For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
August 29, 2002
Vice President Honors Veterans of Korean War
Marriott River Front Hotel
San Antonio, Texas
2:35 P.M. EDT
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you, and thank
you, Colonel. It's a very special privilege to be here this afternoon,
and I appreciate that warm welcome. Just last month, I had the
opportunity in Washington to be part of the presentation ceremony for
veterans and family members receiving the Republic of Korea Service
Medal. And I appreciate this opportunity once again to join with so
many distinguished veterans of the Korean War. And I bring good
wishes to all of you from the seat of power -- Crawford, Texas.
(Laughter and applause.)
I know you all feel especially welcome here in President Bush's
home state, and in this great city of San Antonio -- as the Colonel
pointed out, the site of the Alamo. The armed forces have a tremendous
presence in this community, at Brooks, Lackland, and Randolph Air
Forces bases -- and of course at Fort Sam Houston, the place where
military aviation was born, and where Dwight Eisenhower was first
posted as a second lieutenant. San Antonio is a proud military town,
and I know the residents of this community are honored by your
presence.
I, too, am honored to be with you. Colonel Gray was very
thoughtful to send me an invitation some months ago, and I couldn't
have been more pleased to accept. And in this room I see more than a
few friends, and many personal heroes. You share the experience of
serving in America in an hour of need -- of showing incredible
strength, endurance, and character in the worst imaginable conditions.
And you gained that experience in what has been called "the war that
America forgot to remember."
I was struck by an item that appeared in the corrections column of
a major newspaper several months ago. It seems that the obituary of
Colonel William Barber -- a Medal of Honor recipient known to all of
you -- the paper described Chosin Reservoir as "one of the worst
defeats in Marine Corps history." Well, they may not have checked with
many Marines before they printed that. But something tells me they
heard from Marines after they printed it. In any event, the editors
had to run a correction to point out that the American action was a
"series of tactical victories in the course of a fighting withdrawal."
The paper did right by correcting that record. But it does tell us
something when, even fifty years after the fact, there's still a lot of
misinformation out there. At the first reunion of the Chosin Few, I'm
told, one member of your group said that he asked his children what
they teach in the schools about the Korean War. The kids replied,
"What war?"
Fortunately, that was a long time ago, and Americans already
familiar, now, with the tremendous accomplishments of America's armed
forces not only in World War Two and Vietnam have been reminded once
again of the tremendous contribution that all of you made in Korea.
Visitors to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington now see the
names of more than 58,000 Americans lost in that conflict, over a
period of more than a decade. Nearby, of course, at the Korean War
Veterans Memorial, a lot of people are surprised to learn that in Korea
we lost almost that many in just three years' time, the length of the
Korean conflict. A good number of you, I'm sure, have seen that
memorial -- with the figures of 19 troops, fitted for battle, moving
toward the American flag. One visitor asked a Korean veteran if he
liked the statues. He did. But, he said, "If you want to know what
Korea was like," come back and "look at them when it's 10 degrees below
zero, snowing and sleeting."
The Korean War Memorial, together with the 50th anniversary
observances, has done a great deal to reacquaint the nation with the
history of that conflict. When the conflict began, our military was
greatly weakened by years of demobilization, and was scarcely prepared
for what lay ahead. It was, said one soldier, "a war of fists and
rifle butts" -- where weapons rusted in the monsoons of summer, and
froze solid during the coldest Korean winter in a hundred years; where
many who fell into enemy hands were treated with almost unimaginable
brutality. Yet in Korea were written some of the most notable chapters
in military history -- among them General MacArthur's brilliantly
conceived landing at Inchon, the intense struggle for Pork Chop Hill,
the Eighth Army's phenomenal defense of the Pusan Perimeter, and, of
course, the successful fighting withdrawal from the death trap of the
Chosin Reservoir.
Military historians have properly termed Chosin Reservoir "the most
violent small unit fighting in the history of warfare" and "one of
those military masterpieces that occur when skill and bravery fuse to
defy rational expectation." This is not the audience for a recitation
of those facts; you all know firsthand what happened there. I will say
that I hope and pray that greater and greater numbers of Americans
will, over time, learn and understand what the Chosin Few did for our
nation.
