---

June 08, 2006

Special Report Roundtable - June 8

FOX News Special Report With Brit Hume

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAJ. GEN. WILLIAM CALDWELL, COALITION SPOKESMAN: We knew exactly who was there. We knew it was Zarqawi. And that was the deliberate target that we went to get. And in those 17 raids last night, a tremendous amount of information and intelligence was collected and is presently being exploited and utilized for further use. I mean, it was a treasure trove, no question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: So from a military point of view, two important developments in Iraq: One obviously, the death of Zarqawi and the second, 17 raids in the Baghdad area said to have turned up what you just heard General Caldwell, there, call it, a treasure trove of information. Some observations now from Fred Barnes, executive editor of the "Weekly Standard," Mort Kondracke, executive editor of "Roll Call," and Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of "National Public Radio," FOX News contributors all.

Mara, let's start here with the significance of this development, and just in terms of fighting this insurgency in Iraq.

MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: Well, I would say it's the most significant thing that's happened since we got Saddam Hussein. I think that's pretty clear. And the other thing that was important is the fact that information that led them to him came from inside his own network, so it shows that the U.S. actually had some intelligence. They were able to know exactly where he is and get him, and then as you heard Major General Caldwell say, they got a whole bunch of other stuff in these raids that they could use.

HUME: Interesting that he had a safe house that was heavily fortified and this was not just some, you know, shack where a bunch of guys were hiding, this...

LIASSON: Well, it shows you that they have a lot of resources. They do have support among a certain segment of the population. Money is not a problem for him. When we saw him last on videotape, he looked pretty plump. I mean, in other words, he clearly was eating well and being supported in some way. But, you know, obviously, a safe house can't protect you from an air strike.

MORT KONDRACKE, "ROLL CALL": You know, there's a -- well, it's a great moment. You know, this guy was a homicidal maniac and a butcher. But, you know, there's a conventional wisdom out there that, as stated, for example, by Joe Biden, that the jihadists represent about 10 percent of the insurgency problem that the Sunni insurgency is much bigger, and that they're both getting dwarfed by the militias and the sectarian violence and all that.

But another way to look at this is this guy was a major proponent of civil war and sectarian violence. I mean, his whole modus operandi lately, has been to butcher Shiites and peace-loving Sunnis, to some extent, but basically Shiites. He's called for the assassination of the Grand Ayatollah Sistani, he may have been was responsible for the murder, you remember, very early on of that revered Shiite and may be responsible even for blowing up the mosque in the -- the Golden Dome in Samarra, which triggered all this sectarian violence. So with him out of the way, you know, his movement presumably will continue to some extent, but whether, if indeed, his own people ratted him out, it may be over this butchery, this excessive anti-Shiite attacks, which may diminish, and therefore, the sectarian violence may diminish somewhat.

FRED BARNES, "WEEKLY STANDARD": I know, I think that's right, but he could also, since he was ratted out by people inside the insurgency, that may create more disruption and civil war among the insurgents themselves. We know there has actually been some in the last few months, something that wasn't there before.

KONDRACKE: The thing about Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda in Iraq is they're the front edge, they're the whole insurgency. They're they -- they have all the intensity. They're the suicide bombers. I thought Zarqawi had taken credit for that bombing in Samarra of the Golden Dome mosque that actually really did set off some of the sectarian violence between Shiites and Sunnis. So getting rid of him is extraordinarily important, it's bound to disrupt at least the Al-Qaeda part of the insurgency in the short run. Maybe in the long run they can get it back together. but it's going to be hard. And the Sunni -- let me just add one thing. The Sunni insurgency, you know when you get into it, those people are more likely, if things -- if they have setbacks, to drop out of the insurgency.

LIASSON: Well, but also, something else important happened today that maybe was a coincidence. But finally the defense and interior ministers have been named.

HUME: We'll get to that.

LIASSON: OK.

HUME: I just wanted to make this point. Tony Blair said today -- this is something the Bush administration hasn't really quite said about Iraq, and that is that Al-Qaeda has chosen to make a stand in Iraq. Clearly Zarqawi seemed to have eclipsed Osama bin Laden in terms of being an operational figure. He was a larger figure on the world stage in the last year on two than bin Laden has been. He seems to be the guy who was inspiring people to sign up and come to fight the hated infidel Americans in Iraq. One has to wonder what this does to the whole effort to recruit people to come and fight.

KONDRACKE: Yeah, he was a master propagandist. I mean, he was a great internet rabble-rouser and he was attracting all these people and was, to some extent, displacing Saddam, I mean, Osama bin Laden in -- as the popular hero. And he may have been, you know -- you could even argue that the upsurge of violence in Afghanistan was a kind of a response, because the Afghanis were kind of losing traction as the leading force of the jihadist movement around the world.

BARNES: He was an action figure. Not someone hiding in a cave, like Osama is.

