london, bombing alone will not change will. in some cases it strengthens resoven. and so what you're left with is in the void that's created with bombings is boots on the ground. but in this case we're leaving that precious job of boots on the ground to what are described as moderate rebels, whatever that is, and an example that we have to look back on, what just happened. if you look at the activities of this spring, 1,000 isis soldiers routhed 30,000 trained soldiers -- routed 30,000 strained -- trained soldiers ar we spent $35 billion in a that process. i think there's a whole loft of mistakes and errors in this plan and would rise in opposition to it. with that i yield back. thank you, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california, mr. mckeon, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized. .

mr. garamendi: i yield five inutes to the gentleman from the foreign relations committee, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding to me. my colleagues, there are only bad choices left in syria and iraq, but in my opinion, the worst choice of all would be to do nothing. this is an attempt to do something. i want to commend chairman mckeon. i rise in strong support of the mckeon amendment, which would authorize and train and equip mission for the vetted moderate syrian opposition. again, the worst choice would be to do nothing. this is an attempt to do something. it's urgent that we do it now. every day we wait is a day longer isis gets stronger and the opposition gets weaker. now, i think it should be

plainly stated that this is a separate issue from aumf. this is separate. this is talking about aiding and abetting the vetted syrian opposition. now, i was in favor of doing this two years ago. for two years i've been working to assist the moderate opposition. in early 2013, i introduced the free syrian act, to provide the syrian opposition with the weapons they need to fight the syrian regime and the extremists that now control a large part of syria and iraq. so this is authorizing a train and equip mission for the vetted moderate syrian opposition. it isn't perfect, but it's a step forward and it's far, far better than doing nothing. since i introduced that legislation, the situation in syria has gotten much worse. more than 200,000 people have died and millions have been driven from their homes. now, it's impossible to know if the -- know the answers to the

what if questions. what if we trained the opposition two years ago? what if they had been able to hold territory against assad and isis? what if and what if? we have to deal with what might have been, no one will ever know. right now this is a very, very important thing for us to do. i understand that my colleagues are war weary. i'm war weary. i understand the american people are war weary. i'm war weary. but, again, i think doing nothing would invite something very similar that happened to my city, new york city, on that faithful day of september 11, 2001. you know, we kicked the russians -- the world kicked the russians out of afghanistan when that happened, and so what happened was we took our eye off the prize. and so we allowed afghanistan to become a safe haven. we allowed the taliban to

welcome in al qaeda, and al qaeda had a safe haven to plot and plan attacks against the u.s. homeland. that is replicating itself right now in syria and in iraq. and if we do nothing, isis will plot and plan and we'll have many more september 11's in the united states, in europe, in the middle east. that is why this is in the national interest, the u.s. national interest, and it's something we need to really do. the foreign affairs committee held a hearing last month with the syrian defector caesar, military photographerer, who smuggled thousands of -- photographer, who smuggled thousands of pictures out of syria. the gruesome photographs of christians and muslims, men, women and children starved, tortured and killed by the regime demonstrate the true brutality of assad and his cronies. last month, the american people and the world woke up to the brutality of isis which

beheaded two american journalists and murdered christians and other minorities and recently beheaded someone from the united kingdom. a self-finance terrorist groups with highly trained fighters willing to die, isis represents an immediate threat to our interests and allies and remain unchecked the u.s. homeland. terrorism, wherever it rears its ugly head, is all the same. whether it's isis or iso or hamas or hezbollah, they're all terrorists. they all want to use terror to achieve their political goals. assad and isis is two sides of the same coin, fighting one must not empower the other. only fighting assad would allow isis to flourish, but only fighting isis would leave assad in power and he's the biggest magnet drawing foreign fighters, believe it or not. they have the same relationship around the globe. the will not end until

syrian people can fight and win isis and win and later they'll fight assad and win. the moderate opposition can get leverage and create a political solution. now we have the opportunity to change course in syria and the region. this authorization can give new hope to the syrian people and to the people of the region that the united states will stand with them against terrorism. like many of my colleagues, i've attended a number of briefings on these matters and i have noticed the persistent theme -- may i have an additional minute? mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, i yield an additional minute to the distinguished gentleman from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. engel: i hope to correct this theme. syrian christians would rather live under assad than the opposition. this is mischaracterization, in my opinion, of the situation in syria. assad may profess to protect christians but in reality he buys his oil from isis. and isis will not be able to

fund their operations without the assad regime. moderate opposition has publicly stated their acceptance and tolerance of -- intolerance of christians and the syrian christians have welcomed the u.s. call to defeat isis and defend their communities. again, we have no great choices here but the worst choice is to do nothing. i want to again thank congressman mckeon. chairman royce and i conduct the foreign affairs committee in a very bipartisan fashion. we pride ourselves in being one of the most bipartisan committees. foreign policy should be bipartisan. issues like this should be bipartisan. i think we can all be proud to be members of congress. this is being done in a bipartisan way. i certainly support this resolution. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. mckeon, is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, i

