Souder Speaks Out About Iraq, Federal Spending
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
The war started with a United States-led invasion of the country. The rationale for the war offered by the George W. Bush administration, at the time of invasion, which was backed by Congress, was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an imminent threat to the United States and the world community.[[In-content Ad]]Other reasons for the invasion offered by U.S. officials have included concerns about terrorism, the Iraqi government's abuse of its own citizens and the economic importance of Iraq's oil supply
Times-Union managing editor Gary Gerard asked the Third District Representative how he wanted to see the war resolved.
What Souder said he didn't want to see was Congress mandating restrictions. "If 535 people start to micro-manage the situation, things can only be worse than they are."
Souder expressed his disappointment with President George W. Bush.
"I don't favor the surge (of troops). How do you hold the course? It's a civil war. It was always about ethnic, religious groups, 20 million people intent on killing each other.
"Do you send 1 million or 1.5 million soldiers to contain that?"
Originally, Souder said, there was a 60 percent chance Iraq had developed weapons of mass destruction.
"We didn't have the intelligence. Now we know they were developing weapons to hit 12 targets in the U.S. We've seen the maps with targets."
New intelligence indicates the Iraqis had the capability to launch missiles loaded with chemicals and biological "back packs."
"They had sarin gas," Souder said. "If they would have hit here, it wouldn't be a couple of hundred people dead, like in Japan (on a Tokyo subway in 1995), but tens of thousands."
Souder said the Iraqis will have their own military force in place within six to 12 months.
He said he is in favor of partitioning and a gradual pullout. The question is how much, where and when.
Bush's attitude is to "take no prisoners" with the surge, Souder said.
"We were right to go in, to have a presence, to go after the terrorists in our national interests," Souder said. "But we'll never establish a democracy there."
He suggested moving out of the major cities and retreating to the borders to watch the Jordanian, Iranian and Syrian borders. A base in Iraq would increase the U.S. presence in the region, which also includes military encampments in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean.
"If Bush wasn't so dog-gone stubborn, we'll have a Vietnam-like pullout. It feels so much like Vietnam to people my age," said the 57-year-old. "That means a pull out at the last minute and all that chaos.
"To protect our national interests, we have to have a base there."
"Bush doesn't want the perception of troops dying in vain," Gerard said. "He must get to the middle ground."
"I agree with you," Souder said. "He doesn't want to leave that legacy.
"Bush should have kept the reasons for the war about our own national interests and defense, not to bring democracy to the region.
"What is this baloney about democracy? The different factions do not get along together. They would kill each other if they met in my office."
Gerard asked Souder about the national budget, especially the deficit. "You spend it all and then some," he said. "It's an insane level of spending.
"This kind of happened to (President Ronald) Reagan, too. He was right on revenue, wrong on spending. Why didn't Bush veto (the recent budget) if for no other reason than to curb spending? All the focus is on pork projects, but that's not the problem."
Souder said as far as discretionary spending, the national park budget is up 3 percent; education is up to 6 percent. Foreign aid was cut 50 percent.
Where spending is out of control is from recent Supreme Court decisions about Medicare.
"We're funding illegals," Souder said. "In one Atlanta hospital, 85 percent of the births were illegals. And we have to fund them all.
"Following the passage of the Patriot Bill, we traded homeland security for No Child Left Behind and Medicare increases."
"So, it all boils down to politics and horsetrading," Gerard said. "My concern is if we keep going at this rate of spending we'll become a third world country. There are looming economic troubles ahead for us."
"Social Security is 70 percent of the budget," Souder said. "Everyone wants the best health care, cheaper medications, every new innovation.
"With today's elementary school-aged children expected to live to age 110, we have to work longer, save more, scale down our lifestyles and cap Social Security.
"When we hit 65, will we surrender our power so our kids don't have to pay a 50 percent FICA tax?"
The Congressman said, in the near future, energy sources and water supplies will be the biggest issues.
"What about catastrophic events? During World War I we had the influenza that killed tens of thousands of people.
"What I don't have is people back here discussing anything. It's discouraging."
