Meet the Press (NBC) - 1983-10-23 (Marine barracks bombing)
Channel: malgent
Transcript
Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)
[0:01] Here's the chief Middle East
[0:02] correspondent for Le Monde, one of
[0:04] France's most prestigious publications.
[0:08] Meet the press, a public affairs
[0:10] presentation of NBC News.
[0:12] Meet the press is sponsored by the
[0:14] Archer Daniels Midland Company, ADM,
[0:16] helping America use its abundance to
[0:18] meet the world's needs, and by Chrysler
[0:21] Plymouth. Quality products from the new
[0:24] Chrysler technology.
[0:27] Prepare yourself for the new world of
[0:29] Chrysler technology.
[0:30] Where an electronic cockpit helps keep
[0:32] you secure, where you sit in the lap of
[0:35] luxury. The 1984 front-wheel drive New
[0:38] Yorker, Chrysler's most technologically
[0:40] advanced luxury car. Here's available
[0:42] turbo power, the new way to achieve
[0:45] extra performance, impressive mileage, a
[0:47] quiet, luxurious ride, and Chrysler's
[0:50] 5-year 50,000-mile protection plan. The
[0:53] new Chrysler New Yorker.
[1:29] In the wake of the explosion in Beirut,
[1:30] Lebanon this morning that killed perhaps
[1:32] as many as 120 US Marines and wounded
[1:36] many others, our guests today on Meet
[1:38] the Press are Senator Sam Nunn of
[1:41] Georgia, considered the most influential
[1:43] Democrat on the Armed Services
[1:44] Committee, and Eric Rouleau, who for 30
[1:47] years has been the chief Middle East
[1:49] correspondent for the French newspaper
[1:51] Le Monde.
[1:53] Our reporters today are Morton Kondracke
[1:56] of The New Republic, Suzanne Garment of
[1:58] The Wall Street Journal,
[2:00] Robert Novak of the Chicago Sun-Times,
[2:03] and to open the questioning, our regular
[2:05] panelist Bill Monroe of NBC News.
[2:08] Senator, do you have any information on
[2:10] this incident that we might not have at
[2:12] this point?
[2:13] Bill, the latest information I have is
[2:15] they have confirmed about 120 Marines
[2:18] dead, and there are over 100, probably
[2:20] around 112 wounded. Some of those
[2:22] wounded could move into what we call the
[2:25] KIA category, or killed in action, in
[2:28] the near or the coming hours. So, that's
[2:31] the latest information I have. You
[2:33] originally opposed our putting these
[2:35] Marines into Lebanon. What is your
[2:37] reaction to this news?
[2:39] Well, my first reaction is one of great
[2:41] sympathy to the families of the brave
[2:45] men that were killed.
[2:46] My second reaction is that we need to do
[2:49] everything possible now to protect those
[2:52] Marines who are still in Lebanon,
[2:55] because we have a unit that has been
[2:57] literally decimated. That unit has taken
[3:00] between 15 and 20% casualties. In
[3:03] Vietnam or any other war, we would
[3:04] consider that unit almost ineffective at
[3:07] this stage. So, the second point I would
[3:09] like to make is we've got to augment
[3:11] that unit, and we've got to do it very
[3:13] rapidly, because they're in their most
[3:15] exposed positions now. What do you mean
[3:17] augment the unit? We've got to at least
[3:19] have some people come back
[3:21] to to the ground from the ships. The
[3:24] Marines have got to have a unit that has
[3:26] what we call unit integrity. That means
[3:28] command. That means clear-cut line of
[3:31] authority. We don't even know now how
[3:33] many of the people who were in charge of
[3:34] the unit, the top officers, remain
[3:37] there. So, that is the first step.
[3:38] >> You're not talking about adding more
[3:40] Marines to the overall total of about
[3:41] 1,600 we have there. Well, I felt that
[3:44] the unit we had there was woefully
[3:46] inadequate for the mission they'd been
[3:47] given, but that's not the immediate
[3:49] problem. The immediate problem is to at
[3:51] least have as capable a unit there in
[3:53] the next few hours as we had there
[3:55] before this of tragedy. Do you feel
[3:57] there's any reason to believe that this
[3:59] kind of attack could have been
[4:01] anticipated and security improved so
[4:03] that it could not have taken place?