would like to thank the previous gentleman for his comments. he's the ranking member on the oreign affairs committee, very -- understands this situation very well. and the only thing i would say a couple of things. the reason we say isis, isil, i would say isil because they're the same, we need to let the american people know who the enemy is, it's that group, isil. they're the worst of all, in my opinion. and secondly, the reason we're doing this now is because two-fold. the president asked for it. we only have one commander in chief at a time. i didn't vote for him but he is our commander in chief. he asked for this. we're responding to that request, as he asked, as commander in chief. secondly, i think this is very important. saudi arabia stepped up and

said not to keep this secret but we overtly will open up our territories and give you training facilities to train these syrians. that sends a message to people in that part of the world that this is not the big bad satan america against the world. this is moderate arabs, kurds, sunnis, shiia, all joining together against terrorism that's out to destroy the world. so i think that opened up this possibility for the president to ask for this, and i'm hopeful we'll be able to give him that authority. i yield 2 1/2 minutes to my friend and colleague, a member of the committee on appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from nebraska, mr. fortenberry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. fortenberry: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the chairman for his hard work on this very

difficult subject. mr. speaker, several months ago our best c.i.a. analyst could not have predicted that large sloths of iraq and syria would be overrun, conquered by a group called isil, the islamic state of syria and the levant. isis is better army than al qaeda ever had in its dark history. -- wisted form of relidge religion is ascent rest. they kill, they behead, they crucify, they rape, they fly a black banner of death wherever they go. and of late, appropriate american leadership has stopped their advance and prevented further humanitarian catastrophe. now the question is what to do next. at this point we're debating a narrow amendment to authorize president obama to train and

arm so-called moderate syrian rebels. mr. speaker, several months ago i offered an amendment to stop any potential arms from flowing to the syrian opposition. at that time there was no broad strategy. weaponizing moderate rebels in a battleground of shifting loyalties and no guarantee a victory was an ad hoc idea that could have made the situation much worse. now, this new amendment is narrowly tail ord with appropriate -- tailored with appropriate benchmarks and aggressive oversight. we're trying to manage very low expectations and i remain concerned. and unfortunately this distracts us from a more complete discussion of the overall strategy as outlined by the president. one thing has to be clear and must continually be made clear. this is the world's problem, not america's problem alone.

the international coalition must be truly robust, not symbolic, and include regional sunni muslim nations who must fight for their own protection. the broader answer here is a regeneration of iraqi forces who must also fight for themselves. plus, the kurds must be truly empowered to defeat isil near their homes and to set up protuctive -- protective zones for minority and vulnerable communities. finally, cutting off the financing and support for isil hopefully ensures that this reclaiming my time page will be short lived. mr. speaker, action has risk but the consequences of inaction are too grave. isil is a threat to all innocent persons and a threat to civilization itself. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california, mr. mckeon, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr. speaker. yield one minute to my cloge

-- colleague from new york, mr. owens. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. owens: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. garamendi. this is a difficult decision, a difficult choice and likely one at does not have a good or better outcome than what we can propose today. i think the american people need to understand that as we act today many of us do with reluctance. i will vote in support of mr. mckeon's amendment, but i do so very reluctantly. i have fear that what we face is a situation in which we will arm folks who subsequently will take negative action against us. however, when weighing the consequences of taking no action, as many of my colleagues have indicated, i think we have no choice but to move forward as this amendment is recommending and the

president has requested. i also believe that we are power back in congress at has drifted over many years to the president, irrespective of what party he is or she may be in in the future, and i think that this is an important constitutional step that we should all support. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. mckeon, is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to my friend and colleague the distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: i thank the chairman for yielding. i thank him for his effort in putting together this amendment, and before he leaves the floor, i'd like to commend my friend, mr. rangel from new york, for the very rigorous and bipartisan speech he gave here today. this is what this issue warrants. chairman mckeon has shown it and i think all of us have to come together to the extent we

can to help the president. i have been critical against the president. we can have these debates. that's all in the past. the fact is that isis is a real threat to the united states. as someone who comes from a district that lost over 150 people on 9/11, i never ever want to go through that again. i can say right now that isis is more powerful than al qaeda was on 9/11. they have more financing, they have more weapons, they have more members, they have more of their fighters who have passports that will enable them to come into the united states. and we know that they are committed to destroying western civilization. so it's essential we take action against isis and take it quickly and take it emphatically. i believe the president has the constitutional and statutoryial power to act but i think it's important that the congress work together with the president. the president has asked us to help train and equip syrians. i think it will be difficult to vet a certain number. it will be find them, work with