Latest News
E-Editions
The war started with a United States-led invasion of the country. The rationale for the war offered by the George W. Bush administration, at the time of invasion, which was backed by Congress, was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an imminent threat to the United States and the world community.[[In-content Ad]]Other reasons for the invasion offered by U.S. officials have included concerns about terrorism, the Iraqi government's abuse of its own citizens and the economic importance of Iraq's oil supply
Times-Union managing editor Gary Gerard asked the Third District Representative how he wanted to see the war resolved.
What Souder said he didn't want to see was Congress mandating restrictions. "If 535 people start to micro-manage the situation, things can only be worse than they are."
Souder expressed his disappointment with President George W. Bush.
"I don't favor the surge (of troops). How do you hold the course? It's a civil war. It was always about ethnic, religious groups, 20 million people intent on killing each other.
"Do you send 1 million or 1.5 million soldiers to contain that?"
Originally, Souder said, there was a 60 percent chance Iraq had developed weapons of mass destruction.
"We didn't have the intelligence. Now we know they were developing weapons to hit 12 targets in the U.S. We've seen the maps with targets."
New intelligence indicates the Iraqis had the capability to launch missiles loaded with chemicals and biological "back packs."
"They had sarin gas," Souder said. "If they would have hit here, it wouldn't be a couple of hundred people dead, like in Japan (on a Tokyo subway in 1995), but tens of thousands."
Souder said the Iraqis will have their own military force in place within six to 12 months.
He said he is in favor of partitioning and a gradual pullout. The question is how much, where and when.
Bush's attitude is to "take no prisoners" with the surge, Souder said.
"We were right to go in, to have a presence, to go after the terrorists in our national interests," Souder said. "But we'll never establish a democracy there."
He suggested moving out of the major cities and retreating to the borders to watch the Jordanian, Iranian and Syrian borders. A base in Iraq would increase the U.S. presence in the region, which also includes military encampments in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean.
"If Bush wasn't so dog-gone stubborn, we'll have a Vietnam-like pullout. It feels so much like Vietnam to people my age," said the 57-year-old. "That means a pull out at the last minute and all that chaos.
"To protect our national interests, we have to have a base there."
"Bush doesn't want the perception of troops dying in vain," Gerard said. "He must get to the middle ground."
"I agree with you," Souder said. "He doesn't want to leave that legacy.
"Bush should have kept the reasons for the war about our own national interests and defense, not to bring democracy to the region.
"What is this baloney about democracy? The different factions do not get along together. They would kill each other if they met in my office."
Gerard asked Souder about the national budget, especially the deficit. "You spend it all and then some," he said. "It's an insane level of spending.
"This kind of happened to (President Ronald) Reagan, too. He was right on revenue, wrong on spending. Why didn't Bush veto (the recent budget) if for no other reason than to curb spending? All the focus is on pork projects, but that's not the problem."
Souder said as far as discretionary spending, the national park budget is up 3 percent; education is up to 6 percent. Foreign aid was cut 50 percent.
Where spending is out of control is from recent Supreme Court decisions about Medicare.
"We're funding illegals," Souder said. "In one Atlanta hospital, 85 percent of the births were illegals. And we have to fund them all.
"Following the passage of the Patriot Bill, we traded homeland security for No Child Left Behind and Medicare increases."
"So, it all boils down to politics and horsetrading," Gerard said. "My concern is if we keep going at this rate of spending we'll become a third world country. There are looming economic troubles ahead for us."
"Social Security is 70 percent of the budget," Souder said. "Everyone wants the best health care, cheaper medications, every new innovation.
"With today's elementary school-aged children expected to live to age 110, we have to work longer, save more, scale down our lifestyles and cap Social Security.
"When we hit 65, will we surrender our power so our kids don't have to pay a 50 percent FICA tax?"
The Congressman said, in the near future, energy sources and water supplies will be the biggest issues.
"What about catastrophic events? During World War I we had the influenza that killed tens of thousands of people.
"What I don't have is people back here discussing anything. It's discouraging."
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092