Hello Everyone:

Here is the CNN Situation Room transcript from Tuesday, April 8 where Michael Ware called Obama's exchange with Gen. Petraeus and Ryan Crocker over Iraq "frighteningly disappointing" and where he gave his reasons why he believes that:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/08/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

Iraq Sits on Oil Money; Candidates Grill Petraeus and Crocker on Iraq War; Black Voters Under Pressure to Support Obama; American Airlines Cancels Hundreds of Flights

Aired April 8, 2008 - 17:00 ET

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, so there you have it, the questioning from Senator Barack Obama. He's going to have another round of questioning, as all the members of the Senate Foreign Relations will have later, a second round, we just heard from the Chairman Joe Biden. Factual questions by Senator Obama including the Iranian involvement, what's going on right now.

Let's get some analysis from our man up there on Capitol Hill, right now, Michael Ware, normally our man in Baghdad, but you're watching this hearing.

What did you think of that exchange, that Senator Obama had with Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus?

MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, like much of what I've witnessed today in the Armed Services Committee now in foreign relations, we're not learning anything new. And the questioning by any of the members of the committees is hardly probing. And it seems to be more about politicizing or political grandstanding for the members of the committee's benefit themselves. I mean, it seems like there's so much wasted opportunity here.

Now, obviously Senator Obama was trying to wrap things up and give it a sharper edge to try and pull all these fragments of the testimony that are very much fuzzy on the edges and say, well, look, you know, what is it that can get us out? What is it that can do this?

But I have to say, you know, his questions, like so many others, from so many other people, reflect what strikes me as fundamental misunderstandings about the nature of the fight in the Iraq or the nature of the current situation in Iraq or what it's going to take to hold this country together, even as messy and as ugly as it is right now.

So, I have to say, overall, including Senator Obama's exchange that I think you just witnessed, it's -- it's frighteningly disappointing.

BLITZER: Well, give us one example of a question you would have liked to have heard.

WARE: Well, for example, when we're talking about Iran. We all know they're there. No need to ask, you know, what are Iraqi intermediary are saying. I'm sure you've sent messages there. We all know that. It's been in the papers for goodness sakes. People rant about it on TV.

Let's find out what exactly are you doing to curb Iranian interference. Come on, come clean. What are you doing? How are you cutting out this tumor of Iranian influence?

Because at the end of the day, there is no real answer. But it's American policy remains light and fluffy on that, as well there are Persians, there are Arabs, the Iraqis are firmly nationalist, there's a long history but they are scarred by the Iran/Iraq war and let's cross our fingers and hope the divisions are enough to unite them. It hasn't helped with Lebanese Hezbollah and their Arabs.

It hasn't helped with Hamas and Palestine and their Arabs. There seems to be very little clarity on the main issue of this war which is America's competition for influence with Iran.

Now, why that's not being drilled home? I have no idea. And I think it reflects the nature of the body -- general body of knowledge held by members of the committee. I mean, I just see a lot of oxygen being wasted here. I wish I could jump in with my own boxing gloves and have a go at it myself.

BLITZER: All right, stand by..."

Michael Ware is very credible, objective, and he sees all of the important things that Gen. Clark sees when he talks about Iraq:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15196

Michael Ware called Obama's 16 month troop withdrawal plan from Iraq "ludicrous"

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 5, 2008 - 7:16am.

Here is where I documented Michael Ware saying "if you think American troops can withdraw next year, then someone is being delusional:"

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15132

TRANSCRIPT: Michael Ware on Iran's influence in Iraq & troop withdrawal reality!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 28, 2008 - 6:33am.

Right below is the CNN transcript of Obama's exchange with Gen. Petraeus and Ryan Crocker that Michael Ware was commenting on in the transcript above.

Please forward this information on so that more Democratic primary voters and superdelegates will know what Michael Ware is saying about Obama when he called Obama's exchange with Gen. Petraeus and Ryan Crocker "frighteningly disappointing." People definitely need to be made aware of this very important information BEFORE they vote!

Mitch Dworkin

http://www.securingamerica.com/

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.

http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!

--------------------

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/08/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

Iraq Sits on Oil Money; Candidates Grill Petraeus and Crocker on Iraq War; Black Voters Under Pressure to Support Obama; American Airlines Cancels Hundreds of Flights

Aired April 8, 2008 - 17:00 ET

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Senator Obama has just started his questioning, talking about al Qaeda in Iraq.

Let's listen in.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In that narrow military effort, we are successful.

Do we anticipate that there ever comes a time where al Qaeda in Iraq could not reconstitute itself?

