Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown

Bush Gives Saddam One Last Chance to Avert a War; Alert Level Raised to Orange

Aired March 17, 2003 - 22:00   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.


AARON BROWN, HOST: And good evening again, everyone. So here we are. In a matter of days, barring a miracle -- and that's what we're left with tonight, miracles -- the United States will go to war.
The debating ends and the fighting begins. The diplomatic maneuvering ends and the maneuvering of planes and troops and tanks begins. Whatever follows after all that will leave rubble or craters or bodies behind.

Opinion and theory are over. What Julius Caesar said tens of centuries ago applies today or very soon will: The dye is cast. Notice that that great Roman general didn't talk about passing a point of no return. Caesar new what war was really like. That's why he used a gambler's turn of phrase.

Everything else has changed between his time and ours, but that hasn't. War is still a gamble, a terrible gamble. You can win a war and still lose. Lose the lives of good young men and women, for one.

So as Caesar said, the dye has been cast. And tonight we look at how it came to be and where we're headed in the next few days. We begin, of course, at the White House. And our senior White House correspondent, John King, starts The Whip off. John, a headline from you tonight.

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, the president told the American people and the Iraqi people tonight "The tyrant will soon be gone." The clock is ticking. An ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to leave the country by Wednesday night or face war. No one in the Bush White House believes Saddam will accept.

BROWN: John, thank you.

Two shoes dropped tonight. The president dropped one, and then the threat level was raised right after the president's speech. Jeanne Meserve covering that for us. Jeanne, a headline.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Possible multiple terrorist attacks abroad and at home that could involve chemical, biological or radiological weapons. That's the forecast tonight from Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, as the nation's threat alert status moves up to Orange -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jeanne, thank you. To the U.N. now, where hope for a diplomatic solution has finally collapsed. Richard Roth of course is there for us. Richard, your headline tonight.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SR. U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, in the end, nobody had to show their cards at the Security Council. The U.S. and Britain picked up their decks and left, confident they have authorization for a military assault already on the books. But not without a shot at France, which said, don't blame us, you couldn't find the votes -- Aaron.

BROWN: Richard, thank you.

And the Pentagon next. And a troubling reminder of one threat U.S. troops may -- we underscore "may" -- be facing. Jamie McIntyre there for us. Jamie, a headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Republican Guard is dispersing, according to U.S. intelligence, taking up defensive positions. President Bush urged them tonight not to fight for a dying regime and to permit the peaceful entry of U.S. troops. He said they would be given clear instructions on how to surrender. But the question is, will they fold or fight?

BROWN: Jamie, thank you. Back to you and the rest shortly.

Also coming up tonight, an important night. We've tried to get as many voices into the mix as possible. We'll talk diplomacy with Robin Wright of the "L.A. Times." Former presidential adviser David Gergen joins us on the message the president delivered tonight. Also, retired General Wesley Clark on the military strategy for the days ahead.

And Some other voices we ought not leave out ever in moments like this, voices from the troops who are actually putting their young lives on the line. A special whip from the front lines.

And your voice, too. A sampling of opinions from across the country. Early reaction to the president's words tonight. All of that in the hour ahead. And it is a busy hour to come.

And we begin at the White House. There's no overestimating the effect that words, the president's words can have. We've been watching this military buildup for months, following the diplomatic maneuvering even longer. We've seen where this has been going, known where the president stands. But somehow hearing him say the words tonight changed everything.

Tonight, the president made it clear either Saddam Hussein goes or we go to war. It cannot get clearer than that. And though we'll devote a good deal of the program to the implications and complications of all of it, here is where we begin, at the White House, where the words were spoken, and John King.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): The president gave Saddam Hussein one last chance to avert a war.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing.

KING: That ultimatum gives Saddam until Wednesday night. Officials say war could begin any time after the deadline lapses and that Mr. Bush would deliver an Oval Office address after ordering troops into combat. The speech included a hopeful message to the Iraqi people.

BUSH: We will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.

KING: And this blunt warning to the Iraqi military.

BUSH: Your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone.

KING: The United States, with more than 225,000 troops already deployed, will carry the overwhelming load in any war. But British troops also are on hand, and Australia says it will offer military assistance. Spain, Italy and Portugal back the U.S. position, as do Japan, Poland, Bulgaria and most of the new Easter European democracies that were once part of the Soviet block.

But France, Germany, Russia and China are the major powers opposed to war in Iraq. Mexico refused to back the White House. And Canada said Monday its troops would have no part in any war.

BUSH: These governments share our assessment of the danger but not our resolve to meet it.

KING: The president warned the prospect of war in Iraq raised the likelihood of terrorist attacks here at home and said the government is taking immediate measures to beef up airport and port security. Mr. Bush gave leading members of Congress a speech preview. And sources tell CNN the White House is poised to seek between $75 billion and $100 billion in emergency spending to pay for the war and its immediate aftermath.

Not long before the speech, one senior aide described the president as well aware of the gravity of the moment, but comfortable with the course he is on.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: And officials say they clock on that ultimatum began ticking at the beginning of the president's speech. So now fewer than 46 hours for Saddam Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq and avert a war. No one at the Bush White House expects that to happen.

Many believe that perhaps even as early as Wednesday, but certainly by the end of this week, Mr. Bush will be in the Oval Office announcing that war is at hand. As he put it in a message to the Iraqi people, "The day of your liberation is near" -- Aaron.

BROWN: All right. John, let's talk about the next 24 hours. Are there phone calls to make? Is there business to be done by the president at this point?

KING: There is a great deal of business to be done. Number one, Turkey today signaled its willingness suddenly to finally let U.S. troops come ashore. The president will work on that diplomacy.

He will reach out to members of what he calls the coalition of the willing. There was one call today to the Australian prime minister. Look for additional calls on that front.

He will also meet with his military planners and his complete national security team to fine tune any war plans. And of course they will wait to hear from Saddam Hussein. But they think they already know the answer.

BROWN: Is there any feeling at the White House that they could have done anything differently to have changed the outcome? The ultimate outcome or the outcome at the U.N.?

KING: Well, some say privately the president being so open about the goal of regime change is one of the reasons the debate at the United Nations became so polarized. But they also say that is what the president believes, and he was not going to change what he believes. So, so be it.

That the president is for regime change, and if that affected the French, say at the Security Council, or Russia at the Security Council, so be it. That was the president's position. They continue to say here they are struck by the fact that France could have voted for Resolution 1441, which says full and immediate disarmament or serious consequences, and yet now refuse to address those serious consequences.

Those will be riffs to be discussed in the days and weeks, perhaps even months and years ahead. There are some in this administration who believed all along this was the moment we would end up at, and here we are.

BROWN: We are indeed, John. Thank you. Senior White House correspondent John King with us at the top tonight.

We think our U.N. correspondent was on to something last night when he talked about a sense of finality in the air. In the wake of the last chance given at the summit in the Azores, few expected any positions to change. Some said the Russians might find way to abstain, others hoped the French, having made their point and seeing where things were going, would find a graceful way to back down.

