The Rumsfeld Lehrer Variations
Sec Def Rumsfeld in interview with Jim Lehrer
Suite arranged by Dana Pattillo
Borders
Well,
that’s like asking do you think
our borders with Mexico and Canada
are sealed
or are they porous?
Do people move back and forth
across them that
we don’t know about?
The United States and Mexico.
I mean it’s a border
is a problem.
Look at the border
between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Look at the border
between Iran and Afghanistan.
The borders
between Iran and Iraq
are porous.
The borders between Syria…
Of course we can do some things
about it
and we are doing some things
about it but
can you make them sealed?
Not likely.
Think of the borders.
You have got Kuwait.
You’ve got Saudi Arabia.
You’ve got Jordan.
You’ve got Turkey.
You’ve got Iran.
Very likely.
And of course these folks
are very skilled at fake passports
and they bribe,
they pay money.
Think what it would take.
Think what it would take in our country.
Oh, my goodness.
The question is:
how do you want to use your troops?
What we want to do is get
the neighbors to help
patrol the borders
in Kuwait,
in Jordan,
in Saudi Arabia
and they're going to do that.
We've got some ways
that we can do a better job
along Iran and Syria.
We're hiring more
and more Iraqi border guards,
training them
and putting them there.
There's some other things
we can do to make the border...
but in terms of making it –
sealing it,
not likely.
Surrender
We’ve scooped them up
and arrested them and killed them.
There’s something in excess
of 100 just from one or two countries.
And we’ve got that many
that have been captured and killed
We're killing, capturing
terrorists in Iraq
which is a...
Baghdad today which is
a whale of a lot better than Boise.
There were some people
who were quite optimistic
there would be a surrender
of their army
in a formal way.
In fact,
what happened was
they didn’t surrender
The intelligence was not perfect
on that.
They bled into the countryside.
We had maybe ten,
twelve thousand surrendered
out of a much bigger universe.
They are.
They’re finding them all the time.
Money
They have money
that they’ve been given
to do this.
They’ve got leaflets
that recruited them.
It varies.
One of the things
that we’ve seen is
in the country
some of these people
that are engaging in these attacks
have been paid to do it.
They’re kind of unemployed
or they’re people
that are available for criminals
and the Baathists
are paying them.
The Baathists have money.
General Sanchez
We've got General Sanchez
who is in charge of the country
who says he does not want more U.S. troops.
More U.S. troops
from his standpoint would mean
more force protection,
more combat support,
and he says that he's got about
on a daily basis fifteen,
twelve,
fifteen,
eighteen incidents a day.
They last two or three minutes.
Military conflict
where somebody is attacking
somebody or somebody
is doing something.
Some we initiate.
Others they initiate.
And we've got 130,000 troops there.
And he said he does not have a strategic
or tactical military threat
to deal with.
He's got a security problem.
And what he wants is more Iraqis
to help provide for the security
in that country.
Some people look at it and they say, well,
you've got 130,000,
you're still having some people killed.
If 130,000 are good,
let's double it, 260,000.
And that's better.
Why not triple it?
And General Sanchez
and General Myers
and General Abizaid
believe that that would be a bad idea.
The Question
And then the question is:
What do you think is the best thing to do?
Do you want to do
what the Soviets did in Afghanistan
and flood it,
flood the zone as they say in football,
flood it with 300,000 people and lose –
and become an occupier,
be oppressive,
be everywhere,
be in everyone's business?
If you have 130,000 U.S. troops there now
and 55,000 Iraqis
and another 22,000 international troops,
doing what they're doing
and you're only getting ten
or twelve
or fifteen incidents a day
that last two or three minutes,
what would the 300,000 do?
What would they do?
Now, it's an interesting thing.
I've heard people who feel very strongly on this.
I understand that.
But it is never, to me,
I've never heard
a good, sound, substantive argument
that is persuasive.
To me what's persuasive
is what the commanders say
and the commanders
are unanimous on this.
It's their opinion,
it's not my opinion.
So your friend,
if he wants to talk about stubbornness,
he can talk about stubbornness
for the entire chain of command.
I brought my quote in.
And you don't have it.
I'll bet you.
I'll bet you you've got
what some newspaper printed.
I was asked the question,
there are a lot of critics criticizing
the president and you
and does that complicate
your effort in Iraq or Afghanistan?
Healthy Debate
And I said it does make...
it makes it complicated sometimes.
It makes it difficult.
That's life.
And I finished by saying,
that does not mean
there should not be debate
on these issues.
There should be debate and discussion
on these issues.
We can live with that.
We can live with a healthy debate
as long as it's elevated as possible
and as civil as possible.
Is that testy, Jim?
I don't think so.
I'll tell you what I said.
I said to the extent
that the terrorists
are given reason
to believe
that he might prevail
in some way
and they take heart from that
and it leads to more money
going into these activities
or that leads to more recruits
or that leads to more encouragement
or more staying power
on the part of the terrorists
obviously it makes our task more difficult.
The next sentence is,
that does not mean there should not be debate.
That's the context.
There should be debate and discussion
on these things.
We can live with that.
We can live with a healthy debate
as long as it's elevated
and reasonably civil.
Now that is a very balanced statement.
That is not testy.
I don’t do politics.
Absolutely not.
That subject never came up
in the conversation
when I was asked this.
They talked about critics.
There are lots of critics
including the ones you quote.
No, I do not get into politics at all.
It's the season.
That's life.
We can live with it.
It's healthy.
We like a good debate.
Nihil obstat. Imprimatur ego pater Omed.
12:17:51 AM 
|