PETRAEUS: Well, I think the question, Senator, is whether Iraqi security forces, over time, with much less help, could deal with their efforts to reconstitute. And I think it's a given...

OBAMA: That's my point.

PETRAEUS: I think it's -- I think it's a given that al Qaeda Iraq will try to reconstitute, just as any movement of that type does try to reconstitute.

OBAMA: I don't mean to --

PETRAEUS: And the question is whether...

OBAMA: -- I don't mean to interrupt you, but I just want to sharpen the question so that -- because I think you're getting right at my point here. I mean if one of our criteria for success is ensuring that al Qaeda doesn't have a base of operations in Iraq, I just want to harden a little bit the metrics by which we're measuring that. At what point do we say they cannot reconstitute themselves or are we saying that they're not going be particularly effective and the Iraqis themselves will be able to handle the situation?

PETRAEUS: I think it's really the latter, Senator, that, again, if you can keep chipping away at them, chipping away their leadership, chipping away at the resources, that comprehensive approach that I mentioned, that, over time -- and we are reaching that in some other areas already, as I mentioned.

We are drawing down very substantially in Anbar Province, a place that I think few people would have thought we'd be in the situation we're in at this point, now, say, 18 months ago. And, again, that's what we want to try to achieve in all of the different areas in which al Qaeda still has a presence.

OBAMA: OK. So I just want to be clear, if I'm understanding. We don't anticipate that there's never going to be some individual or group of individuals in Iraq that might have sympathies toward al Qaeda. Our goal is not to hunt down and eliminate every single trace, but rather to create a manageable situation where they're not posing a threat to Iraq or using it as a base to launch attacks outside of Iraq, is that accurate?

PETRAEUS: That is exactly right.

OBAMA: OK. And it's also fair to say that in terms of our success dealing with al Qaeda, that the Sunni awakening has been very important, as you testified. The Sons of Iraq and other tribal groups have allied themselves with us. There have been talks about integrating them into the central government.

However, it's been somewhat slow, somewhat frustrating. And my understanding, at least, is although there's been a promise of 20 to 30 percent of them being integrated into the Iraqi security forces, that has not yet been achieved. On the other hand, the Maliki government was very quick to say we're going to take another 10,000 Shias into the Iraqi security forces.

And I'm wondering, does that undermine confidence on the part of the Sunni tribal leaders that they are actually going to be treated fairly and they will be able to incorporate some of these young men of military age into the Iraqi security forces?

PETRAEUS: No, that is ongoing, Senator. As I mentioned, there's well over 20,000 who have already been integrated into either Iraqi security forces or other government positions. It doesn't just have to be the ISF, it can be other positions. And there are thousands of others who are working their way through a process, with the Iraqi National Committee for Reconciliation and the Ministry of Interior and so forth.

It hasn't been easy because in the beginning, certainly, there was understandable suspicion about groups that were predominantly Sunni Arab, although about 20 percent are actually Shia, as well. But the process is moving. It's not been easy, but it is actually ongoing. And it is generally, now, a relatively routine process, although it takes lots of nudging.

OBAMA: OK. Let me shift to Iran.

Just as -- and, Ambassador Crocker, if you want to address this, you can. Just as it's fair to say that we're not going to completely eliminate all traces of al Qaeda in Iraq, but we want to create a manageable situation. It's also true to say that we're not going to eliminate all influence of Iran in Iraq, correct?

That's not our goal. That can't be our definition of success, that Iran has no influence in Iraq.

So can you define more sharply what you think would be a legitimate or fair set of circumstances in the relationship between Iran and Iraq that would make us feel comfortable drawing down our troops?

CROCKER: Senator, as I said in my statement, we have no problem with a good, constructive relationship between Iran and Iraq. The problem is with the Iranian strategy of backing extremist militia groups and sending in weapons and munitions that are used against Iraqis and against our own forces.

OBAMA: Do we feel -- do we feel confident that the Iraqi government is directing these -- this aid to these special groups? Do we feel confident about that or do we think that they're just tacitly tolerating it? Do you have some sense of that?

CROCKER: There's no question in our minds that the Iranian government, in particular the Quds force, is -- this is a conscience, carefully worked out policy.

OBAMA: If that's the case, can you respond a little more fully to Senator Boxer's point. If, in fact, it is known -- and I'm assuming you've shared this information with the Maliki government -- that Iran's government has assisted in arming special groups that are doing harm to Iraqi security forces and undermining the Iraqi government, why is it that they're being welcomed the way they were?

CROCKER: Well, we don't need to, again, tell the prime minister that. He knows it...

OBAMA: OK.

