing the United States.

President Bush has led our country in a dangerous direction, weakening our security and our standing in the world. Those who rubber stamp his policies are endorsing a policy of failure. It's time we forge a new direction that makes America as safe as it should be and restores our moral authority in the word.

Five years ago, radical terrorists struck this country. Many Connecticut men and women were killed on September 11th. It was a shocking and awful time, a sad time that eventually became a time of hope. We came together as a people, without regard to party, without regard to political philosophy, and we acted as one nation.

Since September 11 President Bush and his supporters have squandered the good will and support the world offered to us. Today America is weaker, not stronger. We have sacrificed our daughters and sons and our treasure in a war we didn't have to fight. We have ignored the real threats and security needs in the war we should be fighting against terrorists.

Senator Lieberman believes that we are "safer" than we were on 9/11. He believes that President Bush "has it right" in Iraq.

He is dangerously wrong.

Look at the President's "axis of evil." Iraq is lurching toward chaos in a civil war with whole provinces lost to insurgents. Iran is emboldened and threatens Israel through its proxies. North Korea may soon threaten the world through nuclear blackmail.

America cannot afford any more blind faith in the President's policies. We cannot afford more rubberstamping. It's time to hold those who have failed accountable.

This year the people of Connecticut are saying, simply, that we are on the wrong path - and we need a better way. We can't "stay the course" when that course is not working.

Today America needs strength in this dangerous world. We must be able to deter our enemies, protect our friends, advance our interests and sustain our historic support for human rights and dignity.

But strength is not enough. We also need judgment. Judgment has been conspicuously absent in Washington these past six years, and our nation is the worse for it.

We are being led by a foreign policy team with years of inside the beltway experience. What they lack is the sound judgment to take on our enemies and win.

We went to war with a country that did not have weapons of mass destruction, ignored the two that did and took our eye off the ball in the war on terror.

The fault of our failures is not the President's alone.

It is the job of Congress to provide the necessary checks and balances, to work with the President when he's right - but hold him to account when he's wrong. President Bush rushed us into this war based on trumped up intelligence, and Senator Lieberman cheered him on every step of the way.

President Bush failed in the execution of this war, and Senator Lieberman failed to hold him accountable. Since the start of the Iraq war, Senator Lieberman has missed more than half of all votes on the war.

Throughout this war, Connecticut needed a second Senator who would ask the tough questions when it mattered. And, we need one now.

That's not partisanship. When you're a senator, that's called doing your job.

We know that the United States has a special place in the world. For half a century after World War II we had truly bipartisan foreign policy, led by Democrats like Truman and Kennedy and Clinton, and Republicans from Senator Arthur Vandenberg to Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

Just two days ago, we rightly remembered 9/11. A day of great tragedy and sorrow that changed our world forever.

But, there's another day we should remember - 11/9. That's November 9th, 1989, the day the Berlin wall came down. That day symbolized an extraordinary victory for a country which is strongest when we are unified and when we work steadfastly with our allies.

We waged a struggle for the hearts and minds of millions around the world because we knew that was the best way to protect our security. And, we won.

That strong, bipartisan consensus was energized by honest debate at home.

We cannot let this Administration hijack the term "bipartisan foreign policy" and turn it into "my way or the highway," policies that weaken our security and lessen our democracy.

Unfortunately, this President has broken the rules of bipartisan foreign policy and set us on a dangerous course.

I recall the words of Benjamin Franklin that "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." Intimidation does not work in a democracy.

When Vice President Dick Cheney says that the voters of Connecticut give encouragement to Al Qaeda; when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says that those who criticize his incompetence are practicing appeasement; and when Senator Lieberman has the nerve to say that it is not appropriate to question the President during a time of war, they are playing politics at its worst.

We know why they don't want to be questioned. President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Senator Lieberman have been so wrong about so much. My fellow citizens, I will never hesitate to question what's wrong and to fight for what's right, especially when it comes to protecting your safety.

Today, when it comes to protecting our nation and projecting our values, America is on the wrong path.

But, we can right that path and choose a different direction that protects our country.

The first thing we must do is to fight a more effective war against jihadi terrorism, with strength, values and judgment.

I supported our invasion of Afghanistan. That's where Al Qaeda was. That's where terror was breeding.

Five years later, the war in Iraq has drawn resources away from Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. The Taliban is making a comeback, and Afghanistan risks becoming yet again a safe haven for terrorists.

In 2002, the 5th Special Forces Group was pulled from the hunt for Osama bin Laden to prepare for the Iraqi invasion. Their replacements were troops with expertise in Spanish culture.

Today we have five times as many troops in Iraq as we do in Afghanistan. We spend more in a eight weeks in Iraq than we do in an entire year in Afghanistan. These decisions are wrong, and they've left us less safe. Each day, Afghanistan falls further and further towards chaos.