[4:06] I have no way of judging the security. I
[4:08] think we'll have to get all the facts.
[4:09] It seems to me to be strange that that
[4:11] truck was able to go through
[4:13] that those checkpoints. But, it's my
[4:16] understanding that they chose the
[4:17] entrance that was most unlikely from the
[4:20] point of view of Marine planning. It is
[4:22] also my understanding that the entrance
[4:25] that they crashed through was about 100
[4:27] yards from the actual building, so it
[4:28] was a very exposed position. The bottom
[4:31] line is our Marines have been in an
[4:33] untenable military position. They remain
[4:35] in an untenable military position, and I
[4:37] think we've got to look
[4:39] very seriously. I think the president
[4:41] owes the nation and the Marine Corps and
[4:43] our national security a a quick but a
[4:46] very thoughtful analysis of our
[4:48] situation there now. I don't think we've
[4:50] had that in the past. Thank you,
[4:51] gentlemen.
[4:53] We'll be back with more questions for
[4:54] Senator Sam Nunn and Eric Rouleau.
[4:58] It was 1921 when lead first appeared at
[5:01] the gas pump, and its impact on the
[5:03] environment has been a source of concern
[5:06] ever since. In fact, leaded gasoline was
[5:09] even pulled from the market in 1925.
[5:13] Just 1 year later, however, it returned,
[5:16] and it's still being used today.
[5:19] Now, no one disputes the fact that high
[5:21] compression engines need high octane
[5:23] fuel. But, in light of the growing
[5:25] concern surrounding its effects, lead is
[5:28] hardly a sensible solution. Fortunately,
[5:31] there's an alternative, and at ADM,
[5:33] we're using the latest in technology to
[5:36] produce it from corn, America's most
[5:38] abundant crop. It's called ethanol, and
[5:41] it's shown tremendous potential to help
[5:44] improve the environment. Because beside
[5:46] its ability to boost octane and help
[5:48] eliminate knocks and pings, ethanol is
[5:51] totally lead-free, which makes for
[5:53] healthier fuels that let us all breathe
[5:56] a little easier.
[6:00] Our guests on Meet the Press, Senator
[6:01] Sam Nunn and the French journalist Eric
[6:03] Rouleau. Mr. Novak. Senator Nunn, I just
[6:06] want to follow up one part of the
[6:08] questioning of you by Mr. Monroe. You
[6:10] left the impression that for the future,
[6:13] uh you would advocate an increase, an
[6:16] overall aggregate increase in the number
[6:18] of Marines in Lebanon. Do you think that
[6:20] would make their position more tenable?
[6:22] I'm not talking about the long term. I I
[6:24] tried to make it very clear. I'm talking
[6:25] about in the next few hours. We've got a
[6:27] very exposed position there. We've got a
[6:29] unit that's been decimated. We have
[6:31] security forces that are must be in
[6:33] disarray. We have Marines that are also
[6:35] under attack at the University of
[6:37] Beirut, I understand, which is not a
[6:39] comfortable situation. So, I'm talking
[6:41] about the immediate next few hours. In
[6:42] the longer term, I have a totally
[6:44] different view. I think the president is
[6:46] in in the long view, the president
[6:49] should try to get the United Nations
[6:51] forces. I would like to do it
[6:52] immediately. I would like to see the
[6:53] United Nations forces that are in the
[6:55] northern part of Lebanon now move in and
[6:57] augment our Marines, and eventually
[6:59] replace those Marines. That has been my
[7:02] view from the very beginning. So, when
[7:03] would you like to see the Marines out of
[7:05] Lebanon? Well, as soon as we can first
[7:07] protect them, make sure we don't suffer
[7:09] any more casualties. We don't want to be
[7:11] seen doing things in the short term that
[7:13] would increase their exposure, but I
[7:15] would like to see a uh
[7:17] augmentation by the UN forces and a
[7:20] replacement by them, hopefully in the
[7:21] next few weeks. Mr. Rouleau, uh
[7:23] there's been a lot of speculation by
[7:25] administration officials in the past few
[7:28] hours that this atrocity, this act of
[7:31] terrorism, was committed by
[7:33] uh Iranian sources. Do you, with your
[7:35] knowledge of the Lebanese situation,
[7:37] think that is an accurate appraisal?