CROCKER: ...and is trying to take some steps to tighten up significantly on the border. In terms of the Ahmadinejad visit, you know, Iran and Iraq are neighbors. A visit like that should be in the category of a normal relationship.

OBAMA: OK.

CROCKER: I think what we have seen since then, in terms of this -- this very clear spotlight focused on a malign Iranian influence puts that visit into a very different perspective for most Iraqis, including Iraqi Shia.

OBAMA: OK. Mr. Chairman, I know that I'm out of time, so let me just -- if I could have the indulgence of the committee for one minute.

SEN. JOE BIDEN (D), COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Everybody else has.

OBAMA: Thank you. I just want to close with a couple of key points.

Number one, we all have the greatest interest in seeing a successful resolution to Iraq. All of us do. And that, I think, has to be stated clearly in the record. I continue to believe that the original decision to go into Iraq was a massive strategic blunder, that the two problems that you've pointed out, al Qaeda in Iraq and increased Iranian influence in the region, are a direct result of that original decision. That's not a decision you gentlemen made. I won't lay it at your feet. You are cleaning up the mess afterwards. Undermining it is important as we debate this forward.

I also think that the surge has reduced violence and provided breathing room, but that breathing room has not been taken the way we would all like it to be taken. And I think what happened in Basra is an example of Shia versus Shia jockeying for power that underscores how complicated the political situation is there and how we still have to continue to work vigorously to resolve it.

I believe that we are more likely to resolve it -- in your own words, Ambassador -- if we are applying increased pressure in a measured way. I think that increased pressure in a measured way, in my mind -- and this is where we disagree -- includes a timetable for withdrawal. Nobody's asking for a precipitous withdrawal, but I do think that it has to be a measured but increased pressure and a diplomatic surge that includes Iran.

Because if Maliki can tolerate, as normal neighbor to neighbor relations in Iran, then we should be talking to them, as well. I do not believe we're going to be able to stabilize the situation without them.

Just the last point I will make. Our resources are finite. And this has been made -- this is a point that just was made by Senator Voinovich. It's been made by Senator Biden, Senator Lugar, Senator Hagel, there is a bipartisan consensus that we have finite resources. Our military is overstretched and the Pentagon has acknowledged it.

Our -- the amount of money that we are spending is hemorrhaging our budget and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, I think, is feeling a lot more secure as long as we're focused in Iraq and not on Afghanistan. When you have finite resources, you've got to define your goals tightly and modestly.

And so my final -- and I'll even pose this as a question, and you -- I won't -- you don't necessarily have to answer it. Maybe it's a rhetorical question.

If we were able to have the status quo in Iraq without U.S. troops, would that be a sufficient definition of success? It's obviously not perfect. There's still violence. There's still some traces of al Qaeda. Iran has influence, more than we would like.

But if we had the current status quo and yet our troops had been drawn down to 30,000, would we consider that a success? Would that meet our criteria, or would that not be good enough and we have to -- we'd have to devote even more resources to it?

CROCKER: Senator, I can't imagine the current status quo being sustainable with that kind of precipitous drawdown.

OBAMA: That wasn't the question. No, no, that wasn't the question. I'm not suggesting that we yank our troops out all the way. I'm trying to get to an end point. That's what all of us are trying to get to.

See, the problem I have is if the definition of success is so high, no traces of al Qaeda, no possibility of reconstitution, a highly effective Iraqi government, a Democratic multiethnic, multi- sectarian, functioning democracy, no Iranian influence, at least not the kind that we don't like, then that portends the possibility of us staying for 20 or 30 years.

If, on the other hand, our criteria is a messy, sloppy status quo but there's not, you know, huge outbreaks of violence, there's still corruption, but the country's struggling along, but it's in the a threat to its neighbors and it's not an al Qaeda base, that seems to me an achievable goal within a measurable time frame. And that, I think, is what everybody here on this committee's been trying to drive at and we haven't been able to get as clear of an answer as we would like.

CROCKER: And that's because, Senator, it is a -- I mean, don't like to sound like broken record.

OBAMA: I understand.

CROCKER: But this is hard, and this is complicated. I think that when Iraq gets to the point that it can carry forward its further development without a major commitment of U.S. forces, with still a lot of problems out there, but where they and we would have a fair certitude that, again, they can drive it forward themselves, without significant danger of having the whole thing slip away from them again, then clearly our profile, our presence, diminishes markedly. But that's not where we are now.

OBAMA: Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.

BIDEN: Thank you. On a second round we'll ask you to go back and answer the question that you were asked, but haven't answered. We'll do it on a second round...