ABC News - Iraq War - 2003-03-20 - 3 p.m. (E)
Channel: malgent
Transcript
Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)
[0:00] talking about the coalition of the
[0:02] willing. It will take us some time to
[0:05] truly analyze the coalition which the
[0:08] president president spokesman and the
[0:09] secretary of defense have all said is
[0:11] larger than that going into the Gulf
[0:12] War. Uh because we do not have a an
[0:15] absolute handle at the moment on how
[0:17] willing and where uh we know that coming
[0:20] into this war there was a very
[0:21] significant portion of international
[0:23] public opinion that was opposed to the
[0:25] war. But the president and his staff
[0:29] saying at the moment that this coalition
[0:30] of people eager to support the United
[0:32] States on this mission uh is growing
[0:34] almost by the hour to listen to them.
[0:37] This is ABC News continuing live
[0:39] coverage of war with Iraq.
[0:50] I'm Peter Jennings at ABC News
[0:52] headquarters. Again, our continuing
[0:53] coverage, as I said, of the war with
[0:55] Iraq, which has begun in earnest, if not
[0:57] in full, uh, with attacks across the um,
[1:01] southern frontier from Kuwait into Iraq,
[1:03] with cruise missile attacks on targets
[1:06] both of opportunity and long planned
[1:08] targets in Baghdad. Tremendous pressure
[1:10] being exerted, well, pressure being
[1:12] exerted at the moment on the Iraqi
[1:14] leadership with tremendous pressure, we
[1:16] are told, yet to come. Uh there have
[1:18] been some minor incidents but no
[1:21] American casualties that we are aware of
[1:24] at the moment. There was a um an
[1:27] American helicopter that went down in
[1:28] the western desert earlier today. That
[1:30] crew was all rescued and the helicopter
[1:32] destroyed on the ground by American
[1:33] forces. There was a pave low helicopter
[1:36] and there was an that was a pave low
[1:38] that was a sort of carrying utility
[1:40] helicopter carrying special forces in
[1:42] often used by the special forces. Zenna
[1:44] was an Apache attack helicopter that
[1:46] went down, but apparently only briefly
[1:48] according to Ted Cppel when it went
[1:50] across the frontier into southern Iraq
[1:52] with the army uh just several hours ago
[1:56] and they got it apparently up and going
[1:58] again. Uh the town of Um Kaser on the
[2:02] Shatal Arab uh Iraqi small Iraqi oil
[2:05] port at the top of the waterway that
[2:08] gives Iraq its access to the sea has
[2:11] been captured. We do not know whether
[2:13] it's been captured, at least I don't
[2:14] know, I should say, whether it's been
[2:15] captured by American or by British
[2:18] forces. They both went up that eastern
[2:20] corridor. So, we don't know precisely
[2:22] who's across the frontier and who is
[2:24] not. But there was some talk before the
[2:26] campaign that as the British as the
[2:29] Americans bypass these significant towns
[2:31] in the south, particularly Basra,
[2:34] which is the largest Iraqi town in the
[2:36] city just north of Kaser, um that the
[2:38] British would uh be left in charge of
[2:42] those cities, but we don't know that at
[2:44] the moment. And as we talk to our
[2:47] various uh reporters on the perimeter,
[2:49] uh not much happening on the on the
[2:51] northern frontier at the moment. Two of
[2:53] our reporters say it's fairly quiet up
[2:55] there where it's the eve of the Kurdish
[2:56] New Year. Kurds and Turks making
[2:58] everybody nervous. On the Jordanian uh
[3:01] frontier, uh there's no great sign of
[3:03] people coming across. No great movement
[3:05] of refugees at the moment, which is a
[3:07] good thing on the Jordanian side because
[3:08] they're not completely ready to handle
[3:10] refugees at the moment. But ABC's David
[3:12] Wright said the border was fairly quiet
[3:14] and a number of people were going back
[3:16] in. It was similarly reported on the on
[3:19] the Syrian Iraqi border that some Iraqis
[3:22] were going back in. Weren't altogether
[3:24] sure or why. And there were some signs
[3:26] of better off uh Iraqis getting out and
[3:30] going to the northwest a couple hundred
[3:32] miles up to take uh refuge from the war
[3:36] in Syria. Um, we're told among other
[3:39] things in terms of just latest
[3:41] developments here, uh, that from Martha
[3:44] Ratis just a moment ago that perhaps
[3:45] Saddam Hussein and his family was in bed
[3:47] sleeping at the time of the US bombing.
[3:49] No confirmation of that. Uh, US forces
[3:52] have taken, as I said, Umar Kaser. We
[3:55] don't know what else. It was, everybody
[3:57] believes, Saddam Hussein on television
[4:00] in Iraq earlier today speaking to his
[4:02] people. And it was, we believe, recorded
[4:04] after the attack, but that's all we
[4:06] know. And it was fairly rhetorical in
[4:09] terms of him rallying his people. But we
[4:11] keep getting these bits and pieces from
[4:13] the American intelligence community via
[4:16] our reporters that the pressure on the
[4:20] command structure both on the military
[4:22] and on the political appears to have
[4:25] them anxious, wavering. I'm not sure
[4:27] exactly what the precise phrase is or
[4:29] really how how serious it is. Let's go
[4:31] to the White House. ABC's Terry Moran.
[4:33] Terry, tell us a little more about
[4:34] what's happening there in and around the
[4:36] cabinet meeting.
[4:38] >> Well, Peter, this is command central in
[4:40] some ways at a political level, not at a
[4:42] military level. Although the president
[4:44] is being kept apprised of all the
[4:46] military developments that you've just
[4:48] described, his real job, aids say, is to
[4:51] look ahead to the next steps where
[4:53] presidential decision-making will be
[4:55] required. And chief among those in many
[4:58] ways is that very delicate, as you
[5:00] rightly put it, situation up in the
[5:02] north of Iraq that Deb Amos was
[5:04] describing. Vice President Cheney, we
[5:06] are told, has been working that
[5:07] situation for a long time. I was told
[5:10] that the Turks negotiating position
[5:13] throughout this delicate negotiation
[5:16] with them about uh using Turkish
[5:18] airspace was that they wanted a
[5:20] coordination and they didn't want to be
[5:22] under the command of an American
[5:23] military officer. The White House has
[5:25] been saying for some time that all
[5:28] troops in the theater of operations must
[5:31] be under the coalition command structure
[5:33] and now it seems like it's still
[5:34] unresolved. That's one big problem he
[5:37] has. And then there are others. What is
[5:39] happening to the Iraqi leadership? Not
[5:41] just did the United States kill Saddam
[5:44] Hussein last night, but these senses and
[5:47] these indications that Secretary of
[5:49] Defense Rumsfeld has said that maybe
[5:51] that leadership is cracking that will
[5:53] require presidential decision-m as well
[5:56] as the question of amnesty, leniency,
[5:59] and what to do with these units if they
[6:02] fall down and surrender uh as that takes
[6:05] place.
[6:05] >> Terry, uh, help help us with with one
[6:07] thing. I I I don't think I'm the only
[6:09] person to notice this and that is the
[6:11] real emphasis on the coalition of the
[6:12] well of the willing and the enumeration.
[6:15] It's very different this coalition of
[6:17] the willing compared to the coalition of
[6:19] the participants.
[6:22] Well, it is certainly at at the ground
[6:24] combat level. There's no question about
[6:26] that. Uh there are only three countries
[6:30] participating in ground combat. But what
[6:32] you hear in the White House as they talk
[6:33] about this coalition of the willing,
[6:35] they're fighting back. They are fighting
[6:37] back against this argument that is being
[6:40] launched at them by governments around
[6:42] the world as well as by many people in
[6:44] the streets around the world that the
[6:46] United States is acting unilaterally.
[6:48] And you heard Ari Flesher saying hardly
[6:50] the 35 plus nations in this coalition of
[6:54] the willing uh represent 1.8 billion
[6:57] people. Now, a lot of that is uh
[7:00] overflight rights perhaps picking up
[7:03] some slack for the American military as
[7:05] they shift resources into the Persian
[7:07] Gulf. But Peter, there was one thing the
[7:09] president said last night that nations
[7:11] around the world will pay very close
[7:13] attention to. He said that the nations
[7:16] in this coalition of the willing will
[7:18] share in the honor and the
[7:20] responsibility of defending freedom.
[7:23] There's a lot of question around the
[7:24] world. What will the United States do in
[7:27] big security issues going forward now
[7:30] that the United States has left the
[7:32] United Nations to do this?
[7:34] >> Well, Tara, the United States hasn't
[7:36] left the United Nations to start with
[7:37] and and there was a lot of muscle used
[7:40] uh by the US on a variety of countries
[7:41] beforehand. Isn't at least relevant
[7:44] question these people would will judge
[7:47] the United States in some measure
[7:49] depending on how successful the war is?
[7:51] >> No question about it, Peter. For weeks,
[7:54] I have been hearing from senior
[7:56] officials, victory is our best argument.