[7:40] Uh
[7:40] you see, I don't think at this point we
[7:42] can judge who did it, but there are at
[7:43] least two organizations which have the
[7:45] capabilities of doing it. One of them is
[7:48] this Shiite pro-Iranian group, and the
[7:51] other one, which is a I think a much
[7:53] larger organization called the National
[7:55] Resistance Movement, the Lebanese
[7:56] National Resistance Movement in Lebanon,
[7:59] and which has been active in the south
[8:01] of Lebanon now for a year and has killed
[8:03] something like 130 or 140 Israeli
[8:05] soldiers and wounded scores wounded
[8:07] scores of them.
[8:08] Uh
[8:09] this organization, I know, took a
[8:11] decision around the 15th of September
[8:14] to
[8:16] uh organize attacks against American
[8:19] Marines and French soldiers, even if a
[8:22] cease-fire was concluded. At that time,
[8:23] there was no cease-fire. And the reason
[8:25] why they decided to do that is that they
[8:27] consider the Americans and the French as
[8:30] not an impartial force.
[8:33] Uh if you remember, when the
[8:34] multinational force came into Lebanon a
[8:36] year ago, there was a national consensus
[8:38] for it. Everybody All the Lebanese
[8:39] wanted it. Now, uh rightly or wrongly,
[8:42] the French and Americans appear as if
[8:45] they are part of the civil war in favor
[8:47] of the government of Mr. Gemayel.
[8:49] >> In your opinion, is it significant that
[8:51] the Italians were not attacked?
[8:53] I I didn't expect the Italians to be
[8:55] attacked.
[8:56] I wrote an article three or four weeks
[8:58] ago saying that the only Americans and
[9:00] French would be attacked for the simple
[9:01] reason the Italians have remained very
[9:03] uh noncommittal, and they were neutral
[9:05] in this conflict, and they don't appear,
[9:06] I again I repeat, they're not perceived
[9:09] as
[9:10] uh supporting a faction in Lebanon, uh
[9:12] they Mr. Gemayel's faction. Mrs.
[9:14] Garment.
[9:15] Senator Nunn, let me press just once
[9:17] more on the question of of US force in
[9:20] Lebanon.
[9:22] There are still many people in
[9:24] Washington talking about how to get the
[9:26] Marines out.
[9:27] Uh the US government has said that it
[9:30] does not want to participate directly
[9:32] and intimately in the political talks
[9:35] that are to come.
[9:37] When we give signals like this,
[9:40] don't we increase the talk among the
[9:43] factions in Lebanon that it is possible
[9:45] to scare America away?
[9:48] Well, I don't know, but I I believe that
[9:50] we must look towards our own interest.
[9:52] We are spread too thin all over the
[9:54] world. If we had a legitimate and a
[9:56] precise military mission in Lebanon,
[9:59] then certainly casualties like this
[10:01] should not deter us. But the president
[10:03] has defined our mission in in Lebanon as
[10:05] as having the Marines participate in the
[10:07] effort to clear Lebanon of all foreign
[10:10] forces. That is mission impossible. It
[10:12] has been mission impossible from the
[10:14] very beginning. So I would submit we
[10:15] must look to our own security. I submit
[10:17] we must protect the Marines that are
[10:19] there, but I think that we must find a
[10:21] way to replace them. We are no longer a
[10:24] deterrent force in Lebanon. We are
[10:26] targets. Our Marines are targets. They
[10:29] are much more hostages than they are a
[10:31] deterrent.
[10:33] If after his analysis, the president
[10:35] nevertheless decides to ask for more
[10:38] troops,
[10:40] what is your guess about what your
[10:42] colleagues in the Senate would say to
[10:45] him?
[10:46] Well, I do not know. The The Senate had
[10:49] a long debate on the 18 month. I did not
[10:52] favor that because the president had
[10:53] never precisely defined the mission. He
[10:56] still has not. It seems to me that we
[10:58] ought to go back to the drawing boards
[10:59] and say, "Mr. President, what are the
[11:01] Marines doing there and under what terms
[11:03] would they be withdrawn?" I have not
[11:05] gotten anyone in this administration to
[11:07] even tell me what success is. That is
[11:09] under what conditions we could say the
[11:11] Marines have fulfilled their mission.