But in the end, and even before the day was out, indeed before noon time, it became clear nothing would change in the sense of finality. Last night became reality today. Here's CNN's Richard Roth.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROTH (voice-over): Monday morning, the U.S. flag going up in front of the United Nations. Two hours later, a U.S.-U.K. Iraq resolution was pulled down from judgment by the Security Council.

JOHN NEGROPONTE, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: We believe that the vote would have been close. We regret that in the face of an explicit threat to veto by a permanent member, the vote counting became a secondary consideration.

ROTH: Despite enormous pressure, the U.S. was unable to obtain nine votes in favor and blamed France for its veto threat.

JEREMY GREENSTOCK, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: That country rejected our proposed compromise before even the Iraqi government itself.

JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIERE, FRENCH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: They had realized that the majority in the Council is against and a oppose a resolution authorizing the use of force. This is a position of the huge majority in the Council.

ROTH: Despite a looming military attack, France, Russia and Germany are calling for a meeting of foreign ministers on Wednesday to consider, as scheduled, remaining priorities for U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq.

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I think the time for diplomacy has passed. I think that's pretty clear.

GUNTER PLEUGER, GERMAN AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: The Chinese ambassador once said, if you have one percent chance of keeping the peace, you should make 100 percent effort to achieve this.

ROTH: But many diplomats were disappointed the deadlock could not be broken.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When the Council is divided like the way it is now, it's a sad moment for the U.N. and our vision of the world.

ROTH: With the U.S. closing the diplomatic window, the U.N. took action, ordering the pullout of some 330 people, including weapons inspectors and humanitarian aide staff. Secretary General Kofi Annan, frustrated the U.N. Security Council powers couldn't work out differences, believes U.S. military action now without Council approval runs counter to international law, thus damaging the U.N.

KOFI ANNAN, U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL: If the action is to take place without the support of the Council, its legitimacy will be questioned and the support for it will be diminished.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROTH: U.N. officials say they believe the organization will still be called upon to be as, one person put it, the cleanup crew, the mop up crew in post-war reconstruction and reconciliation of Iraq. President Bush tonight, Aaron, said he believes in the mission of the United Nations, though he heavily criticized members of the Security Council for not living up to their responsibilities -- Aaron.

BROWN: Richard, thank you for your work tonight and your work over the last months. It's been a long haul for you. We appreciate it. Richard Roth at the U.N.

It's no secret by now that the efforts at the Security Council were aimed in large part at providing a degree of political cover for Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair. It hasn't gone that well so far. Opposition remains strong, especially so in his own labor party.

Today, the prime minister's leader in the parliament resigned from the cabinet. Robin Cook getting a standing ovation from (UNINTELLIGIBLE) when he did. A vote on the war expected shortly, and the prime minister should win that vote, but only because of the conservative party, which many of the 160 of his own labor MPs are prepared to vote no.

Here to help sort through some of what went on tonight, Robin Wright, who is the chief diplomatic correspondent for the "Los Angeles Times." She's with us from Washington. And from Boston tonight, David Gergen, who has been on the inside, all the way back to the Nixon administration. Currently, he's a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. It's good to see both of you.

David, let me start with you tonight. We talked some months back about the president having failed to close the deal with Americans. Do you think there was a point in the last, I don't know, month or six weeks when he found the right tone, the right words, and did close the deal?

DAVID GERGEN, FMR. WHITE HOUSE ADVISER: I don't think so. I think he's got -- I think he's closed the deal with the troops. And you're going to see enormous support in this country for the troops and prayers that they will come home safely and that they will be successful. I think he's got the majority of the country behind him, but there is a substantial body that is perhaps more skeptical today than it was three months ago.

BROWN: Why is that?

GERGEN: Well, I think those people had hoped that we would do this with the United Nations. When you ask people -- and Robin Wright's "Los Angeles times" polls -- do you want to do this, do you want to go after Iraq, the support for doing it with U.N. support has always been stronger than the support for doing it without the U.N.

So tonight, I think that the failure, the train wreck at the United Nations that occurred today, will be dispiriting to many. And I think that, while they will certainly support the troops and they will salute the president, they will come into this with serious misgivings. The majority of Americans will do it wholeheartedly. I think the majority of Americans will support him. I think many have questions, but I think there's a substantial body of people who also have serious misgivings. BROWN: Robin, if you had to pick let's say two or three moments, where it was clear there was either a diplomatic failure or a diplomatic miscalculation in all of this, what would they be?

ROBIN WRIGHT, CHIEF DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": Well the administration has really known for a full week that it was not going to get the vote at the United Nations. The moment that Mexican President Vincente Fox went under the surgeon's knife last Wednesday, the United States knew they didn't have his vote, and then counted on Mexico as the ninth and vital vote, which was the core of the strategy. Get the nine votes and then turn to the veto- wielding members of the United Nations and try to squeeze them into not going against the majority. That was one moment.

Clearly, the French veto. There was always a basic philosophical difference about how you approach the issue of disarmament between the United States and France. The United States thought that it would use the threat of force and the inspections to show that Saddam was not complying.

France always looked at inspections as a way to gradually disarm Saddam under the threat of force, kind of indefinitely in the background. And, finally, I think the win was taken out of the diplomatic balloon when Turkey decided or failed to get the vote of its parliament to provide bases for American troops that, when it was widely expected, it was a signal that the United States strategy was not invincible and was, in fact, quite vulnerable.

BROWN: Let me just pick at one of those. The failure to get our two neighbors, the Canadians and Mexicans, to sign on to this, why not? Why did that not work for the president? The president had a warm relationship with President Fox of Mexico.

WRIGHT: Well, there were issues actually between the two men. They initially had a very warm relationship, but there were some serious issues on immigration, particularly. And Chile was probably much more important than Canada; Chile being one of the members of the Security Council. And, of course, it has a strong trade relationship with the United States, too.

But, again, it had not been finalized. And both countries were looking for signs and they hadn't seen them in the run up to this debate of the U.S. commitment to both countries.

BROWN: David, let me go to you for the last word here. Maybe this is a check of how cynical you are or are not. Do you think this was preordained? Do you think that going back, oh, three or four months, the people in the White House said, this is how it's going to go, and eventually in March, mid March, we're going to launch an invasion?

GERGEN: I think it was preordained. But I think one must be careful about how cynical one gets. There were many people in the White House who believed that Saddam Hussein would never pay any attention to the inspectors and therefore that it was going to result in military action and they needed to be prepared for that. There were also others in the White House, of course, who believed -- and the administration believed -- that it was not important to go to the U.N. anyway. That it was always going to be messy there.

Vice President Cheney took that view very publicly. You know, got out in front of the administration by saying, let's not go there. So I think that the preparations for war have been underway for a year. I think that people have been moving material into place.

