September 30, 2002 - Roll Call: RPCV and Vietnam Veteran Congressmen from Connecticut have differing views on war with Iraq

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Headlines: Peace Corps Headlines - 2002: 09 September 2002 Peace Corps Headlines: September 30, 2002 - Roll Call: RPCV and Vietnam Veteran Congressmen from Connecticut have differing views on war with Iraq

By Admin1 (admin) on Monday, September 30, 2002 - 12:17 pm: Edit Post

RPCV and Vietnam Veteran Congressmen from Connecticut have differing views on war with Iraq





Read and comment on this story from Roll Call that contrasts the views on war with Iraq between two Connecticut Congressmen: Rob Simmons who served in Vietnam and Chris Shays who served in the Peace Corps.

After nearly two decades of experience as a soldier and spy, Simmons is deeply troubled about an impending war with Iraq, and GOP leaders are hard-pressed to brush aside his concerns as typical of a liberal Northeastern freshman in a tough re-election fight.

Simmons seems genuinely shocked by how ready and eager most of his GOP colleagues are to grant the president broad authority to wage war with Iraq. As an example, he points to his Connecticut colleague Rep. Christopher Shays (R), who was a conscientious objector during the Vietnam War while serving in the Peace Corps but now is a vocal proponent of regime change in Iraq.

"I find it funny how bellicose Chris Shays, a Peace Corps guy, has been these days - when someone like me who's been in a war zone is just much more hesitant," Simmons said. "Once you unleash the dogs of war," Simmons said, "it's hard to control them."


Read the story at:


GOP Hears Voices of Caution*

* This link was active on the date it was posted. PCOL is not responsible for broken links which may have changed.



GOP Hears Voices of Caution

By Susan Crabtree

Rep. Rob Simmons (R-Conn.) pulls out a pair of dog tags he is wearing under his shirt and tie, pointing to the image of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial etched on one.

"Iwear this every day as a reminder that we should never again get involved in a conflict without the public's clear understanding and support," he said in an interview last week.

After nearly two decades of experience as a soldier and spy, Simmons is deeply troubled about an impending war with Iraq, and GOP leaders are hard-pressed to brush aside his concerns as typical of a liberal Northeastern freshman in a tough re-election fight.

"Obviously Simmons is someone who has a lot of respect. He's a very smart person and he raises concerns that are probably legitimate concerns," said John Feehery, spokesman for Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), noting that the administration will have a "continued dialogue" with Members who have serious issues about how to conduct any military action. "That doesn't mean at this step there's not a case against Saddam Hussein. Right now what we're doing is authorizing action against Saddam Hussein."

Simmons, 59, earned two Bronze Star Medals for the 19 months he spent conducting undercover missions in Vietnam. He left the CIA in 1979 to become the staff director of the prestigious Senate Select Intelligence Committee, serving under legendary conservative Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), then chairman of the panel.

Simmons left to take a seat in the Connecticut Legislature, where he served for 15 years before ousting veteran Democrat Rep. Sam Gejdenson in an upset nearly two years ago. He's faced a serious re-election challenge, though recent polls showed him with a wide lead over his opponent.

Even though he's not a member of the House Intelligence panel, Simmons has been sitting in on the committee's guarded proceedings since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as Congress deliberated what kind of information breakdown led to the tragedy and how to protect the country against a repeat performance.

Simmons readily concedes he will most likely vote for a resolution granting Congressional approval for use of force against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein when it comes to the floor this week or early next, but he has serious reservations about the military game plan and said he cannot, in good conscience, suppress them.

"Once you unleash the dogs of war,"Simmons said, "it's hard to control them."

While the vast majority of the GOPConference is poised to support a resolution granting wide latitude to the president to take action in Iraq, GOPsources estimate that a core group of roughly 15 House Republicans share Simmons' concerns about the prospect of war with Iraq.

The group includes such likely suspects as Rep. Connie Morella (R-Md.), the only sitting House Republican who voted against the 1991 resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq in the Persian Gulf War, as well as well-known moderate Reps. Amo Houghton (N.Y.) and James Greenwood (Pa.). Even six-term Rep. David Hobson (Ohio), who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee on military construction, has criticized the prospect of unilateral U.S. action and the effect the war would have on military troops he argues are already stretched too thin.

Simmons cannot discuss the covert missions he undertook in Vietnam; they're all still classified. But it's clear the experience left an indelible impression.

"It is so difficult for American soldiers to serve in an unpopular war," he said. "We have to be sure that Americans support our goals and our mission. And that's the process we're in right now."

