{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-1998-12-18-pt1-PgE2345", "1998-12-18", 105, 2, null, null, "EXPRESSING UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT FOR MEN AND WOMEN OF OUR ARMED FORCES CURRENTLY CARRYING OUT MISSIONS IN AND AROUND PERSIAN GULF REGION", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E2345", "E2345", "[{\"name\": \"John Conyers, Jr.\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"105\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"612\"}]", "144 Cong. Rec. E2345", "Congressional Record, Volume 144 Issue 154 (Friday, December 18, 1998)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 154 (Friday, December 18, 1998)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E2345]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n EXPRESSING UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT FOR MEN AND WOMEN OF OUR ARMED FORCES\n   CURRENTLY CARRYING OUT MISSIONS IN AND AROUND PERSIAN GULF REGION\n\n                                 ______\n\n                               speech of\n\n                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.\n\n                              of michigan\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                      Thursday, December 17, 1998\n\n  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, last night the president ordered an\nAmerican missile attack on Iraq. Going to war is one of the most\nserious decisions that Congress can make, and that is why I chose to\nnot take this vote lightly. As a veteran and a Member of Congress, I\nwill honor our troops by working to keep them out of harm's way and the\nworld at peace.\n  I am convinced that the effect of H. Res. 612 will be for Congress to\nabandon its proper role on deciding when to go to war, one of the\ngreatest issues of Constitutional importance. This act of war being\nundertaken raises many questions in my mind. How long does the bombing\nneed to go on before the executive will obtain congressional authority?\nAt what point will we deem the bombing a success? What are our goals in\nthe bombing? If the stated goal of the bombing is to destroy weapons of\nmass destruction, then that is what this resolution should have\ndeclared.\n  The United Nations must remain a central component of our policy\ntoward Iraq. I believe it is extremely dangerous to carry out this\nbombing without the full support of our allies. Failing to do so not\nonly undermines our trust internationally, it also denies our troops\nthe additional military support they deserve. In addition, I do not\nbelieve that it is up to the United States to unilaterally determine\nwhat constitutes a violation of United Nations Security Council\nResolutions. That role properly resides with the UN Security Council.\nChina, Russia and France are already outraged with the American\ndecision to interpret the resolution unilaterally.\n  I am also concerned because this bombing campaign will in effect, if\nnot intent, abandon UNSCOM, the special commission created after the\nGulf War to carry out weapons inspections. This clearly begs the\nquestion: What will our new disarmament policy be? And how will we\nconduct inspections, since, as the Pentagon has pointed out, much of\nthe inspection equipment will be destroyed? UNSCOM is an imperfect\ntool, but it is a necessary tool.\n  This resolution affirms that it should be the policy of the United\nStates to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Members of Congress need to know if\nthis means that our troops will remain engaged in combat until that\nhappens.\n  If overthrowing the government is a reference to a massive covert\noperation, I would point out that the record of such undertaking in\nIraq is not comforting. The New York Times has called the proposed\noperation an ``expensive fantasy,'' and I think there are a lot of\nserious problems to consider. For one, we're not sure if the opposition\nin Southern Iraq actually controls any territory or how united they\nare. I also doubt that we will be able to get our allies in the region\nto endorse the overt overthrow of the Government of Iraq, however\nunpopular that government may be among our friends and the Iraqi\npeople. Kuwait has insisted that any covert action should be part of a\nlarger policy, including one that better addresses the humanitarian\ncrisis in Iraq. Otherwise it is unsustainable.\n  Most critically, when we get down to life or death decisions during a\ncovert action, how far will U.S. support be willing to go? I can\nimagine some horrible scenarios if the U.S. is asked to help the Iraqi\nresistance if their rebellion appears to be failing. Haven't we been\ndown this road before?\n  We need to keep the United Nations at center stage, and reinvent a\nvigorous weapons inspection regime that facilitates disarmament in the\nMiddle East. We need to build political support in Iraq and in the\nregion by revisiting the economic sanctions that have caused a great\nhumanitarian disaster. Most importantly, all of these efforts must be\nthe product of a clear and strong international consensus.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-1998-12-18-pt1-PgE2345"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 16.076644067652524, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}