http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/04/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

B1 Bomber has Crashed in Qatar; New Report Claims Surge in Iraq is Working; Presidential Candidates Pay Tribute to Dr. King

Aired April 4, 2008 - 17:00 ET

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Realistic or rosy, that new intelligence report on Iraq is sparking new controversy. Let's get a fact check. Our CNN's Michael Ware joining us live from New York, but he has spent most of his time in Iraq.

Really Michael, since day one since this war has begun we've been listening to John McCain. We've heard this idea from the administration that the so-called surge is making conditions on the ground better in Iraq. What is your assessment?

MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, to a fair degree that's true and it's not true. What one has to look at is, first, what exactly is the surge. Well I can tell you now it's far more than just 30,000 combat troops acceptability to reinforce the capital. That's just the thin veneer on the surface.

What the surge really is as Ambassador Crocker and many others told us, it's really about cutting deals with the Sunni insurgents who have been killing Americans, it's about Muqtada al Sadr telling his militia to lay low for his own political purposes, nothing to do with trying to help America. It's about segregating Baghdad into divided communities that perhaps irreparably has torn apart the fabric of Iraqi society but it's prevented people from getting at each other to kill one another.

It's about a whole host of other political accommodations. It's also about political surge where the state department and the embassy has been trying to force the Iraqi government and the various factions to agree on legislation and push it through. That's hard markedly mixed results. Even General Petraeus himself who said reconciliation, the progress on that is insufficient. At the end of the day, that was the ultimate purpose of the surge.

I have to tell you, whatever the reason, no matter how it's done, no matter how long it lasts, it's brought the death toll down by cutting the deals and separating the communities. Who's not thankful for that?

The one thing you must bear in mind, Suzanne, what are the costs of this strategy and what are going to be the consequences? There's a number of things that have been put in as a result of the surge to obtain short-term goals and at some point someone's going to have to pay for them, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: Well that's a very good question Michael because we really don't know how much this is going to cost when it's all said and done. We've heard of Barack Obama's campaign. Perhaps there seems to be a window opening here, 16 months to get the U.S. troops out. But do you think it's a good idea for a timetable in the first place? You've never been a big fan of that. Do you think it's good there's some flexibility perhaps the candidates are showing?

WARE: Well, the notion of a timetable is ludicrous to begin with strategically and realistically. One must bear in mind campaigning this is actually running a war.

Certainly it's the hope of the commanders on the ground from a senior level that what's being said now may not necessarily be what's done when someone's sitting in the oval office.

Indeed I was speaking to Senator Kerry in D.C. just yesterday. Even when he was outlining what he considered to be a responsible timetable for withdrawal, it was a much more nuanced approach than the bumper sticker kind of slogan that you're hearing from the candidates currently campaigning.

In Senator Kerry's version which is on record, there still remained U.S. troops for some time to come. There was going to be renewed efforts in other fields and areas, but it was not the let's pull out and go home.

MALVEAUX: Sure.

WARE: He said we're not pulling the plug. Really I think there's a lot of wiggle room and the American public need to be aware of that.

MALVEAUX: Sure. I spoke with Senator Kerry yesterday as well. It seems like it's going to be a lot more complicated for whoever really gets in the office there.

Thank you very much, Michael Ware, for your perspective. Obviously from day one inside of Baghdad. Thanks again, Michael...

away from his 16 month pledge:"

What does this say about Obama's judgment that he is running on right now?

It scares the daylights out of me that he will not listen to sound advice right now and this shows that we will probably have two false choices about how to handle Iraq IF Obama is the nominee (hopefully he will NOT be)!

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/04/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

B1 Bomber has Crashed in Qatar; New Report Claims Surge in Iraq is Working; Presidential Candidates Pay Tribute to Dr. King

Aired April 4, 2008 - 17:00 ET

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: A campaign adviser to Barack Obama is recommending that U.S. forces remain in Iraq longer than the candidate has been promising. CNN's Jim Acosta joining us now.

And, Jim, tell us what this is all about.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Suzanne, on his Web site, Barack Obama promises he will "have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

But an Obama adviser on Iraq has other ideas.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OBAMA: Yes, we can! ACOSTA (voice-over): It's one of Barack Obama's "yes we can moments" on the trail. Yes, he asserts, America can end the war in Iraq in 16 months.

OBAMA: We're going to bring one to two brigades out per month. At that pace, it will take about 16 months to get all of our combat troops out.

ACOSTA: But Colin Kahl, an unpaid adviser to the Obama campaign on Iraq, argues no, America can't. In a policy briefing obtained by "The New York Sun," Kahl urges a transition force of 60,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq until the end of 2010. That's nearly two years into an Obama presidency.

Kahl writes: "A policy of conditional engagement, a nuanced middle position between all in or all out, offers a better chance of producing lasting progress in Iraq."

