We Must Change Our Tactics If We Are To Effectively Combat InsurgencyEssay Preview: We Must Change Our Tactics If We Are To Effectively Combat InsurgencyReport this essayWe must change our Tactics if we are to effectively Combat InsurgencyThe United States of America is by far the strongest nation on the planet. In a measure of military might no other nation in the world is stronger or more technologically advanced than us. With all this military might at our disposal we still lose soldier after soldier against an enemy that hides under cover of the shadows and randomly strikes out to not only stop but to also disrupt and terrorize the local population for a belief, usually a religious one at that. For some the belief is to purify and unify Umah, or the Muslim community (Gerges, 2006). There is a mixture of influences that cause someone to turn to terrorism (Egendorf, 2007). Four of these would be; rational motivation, psychological motivation, cultural motivation, and fearing the values of others. The rational terrorist thinks through all his options when planning out his operation. This thought process covers maximum effect for finances or in simpler terms, getting the biggest bang for his buck. Psychological motivations are usually due to the terrorists own dissatisfaction with their lives and or accomplishments, When this motivation moves a terrorist to conduct his operations they are usually finding self worth in their terrorist acts. Cultural Values motivate whole nations to a movement that may seem excessive to foreign observers. An example of this would be the way Iran has influenced the majority of its country into believing that the western ways need to change, and if we will not change on our own then they will make us even if it costs our lives. Fearing the values of others is a major cultural determinate of the impression of outsiders and the anticipation of malice towards their whole way of life, or the secularization of their beliefs. This is believed to be the current driving force that motivates the secular violence that happens daily within Iraq on a day to day basis.
Throughout history we have seen firsthand how effective guerrilla warfare tactics can be. One example was during Napoleons campaign across his spanning empire. During this time frame the local population would strike out against Napoleons soldiers in retaliation to being required to house and feed them. During our battle against the Indians while founding this great nation, we were subjected to guerrilla type tactics. Toe to toe the Indians would never have been able to stand up to our more modern weapons. This is why the Indians would hide off undercover. The Indians would then strike out and return to cover. While fighting against the Vietnamese we were again fighting an asymmetrical war conventionally. Here the enemy would hide in the jungles, or through the tunnel networks. In doing this they were able to sustain a fight that once again in a conventional methods woul never has been able to last. By continuing to follow these outdated tactics we, the United States people, are setting ourselves up for failure.. Just as we see on a day to day basis in Iraq or Afghanistan, the enemy no longer follows our set rules of war fighting. If they would the war would have been over long ago.
While all insurgencies are different, the reasons most insurgents fight their battles are similar. Some past insurgencies have included a fight for freedom from the oppression of an overbearing government. The rising up of ethnic or religious people against those they do not see eye to eye such as the current jihad against the U.S. In the beginning insurgents were mainly concerned with defending land, home, royal stations and traditional religious beliefs. Later the insurgents began to have a more revolutionary purpose. Now insurgents are no longer content with maintaining their ways of life in their on homeland, now they are looking at converting globally. To effective combat the insurgents, a counterinsurgent must determine the insurgents motivation, their methods of delivery. A few of these methods of delivery include but are not limited to; conspiratorial, military, urban, protracted popular war, identity focused, and coalition. Some adjustments will need to be made depending on the location, reason for the insurgency, and the beliefs of the insurgents but the basics can all be drawn from as a starting point. With this in mind it is important to remember that “The side that learns and adapts the fastest usually wins” as stated in the Counterinsurgency Field Manual (Unk, 2007)
This being said, an effective way to combat insurgency begins with; understanding the mission of counterinsurgency. Counterinsurgency is a combination offensive operations, defensive operations, and stability operations. The offensive, and defensive missions are self explanatory. Under stability the things to consider are civil security, civil control, essential services, governance, and economics and infrastructure development. Some of the steps that the counterinsurgent should consider in combating insurgency is developing and practicing counterinsurgency doctrine, known in laymans terms as a plan of attack or execution, and indentifying participants and their responsibilities in counterinsurgent operations. These participants that should be considered are the local law enforcement and the host nations own military once that is an option. Other key participants would be US forces of course to observe, maintain, and guide the local forces, any other nations forces involved in the area of operations would also be included, U.S. government Agencies, Non-governmental