Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

'New York Times' Reports Plans to Attack Iraq Are in the Works

Aired July 05, 2002 - 13:49   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: There's a report out today in the "New York Times" that indicates the Pentagon is far along in planning a war with Iraq. A classified document obtained by the "New York Times" hints at a massive U.S. invasion. Joining us now to talk more about the report, CNN military analyst, General Wesley Clark, the former NATO supreme commander. General, thanks for joining us.

This report speaks of tens of thousands of U.S. ground troops in addition to Marines and air support as well. Is this an indication that perhaps what has been called a concept just might be a bit further along?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: This is part of the process, Fredricka, of doing a plan. You first have to look at various courses of action. You have to then produce a concept of operations, and then once the concept of operations is approved, you then go back and do the formal operations plan with all of the annexes that handle all of the details.

So, what has been leaked is some sort or some version of a courses of action briefing, apparently at least one concept in there calling for about 250,000 American ground troops to do the job. But this is a serious planning effort. I think it was notable in the "New York Times" article that General Tommy Franks has met twice with President Bush to discuss the concept of the operation.

WHITFIELD: And so, what stage would that sort of meeting be in this concept? Would this mean that -- would this indicate what the next following steps are likely to be?

CLARK: This probably indicates that, since there's been a couple of concept meetings, that the president has generally blessed the concept for development of further planning.

But what's missing in the "New York Times" article -- and probably it's a good thing that it is missing -- are the real guts of the concept. What to do about...

WHITFIELD: Such as when?

CLARK: Well, first, what do about weapons of mass destruction. How do you keep the Iraqis from firing them, let's say, at our own troops or at Israel as we are preparing to attack. And how do you get Saddam Hussein? And what if the Iraqis were to go back into Baghdad and try to slug it out in an urban battle, some giant battle of Jenin, as we saw the Israelis trying to deal with.

And all of these are contingencies that the planners have to be able to deal with, and they probably are looking at these things in great detail. It's just not in this leaked document.

WHITFIELD: Well, one thing that report does indicate is that operation forces or covert CIA operatives would strike depots or perhaps laboratories or manufacturing plants of weapons of mass destruction, which would indicate that there's already some considerable knowledge about where those would be.

CLARK: We do have good information on where many of the weapons of mass destruction facilities are. You may recall that in December of 1998, the United States conducted a four-day bombing campaign called Operation Desert Fox, in which we struck a number of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction facilities. General Tony Zinni, then the Central Command commander, who's General Franks' predecessor, was the commander then who led this operation.

Presumably, we've got eyes on Iraq every day from a variety of sources. We are watching as he tries to hide this. But we also know that you never have perfect intelligence. And so, for every 100 strikes we make, there may be 10 percent, maybe 20 percent or more that we simply don't have targeted. And that's the dilemma.

WHITFIELD: Now, general, this report also indicates that there would have to be the cooperation from neighboring countries of Kuwait, of Qatar, as well as Turkey. But those countries are saying flat out that they have not been approached by U.S. authorities as of yet. So if these names are tossed around, wouldn't there have to have already been some sort of preliminary discussions of their cooperation in order to carry out this plan that would ultimately take out Saddam Hussein?

CLARK: There may well have been some preliminary discussions, Fredricka. But on the other hand, there wouldn't necessarily have to be. These countries certainly are not going to come forward and admit this and discuss it openly at this time. We know Vice President Cheney did make a trip over there.

I think what's notable in the plan is the omission of Saudi Arabia, and so I think it's significant here that the plan is being put together without the assumption of the use of the Saudi bases. And this indicates the enormous flexibility and capabilities of U.S. military power. It also takes the Saudis off the hook, so to speak, for having to consent to the planning and to the execution of the plan before its success is assured.

WHITFIELD: And quickly, general, in just a couple of seconds, do you think it's dangerous that we are even conversing about this?

CLARK: I think it cuts both ways, because the conversation does put more pressure on the Iraqis, and that's good.

WHITFIELD: All right, General Wesley Clark, thank you very much. Appreciate it. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com