them. as commander in chief, the president is entitled, i believe, that is his prerogative, and we should stand with him on that because if we can put together an effective fighting force on the ground that will make our airpower all that more effective. and it's also important we try to put together a coalition and i believe by congress standing together as one, by showing strong support for the president, that will encourage other countries to join with us. they will realize we're for real, that we're not making empty gestures and it's important for congress to come forward at this time. now, having said that, i also believe that the president should be more open with the american people and say this is going to be tough and i believe that there are going to be boots on the ground. now, i don't believe we have to have combat troops, per se. this is not going to be easy. this is going to be involve a -- mr. mckeon: i yield the gentleman for an additional minute. mr. king: i thank the chairman for that. no matter how well a war is

plan and how specific our strategy is, the fact is there are going to be tough days ahead. it's not going to be easy and prepare the american people and be honest and we as republicans have an obligation not to be critical but to stand with the president if we believe overall that isis has to be stopped. what happened in the past is in the past. i don't want the past to be pro logged, but we can work positively and make sure that the job gets done. i'm not in this for iraq or afghanistan. yes, that's important. but i'm in this for the people of the united states. people who never ever should be attacked again and our forces overseas that are in harm's way. i vote for the chairman's amendment and i thank him for the outstanding job he has done

and outstanding job he has done as chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california, r. mckeon, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi is recognized. mr. garamendi: i yield three minutes to my friend from california plrks price. mr. price: i rise in support of the mckeon amendment which would permit the administration to train and equip syrian opposition forces to confront the deadly threat posed to them and their country by isil. this measure is limited and leaves the broader question of authorizing the use of force against isil and extends only to december 11, the expiration date of the continuing resolution that it demands. but, it is necessary. if our country to get under way the training of forces that are essential. if the syrian component to

degrade and defeat isil is to succeed. the president has no intention of introducing ground combat forces into this conflict, but our strategy does depend on indigenous forces for iraq and syria fighting. forces of -- capable of taking advantage of the support we will provide. getting forces up to speed in syria is one of the most difficult challengeses we face. many speakers have stressed these uncertainties and risks. there isn't one that the president hasn't recognized and considered in devising his strategy and has done what we must now do, consider the consequences of letting the threat of isil go unchecked. e spread of isil and its violent jihad is a grave threat

to our allies and the region and around the world. the united states must work with allies to make sure they do not further destabilize a volatile region or establish a staging grouped for activities aimed at american personnel at home and abroad. we have the grave responsibility to weigh the cost and benefits of action or inaction or this resolution being defeated. this is not a time if i may so for members to vote no and then hope the resolution nonetheless passes. we don't have the luxury of holding out for a perfect or assured outcome. we must make the best decision we can countering the threat in a careful and measured way that maximizes the chances for success and gives this body the ability to monitor and oversee the process and make course corrections when necessary.

i believe the resolution before us meets this test and i urge its adoption. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. . the gentleman from washington, mr. smith reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. mckeon, is recognized. mr. mckeon: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, dr. boustany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. boustany: i thank the chairman for yielding time. i want to put it in strategic context, we are seeing a century of upheaval in the middle east and that is occurring in syria with a complex civil war. on one side you have the brutal assad regime aligned with hezbollah. and on the other side, sunni groups of which the worst, the most barbaric is isil. it is in america's national

interests, our national security interests to defeat and destroy isil, period, hands down. and this is going to require american unity, american resolve and i can tell you never in recent times has american leadership been more in demand. this is the time for us to step up. it will take a lot of work. it's going to take the fighting capabilities of the kurdish with the iraqi forces and will take the u.s. training and vetting moderate syrian forces to deal with this. this is a necessary first step and that's why i support this amendment. it's necessary. again, we need a broader strategy that's going to involve a coalition. this first step will show that american resolve to friends and foes alike as well as those on the sidelines. we will demonstrate that and pull this coalition together. this will help the president

have the necessary leverage to do this and put this coalition in place to defeat threat of isil and get to a broader political settlement in the region. what's going on in syria is a national security threat to the united states. that's why this country, all americans must speak what a unified voice. a strong vote on this amendment is essential as a first step to putting this in place. my colleagues, mr. speaker, i urge the president, i urge the resident to put all diplomatic efforts inputting together a strong coalition and ask for very specific deliverables on these countries whether it is turkey, qatar and they will have to step up. the president needs leverage. this gives him the first step. i would hope he will come to the congress for a broader authorization for the use of military force, because i do believe that will give him all

