In a message dated 10/10/2002 1:24:10 PM , [log in to unmask] writes: > Subj:CONGRESSWOMAN MAXINE WATERS > > Nationwide, it looks as if we need to help our Congress focus on domestic > agendas. Let's connect our spirits and bring it home! > > Tammy Lee > Reparations Queen LA > <A HREF="http://www.kwanzaapeopleofcolor.com/">http://www.kwanzaapeopleofcolor.com</A> > (323) 296-1532 > > Statement > H. RES. 114, Authorization For Use of > Military Force Against Iraq Resolution > Congresswoman Maxine Waters > Tuesday, October 08, 2002 > > Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) > for yielding me time; and I commend him on the tremendous work that he does > in this Congress dealing with the many complicated problems of foreign > relations. I thank him for the time that he is allocating to me this > evening. > > Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution which would authorize the > President to use unilateral military force against Iraq. > > Mr. Speaker, I do not believe the President has provided sufficient > evidence to conclude that Saddam Hussein currently possesses significant > quantities of weapons of mass destruction. Although I am aware that weapons > inspectors found significant amounts of chemical and biological weapons in > Iraq between 1991 and 1998, those materials have been destroyed. Since that > date, there have been allegations of a growing arsenal of chemical and > biological weapons, but there is to date no credible evidence of such an > arsenal's existence. > > Even if Saddam Hussein does possess weapons of mass destruction, Iraq does > not represent an imminent threat to the United States of America. There is > simply no evidence connecting Saddam Hussein with the 9-11 terrorist > attacks. There is also no evidence to indicate that Saddam Hussein has ever > given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups. > > Furthermore, Iraq is 6,000 miles away from the United States and the Iraqi > regime lacks the capability to strike the United States from within its own > borders. > > The ultimate weapons of mass destruction are nuclear weapons. If > administration officials are really concerned about other countries having > weapons of mass destruction, they should turn their attention to Russia, > China, India, Pakistan, and Israel, all of which are known to possess > nuclear weapons. > > No one doubts that Saddam Hussein is a potential threat to his neighbors in > the Middle East. He has attacked them in the past, and certainly he could > do it again. However, Saddam Hussein's neighbors do not support military > action against Iraq at this time, and it would be diplomatically and > militarily unwise for the United States to initiate a war in the Middle > East without the support and participation of a coalition of countries in > the region. > > If administration officials are concerned about countries that support > terrorism, perhaps they should turn their attention to our friend and ally, > the most undemocratic country, Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has been > financing extremist Islamist madrassahs in Pakistan and other Islamic > countries. These madrassahs, or schools, teach young boys an extreme > interpretation of Islam, combined with a support for terrorism and hatred > for America. But they are our friends, and I do not see talk or discussion > from this administration about trying to bring about democracy in Saudi > Arabia, or being concerned about the financing of the madrassahs and the > things they have been doing for so very long. > > The human and economic cost of a war on Iraq are completely unjustified. It > has been estimated that a war on Iraq would cost between $100 and $200 > billion. This would come at a time when we are already spending billions of > dollars to wage a war against terrorism in Afghanistan. A war on Iraq could > lead to the deaths of thousands of innocent citizens in Iraq and unknown > numbers of American servicemen and women. > > Mr. Speaker, we would like the President to finish the war on terrorism. > While we have had some success in Afghanistan, we still have not located > Osama bin Laden. Our servicemen have been fired on in Afghanistan every > day, and they are all set to assassinate the President or the leader that > we have supported in Afghanistan, and it could happen at any time. > > I am deeply concerned that a unilateral war on Iraq would make Americans > more vulnerable to terrorist attacks at home. A unilateral war on Iraq > could lead to an increase in anti-American extremism throughout the Muslim > world. This could destabilize countries in the Middle East and South Asia. > It could also provide al Qaeda with an opportunity to recruit additional > terrorists within these countries. > > Al Qaeda is America's greatest enemy. We should be focusing our efforts on > confronting the al Qaeda threat, while encouraging the people of the Middle > East and South Asia to support democracy and oppose terrorism. > > Instead of authorizing a unilateral war, Congress should support the > efforts of the United Nations to resume weapons inspections in Iraq. The > resumption of weapons inspections would allow us to determine whether > Saddam Hussein has the weapons of mass destruction that the Bush > administration claims he has. Working with the United Nations would also > illustrate to our allies and people throughout the Muslim world that the > United States respects the rule of law and considers war a last resort. > > I urge Members to oppose unilateral use of America's Armed Forces and give > United Nations weapons inspectors an opportunity to do their work. I urge > my colleagues to oppose this resolution. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: [log in to unmask] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~