I think we've already taken out a lot of his anti-aircraft capacity in the south of Iraq, even before this. And I think we've got special forces on the ground in Iraq tonight, and we've had them there. So I think this has been -- I think the Bush administration is fully prepared and expected to go to war, but they did that with the expectation that he would never disarm and he would never leave and therefore.

So that -- can you say whether they've been committed to war right from the beginning? Yes, I think they have been. And I think the problem they're running into with many nations is that it was that sense of, this is inevitable, we are doing this regardless whether you like it or not. It's just a matter of time. And now that we've got our troops there, we have to do it now.

That is why many nations feel they've been bullied on this. And we find that, as we go forward, Americans are going to support the troops, but we're going to have a lot of other nations that are going to be opposing us as we go forward.

BROWN: David, Robin, it's always good to talk to both of you. Thanks for coming in tonight. Thank you very much.

GERGEN: Thank you.

BROWN: On we go. Not more than a minute or two after the president stopped talking, the other shoe dropped, as we said. This being the season for dropping shoes, it wasn't entirely unsuspected. The Department of Homeland Security raised the alert level from Yellow to Orange, unwelcome yes, unsettling, absolutely.

Unexpected? Well, it is the new normal. Here's CNN's Jeanne Meserve.

MESERVE: Aaron, sources tell CNN the intelligence community believe that there is a "near certainty of al Qaeda attack" and that the group is in the final stages of planning a large-scale terrorist attack overseas. The secretary of homeland security says their planning includes the use of chemical, biological and/or radiological weapons, and that there is a risk of multiple attacks abroad and at home.

Homeland security sources say in this country there is particular concern about buildings, subways and enclosed areas, as well as critical infrastructure. And that an attack would likely try to inflict mass casualties, economic hardship, psychological damage and have symbolic value. In addition to al Qaeda, there is fear of retaliatory action by Iraqi agents who specialize in assassination, kidnappings and bombings, and by others who sympathize with Iraq. The intelligence comes from a large volume of reporting, some of it from highly reliable sources. In a statement, Secretary Ridge notes that in recent months there have been reports of suspicion activities in and around military facilities, ports, waterways, bridges, dams, generating facilities and symbolic targets.

In response, he is launching Operation Liberty Shield to bolster public health preparedness, as well as increased security at the borders, in the transportation sector, and around critical infrastructure. Among the specific steps being taken, asylum applicants from nations where al Qaeda, al Qaeda sympathizers and other terrorist groups are known to have operated will be detained for the duration of their processing.

New temporary flight restrictions have been put in place over certain cities, including Washington and New York City. National emergency response teams are being pre-positioned to enable quick deployment anywhere in the country. Governors are being asked to deploy National Guard or additional police forces at critical locations. In addition, Iraqi-born individuals in the U.S. may be invited to participate in voluntary interviews to elicit useful information.

It was widely anticipated that the nation would move up to Orange when hostilities approached, but the information shared tonight shocked some state officials and made it clear this Orange alert will be more intense than the two that preceded it -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jeanne, thank you. It didn't just shock state officials. I think the tone of it all was shocking. Thank you for your work tonight.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we go off to the deserts of Kuwait and hear from some of the soldiers and the Marines as they get ready for their D-Day. We'll also talk about last-minute military moves and strategies with retired General Wesley Clark.

And later, how Americans are reacting to the president's speech tonight in this American moment. This is NEWSNIGHT from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: If war comes -- and does anyone really doubt that it will -- it will be carried out by a smaller force, considerably smaller than the first Gulf War, and it will be executed differently. The mission, of course, isn't different. This isn't about Kuwait, it's about Baghdad.

But the weapons are different. There are another generation of smart bombs and missiles. For the planners, these are the last hours of planning. Here's CNN's Jamie McIntyre from the Pentagon.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) MCINTYRE (voice-over): As U.S. troops prepare to fight in the face of chemical or biological attack, the United States is citing fresh intelligence that even as Saddam Hussein is insisting he has no band weapons, he has issued chemical shells to at least one Republican Guard unit. While the intelligence falls short of hard proof, one U.S. official told CNN they clearly have given some chemical capability to some Iraqi forces.

Other U.S. officials downplayed the intelligence, calling it ambiguous and inconclusive. But nevertheless, said there were increased reasons to be concerned Saddam Hussein might use chemical weapons against U.S. troops or his own people. Meanwhile, Pentagon sources say all is ready for an invasion.

Two U.S. aircraft carriers are likely to remain in the Mediterranean Sea because the U.S. expects to have permission to fly around Israel and over Jordan to hit targets in the north. More than 1,000 tomahawk cruise missiles are poised on more than 30 ships in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. And the 101st airborne division in Kuwait now has all of its battle gear and is ready to go, sources say.

Iraq could trigger war sooner by using chemical or biological weapons, attacking U.S. forces or neighboring countries, torching oilfields or creating some other ecological disaster, or taking high- profile hostages. Otherwise, the military will execute the war plan as soon as it considers conditions favorable. Sandstorms, for instance, could delay a war by a day or two, sources say. But the moon, which is now full, will not. Even though a full moon can make planes and paratroopers easier to see, the U.S. does not want to wait until next month for the total darkness of a new moon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE : And tonight, Aaron, Pentagon officials say Iraq's Republican Guard, some of Saddam Hussein's best troops, are dispersing around Baghdad in what appears to be a defensive move aimed at surviving the shock and awe of a U.S. air campaign. Tonight, President Bush urged those troops to allow the peaceful entry of U.S. forces and said they'd be given instructions on how to surrender. His words, "If war comes, do not fight for a dying regime" -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. We'll be seeing lots of him I suspect in the days ahead.

We'll also be seeing lots of General Wesley Clark. General Clark is here with us tonight, former Supreme NATO Commander. One of the great titles anyone could possibly have in life.

Let's talk a little bit about -- I was reading the other day about -- I guess this would be strategy -- that the generals really would have liked more troops. And the civilian leadership, the secretary of defense, actually saw a war fought differently. First talk about that, and then answer the question, is it appropriate for the civilian leadership to determine that sort of tactic.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, FMR. NATO SUPREME COMMANDER (RET.): Well I think there was an ongoing struggle that had to do with the so-called transformation of armed forces. Namely, with precision air power, you could do more without these big heavy divisions that are so expensive and so difficult to deploy.

You could have a smaller more agile force. You could make up your mind to go and go much more quickly. And Afghanistan is seen by many as a model of this.

So all during the planning phase in Iraq, according to the leaked reports and this sort of back channel that you get, this battle was going on inside the Pentagon. The airmen, office of the secretary of defense and others were saying, why can't you do it with 75,000 troops, two or three divisions? Why do you need -- you know in Desert Storm you had six U.S. Army divisions, a British division, a French division, the Egyptians and the Syrians. Do it with less, you've got all these great airplanes now.