the leverage he needs to complete this diplomatic task inputting together a coalition along with the strategy to defeat isil and eliminate this major problem we are seeing with a failed state in syria that has allowed extremist groups to arise. this is a time for unity and american leadership and this is the time we step up. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. smith: i yield four minutes to the gentlelady from ohio, ms. kaptur. ms. kaptur: the resolution before us is a fateful one. if operations planning is not executed properly, it will result in the united states becoming embroiled in a modern version of the 100 years war. over the past decade and indeed

since the bombing of our marine barracks in lebanon, our nation's blood and treasure have been expended in growing numbers to influence foreign policy and the result has shifted iraq from a sunni-led dictatorship, replaced by a corrupt unrepresentative shia-leaning regime. both corrupt regimes thwarted democratic advancement and now a new untested government has been set in place in baghdad. its connectivity is uneven and undemocratic. we witness the rise of isil, a barbaric sunni force composed of foreign fighters that manifest the discontent of the sunnis. isil's leader has been a leader inside iraq, recognized for the most part iraq's huge sunni population has been ignored and purposely excluded in iraq's mal

arch ki-led government. and the sunni tribe not affiliated with isil that have dug in for the long haul and exist in key provinces in iraq. it is to america's peril if we miscalculate and fail to understand their importance. it is to america's peril if we underestimate who the enemy is, what isil is fighting for and against and what it will take to defeat isil. never place our military between two warring fractions is legged end dare and lethal. if america is pulled into a civil war on the lands of iraq and syria with having taken sides, we will be on the wrong side of history. our military has already lost over 6,000 americans with 50,000 more brave wounded or

incapacitated. our nation has spent over a trillion dollars training iraqis to defend their own nation but lieges that our government trained tore off their uniforms and fled. it is not disputed that an important reason for this is the former prime minister of iraq weakened his own iraqi army by putting his cronies who were underequipped and could not fight. to win, america cannot and must not make a mistake of looking at native tribal leaders who have been cut out of the decisions being made by a baghdad government so utterly calculated against sunni representation. this exclusion will imperil success in any coalition effort isil the regime of mr. barrow:ism. the exclusion of iraq's four

main tribal sunni groups continues. the current government in baghdad led by the prime minister does not engender nor seek their confidence. there is no contact between, for example, historic sunni tribes and the iraqi government and our government. what a gaping omission. -- has comen tribes to my attention that if any iraqi claims to speak for them in baghdad he does so fraudulently. before i vote on any resolution before taking sides in a major shia-sunni civil war, i would seek assurances that our government has been indirect contact with the native sunni tribes in iraq whose met will was proven. fail to understand their importance -- mr. speaker, might i ask for an additional 30

seconds? mr. smith: i yield. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. kaptur: to fail to understand their importance or exclusion for the match inations in baghdad is to play chest with half the board empty. if certain key decision makers in our own government as well as baghdad's didn't recognize that most you will could be taken by isil, why depend on those to support a forward policy now. we should leave no cheps men off the table. very reluctantly i will support this resolution. i hope the administration will hear my pleas to measure up to the full task at hand. leave no major sunni absent from the daunting coalition that must be forged to be successful in this venture. mr. speaker, i yield back any remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from california is

recognized. mr. mckeon: i yield two minutes to my friend and colleague, the entleman from louisiana, mr. mcallister. mr. mcallister: i'm very frustrated that i stand before you today and wage a war on ebola and allow isil to wage a war against us. a no vote is the easiest vote to cast. we cannot stand back while isil threatens our national security and terrorize the middle east. everyone wants to be a general, but now is not the time to argue amongst ourselves. back home people think we -- all we do is argue about petty politics and get nothing accomplished. now is the time to take action and stand unified behind house leadership. we are dealing with one of the most barbaric terrorist organizations we have seen in

years and the american people cannot afford to have congress go home without having a strategy to get rid of isil. this gives congressional approval to act in the best interest of our national security without acting unilaterally. it would be a disservice to american citizens and our allies if we continue bickering while isil mobilizes and recruits new members. it requires coordinated effort to arm and train. as a veteran, i do not want to see my brothers in arms and die in vain while we have not completed the mission. mr. speaker, 9/11 is a reminder that terrorism does not recognize boundaries. we are the united states. we must stand united to defeat all enemies, both foreign and domestic, when appropriate on their soil and not ours. i urge my colleagues to act now

and pass this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield four minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for four minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much. thank you and i want to thank the gentleman for yielding and for his very deliberate tiffly work in -- deliberate tiff work in leading this again. i'm glad we're debating the president's proposal to arm and train the syrian rebels. mr. speaker, i'm totally disappointed that the debate on something that could have such broad implications on the united states national security and the region is being included as an amendment to the continuing resolution. when i became a member of the appropriations committee, the first rule i was taught was that you don't authorize on an appropriations bill. yet, this is another instance of congress taking a path on