[11:13] Now let's have them depart. But I
[11:15] repeat, the first thing is to protect
[11:16] the Marines that are there. Second, I
[11:18] think we ought to get the United Nations
[11:20] forces to replace them in an orderly
[11:21] way.
[11:22] Mr. Kondracke? Uh Senator Nunn, um in
[11:25] 1958, President Eisenhower sent 10,000
[11:27] Marines into into Lebanon
[11:30] uh and and accomplished the purpose for
[11:31] which they went there. Why why is not a
[11:34] a similar show of force appropriate in
[11:37] this in this day and age?
[11:39] Well, Congressman Gibbons uh in the
[11:40] House debate, I believe it was
[11:42] Congressman Gibbons said that we have
[11:43] too few Marines there to fight and too
[11:45] many to die. I think that's exactly
[11:47] where we are now. So if the president
[11:49] does not choose to go the UN route,
[11:51] which I suggest, it seems to me he's got
[11:53] two choices. One choice is to pull most
[11:55] Marines out, put them on the ships,
[11:57] leave a very small symbolic force there
[12:00] that would admittedly be exposed. Second
[12:02] choice is precisely what you indicate is
[12:04] to greatly beef up the force, to
[12:06] increase the perimeter, that is the
[12:09] overall security of the force by
[12:10] increasing the protected area, and that
[12:12] would require probably 5 to 10,000
[12:14] Marines. As far as going in with 20,000
[12:18] uh troops right now, I think you'd first
[12:20] of all have to identify who they were
[12:21] going to fight. I think it'd be very
[12:23] difficult to do that under the present
[12:24] conditions. Finding the enemy,
[12:26] identifying the enemy, knowing which
[12:27] faction to take on, it seems to me would
[12:30] be a military planner's absolute
[12:32] nightmare. So I would be opposed to
[12:33] that. Well, the the president has said
[12:36] on various occasions that the purpose of
[12:37] having the Marines there is to prevent
[12:39] the Syrians from taking over the
[12:41] Syrians, as he says, backed by the
[12:42] Soviets, from taking over the country.
[12:44] Now is is the is that a correct
[12:46] assessment of the situation and is it
[12:48] worth
[12:49] uh the use of American power to
[12:50] accomplish that end?
[12:52] Well, I don't know if that's what if
[12:54] that's what the president has in mind.
[12:55] That That was not the goal that he had
[12:57] in mind when he came to the Senate and
[12:59] asked for our 18-month extension. He
[13:01] said the goal there was not just to
[13:02] clear the Syrians out, but all foreign
[13:04] forces in Lebanon, including the
[13:05] Israelis, the PLO, everyone. Now that uh
[13:09] that is the goal we are now operating
[13:10] under. If the president simply wanted to
[13:11] clear the Syrians out, seems to me we
[13:13] are on a strange uh kind of negotiating
[13:15] pattern because, as I read it, we are
[13:18] basing a lot of our negotiations on the
[13:20] assumption that we're going to convince
[13:22] the Syrians to pull out voluntarily. But
[13:24] the strange thing that's going on while
[13:26] we're doing that and we have that
[13:27] assumption, which I find questionable,
[13:28] by the way, uh the president, it seems
[13:30] to me, about every 3 days blasts the
[13:32] Syrians with some new uh indictment.
[13:35] That does not seem to me to be
[13:37] consistent with the assumption that they
[13:38] are going to cooperate. Mr. Rolo?
[13:41] Senator Nunn mentioned a couple of
[13:43] minutes ago that the US mission at this
[13:45] point can almost be described as mission
[13:46] impossible.
[13:48] From your own experience in Lebanon,
[13:50] do you think that mission is impossible
[13:52] or is it a valid one? Should we be
[13:54] there?
[13:55] Well, first I think one should remind we
[13:57] should uh remind ourselves of what the
[13:59] mission is about. When the this
[14:01] multinational force went there, it
[14:03] wasn't to throw out any foreign forces
[14:05] out of Lebanon or to take part in the
[14:07] civil war. It was just for peacekeeping
[14:09] in the Beirut area and protect the
[14:11] civilian population. That That was all.
