Floor Speech Text
OF H. RES. 114, AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ
RESOLUTION OF 2002 -- (House of Representatives - October 08, 2002)
Hon. John N. Hostettler of Indiana
(Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and
was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Mexico
for yielding me this time.
Today the question before this body, Mr. Speaker, is not ``How shall
we respond to the unprovoked attack by a foreign nation upon the United
States or its fielded military forces abroad?''
We are not debating ``How will we respond to the menace of a political
and/or cultural movement that is enveloping nations across the globe
and is knocking on the door 90 miles off the coast of Florida?''
Nor, Mr. Speaker, are we discussing a response to an act of aggression
by a dictator who has invaded his neighbor and has his sights on 40
percent of the world's oil reserves, an act that could plunge the
American economy, so dependent on energy, into a deep spiral.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, and this point must be made very clear, we are
not discussing how America should respond to the acts of terrorism
on September 11, 2001. That debate and vote was held over a year ago;
and our men and women in uniform, led by our Commander-in-Chief and
Secretary of Defense, are winning the war on terrorism. It is with
their blood, sweat, and tears that they are winning, for
every one of us who will lay our heads
down in peace this night, the right to wake up tomorrow, free.
No, Mr. Speaker, the question before us today is ``Will the House
of Representatives vote to initiate war on another sovereign nation?''
Article I, Section 8 of the governing document of this Republic, the
United States Constitution, gives to Congress the power to provide
for the common defense. It follows that Congress's [sic] power to
declare war must be in keeping with the notion of providing for the
Today, a novel case is being made that the best defense is a good
offense. But is this the power that the Framers of the Constitution
meant to pass down to their posterity when they sought to secure for
us the blessings of liberty? Did they suggest that mothers and fathers
would be required by this august body to give up sons and daughters
because of the possibility of future aggression? Mr. Speaker, I humbly
submit that they did not.
As I was preparing these remarks, I was reminded of an entry on my
desk calendar of April 19. It is an excerpt of the Boston Globe, Bicentennial
Edition, March 9, 1975. It reads, ``At dawn on this morning, April
19, 1775, some 70 Minutemen were assembled on Lexington's green. All
eyes kept returning to where the road from Boston opened onto the
green; all ears strained to hear the drums and double-march of the
approaching British Grenadiers. Waving to the drummer boy to cease
his beat, the Minuteman Captain, John Parker, gave his fateful command:
`Don't fire unless fired upon. But if they want to have a war, let
it begin here.''
``Don't fire unless fired upon.'' It is a notion that is at least
as old as St. Augustine's Just War thesis, and it finds agreement
with the Minutemen and Framers of the Constitution.
We should not turn our back today on millennia of wisdom by proposing
to send America's beautiful sons and daughters into harm's way for
what might be.
We are told that Saddam Hussein might have a nuclear weapon; he might
use a weapon of mass destruction against the United States or our
interests overseas; or he might give such weapons to al Qaeda or another
terrorist organization. But based on the best of our intelligence
information, none of these things have happened. The evidence supporting
what might be is tenuous, at best.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I must conclude that Iraq indeed poses a
threat, but it does not pose an imminent threat that justifies a preemptive
military strike at this time.
Voting for this resolution not only would set an ominous precedent
for using the administration's parameters to justify war against the
remaining partners in the ``Axis of Evil,'' but such a vote for preemption
would also set a standard which the rest of the world would seek to
hold America to and which the rest of the world could justifiably
War should be waged by necessity, and I do not believe that such necessity
is at hand at this time. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I urge my
colleagues to please vote ``no'' on the resolution to approve force
at this time.
Source citation: 107th Congress, 2nd Session, October
8, 2002, Congressional Record, pp. H7286-H7287.