its solemn constitutional obligations to weigh in on matters of war and peace. i am reminded of the failure to have a thorough and robust debate in the wake of 9/11 and the resulting overly broad authorization which i could not vote for because it was a blank check for perpetual war and it still is on the books and is being used for the authority for the strikes taking place now. this resolution should be repealed. and it was the rush to war in iraq in 2002. that led us to where we are today. isis did not exist until the unnecessary and ill-begotten war in iraq which created sectarian violence and the civil war. we should be clear, what the united states is committing itself to in iraq and syria, the u.s. has conducted nearly 3,000 missions and more than 150 air strikes and has

deployed more than 1,000 troops already. in a speech about the united states' mission against isis, the president said, i don't think we're going to solve this problem in weeks. is is going to take some time. i ask today, does this endment begin to help us contain isis or dismantle isis? and what are we getting ourselves into? it's more complex than just an up and down vote on arming and training members of the free syrian army. the consequences of this vote whether it's written in the amendment or not, but it will be a further expansion of a war currently taking place and our further involvement in a sectarian war. that's the consequence of this amendment. as i said earlier, no one in this body believes that we ould stand by while isis

wreaks of a ok across the -- ry and we must address halve ock -- havoc across the country and we must address isis. this is not a way to dismantle or disable or stop isis. i supported the president's plan to protect u.s. personnel and to prevent genocide, but any expansion of the military strikes and what took place during that terrible period really requires a full debate and an authorization of the use of force here on this floor and that's not what we're doing today. also, what's missing from this debate is the nonmilitary solutions and options to this crisis. the president and his national security experts have stated repeatedly that there is no military solution. yet, here we are today once again only discussing more arms

and more air strikes. there are too many unanswered questions for me to support this amendment. ow will we end the sectarian conflict in a deeper involvement, actually, in a sectarian conflict in iraq and syria? how do we ensure different outcomes than when we spent u.s. tax dollars, mind you, to train and equip the iraqi army? may i have an additional minute, please? mr. smith: yes, i yield the gentlelady an additional minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. ms. lee: thank you. how will we ensure that the united states weapons that we are providing to syrian rebels won't get into the wrong hands as they did with the rebels when we supported them in libya? how will we ensure that what we are doing now won't further destabilize the region? and how will we ensure that we do not stand here years from now debating on how to stop another isis? i -- mr. speaker, what is

missing from this debate is the political, economic and diplomatic and regionally led solutions that will ultimately be the tools for security in the region and for any potential future threats to the united states. these are significant questions that must be answered before congress votes on a proposal, no matter how to intervene militarily. once again, in a region that's very complicated and very dangerous, we should not act in haste and we must heed the lessons of the past. we must also live up to our constitutional obligation to debate authorization of the use of military force rather than authorize to send arms to syrian rebels on a continuing resolution to keep the government open. that's why i'll vote no on this amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, at this time i yield two minutes to my friend and colleague, a member of the armed services committee from louisiana, dr. fleming.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. fleming: i thank my good friend, the chairman. mr. speaker, i'm opposed to the president's vague and inadequate strategy for dealing with isis, and therefore, i rise in opposition to this amendment. it is haste to claim credit for withdrawing our troops from iraq, president left the door open to the -- to exactly the kind of crisis that has exploded throughout the region. instead of working hard to renew a status of forces agreement with the sufficient number of american troops to preserve the peace, president obama was anxious to use withdrawal from iraq as a campaign slogan in 2012. we're now reaping the whirlwind song by that reckless policy. and this new policy is a little more than an incremental strategy. not unlike the one used in vietnam. history warns of the dangers of such approaches.

by moving hesitantly in piecemeal fashion, the enemy has more time to learn, adapt and get stronger. this is a recipe for a stalemate and failure. there's another obvious lesson in all of this. almost since taking office, the obama administration has been working to reduce our military. president obama has directed over $1 trillion in cuts to the u.s. military since he took office. under his planned cuts, senior army leaders have testified that the army would be unable to repeat its performance over the last decade in iraq and afghanistan. and finally, the president has acted as if dangerous enemies are either not serious threats, like the j.v. team of global terrorism, or has acted as though they're reasonable enemies who are willing to negotiate peace. neither is true with isis, and if we're going to degrade and destroy them, it will not happen through an indecisive

strategy that relies on unreliable and largely unknown help from syrian rebels whose own motivations and goals are mixed and almost impossible to be certain of. in addition, recent history has taught us that the weapons and resources we commit to other forces that easily fall into the hands of even worse enemies, like isis, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington reserves? mr. smith: i verve, yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, at this time i yield two minutes to my friend and colleague from california, mr. rohrabacher. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. rohrabacher: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this amendment. i support president obama's authority as commander in chief, but his game plan is flawed. it will lead to failure and