[14:14] Now we are talking
[14:15] >> was a valid effort? It was a valid
[14:17] effort because mainly the all the
[14:19] Lebanese were for it. I think we should
[14:22] work on those lines.
[14:23] If there's a consensus for multinational
[14:25] forces, it's a protection for for our
[14:27] forces.
[14:28] But if at one point like this it is the
[14:30] case today,
[14:32] a majority of Lebanese perceive us as a
[14:36] foreign intervention force trying to
[14:38] support one faction against the all the
[14:40] other factions, I think it's a very
[14:41] dangerous thing to do. And anyway, it's
[14:43] outside the mandate. How do you know
[14:44] it's a majority? How do you know it's a
[14:46] majority?
[14:46] >> Well, the majority is because the
[14:48] Gemayel group faction, which is in
[14:50] power, is openly contested by all the
[14:54] other factions, whether they are Muslim
[14:57] or
[14:58] some Christian factions, Maronite
[15:00] factions, are against Gemayel,
[15:02] like former President Frangieh, Raymond
[15:05] Eddé.
[15:06] There are Druze, there are Shiites, and
[15:10] uh so uh it's very easy to I think to
[15:12] conclude that there's a majority of
[15:13] Lebanese who would like to settle their
[15:15] affairs amongst themselves. And we
[15:17] appear as if we are interfering in their
[15:19] affairs. Mr. Monroe?
[15:20] Senator, did I understand you to say a
[15:22] little while ago that you had a report
[15:24] that Marines were under attack or are
[15:26] under attack this morning at the
[15:28] University of Beirut? Yes, that was my
[15:30] information, but the information is very
[15:32] sketchy and that's that's about all I
[15:33] know about it.
[15:34] >> What kind of attack?
[15:35] I can't give you many more details than
[15:37] that. Certainly not the kind of massive
[15:39] uh explosive uh situation we had develop
[15:42] uh near the airport, but certainly
[15:44] sniper fire and I understand small arms
[15:46] fire. You've talked about withdrawing
[15:47] Marines, Senator. What about the factor
[15:49] that this attack makes it harder to
[15:52] withdraw because if we withdrew the
[15:55] Marines in the immediate future, it
[15:57] would appear that we were giving in to a
[15:59] terrorist attack. Well, first of all,
[16:01] I'm not saying we ought to immediately
[16:03] withdraw. Immediately, we need to shore
[16:05] up what we've got there now and protect
[16:06] our people. Second, we need to have a
[16:08] phased withdrawal with the United
[16:09] Nations taking our place. So you're
[16:11] correct. If we simply put the Marines on
[16:14] the ships and pull out, I think it would
[16:15] be very bad. But this has been a
[16:17] disaster waiting for waiting to happen.
[16:19] It was apparent when the cease-fire was
[16:20] declared that that was the time for the
[16:22] president to redefine our mission. Uh
[16:25] the president has not redefined that
[16:26] mission. It is still very very broad and
[16:29] in my view, unless you define that
[16:31] mission to be one of having the Marines
[16:33] there until the UN can take over or
[16:35] until the Lebanese army can take over,
[16:37] then you have defined it defined an
[16:39] open-ended mission. Mr. Rolo, you said
[16:42] that you wrote an article a few weeks
[16:43] ago that a specific organization in
[16:46] Lebanon was planning this kind of attack
[16:48] on the French troops and on the American
[16:50] troops, which has now taken place. What
[16:53] kind of organization? Who are these
[16:54] people?
[16:55] They are a very mysterious organization.
[16:57] I don't think they ever held a press
[16:59] conference or ever met no official
[17:00] representative met the press.
[17:03] But I got their handouts in in Paris and
[17:05] I
[17:06] uh around the 15th or 20th of September,
[17:08] I met
[17:09] maybe not a representative
[17:11] a formal representative, but somebody
[17:12] very close to them.