Organizations (NGO) these can be agencies such as A Self-Help Assistance Program (ASAP), Institute for Development Research, Inc. (IDR), Project Open Hearts (POH). These are just examples and in no way are they all inclusive. There are many other organizations that are out there specifically to help a poorer nation to rebuild its infrastructure, health system, educational system to name a few. The wonderful thing about these organizations is that they are not using our money to accomplish this. The only money our nation is spending is of course the US military costs. By helping the country in question we not only bring it to a point where it can care for its own people without violating human rights of any kind, we win the hearts and minds of the local population that was opposing us and take away from the support base of the insurgents. Another group that can help is International Government Organizations (IGO). These organizations fall into the same boat essentially as the Non-Governmental Organizations but as the name implies are international. Examples of these could include the United Nations. Another group that is included are Multinational contractors because they will be part of the workforce needed to conduct the work that the NGOs and IGOs provide the funds and or materials for. And
A Strategy of Military Intervention for Middle East Middle East-based non-governmental organizations, including the United Nations, have been involved actively in the Middle East during this time period, the United States for at least four years (2005-2009), and we have been involved in a military campaign (and we also played a leading role with respect to various other efforts and strategies by the Obama Administration and allies to combat insurgency in Yemen). US military involvement is a process and not a means. The term military intervention, as applied to the Middle East and the region, means not trying to destroy a country or regime or a country’s people or government, but that the process of war has to be carried out, it being an inefficiency. In this sense it is an ineffective means of military intervention that is a failure; the US military will not destroy any people or regime or country and will never have a political solution to this problem but the process of war. We have been involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which are very difficult, often dangerous, and that have involved a tremendous loss to government. We have been involved in Syria which is a major problem in Syria. This is the kind of situation where we are working on this plan internally, in a local capacity so there is no conflict with one another and we have been doing this for nearly three years now. That is why the United States military is not involved if the political resolution is needed in another country and the opposition is not willing to put up with it and thus it would be wise that we put our resources where ours is. Other issues such as the Middle East-related matters are that it is not a direct military challenge to the government of that country or nation to force it in a civil or military way. In other countries the issue of an independent Syria could be put to a vote. While we will be using the United Nations on Syria, we have not been trying to create a civil conflict. We have not been trying to force this government in a democratic way but rather to make it do things that are democratic and that can be done through political change and direct military means. There is also the military strategy; it is a way of countering all of the pressures and political, economic, spiritual, political. Our military forces are also conducting counterinsurgency training in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In those parts we have been involved and many are being trained by our country. So there have been many initiatives we are involved in. What matters is not which approach is deployed for all parts of the world;
This strategy of US intervention is a model to be used against other countries. That is why we created the Institute for the Study of War, of which we are the head. We do our own work there, while at the same time working with other countries, and our objective is to create a political resolution that is both democratic and will work in the best interests of all countries. One goal is to force the people of other countries to accept their decisions, and this also involves a peaceful resolution to some of the problems that our forces are facing by force. We are concerned that if we continue to be in a state of military adventurism, we may not receive an outcome that is fair for all countries. One thing we have in common is a peaceful one. There is no direct military war on the battlefield, no military action by the United States that is taking place on the ground outside of the international community, a war that has been conducted outside our own borders. The US uses force, not only to enforce terms of peace but to fight. We would like to use force only when it is necessary for people to survive or to defend one’s people over another, for the people of this country or another country to make it more difficult than possible for us to force them out. For that reason we have conducted many actions in the past that have resulted in a political resolution that is not in accord with international law. We have been involved again and again in interventions that involved a government of Iraq as a result of chemical weapons production at the time, and this is a model. We have also used force to help get our country out of Saddam Hussein’s clutches in the second half of the 1980s. When things got out of control, we would consider our military intervention for the country. We have also been involved in several instances where we were involved in activities that involved the transfer and possession of large numbers of uranium material and so we were involved over the past decade. We have been engaged in several counterinsurgency operations so we have taken the appropriate measures to secure our borders from possible invasion while at the same time being prepared to use force to bring about change in the government of Iraq. These
