Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Interview with Julianne Malveaux, Armstrong Williams
Aired September 19, 2002 - 13:37 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.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's stay focused on Iraq. Why Iraq, and why now? The questions have been raised by the Bush administration's eagerness to take on Saddam Hussein.
Two theories on this exist between syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux and Armstrong Williams, who is also a syndicated columnist and radio talk show host. Malveaux is author of "Unfinished Business: A Democrat and a Republican Take On the Ten Most Important Issues Women Face."
All right. I brought my whistle today, are you two ready to go?
JULIANNE MALVEAUX, AUTHOR, "UNFINISHED BUSINESS": Absolutely. Hi, Armstrong.
ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Hi, Julianne.
PHILLIPS: Oh, good. Nice to see a little peaceful beginning here.
OK. Let's talk about Saddam Hussein, and talk about who created this -- well, I guess some people would say "monster," others would say "butcher of Baghdad." We haven't heard that for a while. I first want to see where both of you stand -- Julianne, let's start with you. Saddam Hussein, how did he get to this point?
MALVEAUX: Well, we created this monster. We were in bed with him some time ago. In 1991, we also had the opportunity to do what we needed to do. We didn't do it then, and now we are coming back.
I quite frankly feel that Mr. Bush is attempting to vindicate his father. Saddam Hussein is a despot, but there are despots all over the globe, and if we go door-to-door knocking off despots, I mean, it that becomes our priority, what about our domestic issues? What about our domestic economy? I think he is vile, but I don't think he is the vilest despot on the planet.
PHILLIPS: So you are not for taking him out?
MALVEAUX: Not at all. I think that we -- I think we're making a mistake here. I think we are rushing. I think we ought to pay attention to what the U.N. is saying. I think at the very minimum, they said bring the inspectors on, so let's get the inspectors in there.
PHILLIPS: Armstrong, what do you think? WILLIAMS: Well, I remember during the Clinton administration when that administration was very eager to attack Saddam Hussein and they saw him as a very dangerous threat, and that was years ago, and many of the same people who are seriously against the president now was advocating in favor of then-President Clinton, including Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, minority whip in the House Gephardt, and other pundits around the country, so my -- the question I ask is, Why has everything changed now?
It seems to me that Saddam Hussein has gotten worse and has become an even more dangerous threat. So I think what it really boils down to is whether or not you trust the president of the United States and his advisers. We understand that we lost thousands of lives on 9/11, and we realize that if the president goes for what he believes to be a serious threat to this country, that many more lives could be lost if we don't act now.
Are the American people prepared to see more of their young men and women come back home in body bags? And I think -- I don't know if they are prepared for that or not, but I certainly trust the president of the United States. I think since 9/11, all -- all signals point to the fact that Saddam Hussein is trying to develop nuclear weaponry. It is easy to sit back and play Monday morning quarterback. But if American lives are lost on our soil again as a result of us not acting, what are people like Julianne Malveaux and Tom Daschle going to say?
I say trust the president, that is why he was elected, and this is not a time to second guess him.
PHILLIPS: Julianne...
MALVEAUX: That was a wonderful -- that was a wonderful campaign speech, but let's be clear about a couple of things here. You talk about are we prepared for people to come back in body bags. Well, you are mixing apples and oranges in your conversation. What happened on September 11 of 2001, reprehensible, despicable.
We have to go -- if we are looking for someone there, it is bin Laden, and we have said that time and time again.
We can't find bin Laden, so we are looking for Saddam? Let's be clear here. The president is taking advantage of the feelings that people have about September 11, and hoping for a transference there, but the majority of the American people are not prepared to see young men and women come home in body bags, are not prepared for a war that we lead. The majority of the American people want to have world approval for this. There has been poll after poll after poll. They want to support President Bush in this time of crisis, but people are not -- it is not about whether you trust the president's judgment. We are not lemmings, Armstrong. People who want peace, who want to make sure that we live in a peaceful world, really do not want to see us go to war right now.
(CROSSTALK) MALVEAUX: ... if you want to put me in a category with Tom Daschle, that is fine, but if you recall in the Clinton years, I did not take a position on Saddam being that dangerous. I think we got dangers all over the world, and the United States is not supposed to be the world's policeman.