[17:13] And uh this man told me that they had
[17:15] taken a decision around the 15th of
[17:17] September, a political decision, to
[17:19] attack the Americans and the French to
[17:20] get out all the multinational forces and
[17:22] get as I I'm very happy to hear the
[17:25] senator say that because I think it's a
[17:27] it's a quite a widespread view in
[17:29] Lebanon amongst Lebanese. They would
[17:30] like to have United Nations forces
[17:32] because at least they have a feeling
[17:33] they are neutral forces, they are not
[17:34] going to interfere in the in the in the
[17:36] internal domestic uh affairs.
[17:39] And to answer your question, the
[17:40] decision was taken around the 15th of
[17:42] September to attack and I expected
[17:43] attacks, but I must confess I didn't
[17:46] expect such a murderous such a tragic
[17:49] uh
[17:50] uh bomb attack as this one. I thought
[17:52] they were going to snipe and kill
[17:53] Americans and French soldiers. Mr.
[17:55] Novak? Mr. Rolo, I from your uh
[17:57] experience as a journalist, do you think
[17:59] the perception that you described of the
[18:01] Lebanese, that the Americans and the
[18:03] French are not even-handed, that they
[18:06] have been tilting to one side, is a
[18:08] correct and accurate perception?
[18:11] Well, um
[18:12] I think it's it's the American
[18:14] government is on record. I mean, the
[18:15] American government considers Mr.
[18:17] Gemayel as the legitimate
[18:19] uh government of Lebanon, not the legal.
[18:21] There's a big difference between the
[18:22] two. I mean, there's legal and there's
[18:24] legitimacy.
[18:25] You see, in a civil war, it's very
[18:26] difficult to speak of legitimacy because
[18:28] by definition in a civil war, you have
[18:30] groups warring each other
[18:32] and
[18:33] uh the legitimacy of a government is
[18:35] being contested. So by the fact of
[18:37] saying that Gemayel is legitimate is
[18:39] already taking sides. Number one. Number
[18:41] two, in action, the American government
[18:43] has been supplying
[18:45] uh often a lot of armaments to the to
[18:47] the Lebanese army, training the Lebanese
[18:49] army, which uh is perceived again, I
[18:52] don't think wrongly, by the Muslim
[18:54] factions as a Christian Phalangist army.
[18:57] It's not a neutral army. It's the army
[18:59] of Mr. Gemayel. And therefore, I think
[19:01] at least for the Americans on the
[19:02] American side, I think the American side
[19:04] the American government is taking sides.
[19:06] Senator Nunn, two of your colleagues,
[19:08] Senator Hatch and Senator Zorinsky,
[19:09] several weeks ago came back from Syria
[19:12] with a report which they submitted to
[19:14] the White House uh to the effect that
[19:17] Syria would cooperate with a
[19:19] multinational force that apparently did
[19:21] not contain the United States. Do you
[19:24] think that is an accurate assessment and
[19:26] that we should be moving on that grounds
[19:29] in an agreement with Syria in Lebanon? I
[19:32] really I really don't believe I can make
[19:34] a judgment on that. I have not talked to
[19:36] the senators uh in depth. I've had only
[19:38] passing conversations with them on that
[19:40] subject. I did read the articles about
[19:42] it. I'm not in a position to make a
[19:44] judgment on it. I do believe, however,
[19:46] that as long as we have US Marines
[19:49] sitting there that they in effect
[19:51] hostages, not only of the Syrians but of
[19:53] many other factions in Lebanon, our
[19:55] bargaining position vis-a-vis Syria is
[19:58] much weaker than it would be if we were
[19:59] offshore.
[20:01] Mr. Garment.
[20:02] Mr. Rolo, did you learn anything about
[20:05] about the connections of this group
[20:08] uh who they who they know? You mean the
[20:11] National Resistance Lebanese group? Who
[20:13] leads them?
[20:14] Uh yes, I mean I know it's
[20:16] multi-confessional group. There are
[20:18] people from all religions. There are
[20:20] Muslims, there are Christians, Greek
[20:22] Orthodox, Catholics, Maronites. It's a
[20:24] it's a nationalist leftist oriented
[20:28] group which I think communists are
[20:29] playing an important role in that group.
[20:31] It's very well knitted, very well
[20:32] organized and as I mentioned before,
[20:35] they they they have killed many Israelis
[20:37] successfully and in the sense that they
[20:38] were successful in that operation and I
[20:40] think it was one of the reason why Mr.