In 2004, we engaged in two counterinsurgency operations. We have also been involved in a series of counterterrorist operations. In 2007, we had begun a year of training and equipping Iraqi security forces to fight Islamic extremists. In 2008, we had the highest level of military training on the part of the Iraqi army. In 2010, we began taking part in counterinsurgency operations aimed at countering Iranian and other radical groups that were on the rise in Iraq. In 2011, we was involved in counterinsurgency operations to counter the presence of militants from various localities and insurgencies. The United States has made a strong effort to fight in the context of this global threat, and we will be continuing to do so. We will continue to engage for the rest of our military and peacekeeping service in order to protect our allies, our allies in the region, and the people of Iraq. We have committed to provide our services, in the United States, and to our coalition partners, in the context of any security-related incident, with the highest security and resilience standards, as they apply to all military operations and activities in the world. The United States is committed to using the best training, equipment and personnel to counter the growing threat emanating from the global Islamic extremists group within Iraq and Syria. We can use our military resources to defend our alliance partners, our partners who are protecting the region and Iraq, and our coalition partners that provide intelligence on terrorist activities and intelligence-sharing in an atmosphere of trust and trust. All coalition partners should be prepared to share intelligence with each other regarding potential terrorist threats emanating from Iraq, and should provide and cooperate with each other in the field. In light of the recent military action in Syria. As we’ve come back to Iraq, we have been able to build alliances in our security to address security threats. We are able to do this without having to be an outlier within the Iraqi government. It is also not about being a military dictatorship, like some of the countries that were behind the rise of ISIL. These nations are at war with Russia, but they are not our friends. They are inextricably together. They all are part of this crisis, and in the end we choose to do so militarily, to protect and strengthen our allies. As president, I will always reaffirm our commitment to the common defense of Iraq and the world. The president should keep his hands off our countries, and make sure that he can continue to maintain the status quo with an arms race. His advisers are doing his job, including
We continue to do our very best to work with the Iraqis to build a peace process in Iraq. Although we will continue to lead the effort, it is important that we also continue to work with our coalition partners, particularly the NATO partners, to reduce and ultimately eliminate the number of ISIL recruits and to secure the security and stability of our allies. This is an ever-present danger to our security. Our alliance partners need to work to prevent people who are radicalized from making an escape from Iraq, rather than in ways that allow them to join ISIL. They must provide support for the recruitment, education and retention of the people of Iraq. If ISIL leaves then it will create a vacuum that would not be filled by other terrorist groups such as ISIL. I will continue to engage the Iraqi government and the international community to work with the Iraqis to secure their future and to increase the security of our alliance partners. We share the value of not just a few short years, but decades or more of great leadership in the fight against ISIL, and that is why we are committed to the fight, and have always done so. We must continue to work with Iraq to develop solutions for the growing threat. _________________________________________________________________________________ In the end, it is hard for me to think of a country anywhere else that has managed to protect its people so well as Iraq. Iraq has never been the best place in our country, and we need to be more aggressive to combat and counter the threat of ISIL. On behalf of the United Nations, our government, the Iraqi government, and the Iraqi political leaders, I would like to thank the U.N. Secretary-General for her many years of service to this country as an ambassador and representative of the people of Iraq. On behalf of President Bush, I would like to thank the Vice President of Iraq for his leadership. As the president of the United Nations, I believe that we make our own judgment as to the security situation in these days, and take great responsibility for our actions. Our decision to authorize the use of force in Iraq reflects that decision. I believe that we take great responsibility for the circumstances under which Iraq took action before we authorized violence. We have been on this mission in the past, and we will do it again if we get the authority and the cooperation to do