PHILLIPS: Julianne, let's look at the track record of Saddam Hussein, though. I mean, we can go back to 1979 when he videotaped the execution of three members of his Congress. I mean, it started then, and then it went on to gassing the Kurds, and using weapons of mass destruction against Iranian troops, and then there was the accidental missile attack on the U.S.S. Stark that killed 37 people.
I mean the more time, it seems, he is allowed to stay in power, three presidents have allowed him to stay in power...
WILLIAMS: He becomes more destructive.
PHILLIPS: ... he has got more time to build weapons of mass destruction and make more mistakes -- more attacks, more -- moves, I guess you could say. Armstrong, am I making a point here?
WILLIAMS: You know, the point is -- look, Julianne, Lord knows, we don't want to see anymore Americans lose their lives, and we also know it is not members of Congress and members of the White House who sends their children off to die, it is just everyday Americans who make this sacrifice, but I think the point is whether or not -- since you are saying to me -- and I don't want to offend you -- but it seems to me that you are willing to trust Saddam Hussein at his word more than you are to trust the president of the United States.
MALVEAUX: That is offensive, Armstrong. That is profoundly offensive.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: ... since 1979, Saddam Hussein has shown that he is a very evil -- a very dangerous person, and he will stop at nothing and cost Americans more lives developing weapons of mass destruction. He used them on his own people, and I just think -- I don't think he is the worst that we have seen, I am certainly not comparing him to Hitler or Stalin, but I think he is very dangerous for this time, and he needs to be dealt with now instead of later.
MALVEAUX: He is vile, he is vile. He is awful. I am not nominating him for Boy Scout by any stretch of the imagination.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIPS: But Julianne, you are saying the timing here is suspect, you are saying...
(CROSSTALK)
MALVEAUX: I think the timing is extraordinarily suspect. I think that the U.N. needs to be in concurrence here. Why do we have a United Nations, and incidentally and parenthetically, we ought to be paying our dues, I think that if these were conflicts with anyone else, there is a United States congressman who I believe is on a site visit there as we speak, and we would like to hear from him before there is any voting done, but why are we rushing?
In any other case -- we would have India and Pakistan sitting down, sending Colin Powell over there to negotiate that.
Why aren't we sitting down with these people? We have been making offers now, we have been frustrated about their unwillingness for the inspectors. Now, they are saying that they are willing. You know I don't trust Saddam Hussein, Armstrong. I am offended by your saying that. But what I would say is that we have to trust the process. We have an international process.
WILLIAMS: We tried that, Julianne. We tried.
MALVEAUX: I think it is suspect -- I think it is suspect that late September, before an election, for Mr. Bush to be trying to start a war, especially when he knows with wartime, he does well. If the midterm elections are conducted on the terms of the domestic economy, he does poorly.
I think it is cynical for me to think this way...
WILLIAMS: That is disheartening to hear you say that.
(CROSSTALK)
MALVEAUX: ... but I have to be cynical...
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIPS: Let me throw one thing out. To Osama bin Laden, Clinton even says he regrets he didn't do anything about Osama bin Laden. Look what happened. There have been chances to deal with Saddam Hussein, and again, that hasn't been dealt with.
So the question is: do we sit back and wait on the political process or do we go forward and take action? When I say we, I mean the United States, of course. Armstrong and Julianne, final thoughts -- Armstrong, go ahead.
WILLIAMS: It is sad, there are so many conflicts that we are involved in around the world, but I think, as most Americans, I know I trust the president, I trust his advisers, and I think the president is absolutely correct. He is looking out for the best interest of the American people. The timing may be questionable. It is only because of people who think in a political context.
I think the president is doing what is best and what is necessary at this time, something that has not been done with Saddam Hussein since 1979. The time is now to take him out.
PHILLIPS: Julianne, real quickly. MALVEAUX: Let's let the United Nations act here. The most I will be prepared to do is allow the United Nations to put in some dates certain. If the inspections don't happen by a date certain, then let's deal with some conflict.
I don't think that we lose a lot if we wait a month or two months. I think that we do lose a lot if we precipitously go in there. Saddam Hussein is not suicidal, he is evil, and so I don't think that he is going to be attacking us understanding that we can retaliate.
I think we have to be very strategic here, and I think that if we assume global leadership, we have to act like global leaders. We require other countries to negotiate. Let's live by the same standard that we put on others. I say no war right now.
PHILLIPS: Julianne Malveaux, Armstrong Williams. You guys put up a tough fight. Always a pleasure.