will put us more in danger. the president's approach of using american airpower and local ground troops is wise. it worked in afghanistan and it worked in kosovo. however, president obama is choosing the wrong locals to support. with this vote congress approves the arming and training of the free syrian army, which is riddled with radical muslims. in short, we may, again, be arming insurgents who will end up our enemy. we are told that the free syrian army has been vetted and that we can trust them. this is wishful thinking, not realistic planning. the president wants to send more equipment and supplies and weapons to the kurds. that is certainly a good concept, but proposes to send our assistance via the iraqi government in baghdad. rest assured, baghdad will pass on whatever it doesn't want to keep forth self, and remember

they wasted most of what we have already given them. arming radical islamists is bad enough. depending on baghdad to distribute our military equipment to the right people makes even less sense. we should arm the kurds directly, then instead of relying on an unknown and perhaps radical force, we should instead reach out to the assad regime and enlist his support in a fight for the common enemy against the common enemy. perhaps we should consult president putin in russia about this issue rather than consult the mullahs in iran. the president's proposal will not work. i will not support it. yet, another infusion of american troops in this never-ending conflict in the middle east is a wrong move. it's wrong for the people of the united states and will not succeed. i ask my colleagues to vote no on this amendment.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington reserves? mr. smith: i do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is ecognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to my friend and colleague, the distinguished gentleman from north carolina, mr. pittinger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. pittinger: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i acknowledge the tremendous leadership you've given to this nation and grateful for what you've done as the servant in our congress to protect this nation, to provide the security that's needed and i admire you greatly for your work. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this amendment. this amendment is critical to begin the needed process to destroy isis. yes, it is limited in scope of what the president has designated congress to approve but it is necessary. we must convey to the world our

commitment to destroy isis, the greatest threat we've ever seen in the history of this country. but a grave threat, mr. speaker, requires a commitment, a thorough commitment to make sure the job is done. what we're doing today is limited in scope, but yet it is very important. we cannot however, though, have a commitment that's limited, we cannot have the mind set of chamberlain who never recognized the threat and the force of adolf hitler in germany. we have an enormous threat before us today. the president gratefully acknowledges the threat. however, he has been long in coming to that reality of what we face in the world today. yes, he did stand down on missile defense in poland and czechoslovakia. yes, he did stand down our military, the lowest since

world war ii levels. yes, he has appeased the iranians and given him additional time to build up -- them to build up their economy and there are real adversaries out there and gratefully he understands the adversaries we have in isis today. they are yet been a part of what the dimension of what we are forced to encounter. it must be done and it must be done with this initial amendment. we will need to come back. we will need to be honest with the american people of what's required to secure this country. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. . mr. smith: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mckeon: i yield to the gentleman from texas, mr. williams. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. williams: obama administration is so out of touch with reality, it's disturbing. last month the official white house person said obama's policies have enhanced the world's tran quilt even though there are wars going on. and it was recommended deploying u.s. troops to iraq should there not be a curb. our military well prepared and fully equipped would be right now. our allies aren't stepping up and the president has strained our military to prepare and plan. the president was caught off guard leaving our troops underfunded. he must have a closely defined strategy that fully funds and equips our military. my district, the 25th zict of

texas is home to fort hood and so many to some of the greatest soldiers. all who wear the uniform need to have the full support of their congress and president and need adequate funding and training and trucks, planes, weapons and ammunition. we need to have an unbeatable military readiness and highest quality of life for the debatest military in the history of the world. before president obama takes any more actions to combat our terrorist enemies, he must work with congress to roll back his sequester cuts and provide our troops with the support, resources they need and mostly they deserve. in god we trust. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. smith: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mckeon: might i inquire how much time we have left on either

side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 1:50. nd 1:30. the gentleman from washington remaining. mr. mckeon: are you prepared to talk for five minutes. mr. smith: continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. mckeon: i'm prepared to fill up a few minutes before we vote. you know, a lot has been said today on both sides of this issue. think as i have listened carefully to all of the arguments, it seems to me that

the main argument against as i have heard it, against acting on this amendment at this time is that it doesn't go far enough or we don't know for sure if it would be successful. you know, i have been in this body now for 22 years. i wish that i had the foresight every time we come to this floor to know exactly what's going to happen after we take action. but it seems to me that none of us really has that foresight. we can think about it and project, but we really don't know what's going to happen if we take action. sometimes we know what's going to happen if we don't take action and i think that's probably what we ought to be thinking about a little bit today. there were some comments made about iraq and about syria.