The Army is coming back and saying, yes, but after the war is over and during a war you have all of these prisoners. So that was the debate. Now what's happened on this is very interesting. They actually deployed or gave the announcement of deployment of all these heavy forces.

So you think, ah-ha, the old heavy guys won. But it looks like the war is going to start with at least three of the big Army divisions not there: the first armored, the first (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and the fourth infantry.

BROWN: Is it possible to tell simply by looking at which units are where how this thing will -- at least how the early parts will play out?

CLARK: Well, in a way it is. I mean we know the third infantry division is probably going to race up along the Euphrates and at some point spring across the Euphrates and head to Baghdad. We know the 101st with the helicopters is going to leap ahead to a series of fire basis.

How far it goes, whether it circles around to north of Baghdad and actually tries to occupy the oilfields around Kirkuk or Mosel (ph), we don't know that. And the Marines and the British force, they're probably going to be on the right flank and they're going to go up and they're going to cross the Euphrates early and stay between the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and the Euphrates on up to Baghdad. That's what it looks like.

BROWN: Do you think that this idea that the Iraqis will just kind of roll over and play dead and this whole thing will be over in a week, 10 days, is almost political wishful thinking or is it possible?

CLARK: I think it is possible. But in military planning, you can't bet on the possibility. You have to bet on the hard realities of what's there.

BROWN: Do you bet on the worst possibility? CLARK: Moderate, moderate worst case assumptions of resistance. In other words, we don't believe he has a nuclear weapon. And it's tough to use chemical and biological weapons. He's not going to be able to use that stuff against us day after day after day.

But you have to assume that some of the Republican Guard forces might fight. You can't assume they're all going to surrender. It would be wonderful if they do, but it's a not a prudent military planning assumption.

BROWN: General -- I'll get it right this time -- General Clark -- I suspect we are going to have a lot of time in the days ahead to talk about this stuff. Thank you, sir.

CLARK: Look forward to it, Aaron. Thanks.

BROWN: Same to you, sir. Thank you.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT for Monday from Washington: The U.N. inspectors in Iraq finish up, head for the exits. Just about everybody who can get out is getting out -- that and more as we continue.

Around that world, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Two images are playing off against each other in the Gulf region tonight: two traffic jams representing the yin and yang of wartime, a rush to get military men into the region and a rush to get civilians out. And today in Iraq, U.N. inspectors are packing up and moving out.

Here's CNN's Nic Robertson.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A friendly wave from U.N. inspectors as they left for work, maybe suspecting, but not knowing this was to be their last day of work in Iraq, visiting six sites, including the Al Karama Company, where they searched storage facilities containing computer boxes, a typical day, good access, but no breakthroughs.

Outside the Al Taji barracks, where U.N. experts were overseeing the destruction of two more Al Samoud 2 missiles, heavy military guns were being trucked away, war preparations, it seems, well under way, and not just the military: in Baghdad's food markets, residents stocking up on food. "If there is war, we are ready for it," says this shopper. "And if is there peace, we'll be ready for that as well."

Flashlights popular, too, many remembering the Gulf War, when electricity was cut -- political reaction as war closes in on Iraq acerbic. Foreign Minister Naji Sabri called President Bush a war- monger and accused U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan of violating U.N. resolutions in the U.N. Charter by withdrawing weapons inspector.

NAJI SABRI, IRAQI FOREIGN MINISTER: This means that the U.N. secretary-general has abandoned his sworn responsibility in maintaining peace and security in the world.

ROBERTSON: In total, 134 U.N. weapons inspection staff, including 56 inspectors, expect to fly out of Baghdad early Tuesday morning, bringing to an end 108 days of inspections and apparently any hopes for peace.

Nic Robertson, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we'll talk with columnist Frank Rich about the Bush administration's handling of the situation in Iraq -- that and more as we continue tonight from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: And still ahead tonight: on the front lines, U.S. troops preparing for what now seems an almost certain war.

A short break first. This is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: I'm joined from New York tonight by a very good writer, indeed, a very, very good writer, who for years was the drama critic for "The New York Times" is now an associate editor and columnist there. Frank Rich still reviews drama, though, this time, it's real- life drama, cultural, political, philosophical. And the war to come is a drama in all of those ways, and others, too.

Mr. Rich, it's nice to see you again.

FRANK RICH, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Good to see you.

BROWN: Sir, let me give you an easy one to start and we'll see where it goes.

What scares you tonight?

RICH: What scares me tonight, as I suspect scares many Americans, is simply the unknown.

We had a president who spoke to us tonight with absolute certitude about what had to be done and what was coming. But the truth is, we don't know what was coming. As someone in my household said this evening after the president's speech, are we going to be attacked in New York? For those of us who live here and have seen the effect from the tragedy of terrorism, we don't take this engagement lightly.

BROWN: You don't necessarily think, then, that the end result of this will make New York and Washington and Cleveland and Philadelphia and Olympia, Washington, safer places?

RICH: We don't know. I don't believe anybody knows. I think it's an incredible roll of the dice, the biggest roll of the dice by an American president that I've certainly seen in my lifetime. And I'm old enough, more or less, to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis.

BROWN: You think more so than the Cuban Missile Crisis?

RICH: The Cuban Missile Crisis as -- I was a kid at the time, but I did live in Washington, D.C. It was very vivid to me. And, of course, I've read about it since.

We knew who the enemy was. We knew what the weapons he had were. We knew all the players. It's quite different from going against the Soviet Union to going against a number of shadowy enemies, dispersed throughout a region that is very treacherous, one of whom we know, Saddam Hussein, although we don't even know for sure what weapons he has. The accounts of that have changed so much over the past few months. But we don't know what is going to come out of the closet in the dead of night, set off by the chain of events that could befall us with this impending war.

There's, of course, another scenario, which is obviously the one the Bush administration believes, which is, it will be like the Cuban Missile Crisis. It will be over in a week and 10 days, as that was. The enemy will be this single enemy who will back down. And the meek will inherit the Earth. I sure as hell hope they're right.

BROWN: Look, you're a smart guy. And no politician can stand up before the American people in a moment like this and say: Look, here's what I hope is going to happen, but, actually, it may not work out that way.

Presidents have to stand up there and say with certainty -- I think you said certitude -- with certitude that this is how it will play out. Your concern -- it sounds to me like you're concerned that we're rattling the cages of these terrorists and they're going to come out and get us. Is that it?

RICH: Well, it's a fear. I don't know what's going to happen anymore than anyone else.

BROWN: Of course.

RICH: I want to believe the government knows more than I do. But, certainly, it's not a secret that -- indeed, "The New York Times" and other places have been reporting it -- that this is looked at as an opportunity buy other people who want to get us, including the remnants -- let's hope they're very few remnants -- of what came after us on September 11.

BROWN: But that same "New York Times," having gone through all of that reasoning, ultimately endorsed the underlying proposition, maybe not exactly the way the president pulled it off at the U.N., but the underlying proposition that, if force was required, force should be used. RICH: Right.