Many former Generals who are now free to speak out, like General Anthony Zinni, former head of the U.S. Central Command, have said that the Iraq war has hurt our ability to win the war on terror.

It's time we refocus on the real threat to Americans. Terrorists haven't taken their eye off of us, and we should never take our eye off of them.

To prevail, we must devote to Afghanistan the resources needed to finish the job. We need to strengthen our Special Forces in Afghanistan and enhance our equipment including predator drones to target the terrorists and helicopters to track them down.

To prevail, we must fully and finally implement the 9-11 recommendations.

Five years after 9/11 we still have gaping holes in our homeland security. Last year, the bipartisan 9-11 Commission gave President Bush and Congress 10 C's, 12 D's and four F's on the vital measures needed to keep us safe.

We must stop squandering taxpayer dollars on "bridges to nowhere" and invest in programs at home to keep us safe.

For $1.5 billion, less than one week in Iraq, we could scan every cargo container bound for American ports and prevent terrorists from shipping weapons of mass destruction.

We must secure mass transit systems, nuclear and chemical plants, ports and major cities throughout Connecticut and its neighboring states.

Over the last three years, Connecticut has seen an 86% cut in federal homeland security funding. Much of that has to do with President Bush's budget cuts, but it also has to do with Congress not better-targeting resources to high-threat urban areas.

Three years ago, Senator Lieberman missed a tie-breaking vote to target security funding to high risk urban areas.

Three years ago, Senator Lieberman was the difference between Connecticut getting what it needs to secure our state, and the bill being defeated.

To prevail in the war on terror, we must also rebuild our on-the-ground human intelligence capabilities and combine that intelligence with that of our key allies.

To prevail, we must recognize that the CIA is right when it warns the war in Iraq is breeding hatred of the United States. We are creating enemies at the very moment when we need friends. We can't fight terrorism on our own. We can't fight it with military strength alone. We can't fight it without winning the hearts and minds of millions of people around the world. Fifty years of real bipartisan foreign policy in the cold war reminds us: we've done it before and we can do it again.

The second challenge is Iraq.

To really prevail in the war on terror, we must get out of Iraq. In order to wage the war on terror effectively, we need to get out of Iraq.

President Bush seems immune to reason on Iraq.

His father, President George H. W. Bush and Assistant for National Security Affairs Brent Scowcroft explicitly decided against invading and occupying Iraq, warning that their international coalition would have collapsed, the Arab supporters would have deserted the cause in anger, and that the U.S. could conceivably have been "An occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."

They said if American invaded Iraq, "It would have been a dramatically different - and perhaps barren - outcome."

The son did invade Iraq, and his father's predictions proved to be right.

Yet this President and Senator Lieberman stay the course despite the barren outcome in this bitterly hostile land.

The Iraqis need to know that ours is not an open-ended commitment. The Iraqis need to take responsibility for their own future. They will not do so until we make it clear that their fate is in their hands, not ours. They must carry the responsibility of creating a workable political outcome, and they must own the outcome.

That will not happen unless we make it clear to the Maliki government that there is a timeline to redeploy our troops That is our best hope for victory, or at least a stable Iraq that is not a breeding ground for terrorists and a threat to its neighbors and beyond.

Even the President implicitly admits that "stay the course" is not a winning strategy. He's gone from "Mission Accomplished" to arguing, in effect, "Hey, it could be worse."
The President knows we are not winning this war. He is trying to hang on, prevent defeat and pass this war on the next President. Why does Joe Lieberman continue to support that course of action?

The President knows that an Iraq settlement cannot succeed without major economic aid. Our aid program ends this October - next month! He knows we must have a serious, multi-year aid program to avoid disaster. Why does Joe Lieberman continue to support this broken policy?

We must draw down our forces and make it clear that our role of maintaining internal security will soon end. American forces remaining in the region should be used only to sustain regional respect for Iraq's integrity, ongoing training of the Iraqi military, and special operations.

Within the region, the United States may well have a useful role to play in helping Iraq's neighbors recognize that they have much to lose from a failed Iraq. Turkey does not want an independent Kurdistan. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria and other Sunni-majority states do not want an Iraqi Shiite alliance with Iran. Iran, already managing a tense confrontation with western countries over its nuclear ambitions, does not need a revisited Persian/Arab confrontation with its neighbors if it overplays its hand with the Shiites.

There is opportunity for diplomatic progress here. . It is in America's- and the world's - interest for such an agreement to be reached, monitored and held together. U.S. troops redeployed within the region could be very helpful in reinforcing the American interest in regional stability.

A third major challenge is to rebuild the military that has been so weakened by George W. Bush's policies.

I hear it from families whose loved ones are in the reserves or the National Guard. Many are in their second or third tour of duty. Most vividly and painfully, I hear from families whose sons and daughters are serving with valor without the body armor, support and equipment they need.