[7:59] Uh there has been almost, it seems, an
[8:02] over reliance on the prospect that
[8:05] victory will answer all of the arguments
[8:08] uh that the opponents of the Bush
[8:10] administration policy concerning Iraq
[8:12] have raised. The president is an
[8:14] executive by training, by education, and
[8:17] by style. and he likes to think, as he
[8:20] said last night, decisive action uh that
[8:23] produces positive results quickly will
[8:26] win converts. That's the theory of this
[8:28] war politically.
[8:29] >> Thanks, Terry, very much. Terry Moran,
[8:30] our White House correspondent. One
[8:32] photograph from last night will give you
[8:34] some sense of the energy in the White
[8:37] House there from right across. Of
[8:40] course, Andy Card, the president's White
[8:42] House chief of staff, the president,
[8:43] George Tennant, the CIA director, who
[8:46] we're told for a while today was very
[8:48] enthusiastic about the possibility that
[8:50] Saddam Hussein himself had been
[8:51] attacked. And his and his back to us
[8:54] Vice President Dick Cheney, who has been
[8:56] even more influential in the formulation
[8:59] of policy for this campaign against Iraq
[9:02] than uh than than many people in in the
[9:05] public arena thought. Speaking of people
[9:07] in the public arena, it's a pleasure to
[9:09] see Dr. Hans Blick in person. I haven't
[9:11] seen you since since Baghdad. All your
[9:14] just to confirm, all of the people are
[9:16] out of Baghdad now safely and soundly.
[9:18] >> Yes, we had 134 people for the IA and
[9:22] UNavik and they're all taken out. They
[9:24] went to Lak and Cyprus.
[9:26] >> And I'm not quite sure exactly how to
[9:28] ask the question, but war in some way
[9:31] marks you as not personally perhaps
[9:33] marks you as having been a failure.
[9:36] I say that as politely as I can.
[9:38] >> I hear that.
[9:39] >> No, I think that's wrong. I think that
[9:42] we have shown over these months that we
[9:44] were able to set up an effective
[9:46] international inspection force that
[9:48] reported directly to the UN Security
[9:50] Council. That was respectable. However,
[9:54] we did not find any weapons of mass
[9:56] destruction. They may be there. Our
[9:58] analysis shows that it's possible, but
[10:00] our analysis do not show that it that
[10:03] they necessarily have it. uh so we would
[10:05] all like to have certainty about that
[10:07] and now that we have gone out and the US
[10:09] is going in uh we do hope that the
[10:12] specialists who the United States are
[10:13] bringing that they will bring clarity
[10:15] about it
[10:15] >> and who are some of the specialists the
[10:17] US will take in
[10:18] >> well I don't know I have not been
[10:19] introduced to them but I think some of
[10:20] them probably worked together with unsk
[10:22] in in the past
[10:23] >> the earlier investigation
[10:25] >> and they will have one advantage over us
[10:28] u perhaps several but one is clearly
[10:30] that people whom they interview will
[10:33] dare to speak their mind. Whereas people
[10:35] who we have interviewed might well have
[10:37] been scripted by the regime. A
[10:39] >> as you got to the final stages of your
[10:41] mission and it appeared that Iraqi
[10:43] scientists were at least talking to you
[10:44] more readily. Did you have a feeling
[10:46] that they were still completely unable
[10:49] to speak their minds?
[10:50] >> Um no in many cases they wanted to have
[10:53] some Iraqi representative present and uh
[10:56] we took it that that meant that they
[10:57] would wanted to show to the regime that
[10:59] they said nothing that was against the
[11:02] statements of the regime. But uh I don't
[11:05] think that we could take note or make
[11:07] sure that they they were lying. No, we
[11:09] did not have evidence of that.
[11:10] >> All the time that your organization
[11:12] Unmovic that you ran was in looking for
[11:14] weapons, many of the analysts on
[11:16] television were members of the previous
[11:18] inspection regimes
[11:20] >> and there was sometimes a feeling that
[11:21] they always knew better than you. How
[11:24] did you feel about that?
[11:25] >> I think there was a certain envy among
[11:27] them that they were not part of the new
[11:29] team. But the reality was that the
[11:31] security council in 1999 felt that unsk
[11:35] the former regime that it was
[11:37] discredited. It had such close relations
[11:40] with intelligence organizations. It was
[11:42] not seen as an independent UN
[11:43] organization. And I even asked me today
[11:46] that suppose that we had had such
[11:48] two-way traffic with intelligence would
[11:50] we not then today have been seen as a
[11:52] forerunner as someone helped to prepare
[11:54] for the invasion and that is not good
[11:56] for the security council. I think we
[11:58] should be seen as a UN entity and I
[12:00] think we were.
[12:00] >> There are great many people in the
[12:02] world, governments and individuals well
[12:04] who thought that your your effort was in
[12:07] fact the way to go that it was that war
[12:09] was not the the way to go. Um
[12:13] when you got right down to it at the
[12:14] end, did you how really good a job did
[12:16] you think you were doing? How much
[12:17] farther did you think you had to go?
[12:20] >> Well, I think that the analysis that we
[12:22] had made was quite good. I think that
[12:24] the access was far better than UNSCOM
[12:26] had in the past. However, and we did
[12:29] also destroy quite a lot of missiles,
[12:30] over 70 of these alamood missiles.
[12:33] However, I have to note that we did not
[12:35] find any weapons of mass destruction,
[12:37] whether anthrax or or VX. We did find
[12:41] some uh chemical weapons warhead that
[12:44] were didn't contain any chemicals any
[12:47] longer, but we did not find that. And
[12:49] the big question now for me is will the
[12:51] US specialist find it or is it empty or
[12:54] practically empty? Some people think
[12:55] that they have a jump start capacity.
[12:57] Some intelligence agents are quite
[12:59] convinced that they have hidden things
[13:01] there and we will be curious to see
[13:03] that's true.
[13:04] >> If you were are you in a position now to
[13:06] tell US forces going in that they should
[13:08] be looking at things that you didn't
[13:10] fully look at?
[13:11] >> No, I think that they will probably be
[13:13] aware of quite as many sites as we were.
[13:16] We went to a great many sites and I
[13:17] understand that the US forces have the
[13:20] location of great many sites where they
[13:21] should go. So I don't think they haven't
[13:23] asked us.
[13:24] >> No, I I I appreciate that. And and did
[13:25] you feel during your mission that you
[13:27] got full cooperation from the United
[13:29] States and other countries in terms of
[13:31] intelligence?
[13:32] >> Yes, I think that in December, January,
[13:34] especially in January, we got a good
[13:36] intelligence from from the US and from
[13:38] other states and we did go to a great
[13:39] many sites. However, I must admit that
[13:42] there were very few of these sites were
[13:44] really gave results. a couple of them.
[13:46] >> Now, I know you're a man of precision.
[13:48] In other words, you I you do indeed. And
[13:50] I you don't like to say anything that
[13:52] isn't on the paper or supported by the
[13:54] facts, but I want to ask you one
[13:55] instinct question,
[13:56] >> please.
[13:57] >> Having been through everything you've
[13:58] been through, do you think there are
[14:00] weapons of mass destruction somewhere in
[14:02] Iraq?
[14:04] >> Well, judging by the intelligence, and
[14:06] they are people whom I admire a lot.
[14:08] They put their lives at stake from time
[14:10] to time. I would say that yes, one they
[14:13] overhear conversations. as they look at
[14:15] procurement etc. It would be strange if
[14:17] they did not have it. On the other hand,
[14:19] seeing the Iraqi conduct when they have
[14:22] been almost frantic lately and showering
[14:24] us with letters and and explanations and
[14:26] explorations of how do you dig up
[14:29] measure antrax in the ground etc. It's
[14:32] puzzling. Of course, there's only been
[14:34] one truth at any given time in Iraq and
[14:36] that's the one set by Saddam Husse.
[14:37] >> That's a very good point. Please don't
[14:38] go away. I have one more question to ask
[14:39] you, but I want to go to the Gulf at the
[14:41] moment because ABC's Ted Cppel, who is
[14:43] with the Army, is able to talk to us
[14:45] again. Ted?
[14:49] >> Well, good morning, Peter. I I I know
[14:51] this looks overly dramatic on the night
[14:53] scope, but they are under light
[14:55] discipline here, which means that you
[14:57] can't even use a regular flashlight. Uh,
[15:00] so night scope it is. Uh, I want you
[15:02] just to take a look at some video that
[15:04] we shot literally about an hour and a
[15:07] half ago. Uh, this is video of 155 mm
[15:13] artillery shooting into Iraq. I was
[15:16] telling you about it earlier when you
[15:17] and I were on the phone. Uh, this is the
[15:21] artillery fire that's being directed
[15:23] against some of the observation posts on
[15:26] the other side of the border. Uh the
[15:28] army has uh one of those wonderfully
[15:31] Pentagon-like euphemisms for what they
[15:34] are doing now both with artillery and uh
[15:37] with rocket fire and with longbow Apache
[15:42] helicopters. They are shaping the
[15:45] environment is the way they put it.
[15:47] Basically, what they're trying to do is
[15:49] knock out as much of any potential
[15:52] opposition as they can. Uh so that when
[15:55] this land invasion begins, they will
[15:58] meet as little opposition, when those
[16:01] 20,000 troops go across the border as is
[16:04] humanly possible.