[20:41] Begin withdrew the troops behind the
[20:43] Awali. He could not face them. They are
[20:45] well organized, they're very secret.
[20:47] So uh
[20:48] uh I think they they they we we are
[20:51] going to unfortunately going to hear
[20:52] more of them in the future.
[20:53] When you when you say communists, did
[20:56] you learn anything more specific about
[20:58] which variety of
[21:00] I think members of the Communist Party
[21:02] in Lebanon uh are in it in the
[21:04] leadership. I don't know how important
[21:06] they are, but I know at least one who is
[21:08] connected with that organization.
[21:10] Well, when you mention the word
[21:11] communist, one naturally thinks of the
[21:13] Soviet Union. Is the Soviet is
[21:15] let me ask this is a both uh about the
[21:18] immediate organization and about the
[21:19] geopolitical situation. If the United
[21:21] States really does pull out,
[21:23] do we leave the region open for Soviet
[21:26] influence to increase?
[21:28] No, I I don't I don't think this is a
[21:31] possibility either of the French or the
[21:32] American government. I think the French
[21:34] government has exactly the view of the
[21:35] senator that uh
[21:37] this is too big a job for us.
[21:39] It's the civil war in Lebanon is
[21:41] terrible. I mean, nobody has ever
[21:42] entered Lebanon and gone out uh
[21:44] successfully. No, I think the the the
[21:46] only way out, I think the senator is
[21:48] absolutely right on this, is to organize
[21:50] a
[21:51] a significant force from United Nations
[21:54] to replace the French and the Americans
[21:55] and the British and the and the Italians
[21:58] and make sure that peacekeeping would be
[22:01] uh the job of the United Nations
[22:02] >> Except that except that when whenever in
[22:04] the Middle East the the UN has been
[22:06] required to do a peacekeeping mission,
[22:08] basically they've been a sieve. They've
[22:10] allowed whatever terrorist groups were
[22:11] in the vicinity to go right through and
[22:13] occupy whatever territory they occupied.
[22:14] What evidence do you have that the UN
[22:16] could do the job this time?
[22:18] Well, I think this question can be
[22:19] discussed and examined and maybe the
[22:21] numbers would be more important, but you
[22:23] see what is more important in all this?
[22:25] You see, you are alluding at that at the
[22:26] fact the United Nations troops were in
[22:28] the south of Lebanon and left the
[22:29] Palestinian fedayeen go into the region.
[22:32] Exactly. But that was a very particular
[22:33] situation. Uh there was this fedayeen
[22:35] Israeli confrontation or this. Today we
[22:37] are we are facing another situation. We
[22:39] are facing a situation
[22:40] where most Lebanese, I would say
[22:42] practically all Lebanese would like to
[22:43] see uh peace and order in their own
[22:45] country and they want to look to people
[22:47] in which in whom they can they feel
[22:49] confident. And you can only feel
[22:51] confident if you were Lebanese when you
[22:53] are facing a United Nations force, you
[22:55] know they have no axe to grind, they
[22:57] have no imperial objectives or whatever.
[23:00] Uh I think it will have a much bigger
[23:01] chance to succeed this time than in the
[23:03] times you are referring to. Okay, we got
[23:05] about 2 minutes to go, Mr. Monroe.
[23:07] Senator, as you know, the Marines in the
[23:09] Beirut area have been subjected in
[23:11] recent days to sniper attack and in a
[23:15] remarkably remarkably brutal aspect of
[23:18] this present situation, the risk was
[23:20] around those ruins of being sniped at.
[23:24] Do you have any formula for protection
[23:26] of the Marines from sniping? Is there
[23:27] anything the Marines ought to be doing
[23:28] about this or
[23:30] some inhibition on them now removed?
[23:34] Well,
[23:35] if you if you wanted to protect them,
[23:37] you have to have a much broader
[23:39] perimeter. You cannot put them in the
[23:41] low ground where they are around the
[23:42] airport and expect them to be protected.