_______________________________________________ _______________ “I think the world is facing a very important moment when the leadership of Afghanistan and Pakistan will be able to meet, and it will all go back to that one question that always had a lasting effect,” Dr. Michael Cohen said. “This is a critical situation for the security of the region. The United States of America is also going to need to take very important steps.” UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-201 4-20439 Doc No. C0577039 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-201 4-20439 Doc No. C0577040 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C0577040 Date: 08/31/2015 First, we need to acknowledge that the United States is not alone in the need to fight terrorists. We must recognize the importance of supporting all the political actors working, both good and bad, to achieve peace, security, and prosperity in this region. We must continue to work at increasing our military capability as we respond to the new threats from an increasingly dangerous and unstable world. These threats can only be directed at our adversaries because they are capable of becoming enemies, while it is obvious that those people who are most likely to become adversaries are, in fact, the people that want to harm us. It is time for the United States to do what none of our other friends in this region have been able to do: begin to work to protect our people, our people, our people’s lives; to work to stop this dangerous and uncontrollable spread of extremism and terror, to stop it before it causes trouble for our people in our own countries, our people in Iraq and throughout the world. In this particular moment, our actions will continue to call for more of our nation’s best foreign fighters in the world, in Afghanistan and across the Middle East, including in Iraq and in the other Muslim world. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C0577041 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-201 4-20439 Doc No. C0577041 Date: 08/31/2015 The United States will continue to work with Iraqis to build up our military capacity. We must continue to work with friends, friends and allies on the same ground, including Iraq, to secure and secure our people and the stability that would allow it to continue to thrive.
A more detailed timeline of the progress on the ground to date, based on the best available intelligence, suggests that Afghanistan is far more than just a safe-haven to begin with. It is an important national security objective. A comprehensive, coordinated international military response will begin with the efforts to provide adequate humanitarian assistance. By this time next year, we could be even more effective in our efforts to prevent all but the largest refugee flows from Afghanistan. A further focus will be on ensuring that the United States continues to be engaged with other nations to prevent and respond to terrorist groups from obtaining resources and capabilities, rather than directly engaging others to do the same. We will continue to help other countries fight their respective regional conflicts, and we will continue to work closely with partners to make sure that a credible, stable, and non-strategic war on terror develops. Unfortunately, the political and military system is not yet sufficiently trained to respond adequately to all these challenges, a fact that will have to be corrected, after the President’s next address next September, as we work through these issues and beyond. In a world where there are no effective anti-terrorism forces, there will be and continue to be strong, strong, reliable U.S. support for all those fighting terrorism. But the real question for policymakers — first of all, what does the President’s message mean to America and U.S. allies in Afghanistan? and also for our own people? — is whether the American people have an alternative to such extremism and terror? UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C0577041 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-201 4-20439 Doc No. C0577042 Date: 08/31/2015 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C0577042 Date: 08/31/2015 A more general outline of this country’s economic and diplomatic role is emerging. The U.S. spends about $30 billion each year on defense. This investment is consistent with the strategic guidance developed under President Richard Nixon
, and with increased U.S. power and military influence, particularly in the region. Some of these policies contribute to our continued success in this economic, military, and diplomatic engagement. One U.S. strategic role, provided in conjunction with a strong economy and strong international network, is focused around defense. These include a comprehensive approach to counter terrorism, which will provide for a comprehensive effort to defend and defend America against terrorist organizations and their leaders. This requires a substantial investment in the military and intelligence capabilities, intelligence capabilities, and technology—all of which now have significant implications for our defense, homeland security, and counterterrorism efforts, and in the coming years will determine our future military capabilities. Another policy component of this administration will be that of enhancing our strategic relationship in the interests of regional and global security; the military and intelligence of the United States, including our strong relationships with major, regional, and Asian powers, has enhanced our ability to deter, to fight back and to counter terrorism throughout the world. However, the long term strategic, economic, and diplomatic engagement of U.S. and Afghan governments are already being shaped by long-term military efforts which will not improve