[16:05] >> Are you wearing part of your chemical
[16:08] suit at the moment? And are other are
[16:11] the soldiers with you still in theirs?
[16:16] >> Oh yes. Uh we are we are all actually
[16:19] the uh uh the pants and the and the
[16:23] jacket. And if you want to see the hood,
[16:25] I can give you the hood too. Uh the hood
[16:28] actually goes over the Well, I can't
[16:29] because I've got the earpiece in and I
[16:31] won't be able to I won't be able to hear
[16:33] you, Peter, if I put the hood up. But uh
[16:36] yes, this is uh this is considered mop
[16:38] one and then I've got a flak vest on top
[16:40] of it. Uh at this time of night, the
[16:43] desert, as you know, is cold. At this
[16:45] time of night, it's actually quite
[16:47] comfortable. Uh once the temperature
[16:49] starts to rise in the desert, what this
[16:51] mopsuit does for you is it raises your
[16:53] body temperature by anywhere from 20 to
[16:56] 40°. So when it's 85° during the day,
[16:59] your body temperature goes up to about
[17:01] oh 115 120. Ted, you have you have one
[17:07] advantage from an infantryman is that
[17:09] having access to the commander, I think
[17:11] you're able to see the battlefield in a
[17:14] far larger way than the average
[17:16] infantryman. Can you do you have a sense
[17:17] tonight of the overall battlefield in
[17:19] the south or the overall line of
[17:21] departure as you go across it? And can
[17:23] you tell us what you know about it?
[17:27] Well, uh, one of the most extraordinary
[17:29] things when you talk about the, uh, the
[17:32] kind of overview that these commanders
[17:34] here have, there has never been a war
[17:37] quite like it because they have rolling
[17:39] command posts with them which are
[17:41] equipped with computers and with video
[17:44] screens uh, on which they are capable
[17:47] quite literally just by touching their
[17:48] fingers or touching a stylus to the
[17:51] screen. they are able to call up not
[17:54] only the positions of their own men but
[17:56] the positions of enemy forces. Uh all of
[17:59] this is uh on the basis of both
[18:03] satellite photographs and U2
[18:05] photographs. Uh and uh whatever
[18:09] intelligence they have is all put into
[18:12] uh these or put onto these computer
[18:15] screens so that even as they are rolling
[18:17] into battle they have an overview of the
[18:20] entire battlefield. As I say, there's
[18:22] never been anything quite like it.
[18:23] >> You made a reference to enemy forces.
[18:26] Can you tell what the disposition is of
[18:29] enemy forces on the other side of the
[18:30] border and whether or not, at least in
[18:33] numerical terms, the resistance will be
[18:35] stiff or light or non-existent?
[18:40] Uh actually they're not expecting a
[18:42] whole lot of resistance as they roll
[18:44] across the border, but it is a
[18:46] particularly vulnerable time and point
[18:49] as you can imagine, Peter, even though
[18:50] they are going through multiple entry
[18:54] points into Iraq or will be. Uh they're
[18:57] going to have to move 20,000 troops and
[18:59] about 10,000 vehicles. It's going to
[19:02] take them 24 hours just to do that. That
[19:05] is a time when they are susceptible of
[19:07] course to enemy attack. uh but their
[19:10] expectation is that for the first couple
[19:12] of days they will meet relatively minor
[19:16] resistance indeed as they move toward
[19:19] their first target and I I'm not in a
[19:21] position to tell you what that is but as
[19:23] they move toward it their expectation is
[19:26] that they may actually receive the
[19:28] surrender uh of the regular army
[19:32] division that is defending particular
[19:34] town
[19:34] >> my apologies there was some reporting
[19:36] earlier that uh that Iraqis had been
[19:39] down close to the border laying mines.
[19:42] Are you are you aware of that?
[19:46] >> Uh that's to be expected. But here too,
[19:50] we'll see how well the the military
[19:52] technology functions. I'll have to try
[19:55] and draw you a word picture of it. They
[19:57] have these massive trucks and if you can
[20:00] imagine on the back of them it is almost
[20:02] like uh an automatic catapult but
[20:05] instead of catapulting stones as they
[20:07] would have done in the old days these
[20:09] catapults catapult uh hundreds of
[20:12] bomblelets which explode on the terrain
[20:17] in front of them thereby setting off any
[20:20] mines that may be laid. And those will
[20:22] be followed then by these massive plows
[20:25] and uh uh military plows uh which are
[20:29] going to clear any bombs that may still
[20:31] remain so that by the time the the tanks
[20:34] and the armored personnel carriers and
[20:36] the other vehicles come through uh those
[20:39] minefields should not be a problem.
[20:41] >> Unless you have anything else to add,
[20:42] we'll let you try to get some sleep.
[20:44] It's now almost midnight your time.
[20:47] Anything to add?
[20:50] Uh just that the uh the hood of our uh
[20:54] the hood of our Land Rover is still nice
[20:56] and warm from the engine and that's
[20:58] where I'm going to be sleeping. So I'll
[21:00] see you tomorrow, Peter.
[21:01] >> Thanks, Ted. Come back anytime. Ted
[21:03] Cppel who is with the third infantry. Um
[21:06] very close to the line of departure and
[21:08] giving us the the real sense. There's a
[21:10] real energy of course in the coverage
[21:12] today because little things have
[21:14] happened. But he points out so aptly
[21:16] that it takes 24 hours to get these huge
[21:19] huge huge numbers of men and equipment
[21:22] moving. And so while the pressure is on
[21:26] the president to have a quick war and
[21:27] everybody wants to have a quick war and
[21:29] people begin to imagine this mad dash
[21:32] all the way from the Kuwaiti border all
[21:33] the way up to Baghdad. Um uh it it isn't
[21:37] that easy and the great danger going too
[21:39] fast of course is to run away from your
[21:41] your fuel trucks. A couple more
[21:43] questions for you Dr.
[21:44] Um, what was it like to be in in in
[21:46] Baghdad when you knew that your mission
[21:48] was coming to an end and you all had to
[21:51] leave? Did you did you ever have any
[21:52] doubts about getting out safely?
[21:54] >> I was not in Baghdad. In fact, because
[21:56] I'm in charge here in New York and the
[21:58] relations with the security council, but
[22:00] of course, it was one of the greatest
[22:01] reliefs I've had that there was no
[22:03] problem in bringing our people out.
[22:05] >> Did you anticipate that there might be?
[22:07] >> Well, there was also fear. I mean, I'm
[22:09] responsible for them and there was fear
[22:11] that there could be hostage taking.
[22:12] that's happened in the past once. I
[22:15] didn't think it was very likely because
[22:16] I think that the Iraqis would worry
[22:18] about their reputation
[22:20] such as it is.
[22:23] After all, they feel that they feel as
[22:26] if they were the agrieved party and they
[22:28] know that if they were to take hostages
[22:30] and they know still that if they were to
[22:32] use chemical weapons that attitude in
[22:34] the world, the support or the the
[22:36] sympathy that they have had will be gone
[22:38] immediate and everybody will say, "Well,
[22:40] this war is totally justified." You had
[22:41] a huge amount of experience with the
[22:43] Iraqis. Did you ever think you knew
[22:44] Saddam Hussein at all?
[22:46] >> No, we never met him. And I think that
[22:48] he probably figures himself as a sort of
[22:50] emperor of Mesopotamia and that that he
[22:53] would not uh descend to talk to lowly
[22:56] creatures like an a chief inspector
[22:59] >> and and so you never felt in this entire
[23:02] procedure through all of his other
[23:03] people that you ever got inside his
[23:04] mind.
[23:06] >> We don't know how much he's being told.
[23:08] uh we saw the vice president Ramadan's a
[23:10] couple of times and had long talks with
[23:12] him but how much really transpires to
[23:14] Saddam Hussein we don't know the people
[23:16] we negotiate with are very high level
[23:19] intellectuals and uh no propaganda they
[23:22] knew what leverage was but but no
[23:24] propaganda
[23:25] >> always been fascinated I mean I could
[23:26] keep you for a long time and I won't but
[23:27] the uh always been fascinated by in some
[23:30] respects your opposite number who is the
[23:32] weapons man for the Iraqi government
[23:33] very sophisticated
[23:35] >> man and I wonder what will become of him
[23:37] any thoughts
[23:38] I wonder myself. Um he was an excellent
[23:41] party to discuss with. He knew precisely
[23:43] where his leverage was and he knew where
[23:45] our leverage was as well. And uh it was
[23:48] a very practical discussion that we had
[23:51] and we did manage to reach results on a
[23:54] number of points but on the chief point
[23:55] whether they had any weapons no we did
[23:57] not come to conclusions
[23:59] >> and the ultimate thing I' I've heard you
[24:00] say and you've been very helpful. I'm
[24:01] very glad you can be very helpful to us
[24:03] by the way during your whole mission. I
[24:04] much appreciate it. But you said
[24:06] finally, and I gather you believe it
[24:07] really firmly, there's only one truth in
[24:09] in in Iraq up until now, and that is
[24:11] Saddam Hussein's truth. That's right.