one thing i think that hasn't been mentioned, we, i think know that we left iraq precipitously. we can talk about blame and put it on president obama. and i could criticize him for a lot of things, but i sure wouldn't want his job. and i think because we did leave early and didn't leave any resideal force behind, mall ki did some things -- malaki did some things that we probably would have changed. under saddam hussein, who was a sunni, sunnis are the minority in iraq, he oppressed the shia. when m arch laki came in, a shia, he repressed the sunnis. i think one thing that we do

ow is the new prime minister is really making an effort to reach out to the sunnis, to the shia, to the kurds, to bring a legitimate government that will look out for all of its people. i think that has given us the opportunity to go into iraq. the president has put over 1,000 of our troops in there now to buck them up and help them with the things they need to be ccessful in fighting off the terrorists isil. and i think that there are things they cannot do that we can help them with. they need intelligence. they need i.s.r. they need logistics.

they need air support. if we provide those things and they see that they're getting good support from their government, that it's not a fight between different sects or different regions and can actually fight together as iraqis, they will be successful in pushing isil back, which would be a good thing. they can retake the territory that's been lost. in the meantime, if we vote for this amendment and give the president the authority to train syrians that are early vetted in saudi arabia and then put them back into the fight, these people are fighting for their homeland. they are fighting for their villages, fighting for their families. are they perfect? we don't know. but i was talking to one of our retired generals who has been in

the fight, and he told me sometimes you have to work with people that are willing to fight the same enemy that you are willing to fight. and in this case, these people that we're looking at are willing to fight isil. and if they have the help that we can provide, they can be successful. nd then the people that we train can go back into the fight in syria, and we can squeeze isil in between syria and iraq and keep them from entering into other nations where we do not wish to fight at this time. mr. speaker, at this time, i yield three minutes to my friend and colleague, the distinguished the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. and i do appreciate all the time and energy that our house

republican leaders have put into this issue, trying to work with the president, but the truth is if you look back under this president as commander in chief, we trained people in libya. we provided weapons in libya that were then used against us in benghazi. there are americans dead because this administration felt compeled to go in and take out gaddafi. oh, sure, it was under the guise of nato, but we did it. this administration saw to the bombing of gaddafi, refused to allowed him to leave peacefully. tune neice yeah, it jump started, as i said before, the new caliphate that the muslim brothers and so many of the radicals are saying they're going for.

now, one of the big problems, too, when we go in and train as this president wants to do for syrians, they learn our trade craft. they used it against us as they did at benghazi. now al qaeda today has indicated that all jihaddists must combine together and that pressure is going to get greater and greater. also, today, muslim brotherhood cleric, who had been kicked out of qatar. i believe he is now in turkey, but he's calling for an all-out muslim brotherhood opposition to the united states and the head of the muslim brotherhood is begging jihaddists to combine together in their fight against the united states. and where is he? he is in turkey. he's in turkey.

yes, that's the turkey that says the president says we are going to count on as one of our allies and turkey announced that last week they will not allow united states to conduct air strikes against isis. our action will unify radicals against us. it has already been announced that the leader of the free syrian army has said that it will not join the alliance against the islamic state unless it receives assurances on toppling the syrian regime. turkish reported by the news agency just in the last few days. this is serious stuff. we are uniting the jihaddists of the world to come against us. why? because there is nothing lower to these jihaddists than infidels that help invade what

they consider to be a muslim country. and we are about to ask for more than this administration knows. why? because it continues to purge our training material. they are not allowed to understand what it is what we're up against. and when you lose the "new york times" that this administration has, you are in big trouble if you are president obama. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. smith: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. speaker, let me just say, again, most of the arguments i have heard is don't do this. i haven't heard an alternative. and i think what we need to remember that we hear a lot around here is not let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. the commander in chief has asked

for this authority. saudi arabia is willing to work with us on this and we need to develop the coalition. we are working hard to make that happen. and i think at this time, it would be good for us to reserve. i will reserve the balance of my time. and continue to debate tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. smith: i'll yield myself such time as i may consume to conclude our remarks. i agree with the chairman on one point, you can raise all manner of different questions. there are no guarantees and if you are trying to figure out how to vote on this, save yourself the argument and vote no. this is a very dangerous part of the world. something can always go wrong. we cannot guarantee there will be no bad outcomes. one of the things lost, train and equip has been equated simply with iraq and afghanistan and has been deemed a failure.

and i want to point out to people, the u.s. government has engaged in many very successful train and equip missions. in fact, this is the way out of iraq and afghanistan, the way out of committing over 100,000 troops to a battle to try to change a country. you build partnerships. and those partnerships, those partners in those local areas are the ones that do the fighting. in somalia, we have very significant problem with al-shabaab. we have not lost a u.s. life in that region. we have trained and equipped, uganda, kenya and ethiopia, they have taken the fight to al-shabaab. we are working with yemen to defeat al qaeda of the arabian peninsula in yemen and it is not a model of anything.