Our force readiness - our ability to fight another war should we have to - is lower today than it was six years ago. Most Army units are at their lowest state of readiness. They have shortages of personnel, equipment and training. Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island points out that we do not have a single combat-ready brigade in the Army, and we need billions per year just to repair and maintain equipment used in Iraq. We are less able to use our armed forces elsewhere should that become necessary, and we could not fight a second major conflict because our readiness has declined.

President Bush's "staying the course" in Iraq is damaging our national security, and all Joe Lieberman can say is "Bottom line: I think George Bush has it right."

The fourth great challenge is to once again lead in the effort to bring peace and security to the Middle East.

We cannot shrink from our duty to help Israel protect itself: to live in peace with secure and recognized borders. Israel is surrounded by hostile powers. Even the most ardent supporter of land for peace must acknowledge that Hamas and Hezbollah are bent on Israel's destruction. We may wish for peace, but facts are not wishes. Today we must stand with Israel.

And in the long run we cannot shrink from our mission to bring peace to that region. We know the general outlines of what must be an ultimate settlement. Land for peace. Israel, with secure borders and an end to war. For Palestinians, a country that renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel, and offers its own people a chance to live a better life. For the region, the chance, at long last, to turn from hatred to economic cooperation and a modern prosperity.

I recall the wisdom of Connecticut's Senator Abraham Ribicoff, who noted on many occasions that America was Israel's best ally when we had respect and credibility and influence throughout the region. President Bush has squandered that respect and credibility.

He seems to think that refusing to talk with those who have different interests is a character flaw. His Administration is trying to isolate Syria and Iran. Instead, we are isolating the United States. I am reminded that Prime Minister Rabin said that of course you negotiate with your adversaries - with whom else could you negotiate?

In all these areas, George W. Bush has pursued misguided policies that combine grand intentions with hubris and incompetence. Joe Lieberman has stood strongly with George Bush as our foreign policy has deteriorated.

Iran is a true threat, angrily opposed to the United States, threatening to build nuclear weapons and to annihilate Israel. Now is the time for us to work with Europe, China and the international community to confront Iran, engage in tough, no-nonsense negotiations and say to Iran that an active nuclear program is unacceptable.

Sanctions and tough measures may ultimately prove to be necessary, but we cannot make progress if we continue to call for overthrow of the government and refrain from direct dialogue. One of the least helpful initiatives coming from the U.S. Senate in recent years is Republican Senator Santorum's "Iran Freedom and Support Act" to provide financial assistance to opposition groups in Iran opposed to the current government.

The proposal sounds a lot like the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 that proved to be a precursor to war. Senator Lieberman supports Senator Santorum's regime change bill, and even appeared on television threatening military action. Make no mistake - the use of force is always on the table against those who threaten us. But, strength must always be matched with judgment. He and President Bush have to decide. Are they in favor of tough, frank engagement with Iran, - or do they want to overthrow the regime? If you want results from Iran, you can't have it both ways.

Today, North Korea is a growing threat with the potential to deteriorate further, run by a murderous tyrant, threatening to use his own nuclear program and threatening his neighbors. Our policies have been incoherent and ineffective. North Korea has quadrupled its nuclear weapons capability over the past five years. As the world grew more dangerous on George Bush's watch, Joe Lieberman stood with him.

Russia is the one country capable of destroying the United States. President Bush looked in Russian President Vladimir Putin's eyes and said he saw his soul and trusted him. Finally, even Vice President Cheney admits Russia has backslid into authoritarianism. For six years, as President Bush looked the other way, Joe Lieberman looked with him.

What's especially dismaying about this record of failure is that we have not put our own interests and our values first.

Rather than walking away from the Kyoto accords, America has a duty to lead the world toward recognizing the threat of global warming. We can build an energy and environmental policy that creates jobs while stopping this threat to our very survival.

Working toward these greater goals, we have a duty to build a new web of alliances and institutions, to bind other nations to us and to reinforce our leadership - just as bipartisan leaders did after World War II.

We need to set a moral example Americans can be proud of and the world may aspire to. The Defense Department and the current Attorney General under this President condoned the use of torture at Abu Ghraib, at Guantanamo and in Eastern Europe, putting our own troops at risk and creating a battle cry for terrorists.

Where, I ask, is the voice of moral outrage from Senator Joseph Lieberman?

Sometimes I think American politics are caught between two false historical analogies. Conservatives see every negotiation as a possible "Munich." Liberals see every exertion of American strength as a possible Vietnam. In fact, we need both: strength and judgment. The strength to face our enemies; the judgment to do it right.

It's time for us, right now and right here in Connecticut, to help lead the way to real national security and a better tomorrow.

It will be difficult. As the journalist Edward R. Murrow observed, "Difficulty is the one excuse that history never accepts."

For the sake of our country, no excuses: together we will rebuild our alliances and rebuild our country, stay true to our ideals and worthy of global leadership, and the world will be safer and better for it.

http://nedlamont.com/news/1415/real-security-in-a-dangerous-world