[24:14] >> Thank you, Dr. Blicks. I appreciate you
[24:15] coming in. Dr. Hans Blicks, chief
[24:17] weapons inspector, clearly one of the
[24:19] best known personalities in the world
[24:21] today. Um, I'm going to go and do some
[24:25] other work at 3:30 Eastern time, a
[24:27] little afternoon out in the West at the
[24:29] moment. Uh my colleague Charles Gibson
[24:31] is going to continue here for a while
[24:32] and we shall be back at a later hour.
[24:35] Many thanks for joining us. Our coverage
[24:37] continues. In the meantime, just to
[24:38] bring you up to date as best we can with
[24:41] what's been going on throughout the day,
[24:42] here's ABC's Bob Brown.
[24:46] After last night's opening volley of
[24:48] missiles into Baghdad, the first news
[24:50] today involved episode after episode of
[24:53] gas scares in Kuwait City and among
[24:55] coalition military units near the border
[24:57] as the Iraqis lobbed their own missiles
[25:00] south. Two were intercepted and
[25:02] destroyed by US Patriot 3 missiles,
[25:04] according to the Pentagon, and there
[25:06] were no known casualties in what seemed
[25:08] to be a nervous prelude to the intense
[25:10] fighting everyone knew was coming.
[25:13] Kuwait television reported that some oil
[25:15] wells near the southern city of Basra
[25:17] may have been set on fire. A report that
[25:19] was denied by the Iraqi oil minister.
[25:24] In the meantime, demonstrations in Egypt
[25:26] and Syria protested the beginning of the
[25:28] war and demanded that US ambassadors be
[25:31] expelled from both countries. Riot
[25:33] police used water cannons against
[25:35] protesters in the city center and near
[25:37] the US embassy in Cairo.
[25:43] There was some question as to whether
[25:44] the military responses by Iraqis today
[25:47] might force the coalition forces into
[25:49] speeding up their plans for the invasion
[25:51] of Iraq. Shortly after evening prayers
[25:54] in Baghdad, questions of what the next
[25:56] response would be were answered. Cruise
[25:59] missiles again struck sites in Baghdad
[26:02] shortly after 900 p.m. Baghdad time.
[26:05] First reports indicated that the targets
[26:06] were government buildings on the west
[26:08] side of the Tigress River. There was
[26:10] heavy damage, but military experts still
[26:13] say they don't think this is the big
[26:15] attack that is expected.
[26:18] >> Bob Brown reporting on a summation of
[26:20] where we are so far, but we really want
[26:23] to continue this by turning back to John
[26:25] McQuey, our ABC News correspondent at
[26:27] the Pentagon. We have not talked to John
[26:29] for a while, and it's probably a pretty
[26:31] good time to get some summation as to
[26:33] where we stand. John, do you hear me?
[26:36] >> I hear you, Charlie. All right, let me
[26:37] come back to where we are in terms of
[26:39] the attacks that have occurred on
[26:41] Baghdad tonight. Not last night, but
[26:43] tonight it now being what 11:30 p.m. of
[26:46] Baghdad time. We have seen some air
[26:49] attacks, cruise missile attacks, we
[26:50] understand on sites in Baghdad, but we
[26:53] understand these are not targets of
[26:55] opportunity as they were referred to uh
[26:58] last night when these attacks occurred,
[27:00] but that these were planned attacks. But
[27:02] it doesn't seem to me that they have
[27:04] come in the volume that we were warned
[27:08] the first attacks would would uh would
[27:11] be. Part of the uh the the wonder of the
[27:14] way they are organizing this campaign is
[27:17] that it is not unfolding the way that we
[27:20] journalists had been describing it.
[27:23] While everyone has waited for a massive
[27:26] attack on Baghdad, that has not yet
[27:28] happened. Although Defense Secretary
[27:30] Rumsfeld today promised it uh and we are
[27:33] told tomorrow night uh it may well come.
[27:36] What they've been doing uh officials
[27:38] acknowledge is using cruise missiles,
[27:41] not manned aircraft, because they are
[27:43] concerned about having planes shot down
[27:45] in the intense air defense environment
[27:47] around Baghdad. These cruise missiles
[27:49] are striking what they are describing as
[27:52] leadership targets. Uh these are places
[27:55] where uh the leadership of Iraq uh have
[27:58] been known to work. Uh there is not
[28:00] great hope that they're going to find
[28:02] too many people home. But when these
[28:04] leaders return to their offices, there
[28:06] will be no offices. Uh so they are
[28:09] working uh not only to try to kill some
[28:12] of these individuals, but they are
[28:14] trying to plant in their mind that the
[28:16] US is going to track them uh and go
[28:18] after them. And they are also working on
[28:20] the people who work for the leaders uh
[28:24] trying to get them to either uh defect
[28:27] perhaps turn on the leadership uh or at
[28:30] the very least not resist as much as the
[28:33] US fears they might.
[28:34] >> Curious about a couple of things you
[28:36] said there, John. Number one, as far as
[28:39] we know, these are government ministries
[28:41] that are being attacked. It's difficult
[28:43] to tell uh through some of the smoke
[28:45] which buildings are being hit. But we
[28:46] understand these are government
[28:48] ministries that have been hit, some of
[28:49] which have been fired. But if it is too
[28:52] dangerous for manned aircraft to come
[28:54] into that area, therefore they're using
[28:56] the cruise missiles, it would seem to me
[28:58] somewhat logical, not a military man,
[29:00] but somewhat logical that they would
[29:02] actually try to hit the anti-aircraft
[29:04] batteries to take those out and give
[29:05] them greater control of the skies over
[29:07] Baghdad itself. I I guess I'm asking for
[29:10] an opinion, but do you have some sense
[29:12] as to why they don't do that?
[29:13] >> You have to think of uh this as coming
[29:15] in waves, Charlie. Uh if you look at the
[29:18] extreme southern part of uh Iraq, uh the
[29:22] United States is cleaning up uh in that
[29:25] southern area that used to be called the
[29:26] no-fly zone. They are trying to remove
[29:29] Iraq's ability uh to see aircraft coming
[29:33] and to anticipate uh their arrival in
[29:35] the Baghdad area. Once you blind uh that
[29:39] distant radar capability and the ability
[29:41] to communicate it back to Baghdad, then
[29:44] you can arrive in the vicinity of
[29:46] Baghdad uh and go after uh the what is
[29:49] called the integrated air defense around
[29:52] that city. So they are working at the
[29:54] distant margins and they are working
[29:56] their way toward Baghdad uh where they
[29:59] US officials say they are definitely
[30:01] going to take on this air defense system
[30:03] and they're going to take it on with a
[30:05] vengeance. Now, we have heard, you
[30:06] mentioned uh what may be going on in the
[30:09] southern no-fly zone south of the 33rd
[30:12] parallel there in Iraq. That is the area
[30:14] that we have patrolled for so many years
[30:17] now, but obviously the mission of planes
[30:19] over the southern no-fly zone having
[30:21] changed in the last few hours. We heard
[30:23] there were planes taking off in surges
[30:26] from the aircraft carriers that are in
[30:29] the Persian Gulf. three carriers that
[30:30] are there located in the Persian Gulf
[30:32] and that is their mission uh to take
[30:35] care of those targets in the in the
[30:37] southern no-fly zone that you're talking
[30:38] about.
[30:39] >> Yes, they are. But it's a very broad
[30:41] suite of uh potential targets. Um there
[30:44] is a whole part of uh the Iraqi
[30:46] landscape that we have uh not really
[30:49] addressed today at all and that is the
[30:51] western desert. Uh there are things
[30:53] happening there I can guarantee you that
[30:55] we do not yet know about. Quite likely
[30:59] American special forces out there have
[31:01] captured an airfield. That is part of
[31:04] the plan. Uh but as yet the US is not
[31:07] acknowledging that effort. Therefore,
[31:09] there is going to be intense air cover
[31:12] out in that part of the desert as they
[31:14] look for potential Scud missiles that
[31:16] could be fired at Israel and they
[31:18] provide cover uh for the special forces
[31:21] operation there. There are also things
[31:24] happening uh in the northern part of
[31:26] Iraq that we undoubtedly do not yet know
[31:28] about. Uh and this is more special
[31:31] operations activity. In addition to
[31:34] that, there have been a lot of special
[31:36] operations forces now going across the
[31:38] border into the southern part of Iraq.
[31:40] Uh the first major target that the US is
[31:44] uh probably going to go after is the
[31:47] port city of Basra. uh this is going to
[31:50] become uh the first real test of whether
[31:53] or not Iraqi forces are going to resist.
[31:55] >> Now mentioning that move toward Basra
[31:58] because there was a general expectation
[31:59] that Marines would go in that division
[32:01] to try to secure Basra and the and the
[32:03] oil fields that are around there and
[32:06] that army troops would go more to the
[32:07] west and move up the Safan highway and
[32:10] through the desert toward Baghdad. We
[32:13] heard from Mike Surere earlier uh who
[32:15] was with a Marine Expeditionary Unit
[32:17] that he was actually inside Kuwait and
[32:20] moving forward, but in talking to Ted
[32:22] CPP just a few moments ago, the third
[32:24] infantry division still not across the
[32:26] line it would seem and that may come a
[32:28] bit later. Do you have any timetable as
[32:30] to when the troops move across the
[32:32] border? Without being too specific, I
[32:35] think it's pretty safe to say uh when uh
[32:38] the sun comes up uh the offensive on the
[32:42] ground is probably going to begin uh in
[32:44] a very large way. Uh the troops are now
[32:46] taking advantage of a few hours of rest.