The question there, is force of this sort required to get rid of this guy? I'm willing to accept the president's arguments. And, certainly, I have no doubt that the American military can take him out, or certainly bring about regime change and we hope disarmament in Iraq. I'm not convinced that it had to be done on this calendar, I have to say.

But there's no point in even debating that now. The calendar has been set. It's been set, really, for some time. We sort of always knew this was going to happen in March. And so we have to hope and pray for the best.

BROWN: I think we're all, Frank, hoping and praying for the best tonight. It's such a difficult night, in so many different ways. It's good to see you.

RICH: Nice to see you.

BROWN: Thanks for joining us.

RICH: Thank you.

BROWN: Frank Rich, a columnist for "The New York Times," a wonderful and talented columnist for "The New York Times."

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT from Washington: From the front lines, we'll see how the troops are feeling tonight after the president's speech.

We'll take a short break first. From Washington tonight, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: I thought it crucial tonight to get a sense of how the troops are feeling. So a second whiff, if you will, from our reporters who have joined up with them.

Ryan Chilcote is with the 101st Airborne. Alessio Vinci is with some of the Marines in Kuwait. Frank Buckley is aboard the USS Constellation.

Ryan, let's start with you. What are you hearing?

RYAN CHILCOTE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, the nearly universal feeling here now among the troops is that they will be going to war. They expected the president to issue this ultimatum. And now they're expecting President Saddam Hussein and his sons to stay.

So, basically, they see this as almost the go-ahead to them from President Bush to go to war. The military planners, interestingly, also knew about this speech in advance and were already looking at the speech in terms of a military contact, saying, look, the president's going to make this speech. And they're now watching how Saddam responds to it in a military fashion, whether he just moves his troops around quietly or whether he uses his Scuds, something that they don't necessarily expect him to do.

The feeling among the troops is that, going to Iraq, that's not necessarily something that they want to do, but that it's a necessary evil to make the United States a more safe place, to make the world a more safe place. There's also a pragmatic line of thinking among the troops, which is, look, this is what we came here to do. The sooner we get this job done, the sooner we can go home -- Aaron.

BROWN: Ryan, thank you. Be safe.

Ryan will be among the reporters who are embedded. It's a term you will hear a lot. And they will go in with these units if and when it comes down.

So will Alessio Vinci, who is with the 1st Battalion 2nd Marines in Kuwait as well.

Alessio, good to see you. What are you hearing from your guys?

ALESSIO VINCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, good evening to you, Aaron.

Well, it was 4:00 in the morning here, of course, when the president delivered that speech. And we were listening to that speech together with the commander of this battalion, Lieutenant Colonel Ricky Grabowski (ph), who basically said that this speech was a warning shot to Saddam Hussein, but a also warning to the troops here that the order to move up north could come up now very, very soon.

The colonel also said that he was still hoping that, while he believes that the war was actually imminent, he was also hoping that it could be resolved swiftly, meaning that, perhaps -- hoping, perhaps, that the Iraqi military would heed the president's call not to obstruct in the U.S. military campaign and eventually capitulate to advancing U.S. forces.

As far as the Marines, most of them were, of course, asleep. We do understand this morning, speaking to some of them as they woke but, that some of them did listen to the speech on their little portable radios here. There's no television at this camp -- most of them welcoming the president's speech. They've been here more than a month. They is pretty much an idea that now it is -- that the time to wait is over and that, eventually, the order to go up north will come in a matter of days -- Aaron.

BROWN: Alessio, same words: Be safe when this thing starts to play out. Thank you very much, Alessio Vinci, with the Marines.

Frank Buckley, I guess, got the long straw here. He's on the USS Constellation. And Frank joins us from out in the Gulf tonight.

Frank, hello to you.

FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Aaron.

Really a remarkable thing. We're out here in the Persian Gulf and we're able to watch live, with some of the sailors, airmen and pilots, the actual broadcast of the president's comments. We watched it live here on a ship at sea. And we are with the men of VS-38, the Fighting Red Griffins, one of the S-3 jet squadrons.

And, as you might expect, the reaction from the men that we talked to immediately afterward, very supportive of their commander in chief. These people here on the USS Constellation have been on station here in the Persian Gulf since mid-December. This is about the time when they were supposed to be rotating out of the Persian Gulf, if this was a normal deployment, headed home.

So, really, what has been on the mind of many sailors and airmen here is, they just want to know what's going to happen. Will they be going to war? Will they not be going to war? They're getting pretty frustrated, frankly, with the diplomacy and not knowing exactly what was going to happen next.

So, one pilot this evening told me, this is a sense of relief for many people, that now they at least have a sense of a timeline that they will be probably being called into action -- Aaron.

BROWN: Gentlemen, all, thank you. And be safe out there, should this go down. Thank you very much.

Before we go to break here, just a quick check of a couple of headlines -- a lot of newspapers remaking their front pages, of course. But we have got a couple in. And we'll show you.

"Chicago Sun-Times": "Saddam Has 48 Hours." I suspect we will see a lot of that. That's a cool picture, though, isn't it -- now, don't pan quite so quickly off of it -- on the front page of the "Chicago Sun-Times"?

And then now -- I'm sorry. Now you can go ahead and move. "The Guardian," a British newspaper: "Diplomacy Dies."

And we've got one more in the list there? "San Francisco Chronicle" -- I can tell by the typeface. "Bush's Ultimatum." It certainly was that, 48 hours to get out of Dodge.

We'll take a break. We'll wrap it up for Monday night in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: We had some poll numbers not long ago, polling that took place after the president's speech.

Some of the people who were surveyed had heard the speech. Others had not. And that is something just to keep in mind as we run through this; 66 percent say they approve of the president's decision to go to war, 66 percent, if Saddam Hussein does not leave. Yesterday, that number stood at 64 percent. So, statistically, that's pretty much a wash. When asked if the United States had done all it could do diplomatically, 68 percent said yes. That stood at 54 percent in February. A lot has happened since. Polls, of course, are no substitute for talking to people, or at least talking to lots of people. It's not that pollsters don't talk to people. They talk to them all the time. But this is a quick-flash poll of where the country is after the president's speech.

And we'll continue to do polling and it will get a little bit more sophisticated. And what we would expect to see, over time, at least, is a lot of support for the president, at least in the early- going. And if it goes well, it will probably stay there. And if it doesn't, then that's lots of trouble, political and otherwise, for the country, for the soldiers, and for the president as well.

A couple of other newspapers have come in and we'll end on those.

"USA Today" -- I can't take off my glasses. I need binoculars for this: "Invasion Nears, Bush Gives Saddam 48 Hours to Leave." "As War Looms, Young Soldiers Confront Fear." That's OK. That's a nice honest headline under that young man's face. Who would think that a young soldier or an old soldier or any soldier in a moment like this would not be dealing with their own fears? That's "USA Today"'s headlines. If you're traveling around the country and you're staying in a good hotel, that will end up in your front door.