MALVEAUX: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired September 19, 2002 - 13:37 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's stay focused on Iraq. Why Iraq, and why now? The questions have been raised by the Bush administration's eagerness to take on Saddam Hussein.
Two theories on this exist between syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux and Armstrong Williams, who is also a syndicated columnist and radio talk show host. Malveaux is author of "Unfinished Business: A Democrat and a Republican Take On the Ten Most Important Issues Women Face."
All right. I brought my whistle today, are you two ready to go?
JULIANNE MALVEAUX, AUTHOR, "UNFINISHED BUSINESS": Absolutely. Hi, Armstrong.
ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Hi, Julianne.
PHILLIPS: Oh, good. Nice to see a little peaceful beginning here.
OK. Let's talk about Saddam Hussein, and talk about who created this -- well, I guess some people would say "monster," others would say "butcher of Baghdad." We haven't heard that for a while. I first want to see where both of you stand -- Julianne, let's start with you. Saddam Hussein, how did he get to this point?
MALVEAUX: Well, we created this monster. We were in bed with him some time ago. In 1991, we also had the opportunity to do what we needed to do. We didn't do it then, and now we are coming back.
I quite frankly feel that Mr. Bush is attempting to vindicate his father. Saddam Hussein is a despot, but there are despots all over the globe, and if we go door-to-door knocking off despots, I mean, it that becomes our priority, what about our domestic issues? What about our domestic economy? I think he is vile, but I don't think he is the vilest despot on the planet.
PHILLIPS: So you are not for taking him out?
MALVEAUX: Not at all. I think that we -- I think we're making a mistake here. I think we are rushing. I think we ought to pay attention to what the U.N. is saying. I think at the very minimum, they said bring the inspectors on, so let's get the inspectors in there.
PHILLIPS: Armstrong, what do you think? WILLIAMS: Well, I remember during the Clinton administration when that administration was very eager to attack Saddam Hussein and they saw him as a very dangerous threat, and that was years ago, and many of the same people who are seriously against the president now was advocating in favor of then-President Clinton, including Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, minority whip in the House Gephardt, and other pundits around the country, so my -- the question I ask is, Why has everything changed now?
It seems to me that Saddam Hussein has gotten worse and has become an even more dangerous threat. So I think what it really boils down to is whether or not you trust the president of the United States and his advisers. We understand that we lost thousands of lives on 9/11, and we realize that if the president goes for what he believes to be a serious threat to this country, that many more lives could be lost if we don't act now.
Are the American people prepared to see more of their young men and women come back home in body bags? And I think -- I don't know if they are prepared for that or not, but I certainly trust the president of the United States. I think since 9/11, all -- all signals point to the fact that Saddam Hussein is trying to develop nuclear weaponry. It is easy to sit back and play Monday morning quarterback. But if American lives are lost on our soil again as a result of us not acting, what are people like Julianne Malveaux and Tom Daschle going to say?
I say trust the president, that is why he was elected, and this is not a time to second guess him.
PHILLIPS: Julianne...
MALVEAUX: That was a wonderful -- that was a wonderful campaign speech, but let's be clear about a couple of things here. You talk about are we prepared for people to come back in body bags. Well, you are mixing apples and oranges in your conversation. What happened on September 11 of 2001, reprehensible, despicable.
We have to go -- if we are looking for someone there, it is bin Laden, and we have said that time and time again.
We can't find bin Laden, so we are looking for Saddam? Let's be clear here. The president is taking advantage of the feelings that people have about September 11, and hoping for a transference there, but the majority of the American people are not prepared to see young men and women come home in body bags, are not prepared for a war that we lead. The majority of the American people want to have world approval for this. There has been poll after poll after poll. They want to support President Bush in this time of crisis, but people are not -- it is not about whether you trust the president's judgment. We are not lemmings, Armstrong. People who want peace, who want to make sure that we live in a peaceful world, really do not want to see us go to war right now.
(CROSSTALK) MALVEAUX: ... if you want to put me in a category with Tom Daschle, that is fine, but if you recall in the Clinton years, I did not take a position on Saddam being that dangerous. I think we got dangers all over the world, and the United States is not supposed to be the world's policeman.