[32:49] Uh they have done some of the softening
[32:51] up in the that that's on the Iraqi side
[32:54] of the demilitarized zone and I expect
[32:57] you're going to see a massive movement
[33:00] uh in the daylight hours tomorrow. Just
[33:02] one more question, John, and then I'll
[33:03] I'll let you go. You mentioned uh the
[33:06] heavy air bombardment, and you uh used
[33:10] the words that it would come tomorrow
[33:12] night. I I wonder if that is conjecture
[33:14] or if that's with some certainty whether
[33:16] this is in effect a holding action that
[33:18] we've seen these cruise missiles hitting
[33:21] Baghdad tonight and the heavy attack,
[33:24] the so-called shock and awe or what
[33:27] General Meyers, the chairman of the
[33:28] joint chief said would be such a large
[33:29] concerted attack that the Iraqi regime
[33:32] would know that there was not much
[33:33] purpose in resisting that comes tomorrow
[33:36] night or it it being only 11:33 now in
[33:39] in Baghdad and there is still plenty of
[33:41] darkness hours might it come tonight.
[33:44] >> Charlie, I am one reporter who has been
[33:46] chasened mightily uh because I predicted
[33:49] that all of this was going to begin on
[33:51] Friday and lo and behold, it began last
[33:54] night. Um I hate to be in the predicting
[33:56] business. I think it is quite likely uh
[33:59] that the heavy air attack in the Baghdad
[34:01] area uh could be tomorrow night. It
[34:04] could be the night after that. Um they
[34:07] like the darkness hours um and the night
[34:10] is halfway finished, but they're they're
[34:12] arriving at prime time right now uh for
[34:15] manned air operations. They really like
[34:18] the hours after midnight uh and before
[34:20] dawn. Uh this is the time when there are
[34:22] fewer civilians on the street. Uh when a
[34:26] person's natural bio- rhythms are at
[34:28] their lowest and they are least
[34:30] responsive. Uh it's the time that they
[34:32] prefer to do heavy bombing when they
[34:35] have to do it. All right, John McQuey at
[34:37] the Pentagon. I appreciate uh bringing
[34:39] us up to date, giving us a sort of
[34:41] overview as to where things stand now. I
[34:43] appreciate it. And you can stand down
[34:45] for a while. We'll come back to you a
[34:47] little bit later. Want to turn to two
[34:48] voices in Washington. Voices uh one very
[34:52] prominent now, one who was a major force
[34:54] in the House of Representatives in the
[34:56] past and still speaks with great
[34:57] authority when talking about issues of
[35:00] foreign policy. joined by Senator Pat
[35:01] Roberts, Republican of Kansas, who was
[35:04] chairman of the Senate Intelligence
[35:05] Committee, joins us on Capitol Hill, and
[35:07] I believe we also have with us Lee
[35:09] Hamilton, uh, who is a former Democratic
[35:11] Congressman from Indiana, former head of
[35:13] the House Foreign Relations Committee,
[35:15] currently director of the Woodro Wilson
[35:16] Center, and vice chairman of the panel
[35:19] that is investigating uh, the 911
[35:21] incident. I appreciate both of you being
[35:23] with us. Senator Roberts, I I know
[35:24] there's been a resolution in the in
[35:27] front of the Senate today and some
[35:29] discussion overall about the situation,
[35:31] but a number of your fellow members have
[35:33] come forward and say this is really not
[35:34] a debate. This is not time for debate
[35:36] right now in Washington.
[35:37] >> No, this is a statement by every member
[35:39] of Congress, Senate, House, uh
[35:41] Republican, Democrat, uh one independent
[35:44] or maybe two independents, uh to really
[35:46] state our resolve and our commitment in
[35:48] behalf of our men and women in uniform.
[35:50] There's no politics attached to this. is
[35:52] is a time that we're united
[35:54] >> and we all agree with that.
[35:55] >> But there are deep there are deep
[35:56] reservations I know on the part of of
[35:59] many members of the Senate. Uh not
[36:01] specific well some in some cases
[36:02] specifically to what has been done in
[36:04] some cases uh uh in a rather more
[36:07] general sense as to the way the United
[36:09] States is changing its posture visav the
[36:12] rest of the world. And those uh those
[36:14] reservations have been have been as they
[36:17] used to say in a in a situation comedy
[36:18] on television stifled for the moment.
[36:20] Well, I'm not sure they're ever stifled
[36:22] in the Senate of the United States. And
[36:24] there are concerns on the part of
[36:25] everybody. If you win, what do you win?
[36:27] What do you do? What's going to happen
[36:28] with reconstruction? What is the policy
[36:30] of uh preeemption really mean to our
[36:33] national security policy, our foreign
[36:35] policy, the transition in the military?
[36:36] These are very, very tough questions.
[36:38] We're just going through that. I would
[36:40] expect some good honest debate as to
[36:42] where we are. But, uh, right now we're
[36:45] behind the troops. Uh I think when we
[36:46] get to the reconstruction effort and we
[36:48] get past this particular phase uh we
[36:50] will enter into that debate again and I
[36:52] think it's appropriate.
[36:54] >> Do you think that there has been
[36:56] sufficient debate on that issue? The the
[36:58] administration it was back in September
[37:01] of last year uh issued really what was a
[37:04] very important foreign policy document
[37:07] talking about the right of preemptive
[37:08] strikes of this country and and what
[37:10] they called anticipatory
[37:12] uh self-defense. Do you think that was
[37:14] debated enough in the United States
[37:16] Senate and that there was really enough
[37:18] of a national debate on this as a as an
[37:21] overall US policy? Uh, or do you think
[37:24] we came late to that and and the
[37:26] administration had moved past that by
[37:27] the time the rest of the nation began to
[37:29] engage in that debate?
[37:31] >> I think the events of 9/11 changed
[37:33] everything. We used to in the emerging
[37:34] threat subcommittee on armed services
[37:36] and then the intelligence committee keep
[37:38] talking about the postcold war period.
[37:40] but we didn't know what else to call it
[37:42] and we relied on detection and
[37:44] deterrence and then it in the worst case
[37:46] scenario something called uh uh
[37:49] consequence management and then all of a
[37:51] sudden the word preeemption you know got
[37:53] in there. So now we're on uh detection
[37:56] through our our intelligence community
[37:58] and our unprecedented assets there. Uh
[38:02] and by the way we're doing a lot better
[38:04] job since 9/11 without just without
[38:06] question. and then into preeemption uh
[38:09] and then and then deterrence and then
[38:11] consequence management. But it's a very
[38:13] far-reaching policy and obviously some
[38:15] of our allies do not agree with it and
[38:17] they wonder where it where we're headed.
[38:19] I think in the reconstruction process
[38:21] you're going to see both France and
[38:23] Germany come back in the fold. They are
[38:25] present right now in Afghanistan. 23
[38:28] nations are present in Afghanistan.
[38:29] We're making progress there. This I
[38:32] would I would I would guess that
[38:33] probably Iraq's going to be Afghanistan
[38:35] times 50. And so consequently, I think
[38:37] there's enough time to put this back
[38:39] together and under NATO and other other
[38:42] uh I guess alliances and the
[38:44] transatlantic alliance really discuss
[38:46] what does preeemption mean in this
[38:47] postmodern world.
[38:49] >> All right. Let me ask you to stand by
[38:50] for just a moment, Senator, because I
[38:52] want to turn to
[38:52] >> Sure. Congressman Hamilton was there.
[38:54] And Congressman, I I saw a quote from
[38:57] you. You said I understand that the you
[38:59] felt the missile strikes last night were
[39:02] a foreign policy failure. I would you
[39:04] explain that?
[39:06] >> No, that was not a quote for me.
[39:08] >> I did not
[39:08] >> I take it all back then.
[39:10] >> I did not make any quotation with regard
[39:13] to the military action in Iraq. What is
[39:15] your general feeling about the question
[39:17] that I was just discussing with Senator
[39:19] Roberts that there is a basic very basic
[39:21] change that really was annunciated last
[39:23] September in American foreign policy
[39:25] that is at play here and uh the
[39:27] rationale behind this war a and that
[39:31] there may not be a basic sense in the
[39:33] country uh and maybe even in parts of
[39:35] official Washington uh as to how
[39:37] profoundly things have changed. Well,
[39:39] first I think uh the so-called doctrine
[39:41] of preeemption which was very prominent
[39:43] in that uh strategic statement by the
[39:46] president is not new. Uh I don't know of
[39:49] any American president in recent decades
[39:52] who would not use military force if they
[39:55] felt there were an imminent strike
[39:57] against the United States. Uh I think
[40:00] the Bush administration has articulated
[40:03] that more strongly, made it more
[40:05] prominent, stated it more forcefully
[40:08] than we've done in the past. Uh
[40:10] secondly, I believe that uh Congress has
[40:14] been unusually timid in all of its
[40:16] discussions here. Uh the resolution that
[40:19] was passed some months ago turned over
[40:22] in effect the authority of the Congress
[40:25] uh to the president and said, "Mr.
