BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Speaker, we will be debating an amendment which would not guard our Nation from terrorist infiltration nor even authorize our Armed Forces to eliminate ISIS personnel, equipment, and bases. Instead, the amendment authorizes President Obama to train and equip, with U.S. weaponry, members of the Syrian mujahideen, the so-called moderate rebels.
The amendment states that training and equipment can only be provided to ``vetted'' rebels, but who are those rebels? It says they can't be affiliated with ISIS, al-Nusra, and al Qaeda, which is good, but it would allow President Obama to arm other Islamist fighters who do not meet the threshold of being terrorists, including Harakat al Hazm fighters from the Muslim Brotherhood, the Syria Revolutionaries Front, and the Army of the Mujahideen.
Now, Mujahideen fighters in Syria are not moderates nor are they pro-American. They will take our arms and use them as they see fit, most likely to fight Assad in pursuit of installing a Sunni shari'a state in Syria. They cannot be counted on to vindicate our interests, which is why it is a mistake to subcontract out American national security to Islamist fighters.
Half measures like this, will not suffice. There are no shortcuts when it comes to our national defense.
So I constantly hear people say that Americans are war weary, and I disagree with that. I think Americans are willing to do what it takes to defend our people and our Nation. I think they are weary of missions launched without a coherent strategy and are sick of seeing engagements that produce inconclusive results rather than clear-cut victory. I think they are weary of a President that consistently proves himself unwilling to do what is necessary to win.
I have heard some colleagues say that arming the Syrian Mujahideen demonstrates strength and resolve. I think it is evidence of a lack of resolve. The President's strategy rests on wishful thinking. It is not sufficient to defeat the Islamic State.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT