Listen: 17197661.wav
0:00

As part of congressional debate on the authorization for war in the Persian Gulf, South Dakota’s Democratic Senator Tom Daschle speaks on his view of not authorizing resolution.

Read the Text Transcription of the Audio.

(00:00:00) Do our purposes for being in the Gulf Merit consideration of and support for the president's currently employed strategy? My answer is definitely yes. Do our goals sufficiently argue for the use of strong economic sanctions? My belief and the belief of the vast majority of American people again is yes, do those goals demand the utilization of every diplomatic option available to us. Again, the answer is yes, emphatically. Yes. What do these goals qualify as sufficient reason to suffer the tragic loss of American Life? Especially before we've exhausted every available alternative. my deep conviction is no No, they do not. I cannot look at my 17 year old son. or 19 year old daughter in the eye and say moving Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait obtaining the necessary oil from the Persian Gulf. protecting our allies or saving jobs Is worth your life? I can't say that. if at this time I cannot say it to (00:01:27) them. How in good conscience? Can I say it to a mother or father? How can I say it to a sister or a brother? (00:01:43) My second concern is how this all may be interpreted. both at home and abroad in spite of conflicting signals, which a debate of this kind may send it is most important. In fact, I'd say that it is probably the most important debate that any country can undertake that of initiating or preventing War. And while in dictatorships around the world one, man can commit thousands of his countrymen to their fate in a democracy the weight of that decision falls upon all of us elected to do it in this manner. with proper consideration of facts and the views of all of our people and in this case there is virtual unanimity in regard to our purpose and to our goals that needs to be emphasized and restated without qualification the debate now relates to the appropriateness of a proposed strategy not our stated goals. Nor should this be interpreted as an effort to undermine. The president is the senator from Oklahoma has so eloquently stated that is not our intent. We would not have remained silent on this floor for six months even during an election at someone intended to undermine the president. This is a constructive debate about two strategies. Both proposed by the president one which is implemented and one which maybe and for many the debate is not even over the propriety of the second strategy only the timing. (00:03:21) my third question my third (00:03:24) concern Is that as we debate this question for the most part? We're doing it alone. I'm pleased with the actions taken by the United Nations. I sincerely hope that we rely upon the UN for even more opportunities in the future certainly their actions in the past six months have demonstrated even to the most Ardent cynic the importance of the United Nations now and in the future its involvement in the decisions on sanctions is laudable. as we speak the president of the United Nations seeks yet another opportunity through diplomatic means to find Solutions and ultimate success in the Persian Gulf and he is hardly to be commended. My concern lies with some of its members and their lack of similar involvement and commitment to our efforts in the Persian Gulf Way. Are they in there in this crisis? Why are they more willing to commit resources and personnel? I just returned from South Dakota. And I had an opportunity to visit with many of my cut my constituents about our policy in the Gulf. They're equally as concerned about the quote balance of sacrifice. We've talked about a lot today. They continue to ask questions for which I can find no satisfactory answer. Why can't the sacrifice be commensurate with position? Why can't the sacrifice relate to the financial conditions of the respective countries involved? Why can't it relate to the dependence upon oil in the Gulf or do the threat of the respective economies? One constituent relay to conversation that he had had recently with the European Beast. Businessman. When asked why Europeans weren't willing to commit troops their answer was immediate. We clearly put a higher value on life than you do. your murder rate your death rate your birth rate proves (00:05:26) that I don't believe that for a minute. I don't believe that. (00:05:35) But I can't help believe that that may have been a factor in their unwillingness to send troops to the Gulf. and even in the consideration of their votes in the United Nations, why not vote to use all necessary means When it is not your troops, it is not your sons and daughters were going to be sent. My fourth concern is the rationale for changing our course right now. Today the president has not indicated that the Embargo is not working. If it wasn't working who would not have been it would have been terminated. But every indication is that when it comes to creating economic pain and Military vulnerability it is working today. It has been working the last several months and numerous references have been made to considerable less for expert testimony before Congress before the Committees of Congress including that of CIA director Webster. The Embargo has been a success has it been a 100% success? No has it stopped military parts from government coming into the country. Absolutely. Yes as it cut off their economic viability. Absolutely. Yes. Well it continued to hurt them in ways beyond that which we can calculate today. Absolutely. (00:06:55) Yes. So if it is working (00:07:00) and there is a reason to believe that over a period of time it can succeed. Is it not in our best interest to determine its success or failure before we subscribe to an alternative strategy? It seems a win-win proposition to me either the Embargo succeeds in Iraq withdraws from Kuwait or it fails. And as a result of a significantly weakened position Iraq becomes even more vulnerable. to military confrontation in the future the administration argues that a prolonged effort to sustain the Embargo will fracture the Coalition that the Coalition will split apart. Should it take too long? Should that be the case? I have two questions. What does that say about our purpose? Are the Coalition partners then saying that the cost of sanctions is greater than the cost of an Iraqi presence in Kuwait. If so, what about the cost of War? And secondly if we cannot therefore sustain a Coalition in peace, does anyone truly believe that we can sustain a (00:08:08) Coalition in war? Well that leads me to my final concern. (00:08:17) my final and greatest concern Is that in separating my opposition to a strategy in the Gulf for my support? Not only for our goal. But most importantly to our men and women who have been sent there are commitment must be to them regardless of strategies and goals. They are the most important thing in the world more important than oil than dictators and politics. They are our (00:08:47) family. There are brothers and sisters. They ought not merely be my concern. But the concern of our policy, whatever we decide. (00:09:02) Clearly they are the concern of our (00:09:03) country. And For Heaven's Sake tonight tomorrow the next day as we debate this issue. They have to be uppermost in her mind. (00:09:16) There are commitments we owe these Young Americans (00:09:18) before during and after. We order them to war. We owe them everything. (00:09:30) And should this nation go to war. I'll have a lot more to say about our commitment then. suffice to say we cannot under everything that is right. We cannot ask them to fight without using every conventional means available to them. (00:09:49) And when they come home. We owe it to them to provide every (00:09:55) attention to Health Care available to us. That includes the benefit of the doubt of chemical or biological harm. May occur to them 20 30 or 40 years, hence. remember that Remember that they're going to come home with weapons. We can't see because the last veterans came home with weapons. We couldn't see. (00:10:25) It's ironic. (00:10:27) That as we debate providing victims of the last chemical warfare. Just compensation. We Now find ourselves with the prospect of sending (00:10:40) more men and more women to their same fate That too (00:10:47) is something about which I will have more to say at a later (00:10:50) date. And another time. But let me reiterate. this nation owes these men and women are strongest commitment during and after they go to war (00:11:10) just as we expect that they must give their very best. Should they go to war? So must we now commit to doing our very (00:11:19) best before that war. (00:11:25) And it is this concern which has led me to come to the conclusions. I have the question is before we commit to War as this government down. Its very best. If we're going to ask them to do their best, have we done our best before we say now is the time? To that simple question. There's a complicated answer. Yes. The president has done his best in involving the world community in joining us in the effort. And I use the word joining because I have you joining and participating as two different things. While our Coalition Partners have joined the United States and its effort many have yet to effectively participate. Yes, this country has done its best in coordinating the Embargo. Perhaps the most effective embargo in modern history. But if we done our best in other (00:12:18) respects. I believe. They have we have yet to do (00:12:25) our best in determining the success of that embargo. Who Among Us can say with any confidence that the Embargo will fail? And if we can't say that, how is it even possible to consider the loss of one American life before? We assure that the young men and women who may lose their lives. That we have done our best to ensure the success of this option before we resort to (00:12:49) war. (00:12:53) We've also not done our best when it comes to diplomacy 6 hours of talk with Iraqis after six months of Confrontation is not doing our best. To say we won't talk on this or that day. We won't travel to this or that City. That's not doing our best. Nor is it doing our best to set artificial deadlines? No one has yet explained the significance of January 15th. What is it about that date? That's worth one American Life. What do we tell families of those who may lose their lives on January 16th, but whose lives could have been saved had we waited until April or July or October? If we can save American Life by waiting and until another date. Yet still succeed in removing the Iraqis from Kuwait. Isn't that worth a life (00:13:51) to do? at some point (00:13:58) we've even got to ask ourselves if we done our best in financing this conflict. financing if we succeeded have we done our best in obtaining the financial assistance from others? And to the degree we failed we must ask ourselves. How is it that we intend to pay for our presence there? Certainly, we shouldn't be relegated to borrowing the resources for a cause. So worthy that we are now prepared to send our best into combat. And if we demand from them the courage to fight. Then we ought to demonstrate the courage to find the means to (00:14:39) pay. (00:14:45) Well therefore mr. President. one must ask can we really look these young men in the women and women in the eye and say (00:14:55) yes. Yes. We've done our best. (00:15:00) We've done our best diplomatically we've done our best economically. Therefore now we ask you to do your best in (00:15:09) war. The president must think (00:15:14) so. Many of my colleagues do so, too. (00:15:21) But I have concluded that we have not. (00:15:25) Nor do I have the confidence that we in the Congress in particular have done our best to address these concerns prior to committing our families to (00:15:32) war. So today tomorrow. (00:15:39) And for the foreseeable (00:15:40) future. Can only insist that we do so. (00:15:46) That we consider every diplomatic option available to us. and two others That we enforce the Embargo and monitor its success. That we determine that success before we commit to war. And that before we commit to (00:16:04) war. (00:16:06) We ensure that all of our Coalition Partners commit their people, (00:16:09) too. And above all mr. President. Let us be convinced (00:16:21) beyond the shadow of a doubt that our purposes and our goals adequately (00:16:26) demand. the loss of American Life (00:16:31) only then mr. President. But we have done our (00:16:35) best. only then are we prepared for war?

Funders

Digitization made possible by the State of Minnesota Legacy Amendment’s Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund, approved by voters in 2008.

This Story Appears in the Following Collections

Views and opinions expressed in the content do not represent the opinions of APMG. APMG is not responsible for objectionable content and language represented on the site. Please use the "Contact Us" button if you'd like to report a piece of content. Thank you.

Transcriptions provided are machine generated, and while APMG makes the best effort for accuracy, mistakes will happen. Please excuse these errors and use the "Contact Us" button if you'd like to report an error. Thank you.

< path d="M23.5-64c0 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.2 -0.1 0.1-0.1 0.1-0.2 0.1 -0.1 0.1-0.1 0.3-0.1 0.4 -0.2 0.1 0 0.2 0 0.3 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 0 0.1 0 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.2 0 0.4-0.1 0.5-0.1 0.2 0 0.4 0 0.6-0.1 0.2-0.1 0.1-0.3 0.3-0.5 0.1-0.1 0.3 0 0.4-0.1 0.2-0.1 0.3-0.3 0.4-0.5 0-0.1 0-0.1 0-0.2 0-0.1 0.1-0.2 0.1-0.3 0-0.1-0.1-0.1-0.1-0.2 0-0.1 0-0.2 0-0.3 0-0.2 0-0.4-0.1-0.5 -0.4-0.7-1.2-0.9-2-0.8 -0.2 0-0.3 0.1-0.4 0.2 -0.2 0.1-0.1 0.2-0.3 0.2 -0.1 0-0.2 0.1-0.2 0.2C23.5-64 23.5-64.1 23.5-64 23.5-64 23.5-64 23.5-64"/>