[40:27] president, you handle it from here. Uh
[40:30] we'll keep an eye on it, but you make
[40:32] all the key decisions. Uh that really
[40:36] falls into line with congressional
[40:38] actions in the past when more and more
[40:41] the Congress has deferred for for a lot
[40:43] of different reasons of power to the
[40:45] president. And third, I would say that
[40:48] the doctrine of preeemption and where we
[40:50] go from here after Iraq are very
[40:53] important questions. They should be
[40:55] debated in the public forum including
[40:58] the Congress of the United States. Much
[41:00] of the world is asking who's next. Uh
[41:03] that's a fair question and I think the
[41:05] United States and its people need to
[41:07] understand better uh just what the
[41:10] long-term impact of the doctrine of
[41:13] preeemption may be the defeat of Iraq
[41:16] and what follows that.
[41:18] >> Congressman, just before I let you go
[41:19] though, you use the word timid on the
[41:21] part of the United States Congress. Do
[41:22] you feel your uh your former colleagues
[41:24] uh uh in the Democratic party are the
[41:27] ones particularly at fault there for
[41:28] being quote too timid?
[41:29] >> I I've I've just been impressed by the
[41:31] fact that as we've had this leadup to
[41:34] the war when Iraq has just dominated the
[41:38] American agenda and when the whole
[41:41] attention not just of the country but
[41:43] the but of the world has been turned on
[41:45] Iraq. If you look at the actual agenda
[41:47] of the United States Congress in the
[41:49] Senate and in the House, they are not
[41:52] debating Iraq and have not been debating
[41:54] Iraq for weeks. There just seems to me a
[41:57] kind of an inongruity there uh that
[42:00] doesn't quite fit. So, you have to ask
[42:02] yourself the question, I ask myself the
[42:04] question, what really should the role of
[42:07] the Congress be on in all of this?
[42:09] Senator Roberts said a moment ago and I
[42:10] think quite correctly that in a few days
[42:13] here as the war settles down and we hope
[42:16] victoriously uh the Congress will take
[42:19] these questions up again and debate them
[42:21] seriously. The resolution of course
[42:23] that's on the floor now to support the
[42:25] troops is an important resolution but
[42:28] it's not really a debate about uh the
[42:31] policy of the United States. It is a
[42:33] resolution that I think everyone now, as
[42:35] a number of the senators have said,
[42:36] everyone rallies around the troops no
[42:37] matter what their differences may be on
[42:39] foreign policy. And it is a resolution
[42:40] obviously that will pass if not well
[42:43] it'll pass unanimously. I would suspect.
[42:44] Congressman Hamilton, thanks very much.
[42:46] Good to have you and Senator Roberts
[42:48] with us. Want to turn to ABC's Pierre
[42:50] Thomas who reports from us before us
[42:52] from the Justice Department. And the
[42:54] Justice Department, we understand, is
[42:55] now about to put out a wanted bulletin
[42:58] on an al-Qaeda operative who is being
[43:01] compared. Now we have not heard this
[43:03] name much but is now being compared to
[43:04] Muhammad Ata the person who is generally
[43:07] credited or not credited is the word but
[43:09] is generally held responsible for being
[43:11] the lead actor of the 19 who were
[43:14] involved in hijacking the four planes on
[43:16] September 11th 2001. Uh this is a new
[43:20] wanted um advisory that is being put out
[43:23] by the justice department. Pierre has
[43:25] the details on it. Pierre
[43:27] >> Charlie they just put out this bulletin.
[43:29] His name is Adnan al- Shukri Rejuma. He
[43:32] is described as 27 years old, a Saudi
[43:35] Arabian national. And as you said, he is
[43:37] described as a Muhammad Atal-ike figure.
[43:40] He's also believed to be a pilot. The
[43:42] FBI does not know where he is, although
[43:44] they think he might have entered the
[43:45] country after 9/11, but right now they
[43:48] have no idea where he is. He's believed
[43:49] to be a an al-Qaeda operative, someone
[43:52] who might be planning attacks. Those are
[43:54] the details we have thus far.
[43:56] >> What put them on to him? We're trying to
[43:59] get information about that. They
[44:00] recently got this intelligence that he
[44:02] was a known al-Qaeda operative, someone
[44:05] who might be plotting attacks. And
[44:06] again, the problem that they have is
[44:08] that they don't know whether he's in the
[44:10] United States or elsewhere.
[44:12] >> Do we know if he has been in the United
[44:14] States?
[44:15] >> Again, there is some information that he
[44:17] might have been in the country shortly
[44:19] after the 9/11 attacks. And again,
[44:21] they're now trying to trace his
[44:22] whereabouts from that particular time.
[44:24] >> All right. Thanks, Pierre Thomas who is
[44:26] joining us from the Justice Department.
[44:28] Just a couple of notes. We were talking
[44:29] earlier with John McQuey at the Pentagon
[44:32] about the launch of cruise missiles, the
[44:34] the attack on Baghdad that has come
[44:36] tonight and we have seen sporadic fire
[44:39] and explosions over Baghdad and we have
[44:41] seen some uh ministry buildings on fire
[44:44] there. Uh we understand that these
[44:46] cruise missiles launched today so far
[44:49] tonight and again it is uh just before
[44:51] midnight uh over there that they were
[44:54] launched by three US vessels and two
[44:56] British vessels. All of the cruise
[44:59] missiles that were launched uh last
[45:01] night came from six American ships in
[45:04] the Persian Gulf and in the Red Sea.
[45:06] there were no British ships involved.
[45:07] But today we are we are told that
[45:09] British ships were involved in the
[45:11] launching of the cruise missiles that
[45:13] have come down on Baghdad. Uh tonight
[45:17] we're going to go now to Mike Van who is
[45:19] joining us in Kuwait City uh who has had
[45:22] can give us some sense of what has been
[45:24] going on there. It was early in the day
[45:26] that the sirens were sounding almost
[45:28] continuously in Kuwait City and so many
[45:30] people there were having to were having
[45:33] to head for shelter and put on the gas
[45:36] mask. And Mike has have things been
[45:38] quiet uh once the darkness has come in
[45:40] Kuwait City.
[45:43] They've been uh very fortunate Charlie
[45:45] for about the past 5 hours we have not
[45:47] had any any more siren sound. Now there
[45:49] had been six alarms that had gone off
[45:51] during the day and it really was very
[45:53] unnerving. Now, there is one thing
[45:55] that's been going on tonight. The crown
[45:57] prince, I don't know whether the camera
[45:58] can capture it, but it's a enormous
[46:01] building in back has been meeting with
[46:03] the cabinet. They've been trying to
[46:04] discuss what to do now. Uh they had
[46:07] really thought that Kuwait City was
[46:09] going to be pretty safe through all this
[46:11] with the tremendous patriots to the
[46:13] north, the enormous number of troops, US
[46:15] and British troops. They didn't think
[46:17] this was going to happen. So far, what
[46:18] they've decided to do isn't much.
[46:20] Basically, they're going to cancel
[46:22] school beginning on Saturday for a week.
[46:24] Of course, tomorrow, Friday is a Muslim
[46:25] holy day. Saturday is when school
[46:27] starts. It's going to stop for a week.
[46:29] Um during the uh day, it really began to
[46:32] become frantic here sometime afternoon,
[46:35] Charlie. That was about 3:00 a.m. New
[46:36] York time. It was when the Kuwaiti
[46:38] Defense Ministry first said that there
[46:41] had been two missiles from Iraq that had
[46:43] landed on uh on Kuwaiti soil. It was
[46:46] after that we began to get those sirens
[46:48] and journalists were frantically
[46:50] throwing on their gas masks. They were
[46:52] getting into shelters. Traffic stopped
[46:54] here. Um and it was really unnerving
[46:57] because it would go one after the other.
[46:59] We had a total of six of them. One
[47:01] interesting thing that I was able to see
[47:03] my from my vantage point. Uh but we
[47:05] weren't able to catch many pictures of
[47:07] the check. The checks have a very
[47:09] sophisticated number of uh armored
[47:11] personnel carriers that travel around
[47:14] the city that can basically sniff out
[47:16] and detect whether there's any chemical
[47:17] or biological agents. Uh we met with
[47:20] some of these uh specialists and uh they
[47:24] are people that are wearing uh gas
[47:26] masks. They they have uh special uh
[47:29] suits. They have special tanks and they
[47:31] can they can find anything that's in the
[47:34] air. It's extremely sensitive equipment
[47:36] and the checks learned their trade
[47:38] during the days when they were part of
[47:40] the old Soviet Union. They had great
[47:42] expertise in dealing with that and they
[47:44] are now going throughout the city and
[47:46] it's sort of a an unnerving site in and
[47:48] of itself because when you see one of
[47:51] these uh armored personnel carriers come
[47:53] into a residential neighborhood in
[47:55] Kuwait to basically sniff out whether
[47:57] there's chemical or biological agents,
[47:59] it makes people very frightened here.