PHILLIPS: Julianne, let's look at the track record of Saddam Hussein, though. I mean, we can go back to 1979 when he videotaped the execution of three members of his Congress. I mean, it started then, and then it went on to gassing the Kurds, and using weapons of mass destruction against Iranian troops, and then there was the accidental missile attack on the U.S.S. Stark that killed 37 people.
I mean the more time, it seems, he is allowed to stay in power, three presidents have allowed him to stay in power...
WILLIAMS: He becomes more destructive.
PHILLIPS: ... he has got more time to build weapons of mass destruction and make more mistakes -- more attacks, more -- moves, I guess you could say. Armstrong, am I making a point here?
WILLIAMS: You know, the point is -- look, Julianne, Lord knows, we don't want to see anymore Americans lose their lives, and we also know it is not members of Congress and members of the White House who sends their children off to die, it is just everyday Americans who make this sacrifice, but I think the point is whether or not -- since you are saying to me -- and I don't want to offend you -- but it seems to me that you are willing to trust Saddam Hussein at his word more than you are to trust the president of the United States.
MALVEAUX: That is offensive, Armstrong. That is profoundly offensive.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: ... since 1979, Saddam Hussein has shown that he is a very evil -- a very dangerous person, and he will stop at nothing and cost Americans more lives developing weapons of mass destruction. He used them on his own people, and I just think -- I don't think he is the worst that we have seen, I am certainly not comparing him to Hitler or Stalin, but I think he is very dangerous for this time, and he needs to be dealt with now instead of later.
MALVEAUX: He is vile, he is vile. He is awful. I am not nominating him for Boy Scout by any stretch of the imagination.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIPS: But Julianne, you are saying the timing here is suspect, you are saying...
(CROSSTALK)
MALVEAUX: I think the timing is extraordinarily suspect. I think that the U.N. needs to be in concurrence here. Why do we have a United Nations, and incidentally and parenthetically, we ought to be paying our dues, I think that if these were conflicts with anyone else, there is a United States congressman who I believe is on a site visit there as we speak, and we would like to hear from him before there is any voting done, but why are we rushing?
In any other case -- we would have India and Pakistan sitting down, sending Colin Powell over there to negotiate that.
Why aren't we sitting down with these people? We have been making offers now, we have been frustrated about their unwillingness for the inspectors. Now, they are saying that they are willing. You know I don't trust Saddam Hussein, Armstrong. I am offended by your saying that. But what I would say is that we have to trust the process. We have an international process.
WILLIAMS: We tried that, Julianne. We tried.
MALVEAUX: I think it is suspect -- I think it is suspect that late September, before an election, for Mr. Bush to be trying to start a war, especially when he knows with wartime, he does well. If the midterm elections are conducted on the terms of the domestic economy, he does poorly.
I think it is cynical for me to think this way...
WILLIAMS: That is disheartening to hear you say that.
(CROSSTALK)
MALVEAUX: ... but I have to be cynical...
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIPS: Let me throw one thing out. To Osama bin Laden, Clinton even says he regrets he didn't do anything about Osama bin Laden. Look what happened. There have been chances to deal with Saddam Hussein, and again, that hasn't been dealt with.
So the question is: do we sit back and wait on the political process or do we go forward and take action? When I say we, I mean the United States, of course. Armstrong and Julianne, final thoughts -- Armstrong, go ahead.
WILLIAMS: It is sad, there are so many conflicts that we are involved in around the world, but I think, as most Americans, I know I trust the president, I trust his advisers, and I think the president is absolutely correct. He is looking out for the best interest of the American people. The timing may be questionable. It is only because of people who think in a political context.
I think the president is doing what is best and what is necessary at this time, something that has not been done with Saddam Hussein since 1979. The time is now to take him out.
PHILLIPS: Julianne, real quickly. MALVEAUX: Let's let the United Nations act here. The most I will be prepared to do is allow the United Nations to put in some dates certain. If the inspections don't happen by a date certain, then let's deal with some conflict.
I don't think that we lose a lot if we wait a month or two months. I think that we do lose a lot if we precipitously go in there. Saddam Hussein is not suicidal, he is evil, and so I don't think that he is going to be attacking us understanding that we can retaliate.
I think we have to be very strategic here, and I think that if we assume global leadership, we have to act like global leaders. We require other countries to negotiate. Let's live by the same standard that we put on others. I say no war right now.
PHILLIPS: Julianne Malveaux, Armstrong Williams. You guys put up a tough fight. Always a pleasure.
MALVEAUX: Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