Go ahead, pan over. Show me what else is there. How we doing on time, guys?

OK, "San Francisco Chronicle," I guess we showed you that. "U.S. to Hit From Every Direction." I would expect you'll see a lot -- another nice picture on the front page there, "Soldiers Waiting." I think you will see a lot of reporting in your newspapers, and from us as well, over the battle plan, at least as reporters understand it, how this will play out, at least in the first 48 hours. So, we're mindful of what General Clark once told us, which is that the plan doesn't last all that long.

We'll be back tomorrow at 10:00. We hope you'll join us then.

Until then, good night for all of us at NEWSNIGHT.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Level Raised to Orange>


Aired March 17, 2003 - 22:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, HOST: And good evening again, everyone. So here we are. In a matter of days, barring a miracle -- and that's what we're left with tonight, miracles -- the United States will go to war.
The debating ends and the fighting begins. The diplomatic maneuvering ends and the maneuvering of planes and troops and tanks begins. Whatever follows after all that will leave rubble or craters or bodies behind.

Opinion and theory are over. What Julius Caesar said tens of centuries ago applies today or very soon will: The dye is cast. Notice that that great Roman general didn't talk about passing a point of no return. Caesar new what war was really like. That's why he used a gambler's turn of phrase.

Everything else has changed between his time and ours, but that hasn't. War is still a gamble, a terrible gamble. You can win a war and still lose. Lose the lives of good young men and women, for one.

So as Caesar said, the dye has been cast. And tonight we look at how it came to be and where we're headed in the next few days. We begin, of course, at the White House. And our senior White House correspondent, John King, starts The Whip off. John, a headline from you tonight.

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, the president told the American people and the Iraqi people tonight "The tyrant will soon be gone." The clock is ticking. An ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to leave the country by Wednesday night or face war. No one in the Bush White House believes Saddam will accept.

BROWN: John, thank you.

Two shoes dropped tonight. The president dropped one, and then the threat level was raised right after the president's speech. Jeanne Meserve covering that for us. Jeanne, a headline.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Possible multiple terrorist attacks abroad and at home that could involve chemical, biological or radiological weapons. That's the forecast tonight from Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, as the nation's threat alert status moves up to Orange -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jeanne, thank you. To the U.N. now, where hope for a diplomatic solution has finally collapsed. Richard Roth of course is there for us. Richard, your headline tonight.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SR. U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, in the end, nobody had to show their cards at the Security Council. The U.S. and Britain picked up their decks and left, confident they have authorization for a military assault already on the books. But not without a shot at France, which said, don't blame us, you couldn't find the votes -- Aaron.

BROWN: Richard, thank you.

And the Pentagon next. And a troubling reminder of one threat U.S. troops may -- we underscore "may" -- be facing. Jamie McIntyre there for us. Jamie, a headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Republican Guard is dispersing, according to U.S. intelligence, taking up defensive positions. President Bush urged them tonight not to fight for a dying regime and to permit the peaceful entry of U.S. troops. He said they would be given clear instructions on how to surrender. But the question is, will they fold or fight?

BROWN: Jamie, thank you. Back to you and the rest shortly.

Also coming up tonight, an important night. We've tried to get as many voices into the mix as possible. We'll talk diplomacy with Robin Wright of the "L.A. Times." Former presidential adviser David Gergen joins us on the message the president delivered tonight. Also, retired General Wesley Clark on the military strategy for the days ahead.

And Some other voices we ought not leave out ever in moments like this, voices from the troops who are actually putting their young lives on the line. A special whip from the front lines.

And your voice, too. A sampling of opinions from across the country. Early reaction to the president's words tonight. All of that in the hour ahead. And it is a busy hour to come.

And we begin at the White House. There's no overestimating the effect that words, the president's words can have. We've been watching this military buildup for months, following the diplomatic maneuvering even longer. We've seen where this has been going, known where the president stands. But somehow hearing him say the words tonight changed everything.

Tonight, the president made it clear either Saddam Hussein goes or we go to war. It cannot get clearer than that. And though we'll devote a good deal of the program to the implications and complications of all of it, here is where we begin, at the White House, where the words were spoken, and John King.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): The president gave Saddam Hussein one last chance to avert a war.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing.

KING: That ultimatum gives Saddam until Wednesday night. Officials say war could begin any time after the deadline lapses and that Mr. Bush would deliver an Oval Office address after ordering troops into combat. The speech included a hopeful message to the Iraqi people.

BUSH: We will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.

KING: And this blunt warning to the Iraqi military.

BUSH: Your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone.

KING: The United States, with more than 225,000 troops already deployed, will carry the overwhelming load in any war. But British troops also are on hand, and Australia says it will offer military assistance. Spain, Italy and Portugal back the U.S. position, as do Japan, Poland, Bulgaria and most of the new Easter European democracies that were once part of the Soviet block.

But France, Germany, Russia and China are the major powers opposed to war in Iraq. Mexico refused to back the White House. And Canada said Monday its troops would have no part in any war.

BUSH: These governments share our assessment of the danger but not our resolve to meet it.

KING: The president warned the prospect of war in Iraq raised the likelihood of terrorist attacks here at home and said the government is taking immediate measures to beef up airport and port security. Mr. Bush gave leading members of Congress a speech preview. And sources tell CNN the White House is poised to seek between $75 billion and $100 billion in emergency spending to pay for the war and its immediate aftermath.

Not long before the speech, one senior aide described the president as well aware of the gravity of the moment, but comfortable with the course he is on.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: And officials say they clock on that ultimatum began ticking at the beginning of the president's speech. So now fewer than 46 hours for Saddam Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq and avert a war. No one at the Bush White House expects that to happen.

Many believe that perhaps even as early as Wednesday, but certainly by the end of this week, Mr. Bush will be in the Oval Office announcing that war is at hand. As he put it in a message to the Iraqi people, "The day of your liberation is near" -- Aaron.

BROWN: All right. John, let's talk about the next 24 hours. Are there phone calls to make? Is there business to be done by the president at this point?

KING: There is a great deal of business to be done. Number one, Turkey today signaled its willingness suddenly to finally let U.S. troops come ashore. The president will work on that diplomacy.

He will reach out to members of what he calls the coalition of the willing. There was one call today to the Australian prime minister. Look for additional calls on that front.

He will also meet with his military planners and his complete national security team to fine tune any war plans. And of course they will wait to hear from Saddam Hussein. But they think they already know the answer.

BROWN: Is there any feeling at the White House that they could have done anything differently to have changed the outcome? The ultimate outcome or the outcome at the U.N.?

KING: Well, some say privately the president being so open about the goal of regime change is one of the reasons the debate at the United Nations became so polarized. But they also say that is what the president believes, and he was not going to change what he believes. So, so be it.