Americans must know names like Lieutenant Colonel, later General,
Ray Davis, who led the First Battalion against a numerically superior
and ferocious enemy force, pressing on through deep snow into the face
of withering fire, carrying all his wounded with him, taking and
holding vital terrain and saving a rifle company from annihilation. We
all should know, of course, about how Colonel Barber, felled by
gunfire, maintained personal control of Company F, commanding his
troops from a stretcher.
We need to know about men who fought for weeks on end, having as
their only shelter the holes they scooped in the snow. About how
General Smith, exhausted and overburdened, gained new strength simply
by hearing the sound coming from a warming tent: It was a group of
enlisted men singing the Marine Corps Hymn.
We need to remember, as well, that in addition to those who died,
more than ninety thousand others came home wounded from that war. And
even at this hour several thousand remain missing: brave men last seen
doing their duty, honored and remembered by their country, which will
persist in our effort to account for every last one of them.
The cause America stood for in Korea -- joined by forces from
many countries -- was noble and just. It was the cause of human
freedom. It was a struggle to determine, as General Ridgway put it,
"Whether the rule of men who shoot their prisoners, enslave their
citizens, and deride the dignity of man shall displace the rule of
those to whom the individual and individual rights are sacred."
Because so many sacrificed in that cause, South Korea is today a
land that enjoys progress and prosperity, its people free from
repression, scarcity, and starvation -- the daily conditions of life
in North Korea. President Bush has observed that satellite photos of
the Korean Peninsula at night show the North in almost complete
darkness. South Korea, on the other hand, is bathed in light -- a
vibrant, enterprising society; a prosperous democracy sharing ties of
commerce and cooperation with many nations all over the globe; a
peaceful and talented people who have built the third-largest economy
in Asia.
We look to the day when the light of freedom and progress covers
all of Korea, and stability on the Peninsula rests on a foundation of
peaceful reconciliation. Until then, stability will be maintained by
our great military alliance. Thirty-seven thousand American troops
proudly serve in Korea today. We will maintain our presence there.
America's commitment to peace in the region, and to security for our
friends, is unshakable.
Our people stationed in South Korea today follow in the finest of
traditions, going back to all of you -- and to the millions of others
who have honored this country by their military service. In these last
ten months, the people of the United States have been inspired once
again by the bravery and selflessness of our armed forces. And I can
say, as a former Secretary of Defense, I have never been more proud of
the America's military.
Our military will carry out many critical missions as we fight the
global war against terror. As Secretary Rumsfeld recently put it, we
are still closer to the beginning of this war than we are to the end of
it. We have entered a struggle of years -- a new kind of war against
a new kind of enemy. The terrorists who struck America are ruthless,
they are resourceful, and they hide in many countries. They came into
our country to murder thousands of innocent men, women, and children.
And there is no doubt but that they wish to strike again, and that they
are working to acquire the very deadliest weapons.
Against such enemies, America and the civilized world have only one
option: wherever terrorists operate, we must stop them, stop them in
their planning, and one by one bring them to justice.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban regime and al Qaeda terrorists have met
the fate that they chose for themselves. And they saw, up close and
personal, the new methods and capabilities of America's armed forces.
For whatever lies ahead, our men and women in uniform deserve the
very best weapons, the very best equipment, the best support, and the
best training we can possibly provide them. And under President Bush
they will have them all. The President has asked Congress for a
one-year increase of more than $48 billion for national defense, the
largest increase since Ronald Reagan lived in the White House. And for
the good of the nation's military families, he has also asked Congress
to provide every man and woman in uniform with a pay raise. We think
they've earned it.
In this war, we have assembled a broad coalition of civilized
nations that recognize the danger and that are working with us on all
fronts. The President has made very clear that there is no neutral
ground in the fight against terror. Those who harbor terrorists share
guilt for the acts they commit. And under the Bush Doctrine, a regime
that harbors or supports terrorists will be regarded as an enemy of the
United States.
The Taliban has already learned that lesson, but Afghanistan was
only the beginning of a lengthy campaign. Were we to stop now, any
sense of security we have would be only temporary. There is a
terrorist underworld out there around the globe, spread to more than 60
countries. The job we have will require every tool of diplomacy,
finance, intelligence, law enforcement, and military power. But we
will, over time, find and defeat the enemies of the United States. In
the case of Osama bin Laden -- as President Bush said recently --
"If he's alive, we'll get him. If he's not alive, we already got
him." (Laughter.) A Texas saying, I think. (Laughter and applause.)