HUME: When we come back, with our panel, what's next following his death? We'll talk about what some administration critics are saying and what the political reaction has been. Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DUNCAN HUNTER (R), HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE CHRM.: The real message to the American people is we're winning. The problem is this kind of war takes something that's been in short supply in this country for a long time, an that's lots of patience.

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: And I hope the president will be forceful in saying that, you know, it's been three years now. We've got to transition this mission. We can't stay the course as it is.

NANCY PELOSI (D), HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: So hopefully these appointments will take us closer to that time when our troops can come home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: Two different parties, two different visions of what this Zarqawi capture and, as Mara mentioned earlier, the naming of the remaining members of the new cabinet in Iraq mean or means. What about this? What about the politics of this, Mara? What do you think this does? This is the effect -- this is, of course, you know, a big moment.

LIASSON: Yeah.

HUME: And the first big successful moment on the military side in a long time.

LIASSON: Clearly a success. And I thing the administration is correct by not, you know, saying this solves all our problems and this is a major turning point. We'll see if it's a major turning point. It's a really important development, we know that. And they're making sure that they don't get ahead of themselves on this. And democrats, I think, probably the cautious approach is just to leave it as what it is, a great accomplishment in the war against terrorists there and let it sit.

HUME: Instead of talking about now is the time to get out.

LIASSON: Although I think what Nancy Pelosi was referring to was the political development.

HUME: I understand that, but still saying it's time to get out.

LIASSON: Yeah. Or she hopes it'll bring us closer to the time when our troops can come home. Everybody feels that way.

KONDRACKE: I think, I mean, you know, everything depends on what happens between now and November. And the president is going to go up to the mountain next week, to Camp David, with all of his advisors and try to figure out what to do next, where we go from here. You know, I don't know whether this is correct or not, but there's a large school of people, a lot of them hawks, Fred Kagan in the "Weekly Standard" from the American Enterprise Institute, but there are a lot of moderates, too, like Michael O'Hanlon of Brooking Institution and Ken Pollack who used to be in the Clinton administration who say that what we need to do is to beef up the number of American troops who are actually fighting and clear the insurgency out of a place like Baghdad with about six brigades or three brigades or at least more and do a forceful effort to clear, hold and build in Baghdad.

HUME: .about the political (inaudible).

BARNES: I think -- I agree with Mort on that 100 percent, they do need to do that. Really -- a mount a real counterinsurgency it might cause more American casualty, but it's the thing to do.

Now, what was Zarqawi's main goal in Iraq? It was to get the U.S. out. So now we have people saying, oh, Zarqawi's dead, let's start bringing our troops home. I mean, that's what he was for, that's because he knew with the American troops gone, or as John Murtha says, you know, immediate withdrawal, which Nancy Pelosi also endorsed, that that would allow the insurgency to be permanent. Now, also -- I forget which democrat, Brit, maybe you can tell me, said, well, we didn't need our troops there to do this attack, we could have...

HUME: Barbara Boxer.

BARNES: Well, she must not have seen what General Caldwell said. He said it was a painstaking mission. It took weeks for us to find out exactly where he was, and to make sure it was correct and everything, dealing with all kinds of Iraqis, getting a tip, and doing all this. You couldn't do that if you were in Kuwait.

(CROSSTALK)

HUME: Well, they also probably couldn't have carried out these 17 other operations.

BARNES: Well of course you couldn't. These people are just plain wrong and they're stupid in saying these things. I mean, I mean, don't they stop and think? Don't they think through what's going on? It's a war. You know, you wonder where these ideas come from. Maybe it's just their anti-Bush feelings, but they're -- I mean, you jump to the conclusion that Zarqawi's dead, now let's do what he wanted us to do? That's crazy.

KONDRACKE: Now, look, I think Mara is right, that the democrats ought to do what Teddy Kennedy actually did today, and that's just cheer and say this is a wonderful moment and the troops did it, and isn't that grand and shut up.

LIASSON: Leave it the way it is.

KONDRACKE: Yeah. And, you know, if we fail there for one reason or another, whatever reason we fail, then the democrats win. You know, but they don't have to act as though they're invested in it, which is what they often do.

HUME: What about the -- how much time, how much of a boost politically, does the president and the republicans get, if any, out of this?

LIASSON: I think they get something. It's hard to tell how much of a boost. I mean, are people suddenly going to decide the incredible erosion for the Iraq war is going to turn around because Zarqawi is dead? I doubt that. But look, you climb out of a hole, one step at a time, if you're going to do that. And if this is followed by more good news you've got to function in government, we hope, now in Iraq. There was a defense minister named and an interior minister, the defense minister is a Sunni, the interior minister is a Shiite who's not, we think, as reported, is related to any militias.

---

Sponsored Links

About Us | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy         © RealClearPolitics 2006