That the president is for regime change, and if that affected the French, say at the Security Council, or Russia at the Security Council, so be it. That was the president's position. They continue to say here they are struck by the fact that France could have voted for Resolution 1441, which says full and immediate disarmament or serious consequences, and yet now refuse to address those serious consequences.

Those will be riffs to be discussed in the days and weeks, perhaps even months and years ahead. There are some in this administration who believed all along this was the moment we would end up at, and here we are.

BROWN: We are indeed, John. Thank you. Senior White House correspondent John King with us at the top tonight.

We think our U.N. correspondent was on to something last night when he talked about a sense of finality in the air. In the wake of the last chance given at the summit in the Azores, few expected any positions to change. Some said the Russians might find way to abstain, others hoped the French, having made their point and seeing where things were going, would find a graceful way to back down.

But in the end, and even before the day was out, indeed before noon time, it became clear nothing would change in the sense of finality. Last night became reality today. Here's CNN's Richard Roth.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROTH (voice-over): Monday morning, the U.S. flag going up in front of the United Nations. Two hours later, a U.S.-U.K. Iraq resolution was pulled down from judgment by the Security Council.

JOHN NEGROPONTE, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: We believe that the vote would have been close. We regret that in the face of an explicit threat to veto by a permanent member, the vote counting became a secondary consideration.

ROTH: Despite enormous pressure, the U.S. was unable to obtain nine votes in favor and blamed France for its veto threat.

JEREMY GREENSTOCK, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: That country rejected our proposed compromise before even the Iraqi government itself.

JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIERE, FRENCH AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: They had realized that the majority in the Council is against and a oppose a resolution authorizing the use of force. This is a position of the huge majority in the Council.

ROTH: Despite a looming military attack, France, Russia and Germany are calling for a meeting of foreign ministers on Wednesday to consider, as scheduled, remaining priorities for U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq.

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I think the time for diplomacy has passed. I think that's pretty clear.

GUNTER PLEUGER, GERMAN AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: The Chinese ambassador once said, if you have one percent chance of keeping the peace, you should make 100 percent effort to achieve this.

ROTH: But many diplomats were disappointed the deadlock could not be broken.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When the Council is divided like the way it is now, it's a sad moment for the U.N. and our vision of the world.

ROTH: With the U.S. closing the diplomatic window, the U.N. took action, ordering the pullout of some 330 people, including weapons inspectors and humanitarian aide staff. Secretary General Kofi Annan, frustrated the U.N. Security Council powers couldn't work out differences, believes U.S. military action now without Council approval runs counter to international law, thus damaging the U.N.

KOFI ANNAN, U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL: If the action is to take place without the support of the Council, its legitimacy will be questioned and the support for it will be diminished.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROTH: U.N. officials say they believe the organization will still be called upon to be as, one person put it, the cleanup crew, the mop up crew in post-war reconstruction and reconciliation of Iraq. President Bush tonight, Aaron, said he believes in the mission of the United Nations, though he heavily criticized members of the Security Council for not living up to their responsibilities -- Aaron.

BROWN: Richard, thank you for your work tonight and your work over the last months. It's been a long haul for you. We appreciate it. Richard Roth at the U.N.

It's no secret by now that the efforts at the Security Council were aimed in large part at providing a degree of political cover for Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair. It hasn't gone that well so far. Opposition remains strong, especially so in his own labor party.

Today, the prime minister's leader in the parliament resigned from the cabinet. Robin Cook getting a standing ovation from (UNINTELLIGIBLE) when he did. A vote on the war expected shortly, and the prime minister should win that vote, but only because of the conservative party, which many of the 160 of his own labor MPs are prepared to vote no.

Here to help sort through some of what went on tonight, Robin Wright, who is the chief diplomatic correspondent for the "Los Angeles Times." She's with us from Washington. And from Boston tonight, David Gergen, who has been on the inside, all the way back to the Nixon administration. Currently, he's a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. It's good to see both of you.

David, let me start with you tonight. We talked some months back about the president having failed to close the deal with Americans. Do you think there was a point in the last, I don't know, month or six weeks when he found the right tone, the right words, and did close the deal?

DAVID GERGEN, FMR. WHITE HOUSE ADVISER: I don't think so. I think he's got -- I think he's closed the deal with the troops. And you're going to see enormous support in this country for the troops and prayers that they will come home safely and that they will be successful. I think he's got the majority of the country behind him, but there is a substantial body that is perhaps more skeptical today than it was three months ago.

BROWN: Why is that?

GERGEN: Well, I think those people had hoped that we would do this with the United Nations. When you ask people -- and Robin Wright's "Los Angeles times" polls -- do you want to do this, do you want to go after Iraq, the support for doing it with U.N. support has always been stronger than the support for doing it without the U.N.

So tonight, I think that the failure, the train wreck at the United Nations that occurred today, will be dispiriting to many. And I think that, while they will certainly support the troops and they will salute the president, they will come into this with serious misgivings. The majority of Americans will do it wholeheartedly. I think the majority of Americans will support him. I think many have questions, but I think there's a substantial body of people who also have serious misgivings. BROWN: Robin, if you had to pick let's say two or three moments, where it was clear there was either a diplomatic failure or a diplomatic miscalculation in all of this, what would they be?

ROBIN WRIGHT, CHIEF DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": Well the administration has really known for a full week that it was not going to get the vote at the United Nations. The moment that Mexican President Vincente Fox went under the surgeon's knife last Wednesday, the United States knew they didn't have his vote, and then counted on Mexico as the ninth and vital vote, which was the core of the strategy. Get the nine votes and then turn to the veto- wielding members of the United Nations and try to squeeze them into not going against the majority. That was one moment.

Clearly, the French veto. There was always a basic philosophical difference about how you approach the issue of disarmament between the United States and France. The United States thought that it would use the threat of force and the inspections to show that Saddam was not complying.

France always looked at inspections as a way to gradually disarm Saddam under the threat of force, kind of indefinitely in the background. And, finally, I think the win was taken out of the diplomatic balloon when Turkey decided or failed to get the vote of its parliament to provide bases for American troops that, when it was widely expected, it was a signal that the United States strategy was not invincible and was, in fact, quite vulnerable.

BROWN: Let me just pick at one of those. The failure to get our two neighbors, the Canadians and Mexicans, to sign on to this, why not? Why did that not work for the president? The president had a warm relationship with President Fox of Mexico.

WRIGHT: Well, there were issues actually between the two men. They initially had a very warm relationship, but there were some serious issues on immigration, particularly. And Chile was probably much more important than Canada; Chile being one of the members of the Security Council. And, of course, it has a strong trade relationship with the United States, too.

But, again, it had not been finalized. And both countries were looking for signs and they hadn't seen them in the run up to this debate of the U.S. commitment to both countries.

BROWN: David, let me go to you for the last word here. Maybe this is a check of how cynical you are or are not. Do you think this was preordained? Do you think that going back, oh, three or four months, the people in the White House said, this is how it's going to go, and eventually in March, mid March, we're going to launch an invasion?