[48:01] Another thing that did happen, the uh
[48:04] city of Kuwait has 800,000 Kuwaitis and
[48:06] about two million foreign workers. Many
[48:08] of them wanted to uh go to the telephone
[48:11] and make calls. And also, Charlie, all
[48:12] the journalists here were frantically
[48:14] getting on the phone and the phone
[48:16] system then crashed. So, it made matters
[48:18] a little bit more worse and an unnerving
[48:20] day. But the bottom line of all this is
[48:23] that the missiles that came in didn't
[48:25] there was no damage. It really didn't
[48:27] amount to much. But psychologically for
[48:29] this city that thought really not much
[48:31] was going to happen, it has been a very
[48:34] unnerving day.
[48:34] >> Well, a couple of things. As I look at
[48:36] those pictures that we were seeing of
[48:37] people putting on gas masks, I must say
[48:39] I recognize where those pictures were
[48:41] shot and I even recognize some of the
[48:42] faces behind the gas mask. Those are ABC
[48:45] staffers who are at the offices that we
[48:47] have there in Kuwait City. But Mike, as
[48:49] I watched the pictures from Kuwait City
[48:50] today, I was struck by the fact uh that
[48:54] people were heading for the shelters and
[48:55] then as soon as the all clear sign, as I
[48:57] saw pictures from Kuwait City, people
[48:58] were just heading back out on the
[48:59] street. Car traffic was going as normal.
[49:01] Sirens would go off again. Everybody
[49:02] would stop and then it just it resumed
[49:05] as if it was we, you know, there were
[49:07] people were pausing for this
[49:08] announcement from the sirens and then
[49:09] coming right back out.
[49:13] >> I guess they took it in stride, although
[49:14] I would differ with you just a little
[49:16] bit, Charlie. Traffic seemed a bit
[49:18] lighter today. Seemed that once it
[49:19] happened, many of the workers, I mean,
[49:21] this is a pretty bustling little area.
[49:22] You were here just a little while ago.
[49:24] These streets today wasn't much going
[49:26] on. I'll tell you what it reminded me a
[49:28] lot of, though. It reminded me of Dan,
[49:30] Saudi Arabia, um, some 12 years ago. And
[49:33] the way the pattern went then was the
[49:35] very first day that you began to get
[49:37] these sirens go off. People would put on
[49:39] their entire suits. They would put on
[49:40] their masks. They'd go to the shelter.
[49:42] And then by about the third or fourth
[49:44] time, then you begin to say, "Well, am I
[49:46] really going to go down and do that? I
[49:48] guess I'll just keep my mask with me." A
[49:50] lot of people watch the birds flying
[49:52] around because uh if you see birds
[49:54] dropping, that's a pretty good sign that
[49:55] that you might want to put your mask on.
[49:57] But if this this city uh is is about 40
[50:00] miles from the border, we really didn't
[50:02] think that that much was going to uh be
[50:04] threatening and it was unnerving today.
[50:06] Charlie.
[50:06] >> All right, Mike Von, thanks very much.
[50:08] uh in Kuwait City right there at the ABC
[50:11] headquarters. Uh as I went to Mike, by
[50:13] the way, I should mention that you were
[50:14] looking at some pictures that I didn't
[50:16] explain. Those are B-52s at the Royal
[50:19] Air Force Base in Fairfield in the
[50:21] United Kingdom in England. And they are
[50:24] being loaded with bombs and they are on
[50:26] the runway now. We have not seen them
[50:28] taking off, but there has been some
[50:29] activity of those planes moving around
[50:31] and being loaded with with bombs that
[50:34] are that I think it is fair to say uh
[50:36] are not the kinds of precision
[50:38] instruments that we have heard so much
[50:40] about. When the B-52s were bombing, for
[50:42] instance, in Afghanistan, those were
[50:43] cluster bombs that were falling. Um I
[50:46] don't know what kind of ordinance they
[50:47] have been loaded with there in England,
[50:50] but uh we are watching them and watching
[50:53] the activity with those planes. Now
[50:55] again a live picture of Baghdad and once
[50:57] again you are hearing sirens in Baghdad.
[51:00] This is live of our camera positioned
[51:02] across the Tigress River looking east
[51:05] into Baghdad and the sirens are sounding
[51:08] there again. If there is any activity we
[51:11] will show that to you in just a few
[51:12] moments. I want to bring in John Hillen
[51:15] who is with us from uh down in
[51:16] Washington DC. John is a defense analyst
[51:19] in Washington and a former US special
[51:21] operations officer, US Army captain who
[51:24] served in the Gulf War. And one thing,
[51:26] John, there were reports of two
[51:28] helicopters now that have been lost in
[51:31] this day of activity. And I wanted to
[51:32] ask you about that. One was a special
[51:34] operations chopper that we understand
[51:37] went down before the first attack that
[51:40] came about 9:00 Eastern time last night
[51:42] and another was a an Apache chopper that
[51:45] was brought down just across the line
[51:47] between Kuwait and Iraq. Brought down,
[51:49] we understand, by small arms fire. In
[51:52] both cases, the crews were able to get
[51:54] out and were rescued and are all all
[51:57] right. In one case, the chopper in the
[51:59] special operations division, we
[52:00] understand, had to be destroyed by the
[52:03] crew so that the Iraqis would not get
[52:04] their hands on it. But, um, this is
[52:07] obviously a little dispiriting, I would
[52:08] suspect.
[52:10] >> Well, Charlie, I think what it's
[52:11] evidence of is there's a pretty vigorous
[52:13] special operations campaign going on.
[52:15] We've known now that special operations
[52:17] forces and CIA forces have been working
[52:19] with Kurdish guerrillas and perhaps even
[52:21] Shiite gerillas in Iraq in preparation
[52:24] for a campaign against Saddam Hussein.
[52:26] But now we're starting to see more of
[52:27] what we refer to in the special
[52:29] operations community as direct action.
[52:31] So I think we can expect that special
[52:33] operations forces will be going in and
[52:34] out of Iraq uh looking for Scuds, trying
[52:37] to prevent perhaps a launch of a Scud
[52:38] against Israel, uh looking to secure
[52:41] weapons of mass destruction sites,
[52:42] putting in uh reconnaissance teams to
[52:44] look at very important areas and keep
[52:46] eyes on key objectives. So there's going
[52:48] to be a lot of this activity and and I
[52:50] think we can expect to lose a helicopter
[52:51] or two. And I from reports I think the
[52:53] special operations chopper just went
[52:54] down because of mechanical problems and
[52:56] we decided to destroy it. It's got very
[52:58] sensitive, very classified avionics on
[53:00] board and that's probably the best
[53:01] measure. John, I've been fascinated by
[53:03] reports which have existed now for some
[53:05] weeks and indeed even months that there
[53:08] were special operations forces inside
[53:11] Iraq. Uh you know special operations
[53:14] forces very well.
[53:16] What is your understanding? What is your
[53:18] suspicion of how many we had in there?
[53:20] how many teams and where they might have
[53:22] been located.
[53:23] >> Well, Charlie, one of the principal
[53:25] missions of special operations is to
[53:27] teach. And a lot of Americans are only
[53:29] learning that uh from the Afghan
[53:30] campaign and now this. And the basic
[53:33] idea is that a small team of special
[53:34] operators can make a large number of uh
[53:38] of uh indigenous forces or guerilla
[53:40] forces or partisan forces into an
[53:42] effective fighting force by helping them
[53:45] get organized and teaching them how to
[53:47] how to fight like an effective fighting
[53:48] force. So for instance uh there was a
[53:50] pattern established in Afghanistan where
[53:52] CIA and special operations teams uh
[53:55] helped the northern alliance mobilize
[53:57] gave them air support money those sorts
[54:00] of things and helped them be very
[54:01] effective in the fight against the
[54:02] Taliban. So I think what you can expect
[54:04] to see and what has been going on over
[54:06] the past couple of months especially in
[54:07] northern Iraq is a similar sort of
[54:09] pattern. So we get local allies that can
[54:11] help us in a battle against Saddam
[54:13] Hussein's regime and they'll be
[54:14] organized by some of our special
[54:15] operations forces and CIA assets. When
[54:18] you talk about a reconnaissance team
[54:19] from the special ops uh that are in
[54:21] there, how big is a reconnaissance team,
[54:25] >> Charlie? It can be anywhere from from
[54:27] just a few men on up to bigger teams. Uh
[54:29] reconnaissance missions were pretty
[54:30] successful a dozen years ago in the Gulf
[54:32] War. We tended to drop small teams off.
[54:34] uh they literally dug themselves into
[54:36] the ground at key points and we had uh
[54:39] eyes on very key objectives uh where we
[54:41] could see Iraqi movement or track scud
[54:44] or weapons of mass destruction uh sites
[54:46] and things of that nature. Uh I would
[54:48] imagine given that we uh we had trouble
[54:50] finding the Scuds in the last war
[54:52] throughout that vast western desert and
[54:54] they were able to fire fire on Israel a
[54:56] dozen years ago as a result that we'll
[54:57] probably have bigger teams in there now
[54:58] and probably covering more area. Uh
[55:01] would you suspect that there have been a
[55:04] fair number of additional special ops
[55:06] forces inserted in the last 24 hours?