But the challenges to our country involve more than just tracking
down a single person or one small group. 9/11 and its aftermath
awakened this nation to danger, to the true ambitions of the global
terror network, and to the reality that weapons of mass destruction are
being sought by determined enemies who would not hesitate to use them
against us.
It is a certainty that the al Qaeda network is pursuing such
weapons, and has succeeded in acquiring at least a crude capability to
use them. We found evidence of their efforts in the caves and tunnels
of al Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan. And we've seen in recent days
additional confirmation in tapes played on CNN -- pictures of al
Qaeda members training to commit acts of terror, and testing chemical
weapons on dogs. Those terrorists who remain at large are determined
to use these capabilities against the United States and against our
friends and allies around the world.
As we face this prospect, old doctrines of security do not apply.
In the days of the Cold War, we were able to manage the threat with
strategies of deterrence and containment. But it's a lot tougher to
deter enemies who have no country to defend. And containment is not
possible when dictators obtain weapons of mass destruction and are
prepared to share them with terrorists who intend to inflict
catastrophic losses on the United States.
In the case of Saddam Hussein, we have a dictator who was defeated
in the Persian Gulf War, and who agreed at the time to the destruction
of all of his weapons of mass destruction. In the past decade, however,
Saddam has systematically broken all of these agreements. His regime
is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and
biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear
weapons program. These are not weapons designed for the purpose of
defending Iraq; these are offensive weapons for the purpose of
inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein
can hold the threat over the head of anyone he chooses, in his own
region or beyond.
On the nuclear question, many of us are convinced that Saddam will
acquire such weapons fairly soon. Just how soon, we cannot really
judge. Intelligence is at best an uncertain business, even under the
best circumstances. This is especially the case when you are dealing
with a totalitarian government that has made a science out of deceiving
the international community. One must keep in mind the history of U.N.
inspection teams in Iraq. Even as they were conducting the most
intrusive system of arms control in history, the inspectors often
missed a great deal. Before being barred from the country, the
inspectors found and destroyed thousands of chemical weapons, and
hundreds of tons of mustard gas and other nerve agents.
Yet Saddam Hussein had sought to frustrate and deceive them at
every turn, and was often successful in doing so. At one point in
1995, the inspectors were actually on the verge of declaring that
Saddam's programs to develop chemical weapons and ballistic missiles
had been fully accounted for and shut down. In time, aided by
information from defectors and other sources, they discovered that
Saddam Hussein had kept them largely in the dark about the extent of
his program to mass-produce VX, one of the deadliest chemicals known to
man. And far from having shut down Iraq's prohibited missile programs,
the inspectors found that Saddam had continued to test such missiles,
almost literally under the noses of U.N. inspectors.
Many have suggested that the problem can be dealt with simply by
returning inspectors to Iraq. But we must remember that inspections
are not an end in themselves. The objective has to be disarmament; to
compel Iraqi compliance with the U.N. Security Council Resolutions that
call for the complete destruction of Saddam's weapons of mass
destruction and an end to all efforts to develop or produce more
chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons.
With Saddam's record of thwarting inspections, one has to be
concerned that he would continue to plot, using the available time to
husband his resources, to invest in his ongoing chemical and biological
weapons programs, and to gain the possession of nuclear weapons.
Should all his ambitions be realized, the implications would be
enormous for the Middle East, for the United States, and for the peace
of the world. The whole range of weapons of mass destruction then
would rest in the hands of a dictator who has already shown his
willingness to use such weapons, and has done so, both in his war with
Iran and against his own people. Armed with an arsenal of these
weapons of terror, and sitting atop ten percent of the world's oil
reserves, Saddam Hussein could then be expected to seek domination of
the entire Middle East, to take control of a great portion of the
world's energy supplies, and to directly threaten America's friends
throughout the region, and subject the United States or any other
nation to nuclear blackmail.
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has
weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing
them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.
And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead
him into future confrontations with his neighbors -- confrontations
that will involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will
continue to develop with his oil wealth.
We are, after all, dealing with the same dictator who shoots at
American and British pilots in the no-fly zone on a regular basis; the
same dictator who dispatched a team of assassins to murder former
President Bush as he traveled abroad; the same dictator who invaded
Iran and Kuwait, and has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi
Arabia, and Israel; the same dictator who has been on the State
Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism for nearly two
decades.
