Thanks Paul.....The Eagleburger portion of the program is about half way down the transcript.....It's actually quite interesting to see the words, and remember hearing how the words were said.... I did restrain myself in putting the bolding in....<g>
cnn.com
>>>>>>>>>>Snip
CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Has the United States made its case for going after Saddam Hussein right now? Well, in a minute we will ask the former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, who served in that capacity under President Bush's father. We'll ask him what he thinks of Colin Powell's U.N. presentation.
Later, a hawk and a dove fly in from Capitol Hill. They will debate about what should be done about Saddam Hussein.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
The White House says President Bush watched the last 45 minutes of Secretary of State's Colin Powell's presentation to the U.N. Security Council today. The first 45 he was meeting with the foreign head of state. White House spokesman said the president reviewed the presentation in advance and said little as Powell spoke. Not surprisingly, of course, our president thought our secretary of state did quite well.
First in the CROSSFIRE tonight to give us his impressions, Laurence Eagleburger, secretary of state under George Herbert Walker Bush.
CARLSON: Secretary Eagleburger, I just want to call you a quick clip from something the current Secretary of State said today at the United Nations. Here's Colin Powell.
LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER, FMR. SECRETARY OF STATE: It's back here?
CARLSON: Yes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POWELL: This body places itself in danger of irrelevance if it allows Iraq to continue to defy its will without responding effectively and immediately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Don't you think -- don't you think that's true? This, is a referendum on the U.N.? It's high had its eye poked by Iraq, done nothing about it, and don't you think it does to do something about it soon?
EAGLEBURGER: Yes, I think it's -- there's no question it proves its irrelevance. I think its done that in some other cases, like electing Lybia to head the human rights commission -- but, yes this is clearly something that the U.N. is going to step up to -- even if they were to decide that they were not going to agree with us, they have to at least step up and make the decision. None of this waffling that we've seen as a result of the speech today.
CARLSON: Well -- what, I mean, are you surprised, having watched the speech, that the rest of the world hasn't fallen in line behind the United States?
EAGLEBURGER: No, I'm not surprised by that.
Remind yourself, first of all, we all focus on Germany and France, for example. There are a lot of the other countries out there that have, in fact, supported us and as far as I'm concerned, Germany is totally irrelevant. They're not on the Security Council and the chancellor of Germany has opted out of the whole debate long since with his campaign against us when he was re-elected and the French are being French.
So I don't -- I don't know that I -- and let me just -- you know, it is also true that they've had this has gone on, particularly with the French before. They were not enthusiastic about Desert Storm, but in the end they came around. I won't fall over in a dead faint if they do this time.
BEGALA: Well, let me ask you about your own response. He also was speaking to the American public, average citizens, but also elites like you who have -- you have...
EAGLEBURGER: Elites?
BEGALA: I mean that in the best sense of the word, former secretary of state.
EAGLEBURGER: Thank you very much. My wife doesn't agree with you, but that's all right.
BEGALA: You have expressed skepticism in the past about a war in Iraq. Did the Secretary persuade you?
EAGLEBURGER: Well, I was persuaded before that. I don't want to have waste your time on much here, but my problems at the beginning of this whole thing was that I thought when Vice President Cheney, when he came on on this issue in the first place, with his chest thumping and talking about nuclear weapons and then saying we must do something right away and then nothing happened and indicating unilateralism right down the line, I thought it was the wrong way to come at this. We should've gone -- we should have started talking with our allies and the American people in a much different tone.
I think the administration is still paying for that earlier, I think, erroneous way to approach the problem. I was objecting to the way in which it was being dealt with at first. Once the president spoke to the U.N., in what I thought was one of the best speeches I've ever heard him give, I was convinced. I was convinced before that we were going to have to do something, but I was convinced then that the administration was on the right track in terms of how to deal with both the U.N. and the American people.
And I know that the polls right now are not good from that perspective. No. 1, I think they'll probably change if we go in, and No. 2, I think you have to expect it as this went on and on and once the president decided to go to the U.N., spend some time letting the inspectors go in. I think it was inevitable the polls were going to decrease.
BEGALA: But I do think you're right, as a former pollster, that the polls will go way up as soon as the bullets start flying. I mean, every body's going to support anything our commander in chief tells us to do once men and women are in harm's way.
What's, I think, more troubling for the president politically is, while he was very wise to send Secretary Powell, rather than go himself, is the president is suffering from a credibility crisis.
Here's what our CNN/Gallup poll asked people. They came to two conclusions on this matter. Forty-nine percent of us, almost half of all Americans believe that the president would knowingly present evidence that he knew was not accurate in order to build his case and 58 percent of us believe that the Bush administration would conceal evidence that goes again their position.
Now when his countrymen and women have that low an opinion of his credibility, isn't that difficult to lead us into war?
EAGLEBURGER: Sure it's a difficultly and I find it tragic because I do not believe for one minute that if that's the view of the American that they're right on either case. And I suspect if I pushed you you wouldn't agree with it either although you may not be prepared to admit it in public.
BEGALA: I say yes to one and no to the other, to tell you the truth.
EAGLEBURGER: But the president of the United States, this president doesn't lie to the American people. And the fact that Colin Powell got up there and made the speech he did, I admit that, given the questions about the president, that reinforces the president's position.
But I find it tragic when we have deteriorated in this country, and this applies to any president, when we have deteriorated in this country to have so little confidence our governors. I think it's too bad. Much too bad.
CARLSON: But, Secretary Eagleburger, to the extent the Democrats have a position at all, it appears to be that we would continue to contain Iraq. but the administration says that while the Clinton administration was attempting to contain Iraq, Iraq actually sent military officers into Afghanistan in the early '90s to train al Qaeda in chemical weapons making. Do you think the idea that Iraq can be contained is credible?
EAGLEBURGER: No, I don't. I will tell you if after the first war with Iraq the U.N. had been -- and that really means the United States -- had been very, very strict on the sanctions ever after that, I think we might have been able to contain them.
But this -- and I don't want to make this a political issue. I don't think the issue of war with Iraq should be a political issue, between the parties, I mean. But if we had held firm to those sanctions throughout that whole 10-year period it might be different now, but it's not and I don't think it can be contained.
CARLSON: At this point does it mean that do you think that we'll have to go to war?
EAGLEBURGER: Yes. I think, unless Saddam Hussein falls in a hole one day or somebody shoots him in the head, I personally think he is prepared to go down with his ship. I don't think he's going to give up. I don't think he's going to do what the U.N. demands.
And I don't know -- I don't know why that's deserving of applause but my point is I think we have to understand that he's not likely to compromise in any way that will mean anything. So either our bluff gets called or we do what we've said we're going to do even if we don't get total international support, including from the U.N.
CARLSON: OK. Former Secretary of State Larry Eagleburger, thank you very much for joining us.
EAGLEBURGER: My pleasure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>snip |