[55:09] And specifically, I'm thinking you
[55:11] mentioned about preventing Scud missile
[55:13] attacks. Uh there's been a lot of
[55:15] concern about the western desert of
[55:17] Iraq, whether the Iraqis could move um
[55:20] could move missile launchers over toward
[55:23] that area, which obviously is the
[55:25] closest part of Iraq to Israel. Um, so I
[55:28] I guess I'm really getting more specific
[55:29] there than I want to, but a a do you
[55:31] think there have been additional special
[55:33] ops forces inserted in the last 24
[55:34] hours? And B, uh, might they be
[55:37] concentrating on that western desert
[55:39] area?
[55:41] >> I think there will be a lot of
[55:42] intelligence assets from satellites to
[55:44] special operations forces concentrating
[55:46] on that. One of the things we know
[55:48] politically is we don't want uh an
[55:50] attack on Israel to widen this conflict
[55:52] beyond its current scope, which is just
[55:54] the allied coalition in Iraq. So a
[55:56] matter of grave political concern and
[55:58] one to which we'll commit a lot of
[55:59] operating forces including special
[56:01] operations. And then of course Charlie
[56:03] um there's another possibility in the
[56:04] western desert that John Mcwthy already
[56:06] talked about and that is that u we may
[56:08] use special operations forces to secure
[56:10] what we call a lodgement perhaps an
[56:12] airfield or some other patch much as we
[56:14] did in southern Afghanistan which can
[56:16] then become a base for followon American
[56:18] forces because we know that we'll
[56:20] probably have to move forces up to
[56:21] northern Iraq throughout this campaign
[56:23] and a way to get them there might be to
[56:24] secure an airfield inside Iraq first and
[56:26] then and then use them to move up that
[56:28] way. All right, John Hill and I
[56:29] appreciate your uh being with us talking
[56:31] a little bit about the special
[56:32] operations forces, the couple of
[56:34] helicopters that have been lost and what
[56:35] those special ops troops may be doing
[56:37] right now. Want to go to Charles Glass,
[56:39] who I am delighted to see back with us
[56:40] on ABC, who is in northern Iraq. As you
[56:43] know, there is a northern and a southern
[56:45] no-fly zone over Iraq. And the northern
[56:48] no-fly zone was basically to protect the
[56:50] Iraqi Kurds. Those are people who are in
[56:53] no way enamored of Saddam Hussein,
[56:54] indeed uh opponents of his regime. And
[56:58] um Charles Glass is in that Kurdishont
[57:01] controlled area of northern Iraq and I
[57:03] gather has got some sense of what is
[57:05] happening now with Iraqi troops that are
[57:07] up in that area. Charles.
[57:12] >> Well, one of the things that the Kurdish
[57:13] military here has been saying is that
[57:16] Republican Guard units who had been
[57:18] based around Kirkuk and Mosul, which are
[57:20] the two large oil cities in the north of
[57:22] Iraq that are still in Saddam's hands,
[57:25] have been moved in the last week down
[57:27] nearer to Baghdad for the protection of
[57:30] Baghdad, leaving the north protected
[57:33] only by regular army forces. And I
[57:36] interviewed an Iraqi army deserter who
[57:38] said that most of the men in his unit,
[57:40] he was a mechanic and a tank unit um are
[57:43] ready to surrender to the Americans
[57:45] should they come up here. Um at the
[57:47] moment though there are no American
[57:48] troops up here and because of
[57:50] disagreements with Turkey, it doesn't
[57:52] look like there is going to be a
[57:53] northern front anytime soon.
[57:55] >> All right, Charles, let me interrupt you
[57:56] for just a moment and I want you to
[57:57] stand by because I want to talk a little
[57:58] bit about that changing relationship
[58:00] with Turkey. But Mike Surere is with us.
[58:02] He has just come back. He's with a
[58:04] Marine Expeditionary Unit that has been
[58:06] heading into Iraq. We talked to him
[58:08] earlier. He was inside Iraq. And Mike,
[58:10] if you can hear me, just tell me what
[58:11] you know.
[58:13] >> Yes, Charlie, I can hear you. We crossed
[58:15] into southern Iraq about 2 and 1/2 hours
[58:17] ago. We were making very good progress.
[58:20] We just encountered our first tank
[58:21] encounter at APC encounter. We've
[58:23] exchanged shots. We've been told that
[58:25] we've knocked out two tanks. We've been
[58:27] making fairly good progress. This
[58:29] invasion started about 12 hours earlier
[58:32] than it was supposed to because
[58:34] intelligence reports indicated a heavy
[58:37] concentration of enemy tanks passing on
[58:39] the northern border next to one of the
[58:41] units we were supposed to be going in
[58:43] with. The decision was made for us to go
[58:45] right away to try to relieve some
[58:47] pressure on that area. We are in effect
[58:49] trying to do a left hook to get up and
[58:50] above that area to take the pressure off
[58:52] of them. We have been in chemical suits
[58:55] now for over 12 hours. We've had four
[58:58] gas masks and chemical warnings where
[59:00] we've had to go to full gas mask and
[59:02] full chemical gear. Although there's
[59:04] been no confirmation of any chemical
[59:06] weapons so far. There have been three or
[59:08] four missile launchings that have made
[59:10] us all dot our gear and take cover. Uh
[59:13] and I think those were the incidents
[59:15] that led up to us doing an early
[59:17] invasion. Once they figured we were on
[59:19] the line on the border and started
[59:21] firing missiles and intelligence
[59:23] indicated that there were tanks up
[59:24] there, the decision was made to go about
[59:27] 12 hours earlier than planned. Charlie,
[59:29] >> Mike, I I I hope you can hear me. Uh
[59:32] when you say we're moving very quickly
[59:33] and have been moving for about 2 and 1/2
[59:35] hours. At what speed are you actually
[59:37] advancing? Because as I hear the sounds
[59:39] of that vehicle, it sounds like you're
[59:41] you're moving out.
[59:46] Charlie, I can barely hear you, but I
[59:47] think your question was, "How are we
[59:49] moving?" We are moving well because we
[59:51] are a little bit left of where, excuse
[59:54] me, a little bit west of where all the
[59:56] activity was supposed to be. They are
[59:58] sending us in now to try to get around
[60:01] where we think the most concentration
[60:02] is. Charlie,
[60:04] >> my question, Mike, and again, I'll try
[60:06] it one more time, and I perfectly well
[60:08] understand that you can't hear very
[60:09] well, but how fast are you moving?
[60:13] Uh I would estimate that we're going
[60:15] about 20 mph which is pretty good speed
[60:17] at night. It is nighttime now and with
[60:20] all the indications there's a full moon
[60:22] has come up now and we are trying to
[60:23] move as quickly as we can before the
[60:25] moon gets too much higher and
[60:26] illuminates our position. We are having
[60:29] a hard time having the other vehicles
[60:30] keep up with us because they are running
[60:32] into pitches and ravines. They're using
[60:35] their night vision goggles and are
[60:37] moving as quickly as they can. We are
[60:39] spread out across the desert. uh all
[60:41] kinds of tanks, armored assault vehicles
[60:44] and uh Humpies with uh uh anti-tank
[60:48] weaponry on it. So it is a bit of a rush
[60:51] across the desert. Yeah, I look to my
[60:53] left, I look to my right. I can see the
[60:55] shadows of vehicles just in the
[60:56] moonlight. Charlie.
[60:58] >> All right. Thanks very much, Mike. If
[60:59] you can still hear me, stand by. I do
[61:01] want to say to our local stations that
[61:03] this is ABC News continuing live
[61:05] coverage of the war with Iraq.
[61:15] And I'm Charles Gibson back at ABC News
[61:17] headquarters in New York. We were trying
[61:19] or we had contact there with Mike Sur
[61:20] who was with the Marine Expeditionary
[61:22] Force that moved, as Mike said, into
[61:24] Iraq about 2 and 1/2 hours ago across
[61:26] the border uh with Kuwait and moving at
[61:29] considerable speed. And Mike, if you've
[61:30] been in there 2 and 1/2 hours moving at
[61:33] 20 m an hour, is it safe to say that
[61:35] you're more than 40 miles inside Iraq or
[61:38] can you say?
[61:40] >> I cannot give you our location and I
[61:43] couldn't give you that estimate. I would
[61:45] not say we've been able to maintain that
[61:46] speed throughout. I would say we're
[61:48] short of that. Uh the main thing though
[61:51] is we got through we got through we
[61:52] breached the line went through the
[61:54] concertina wire and got through rather
[61:56] quickly and did not get any opposition
[61:58] until just about 15 minutes ago.
[62:00] >> All right. Thanks very much Mike Sur and
[62:02] you come back to us anytime you can
[62:05] because there's obviously an immediacy
[62:06] to what you're reporting and we will uh
[62:09] be receptive to whatever have you have
[62:10] to say over the coming hours. I want to
[62:13] turn to Lieutenant General Gregory
[62:15] Nubold who was with us.