today. At a time of heightened tension, we have a wide range of strategies ‗ to counter insurgency & terrorism, including our approach to determing, combating terrorism, expanding our intelligence and economic relationships, and bolstering a strong economy and a strong network of international networks. This is the next stage of our sustained effort to counter insurgent & terrorism, and the administration will support that effort through continuing military involvement in the country. At a time when the U.S. is facing a very difficult decision on whether to intervene in Afghanistan or seek more direct U.S. assistance, we cannot afford to make unwise policy decisions in Afghanistan. This includes military action that is necessary to prevent and respond to insurgencies and terrorists in our region. The administration will continue to push forward our military and military-technical cooperation and will continue to support regional and global partnerships. In a place like Afghanistan—where there are not yet effective anti-terrorism forces—an immediate response to insurgent attacks against foreign targets such as U.S. military installations is always first and foremost an intelligence and security issue. Yet, this is where we are facing a major economic, military, and diplomatic problem: in large part, this problem can be prevented with better counterterrorism and countermeasure capabilities. It is critical that the United States continue to work collaboratively with other key partners, including regional and international governments, to reduce the potential for instability or instability in the Middle East, increase U.S. diplomatic
and military assistance across the region; and to ensure the security, prosperity, and security of our children as they mature. As part of this effort, the United States will continue to support efforts to protect our citizens from potential U.S.-backed or foreign influence and will continue to do so through partnerships with other nations. In addition, the Obama Administration is committed to continued defense of our interests and our national security interests based on our commitment to a strong U.S.-first foreign policy. To continue working to rebuild relations with China, we will continue to pursue a comprehensive strategic partnership with China, continuing the efforts of President Obama, to better meet our shared strategic objectives. In addition, the administration will continue to support efforts in our region to strengthen our diplomatic, security, and other bilateral and multilateral mechanisms, including to improve the performance of bilateral and multilateral security cooperation. This, too, will involve increased U.S. military involvement in the most important areas of our security interests while we remain at war and to build bridges between a range of other nations that are interested in the same, and also with different, concerns. By continuing to support such strategic approaches, our interests are enhanced, and, therefore, the United States is able to continue our partnership with such different countries. As secretary of state, Obama will continue to work closely with him on this critical issue. It is time for me and his other top officials to work with the administration to engage in a better course of action. President Barack Obama: On behalf of President-elect Trump and all of his family members and friends, I would like to thank you, especially the great families of those who died in the line of duty in our Armed Forces; President Barack Obama, the first lady, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the National Security Council (NSC), and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis; and all of his family members and friends who provided their lives and the comfort and safety of their loved ones. I can’t emphasize enough how much we truly honor each of them by their service, honor, and bravery. There are a host of things we will do better. Some are good policy choices we’ll make—particularly in their support of the Syrian opposition, and in their continued efforts to end the
to the Syrian Civil War. Others are bad policy choices that I can’t make. While I know that some disagree with me on what it means to honor the people and their resistance, let me be clear: I don’t think we should make such a big deal of it. It could become a distraction to America’s national security. And it could become a distraction for other allies. As commander-in-chief, I will continue to do my best to make sure that we have some solid support, and get those who serve to keep the United States safe. President Obama: I would also love to do more to get our military in order. I would like to ensure that we get in, as soon as, any other American military force has made that decision and we can get in as soon as possible. I would also like to expand our national security capabilities and provide more training and support. In addition, I would continue to build on what the Trump administration has already done in the fight against terrorism. We are seeing a shift in the strength of the international community and with the emergence of a new set of allies, we could meet many of the goals we have set here. But for the time being, I’m focusing on a number of issues that align the U.S.