SAMANTHA POWER, FORMER OBAMA ADVISER: It's the best case scenario.

ACOSTA: Last month former Obama foreign policy adviser Samantha Power suggested to the BBC the 16 month timetable is flexible.

POWER: He will of course not rely upon some plan he's crafted as potential candidate or a U.S. senator. He'll rely upon an operational plan in consultation with people on the ground to which he doesn't have daily access now as a result of not being the president.

ACOSTA: And just this last week, Obama's current foreign policy coordinator said at a panel discussion, "Obama will listen to his commanders on the ground and react to developments on the ground."

As for Hillary Clinton, she promised withdrawing forces in her first 60 days in office.

CLINTON: We're bringing our sons and daughters home. It's up to the Iraqis to chart their own future course.

ACOSTA: But she has yet to say exactly when the war would end. Some Iraq policy analysts believe an immediate withdrawal will be easier said than done.

MICHAEL O'HANLON, BROOKINGS INSTITUTE: I actually find it reassuring given that Senator Obama may very well be our next president that he has some independently minded people willing to say these sort of things in public. On the other hand, it's going to cause some people to question whether Obama has been true to his own premise of his own campaign.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA: As far as the Obama campaign says, the senator does not share the views of this adviser. The campaign insists Obama is not backing away from his 16 month pledge -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: Thank you, Jim Acosta. It'll be interesting to see if those timetables change if they get more information on the ground and if either one of them becomes president. Thanks again, Jim...

and "Neverland" as I documented below:

Michael Ware in my opinion is a very credible and fair "umpire" who can impartially "call balls and strikes" no matter who is making statements about Iraq policy, whether it is a Democrat or Republican or whether it is Barack Obama or John McCain!

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11611

Michael Ware calls McCain's comments about Iraq "beyond ludicrous" & "Neverland"

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 28, 2007 - 5:02pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11663

TRANSCRIPT & ANALYSIS: John McCain goes Round Two with Michael Ware about Iraq!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 3, 2007 - 2:46am.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/17/acd.01.html

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES

No Presidential Do-Over in Florida?; America's Economic Crisis

Aired March 17, 2008 - 22:00 ET

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: "Michael, let me ask you a question about the surge. If the position is the surge is working, and John McCain has said that before, one, would you agree with it? And, two, does it did not continue to work if those troops are moved?

MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Soledad, in a sense, yes, the surge is working. But one thing I'd be very keen to do is ask Senator McCain just what exactly does he think the surge is? Violence is currently down. Back to levels of about 2005. Now, that still means a lot of Iraqis are dying every month. It still means 30 or 40 or more Americans are dying every month. That's completely unacceptable.

But this thing called the surge has brought those levels of horrific violence down from last year. But the surge isn't just about 30,000 troops sitting here in Baghdad. That's not what's really done this. What's really done this is cutting a deal with the Ba'athist nationalist insurgency.

What's done this is Muqtada al-Sadr calling a truce. What's done this is segregating this country into Sunni and Shia enclaves, walling them off with massive blast barriers, and arming local militias to protect themselves.

Now will this survive if 30,000 troops go? Those troops are just in Baghdad. What this is happening and the levels of violence is across the country. So there's much greater things at play here than just 30,000 troops. And in many ways, America is mortgaging the future of this country and America's interests to bring these numbers down by building these militias -- Soledad...

O'BRIEN: Let me give the final question to Michael Ware tonight. Michael, a year ago when you and I spoke, you told me that the Iraqi troops were a disaster. I mean, they were just -- it was just a mess. Do you see improvement there or do you see improvement, but slowly, or no improvement at all?

WARE: Well, look, on an ad hoc local level, depending on which American unit you're dealing with, they may be dealing with a much better Iraqi counterpart than you'll find elsewhere.

But I have to tell you, overall, the numbers of Iraqi troops, the numbers of Iraqi police are growing. But the building blocks of these forces are still essentially militias or the insurgents. There really is no national coming together, certainly within the police. Absolutely fractured. Riddled with Iranian-backed militias.

And now America is putting Sunni insurgents in police uniforms to counterbalance that. You cannot walk away from this country and leave it to anything like the Iraqi security forces, and that's the sad reality.

America broke this place. This place is on its knees, yet America cannot walk away without enormous cost to itself and its own interests -- Soledad.

O'BRIEN: Michael Ware joining us tonight..."

does NOT have a specific timetable for Iraq (like how Obama does) when he said in the CNN transcript below "I don't think she favors setting a specific time table:"

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/09/cnr.01.html

CNN NEWSROOM

Iraq War Commander Fields Questions; Dangerous Weather Situation Brewing in Texas; Police on High Alert in San Francisco

Aired April 9, 2008 - 10:00 ET

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: I think it could be fair to say that it might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again. At such tremendous cost at our national security and to the men and women who wore the uniform of the military.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN, ANCHOR: So what is Clinton's plan of action? For answers on that one, we turned her foreign policy adviser P.J. Crowley in Washington. P.J., thanks for being with us.