and you certainly could have looked at that and said wow, we are going to work with those guys? we did not want al qaeda to continue to grow and threaten us, where two terror attacks against the united states were launched and we have trained and worked with the yemen government that has helped and train them. and that's what we are going to do that in syria. there are several steps to this. first of all, should we confront isis? and i suppose you could decide it is way across the world. you got sunnis fighting shia, syria, iran, all different manner of people mixed up. let's wash our hands of it and hope it works out. the problem with that is isis has made it clear that they will kill americans and will threaten us. and if they continue to grow and continue to hold territory, they will absolutely plan and plot

attacks against the united states. so simply allowing isis to go forward doesn't strike me as a good option which raises the second question. if you want to contain them, how do you it? just sending in the u.s. military to do it? i think the risks there are enormous and would not be successful because it would unite a fair number of sunnis and radicals against us. the option on the table is to train and equip local partners to do the fighting. we are making progress now with iraq and now that we have a new government that gives the sunnis some hope that they will be included. in syria, we will have to work with the free syria movement. we have been working with these folks and providing humanitarian assistance and other assistance. it's not like we don't have nobody over there.

the alternative is allowing syria to be divided up between assad and isis and that alternative is not acceptable. . i fully understand the concerns about mission creep, about open-ended warfare. this is not what we're talking about. we should have a debate about an aumf on this floor. this is not an aumf. his in no way authorizes any u.s. military action against anybody. all it does is it authorizes the department of defense to train and equip other forces. other forces will be hundreds of -- our forces will be hundreds of miles from the battlefield training and equips other forces. there's a much larger debate to have if an aumf is put out on the floor and we have to think about, you know, will be taken and interpreted way too broadly? we've seen that happen with the 2001 aumf, for instance so that would be a worthy debate -- for instance. so that would be a worthy

debate. that's not what we're doing here. this is something that three years ago many people suggested that the u.s. government should do. but we cannot do it unless congress authorizes the department of defense to do it. so i think this is much more narrow in scope than the broader debate and the broader debate is one we should have. but here we're talking about a very narrow approach of train and equip that frankly can help limit u.s. action. i've heard some of my colleagues say, we understand the bombing, we need to do the bombing because isis is a threat and all that. but we don't want to do the train and equip. which to me is just, you know, completely backwards. if you're concerned about mission creep, if you're concerned about the u.s. getting too involved, then direct u.s. military action is certainly a heck of a lot more involvement than training and equipping others in the region to lead the fight. i think that's an appropriate policy. i applaud the chairman for his work to put this together. we do have more work to do. this only authorizes this until the c.r. runs out, december 11, i believe. so we will have to do this in the national defense authorizing act. but i think it is a modest and

appropriate step and whatever criticisms you have of all manner of different mistakes, per received and actual that the president may have made before, please don't let that color what is an incredibly important policy decision as we try to decide how to confront a very real threat in eye sills. with that i -- eye sills. with that i -- isis. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. the gentleman from california wish to reserve? mr. mckeon: reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further consideration of house joint resolution 124 is postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk a rived -- privileged report from the committee of rules for filing under the rule. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 727, resolution providing for consideration of the bills, h.r. 2, to remove federal government obstacles to the

production of more domestic energy, to ensure transport of that energy reliability to businesses, consumers and other end users, to lower the cost of energy to consumers, tone able manufacturers and other businesses to -- to enable manufacturers and other businesses to in order to create and sustain more secure and well paying american jobs and for other purposes. providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 4, to make revisions to federal law, to improve the conditions necessary for economic growth and job creation and for other purposes. and providing for proceedings during the period from september 22, 2014, through november 11, 2014. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order. h.r. 5405 by the yeas and nays.

1 by the yeas and nays. s. 1603 by the yeas and nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5455 as amended on -- 5405 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: h.r. 5405, a bill to make technical corrections to the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act, to enhance the availability of small and emerging growth companies to access capital through public and private marktses, to reduce regulatory burdens and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 320, the nays are 102. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5461 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5461, a bill to clarify the application of certain leverage and risk-based requirements under the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act, to improve upon the definition provided for fees in connection

with a mortgage transaction and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 326. the nays, 97. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without bjection --

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 327, the nays are 97, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the

vote on the motion of the the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, to suspend the rules pass s. 1603 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: an act to reaffirm that certain land has been taken into trust and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question i will will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 359, the nays are 64. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 5134, an act to extend the national advisory committee on institutional policy and integrity and the advisory committee on student financial assistance for one year.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken later. the house will come to order. please take your conversations off the floor.