-Israeli alliance. As Secretary of State, I will continue to work closely with Israeli foreign service officers, Israeli security professionals, and international experts. I think these are important strategic opportunities for us to share and to cooperate. And while the United States is taking steps toward our shared goal of ending the Syrian civil war in Syria, I want to look forward to a productive and successful partnership at the United Nations. As a result, I will continue to work with our allies on what we can achieve. President-elect Trump: I am confident—in my personal view—that our country will be able to take part and help build a world-class diplomatic and commercial system that can work with all of the world’s economies, countries, and governments. We’re going to make it easier and safer for people to travel to places with better privacy and security and to access information that is protected by law, and we’re also going to create great trade and development opportunities, because governments can go from feeling so free, to like everyone they want to work together. And I think everyone who wants to work with me on this matter will be very excited to hear what we’re doing with our international partners. President-elect Trump: By coming together, as Secretary of State, I will remain steadfast in my commitment to work closely with and strengthen an American-
-led international alliance, and will take the necessary actions to do just that. I will continue to pursue all sorts of strategic initiatives, including the creation of a new center for global economic investment to help create jobs on the U.S.-Israeli-Palestinian border. And I will be working closely with our partners on an increased commitment to the development of a trans-Pacific infrastructure. President-elect Trump: We’ve talked about our vision in a number of places, including about how to find ways to secure a safer Middle East for all of us. There are a number of reasons we believe the Middle East can’t exist without a strong, secure, and prosperous Middle East. But there’s another reason we believe that we’re very likely to achieve our vision. I would also be grateful to my staff for this opportunity to make a significant investment — a commitment that I believe we all, like all U.S. citizens — as we progress up the U.S.-Israel-Palestinian pathway, both in terms of the political engagement we and our partners are seeking and the investment we are making, and also in terms of our efforts to achieve the United States’s goals. These investments will begin to make a difference in the lives of U.S. citizens living in and around the region. Indeed, my staff believes that we want to continue to build relationships that strengthen our shared global effort to bring about lasting peace, including through economic, social, and security partnerships. And I would also like to thank Senator Bernie Sanders for sponsoring this bipartisan deal, the Export-Import Bank, which sets up an international system to invest in and to encourage the development of U.S.-made and used vehicles to address the humanitarian needs of refugees across the world. I think it’s an important initiative that will work with our nation’s leaders as we build America’s future and to create a better world for all Americans. President-elect Trump: And to begin with, I want to thank you, the people who helped make this deal possible. Thank you. Senator Sanders: I am very proud we had this opportunity, having worked out some very important agreements, including
-a few recently, that many have felt will help us. The new $5 billion, $6 billion Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is one of the largest and longest-in-the-world bilateral negotiations. And it is one we have already agreed to for the first time, with the United States and a variety of allies in the Asia-Pacific region. And it has provided an immense opportunity for investors, suppliers and exporters in the Asia-Pacific region. And I am sure that it will soon be, that these agreements will serve the interests of our American citizens and provide economic opportunities to more people throughout the world. And, at the same time, I am very confident that in the coming years, we will see, when it comes to our Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, that we will begin to have some great new opportunities for working with each other, because at that time, we will be in a position to continue to strengthen the international position of the United States and of some of the other emerging economies. And, again, that is a goal that I believe is extremely important, especially given a strong U.S.-China relationship and strong leadership in the region. And so, on that point, I am very pleased with your work on that. Thankyou, and to Mr. Speaker and his staff for your continued efforts to bring this trade deal together. Chairman Burr: Thank you very much for the opportunity to serve. We’re grateful to have seen you together as we worked through a variety of issues along the way. We’re grateful because you came on board with me for my trip and talked about it with respect to both the U.S. economy and with the role of the U.S. in the world. And we’re grateful for your effort and for your work with the American people to support efforts to create job growth in low-income countries, and for you working closely with our other partners, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, to build U.S.-led networks in the region to grow investment and help create job opportunities. Thankyou, and I look forward to meeting with you and our many partners as we work together to improve the world’s infrastructure, its economic opportunities and to build a better, stronger democracy in the region and in the world. The Chairman and his staff would appreciate it and we look forward to seeing you out there. Mr. Speaker, I have a number of questions for you. First of all, you wrote in the last few minutes that there is one critical piece of legislation that is critical across the board. To me as an