P.J. Crowley in Washington. P.J. thanks for being with us.

CROWLEY: My pleasure.

KEILAR: And your candidate, Senator Clinton, she is in support of a withdrawal but let's talk details here. How fast? How many troops coming home.

CROWLEY: Well obviously the first question is how many troops will be there if she's elected president. It looks like between 140 and 150,000. she has pledge rapidly to end the war and to begin a responsible but rapid withdrawal of (inaudible)

CHETRY: What does that mean though - responsible but rapid. How fast as we talking?

CROWLEY: Well, I think, the first thing you ought to do is start, you know, start in a fundamentally different direction. She's going to bring most of those troops. She's going to shift some of those trips from Iraq to Afghanistan. She talked yesterday about the opportunity cost and the fact is in her minds that Afghanistan is far more closer linked to our long term security, the better up.

KEILAR: Yes, but P.J., is there any time table specifically that she's looking at. Are we talking months, are we talking years, are we talking continued presence in Iraq.

CROWLEY: Well, I think yesterday, she spoke about the fact that we're going to establish a strategic framework in our long-term relationship with Iraq and that should come and be fully debated in the Congress but we understand what it the long term nature of the relationship. It would be primarily political but put that in the table and sort that through. I think she probably distinguishes herself from Senator Obama while she does favor a rapid and responsible withdrawal from Iraq.

I don't think she favors setting a specific time table because as the general and the ambassador said yesterday, this is not going to be linear. So she's gong to shift for us but do so in a way that can relieve the stress on the military and shift our way of effort to Afghanistan.

KEILAR: But some critics might say that's just more of your hearing in these earrings with General Petraeus that their, isn't really - basically the things are kind of fuzzy that people aren't going to be committing to any time table even if there's a hypothetical situation of things are getting better in Iraq. Some critics might say that's some of the same thing. She's not talking about a specific time table.

CROWLEY: I think that's it. That's a realistic approach. Obviously she has favors, a dramatic and fundamental shift in course but how long that course takes, whether it's 16 months or something longer. I think she will have to access as we go through this.

Unlike the current situation, where we are now projecting a pause that will last through the remainder of the Bush administration. When she is president, she is going to dramatically shift course, again within s very sort period of time to bring troops home and then do that as rapidly but as responsibly as possible.

KEILAR: Are we talking about a full pull out of troops or are we talking about continued presence.

CROWLEY: Well, obviously, they are still going to be a long term interest that we have with Iraq, for example, to the extent that we have been successful in isolating Al Qaeda in Iraq. We can't afford to give them, you know, any ability to recover in Iraq like they have in Waziristan. So I think the nature of the long term, you know, it's a commitment that would have to be re-negotiated I renew.

KEILAR: But long term, P.J., we're talking about a military commitment. As massive military commitment of small military equipment, a small military commitment or are we talking about a monetary commitment here.

CROWLEY: I think perhaps a distinction to the Obama camp which, you know, I think Senator Obama has talked about, maybe have a military contingent to defend an embassy. I think we're going to have to access what the nature of the long term relationship is. We're going to keep forces in the Middle East. It is an area of strategic important that we'll have to be something that we assessors could go along. She's going to promulgate a dramatic change in course but obviously as president she is going to assess the long term nature and see what make sense for the United States over the long term.

KEILAR: All right. P.J., thanks so much for being with us. We appreciate it.

CROWLEY: Thank you.

KEILAR: P.J. Crowley, foreign policy adviser to Senator Hillary Clinton. And this reminder, we're talking this morning about the plan that each presidential hopeful has for Iraq. That's where we're beginning with, with P.J. right there...

tell him:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0806/05/sitroom.01.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

Interview with Barack Obama; Robert Gates Addresses Air Force Nuclear Weapons Mishap

Aired June 5, 2008 - 16:00 ET

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: "Is there nothing that they could show you or that General Petraeus could tell you that would move you from wanting to immediately begin removing U.S. troops?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESUMPTIVE NOMINEE: Well, you know, I would never say there's nothing or never or no way in which I'd change my mind. You know, obviously, I'm open to the facts and to reason. And there's no doubt that we've seen significant improvements in security on the ground in Iraq. And our troops and General Petraeus deserve enormous credit for that.

I have to look at this issue from a broader strategic perspective, though. And in terms of long-term strategy, I am absolutely convinced that the best thing we can do is to set a clear timetable, tell the Iraqis we are going to start pulling out, do it in a careful fashion, make sure...

CROWLEY: Now, when you say careful..."