Despite these deep-seated feelings, Simmons has to walk a fine line as a vulnerable freshman. Vice President Cheney helped raise about $150,000 for Simmons' re-election efforts at a luncheon earlier this month. Cheney told the crowd that the administration needed to ensure Simmons was re-elected so he could help fight the war on terror and went on to blast Hussein's claims that he does not have weapons of mass destruction. He ended by pledging to take "whatever steps are necessary to defend our freedom and our country."

Even though the rhetoric was well-received that day, Simmons later distanced himself from Cheney's remarks, saying he needed more information before he could support a military strike against Hussein.

Now, Simmons said he likes the deliberate way the administration has begun to build its case in recent days - working with the United Nations Security Council, talking directly to individual Members of Congress, and trying to get more allies behind the effort.

"We should not go into Iraq unilaterally unless there is a clear and present danger,"he said. "Unilateral is the key word. And I don't believe that Saddam Hussein has nuclear weapons capability right now."

Simmons argued that the White House should exhaust all means of diplomacy before launching a military strike. If and when the country goes to war, he argues against the use of ground troops in favor of precision air strikes from 30,000 feet.

Still, Simmons calls Bush's speech to the United Nations "brilliant" and likes the recent changes House and Senate leaders have made to draft language of the Congressional Iraqi resolution. The original draft language the White House sent to Congress asked for power to use force against Iraq to protect U.S. interests, enforce U.N. resolutions and to "restore international peace and security in the region," a phrase deleted in the new version because many lawmakers believed it impossible to retore peace to such an unstable region as the Persian Gulf.

The new language adds a requirement that the president report to Congress at least every 90 days on "matters relevant to" to the resolution. And Simmons would like the resolution even more if it asked the president to exhaust all diplomatic means possible before taking military action.

In fact, Simmons seems genuinely shocked by how ready and eager most of his GOP colleagues are to grant the president broad authority to wage war with Iraq. As an example, he points to his Connecticut colleague Rep. Christopher Shays (R), who was a conscientious objector during the Vietnam War while serving in the Peace Corps but now is a vocal proponent of regime change in Iraq.

"I find it funny how bellicose Chris Shays, a Peace Corps guy, has been these days - when someone like me who's been in a war zone is just much more hesitant," Simmons said.

Other Republicans have been even more forceful in their arguments, expressing some of the same concerns Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) made in his Friday speech.

"Ihave serious reservations, I really do,"Houghton said. "I don't think we ought to go pell-mell into a conflict with Iraq when we haven't proved the al Qaeda connection."

"I really wonder if Iraq has a real connection with al Qaeda or if this is not just a side show," he added.

Some of Greenwood's concerns were addressed after attending a classified briefing with Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz on Wednesday.

"He persuaded me that this administration does want to get inspections on the ground," he said. "But I would be more comfortable with a resolution that makes that a precondition - that we will only go to war if we are not able to get Hussein to disarm his weapons of mass destruction. I think it's important to do that first. It's important to the parents of any soldier who is killed."



Click on a link below for more stories on PCOL

Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Sargent Shriver and the Politics of Life911:  A Different America
USA Freedom Corps - "paved with good intentions"PCV hostage rescued from terrorists
GAO reports on Volunteer Safety and SecurityPeace Corps out of Russia?
Help the New Peace Corps Bill pass CongressUSA Freedom Cops TIPS Program


Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Senior Staff Appointments at Peace Corps HeadquartersFor the Peace Corps Fallen
Senator Dodd holds Hearings on New Peace Corps LegislationThe Debate over the Peace Corps Fund
Why the Peace Corps needs a Fourth GoalThe Peace Corps 40th plus one
The Case for Peace Corps IndependenceThe Controversy over Lariam
The Peace Corps and Homeland SecurityDirector Vasquez meets with RPCVs
RPCV Congressmen support Peace Corps' autonomyPeace Corps Expansion:  The Numbers Game?
When should the Peace Corps return to Afghanistan?Peace Corps Cartoons



Some postings on Peace Corps Online are provided to the individual members of this group without permission of the copyright owner for the non-profit purposes of criticism, comment, education, scholarship, and research under the "Fair Use" provisions of U.S. Government copyright laws and they may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner. Peace Corps Online does not vouch for the accuracy of the content of the postings, which is the sole responsibility of the copyright holder.

This story has been posted in the following forums: : Headlines; Peace Corps - Congress

PCOL1090
05

.

By Terry Adcock on Saturday, October 12, 2002 - 10:33 pm: Edit Post

Yeah, right! Some debate. Both Congressmen voted with their party to invade Iraq.

I'm not impressed with either of them.


Add a Message


This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Username:  
Password:
E-mail: