Spencer Cox: “I rise in strong agreement with all of the essential premises of the Spratt resolution and urge a ``no'' vote because of…”

“I rise in strong agreement with all of the essential premises of the Spratt resolution and urge a ``no'' vote because of its conclusion. The Spratt resolution, like the Lee resolution before it, spells out precisely all of the reasons that we are here today; that Saddam Hussein and Iraq have unconditionally agreed to destroy all chemical and biological weapons there, ballistic missiles, to stop the development and the seeking of nuclear weapons; that Iraq unconditionally agreed to immediate inspections. The Spratt resolution goes on to say, and would have this Congress find, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein have ``flagrantly violated these unconditional terms.'' The Spratt resolution goes on to say that Saddam Hussein and Iraq are currently supporting international terrorism and continuing to develop chemical and biological weapons and actively seeking nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to deliver them. But here, unlike the Lee resolution before it, the Spratt resolution does not denounce the use of force but rather says that at this time we should have a U.N. resolution that expressly authorizes the use of force; and, if such a U.N. resolution is adopted, then, by section 3 of this Spratt resolution, the Congress today would have anticipatorily authorized the use of force, expressly authorized President Bush to use military force to eliminate weapons of mass destruction and missiles.…”