e, it concerns a long-term, comprehensive, high-capacity program to develop new technologies to solve some key problems that will be critical to our long-term growth goal. We are working to address our infrastructure and the infrastructure to enable our new trade agreements to grow by over a billion dollars annually to make sure that we create jobs, build wealth, and protect our environment. As you know, I’t have a number of bills in my desk that I’re considering. So, it is very important for me to note it and let the Members of both houses speak for that. I’t have some plans to introduce those bills. We are talking about two of those pieces and I’t will also introduce a bill and I’t will also introduce a bill, or a measure by the name of Ways and Means that has a more complete bill that I’t would allow the President and Congress, as we have talked about, to repeal the sequester. So, it is very important for me to put these bills back in front of the Senate. I’t are trying to set some benchmarks in order to make sure that Americans believe that we work together to achieve the goals of our comprehensive economic agenda. And the members of both houses believe that, that this should be a great opportunity to achieve that success. And for me, we believe that, at minimum, our government is in full compliance with the law so we can continue to do the things we have to do, and not overcomplicate those things, and that’s what we intend to do when we come to the final agreement. So, that bill will go to the floor of the Senate without any debate or delay. And, as I said, that is something that you’re trying to set up. Now, as I look forward to the two-day recess on that in that Senate, just to let others who are in on the action hear from me and the Chair and to try to make sense of what we have agreed on about those two bills together, I’t will not be
f. The Speaker, I must ask you to consider the time in the next few minutes, as I have talked to you all about spending and not spending on our infrastructure, jobs, the environment, and the infrastructure to get our economy going on track. And I’t am very concerned about our people when we send our people back to work in these places in order to help rebuild this country around the promises made to the American people by President John F. Kennedy. We are very concerned about where we’t are getting to and there are many places our people are in these situations. I’t know that the American people are deeply concerned about what you’.t are doing to our economy and what you are doing to our country in these times of increasing political instability and rising economic insecurity. I’t want to be clear about that. I am not sure that you’.t know, I believe that you and the leadership of your party, if you’.t wish to, will be prepared to use any resources or technical equipment and to put us in charge of our country. I’t and I⁁c think this nation’s leaders should have the opportunity to look at our record on this subject. I’t know that our great business leaders — the President has already indicated that he wants to be prepared to use whatever kind of equipment and equipment can bring us — of our economic strength and strength on this continent to help our businesses and businesses. So, I’t know that it is much more important to me to put those bills into front of the House so that they have a chance to go forward. And I’t as I look at what could be done, Iᾰd not just to help your companies and your businesses make a profit, but to help your communities and your communities. Of course I know that in our country these same companies have also been affected. But Iᾰd I think we as a country should make the same clear and just decisions regarding our future and future future. Iᾰd it seems to me that we ought to start with an economic plan that will serve our people, your people. So, Iᾰd we need to do it right now by making sure our jobs, our jobs, our livelihoods are going to be enhanced and we’re going to be able to grow and do
1485>
our job and to get the jobs that we need to create and expand our workforce. And you’.t do your part. You can tell me, Senator, where can I start with your job and your $3 trillion dollar investment in infrastructure? I need to get that done. I’t know that Ię
I’.t want to be well prepared for these timeframes that we see a little bit of every single time we experience significant economic downturn, economic crisis. And if we’.t see what is happening in these times. And if we see that economic downturn happen, in some cases, because of some part of the global financial crisis, we have heard the phrase “it would be hard” but I don’t think that’s accurate. It may be, a part of that is it took longer, but I think it is more complicated than a few things. For instance, if we have a new energy transition and we have to change power plants, it may take some time because some of these new energy and technologies will be different. I could go on for quite a while, but I think maybe people need to remember that we should be prepared. And my friend Senator Warren has said that you will also hear that, that this country is in a recession. What is that? And as you can imagine people are not talking anymore about jobs, and I understand you as you are seeing those jobs disappear. I’.t I⁁/
I⁁ believe that this economy isn’t going to be getting any harder. And what we did to help our business is that we got to stop putting so much on the table and not having to worry about people losing their jobs. And I think it’s time for everyone in this country, in Washington and around the world, to realize that we really are in a recovery. We Are In In This. If we