[23:45] Even the huge amount of firepower we
[23:47] have off the shore will not deter those
[23:49] kind of attacks because we're not going
[23:51] to blow up Beirut if we get three
[23:54] Marines killed with sniper fire. We
[23:56] can't have that kind of massive
[23:57] retaliation against innocent people. Uh
[24:00] we don't have a way to way to protect
[24:01] them where they are now. They're in an
[24:02] untenable military situation. Should we
[24:04] not expand that perimeter?
[24:06] I'd think that would be unwise. If the
[24:08] president will not go towards the United
[24:10] Nations, then that may be the only
[24:12] choice, but I think it is an unwise
[24:13] choice. Mr. Novak, please.
[24:15] >> Senator Nunn, the burden of Mr. Rolo's
[24:17] remarks is that there's a perception in
[24:19] Lebanon that we that our forces have not
[24:21] been objective. Do you think that the US
[24:24] Marine forces under the govern under the
[24:27] direction of our government went wrong
[24:29] in siding toward the Gemayel government
[24:31] instead of being a neutral force? It's a
[24:33] close question because
[24:35] to the extent that we returned fire, we
[24:37] were protecting our own people. You have
[24:39] to protect your own people and I think
[24:40] the French did the same thing, but I
[24:41] believe the unfortunate perception is we
[24:43] were siding with the government. I
[24:44] believe that's an erroneous perception,
[24:46] but I think it is the perception. Mr.
[24:48] Garment.
[24:49] Senator, do you think that it's in the
[24:50] US interest to stop favoring the
[24:52] government against its enemies?
[24:56] Well, that assumes that I think we
[24:57] already have started favoring the
[24:58] government against its enemies. I don't
[25:00] go that far. I think we've tried to be a
[25:02] peacekeeping force, but the problem is a
[25:04] superpower by its very nature has great
[25:07] difficulty being perceived as totally
[25:09] impartial. Thank you very much, Senator
[25:11] Nunn and Mr. Eric Rouleau for being with
[25:13] us today on Meet the Press.
[25:15] I'll be back in a minute with a word
[25:17] about next week's guest.
[25:41] The GE2800 dishwasher, it does almost
[25:44] everything but clear the table.
[25:54] You demand quality and durability.
[25:57] Plymouth builds it in. The 550 Plymouth
[25:59] Horizon, front-wheel drive Horizon.
[26:02] Match it for mileage, Cavalier.
[26:04] Five-passenger Plymouth Horizon. Match
[26:07] it, Civic. 1984 Plymouth Horizon. Match
[26:10] it for price, Escort DL. The 550
[26:13] Plymouth Horizon, backed with a 5-year
[26:15] or 50,000-mile protection plan.
[26:23] Next Sunday on Meet the Press, our guest
[26:24] will be the US Ambassador to the UN,
[26:26] Jeane Kirkpatrick.
[26:28] The address to write to if you would
[26:30] like to comment on today's program is
[26:32] Meet the Press, NBC, Washington, DC
[26:35] 20016.
[26:39] For a printed transcript of Meet the
[26:40] Press, send $1 and a stamped
[26:43] self-addressed envelope to Kelly Press,
[26:45] Box 8648, Washington, DC 20011.
[26:50] That's Kelly Press, Box 8648,
[26:53] Washington, DC 20011.
[26:59] That's it for now. Thank you for joining
[27:01] us. I'm Marvin Kalb saying goodbye for
[27:03] Senator Sam Nunn, Eric Rouleau, and Meet
[27:06] the Press.
[27:11] Meet the Press has been sponsored by
[27:13] Chrysler Plymouth, quality products from
[27:15] the new Chrysler technology, and by the
[27:18] Archer Daniels Midland Company. ADM,
[27:21] helping America to use its abundance to
[27:23] meet the world's needs.
[27:26] News features timely interviews, weather
[27:28] and sports reports, and unique
[27:30] entertainment. They're all part of the
[27:32] Today program every weekday morning.
[27:34] Start your day with us on Today, right
[27:37] here on NBC.
[27:39] This is Maria Hitchens.
[27:53] Meet the Press has been a public affairs
[27:54] presentation of NBC News and has come to
[27:56] you live from our studios in Washington,
[27:59] DC.
[28:02] The day justice took a walk. Two men
[28:04] beat a man to death.