On the recordSeptember 7, 2011
I thank my friend. At one point somebody indicated to us--we were in Baghdad--that the American Embassy, which is already the largest U.S. Embassy in the world in terms of personnel, could go up as high as 20,000. It could be that high. Those are a lot of civilians committed to working in the country that we need to have forces there to protect. We are all coming to the floor today to appeal to Secretary Panetta, to the President: It would be shortsighted. If it is really going to be 3,000 and only 3,000, and, frankly, we are not going to tuck some away in those civilian personnel numbers in the embassy or somewhere else, covert operators--if it is really only 3,000, they are not going to be able to do the job that needs to be done. Not only that, they are going to send a message of weakness, lack of resolve, anxiousness to get out to the Iraqis' enemies and ours in the region, and that particularly includes Iran. I join my colleagues. We have been together on this for a long time. I don't want us to squander what we have won, and we will, I am afraid, if we only leave 3,000 American troops there. Mr. McCAIN. Could I say to my colleague, no events in history are exactly similar. But I think we learned in Lebanon and again in Somalia that forces that are too small and do not have sufficient force protection--and I am not saying they are exact parallels, but certainly it puts whoever is there, whether they be military or civilian, in some kind of danger.…