In the face of such a threat, we must proceed with care,
deliberation, and in consultation with our allies. I know our
President very well. I've worked alongside him as he directed our
response to the events of last September 11th. I know that he will
proceed cautiously and deliberately to consider all possible options to
deal with the threat that Iraq, ruled by Saddam Hussein, represents.
And I am confident that he will, as he has said he would, consult
widely with our Congress, with our friends and allies around the world,
before deciding upon a course of action. He welcomes the debate that
has been joined here at home, and he has made it clear to his national
security team that he wants us to participate fully in the hearings
that will be held in Congress next month on this vitally important
issue.
The elected leaders of the country have a responsibility to
consider all available options, and we are doing so. What we must not
do in the face of a mortal threat is give in to wishful thinking or to
willful blindness. We must not simply look away, hope for the best,
and leave the matter for some future administration to resolve. As
President Bush has said, time is not on our side. Deliverable weapons
of mass destruction in the hands of a terror network, or a murderous
dictator, or the two working together, constitutes as grave a threat as
can be imagined. The risks of inaction are far greater than the risk
of action.
Now and in the future, the United States will work closely with the
global coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the
materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of
mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile
defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And the
entire world must know that we will take whatever action is necessary
to defend our freedom and our security.
As former Secretary of State Kissinger recently stated: "The
imminence of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the huge
dangers it involves, the rejection of a viable inspection system, and
the demonstrated hostility of Saddam Hussein combine to produce an
imperative for preemptive action." If the United States could have
preempted 9/11, we would have, no question. Should we be able to
prevent another, much more devastating attack, we will, no question.
This nation will not live at the mercy of terrorists or terror
regimes.
Some have argued that to oppose Saddam Hussein would cause even
greater troubles in that part of the world, and interfere with the
larger war against terror. I believe the opposite is true. Regime
change in Iraq would bring about a number of benefits to the entire
region. When the gravest of threats are eliminated, the freedom-loving
peoples of the region will have a chance to promote the values that can
bring lasting peace. As for the reaction of the Arab "street," the
Middle East expert, Professor Fouad Ajami, predicts that after
liberation, in Basra and Baghdad the streets are "sure to erupt in joy
in the same way the throngs in Kabul greeted the Americans."
Extremists in the region would have to rethink their strategy of
jihad. Moderates throughout the region would take heart. And our
ability to advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process would be
enhanced, just as it was following the liberation of Kuwait in 1991.
The reality is that these times bring not only dangers but also
opportunities. In the Middle East, where so many have known only
poverty and oppression, terror and tyranny, we look to the day when
people can live in freedom and dignity, and the young can grow up free
of the conditions that breed despair, hatred, and violence.
In other times the world saw how the United States defeated fierce
enemies, then helped rebuild their countries, forming strong bonds
between our peoples and our governments. Today in Afghanistan, the
world is seeing that America acts not to conquer but to liberate, and
remains in friendship to help the people build a future of stability,
self-determination, and peace.
We would act in that same spirit after a regime change in Iraq.
With our help, a liberated Iraq can be a great nation once again. Iraq
is rich in natural resources and human talent, and has unlimited
potential for a peaceful and a prosperous future. Our goal would be an
Iraq that has territorial integrity, a government that is democratic
and pluralistic, a nation where the human rights of every ethnic and
religious group are recognized and respected. In that troubled land,
all who seek justice and dignity and the chance to live their own lives
can know they have a friend and ally in the United States of America.
Great decisions and challenges lie ahead of us. Yet we can and
will build a safer and better world beyond the war on terror. I have
shared these thoughts with you today because war veterans with your
experience often have a superior perspective on matters involving the
nation's security. From experience you understand the overriding
importance of clear thinking, careful preparation, and above all
honesty, when we think about any future course of action. You
understand as well the purposes of this nation -- peace, freedom,
self-determination -- because you defended those very purposes in the
defining hours of your lives.
Once again, I am grateful for this chance to join you today. And
on behalf of the President and the nation, I thank you for your service
to the United States. Those who seek the true meaning of duty, honor,
service, and sacrifice, will find it in the Chosin Few.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END 3:00 P.M. EDT
|