GERGEN: I think it was preordained. But I think one must be careful about how cynical one gets. There were many people in the White House who believed that Saddam Hussein would never pay any attention to the inspectors and therefore that it was going to result in military action and they needed to be prepared for that. There were also others in the White House, of course, who believed -- and the administration believed -- that it was not important to go to the U.N. anyway. That it was always going to be messy there.

Vice President Cheney took that view very publicly. You know, got out in front of the administration by saying, let's not go there. So I think that the preparations for war have been underway for a year. I think that people have been moving material into place.

I think we've already taken out a lot of his anti-aircraft capacity in the south of Iraq, even before this. And I think we've got special forces on the ground in Iraq tonight, and we've had them there. So I think this has been -- I think the Bush administration is fully prepared and expected to go to war, but they did that with the expectation that he would never disarm and he would never leave and therefore.

So that -- can you say whether they've been committed to war right from the beginning? Yes, I think they have been. And I think the problem they're running into with many nations is that it was that sense of, this is inevitable, we are doing this regardless whether you like it or not. It's just a matter of time. And now that we've got our troops there, we have to do it now.

That is why many nations feel they've been bullied on this. And we find that, as we go forward, Americans are going to support the troops, but we're going to have a lot of other nations that are going to be opposing us as we go forward.

BROWN: David, Robin, it's always good to talk to both of you. Thanks for coming in tonight. Thank you very much.

GERGEN: Thank you.

BROWN: On we go. Not more than a minute or two after the president stopped talking, the other shoe dropped, as we said. This being the season for dropping shoes, it wasn't entirely unsuspected. The Department of Homeland Security raised the alert level from Yellow to Orange, unwelcome yes, unsettling, absolutely.

Unexpected? Well, it is the new normal. Here's CNN's Jeanne Meserve.

MESERVE: Aaron, sources tell CNN the intelligence community believe that there is a "near certainty of al Qaeda attack" and that the group is in the final stages of planning a large-scale terrorist attack overseas. The secretary of homeland security says their planning includes the use of chemical, biological and/or radiological weapons, and that there is a risk of multiple attacks abroad and at home.

Homeland security sources say in this country there is particular concern about buildings, subways and enclosed areas, as well as critical infrastructure. And that an attack would likely try to inflict mass casualties, economic hardship, psychological damage and have symbolic value. In addition to al Qaeda, there is fear of retaliatory action by Iraqi agents who specialize in assassination, kidnappings and bombings, and by others who sympathize with Iraq. The intelligence comes from a large volume of reporting, some of it from highly reliable sources. In a statement, Secretary Ridge notes that in recent months there have been reports of suspicion activities in and around military facilities, ports, waterways, bridges, dams, generating facilities and symbolic targets.

In response, he is launching Operation Liberty Shield to bolster public health preparedness, as well as increased security at the borders, in the transportation sector, and around critical infrastructure. Among the specific steps being taken, asylum applicants from nations where al Qaeda, al Qaeda sympathizers and other terrorist groups are known to have operated will be detained for the duration of their processing.

New temporary flight restrictions have been put in place over certain cities, including Washington and New York City. National emergency response teams are being pre-positioned to enable quick deployment anywhere in the country. Governors are being asked to deploy National Guard or additional police forces at critical locations. In addition, Iraqi-born individuals in the U.S. may be invited to participate in voluntary interviews to elicit useful information.

It was widely anticipated that the nation would move up to Orange when hostilities approached, but the information shared tonight shocked some state officials and made it clear this Orange alert will be more intense than the two that preceded it -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jeanne, thank you. It didn't just shock state officials. I think the tone of it all was shocking. Thank you for your work tonight.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we go off to the deserts of Kuwait and hear from some of the soldiers and the Marines as they get ready for their D-Day. We'll also talk about last-minute military moves and strategies with retired General Wesley Clark.

And later, how Americans are reacting to the president's speech tonight in this American moment. This is NEWSNIGHT from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: If war comes -- and does anyone really doubt that it will -- it will be carried out by a smaller force, considerably smaller than the first Gulf War, and it will be executed differently. The mission, of course, isn't different. This isn't about Kuwait, it's about Baghdad.

But the weapons are different. There are another generation of smart bombs and missiles. For the planners, these are the last hours of planning. Here's CNN's Jamie McIntyre from the Pentagon.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) MCINTYRE (voice-over): As U.S. troops prepare to fight in the face of chemical or biological attack, the United States is citing fresh intelligence that even as Saddam Hussein is insisting he has no band weapons, he has issued chemical shells to at least one Republican Guard unit. While the intelligence falls short of hard proof, one U.S. official told CNN they clearly have given some chemical capability to some Iraqi forces.

Other U.S. officials downplayed the intelligence, calling it ambiguous and inconclusive. But nevertheless, said there were increased reasons to be concerned Saddam Hussein might use chemical weapons against U.S. troops or his own people. Meanwhile, Pentagon sources say all is ready for an invasion.

Two U.S. aircraft carriers are likely to remain in the Mediterranean Sea because the U.S. expects to have permission to fly around Israel and over Jordan to hit targets in the north. More than 1,000 tomahawk cruise missiles are poised on more than 30 ships in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. And the 101st airborne division in Kuwait now has all of its battle gear and is ready to go, sources say.

Iraq could trigger war sooner by using chemical or biological weapons, attacking U.S. forces or neighboring countries, torching oilfields or creating some other ecological disaster, or taking high- profile hostages. Otherwise, the military will execute the war plan as soon as it considers conditions favorable. Sandstorms, for instance, could delay a war by a day or two, sources say. But the moon, which is now full, will not. Even though a full moon can make planes and paratroopers easier to see, the U.S. does not want to wait until next month for the total darkness of a new moon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE : And tonight, Aaron, Pentagon officials say Iraq's Republican Guard, some of Saddam Hussein's best troops, are dispersing around Baghdad in what appears to be a defensive move aimed at surviving the shock and awe of a U.S. air campaign. Tonight, President Bush urged those troops to allow the peaceful entry of U.S. forces and said they'd be given instructions on how to surrender. His words, "If war comes, do not fight for a dying regime" -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. We'll be seeing lots of him I suspect in the days ahead.

We'll also be seeing lots of General Wesley Clark. General Clark is here with us tonight, former Supreme NATO Commander. One of the great titles anyone could possibly have in life.

Let's talk a little bit about -- I was reading the other day about -- I guess this would be strategy -- that the generals really would have liked more troops. And the civilian leadership, the secretary of defense, actually saw a war fought differently. First talk about that, and then answer the question, is it appropriate for the civilian leadership to determine that sort of tactic.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, FMR. NATO SUPREME COMMANDER (RET.): Well I think there was an ongoing struggle that had to do with the so-called transformation of armed forces. Namely, with precision air power, you could do more without these big heavy divisions that are so expensive and so difficult to deploy.

You could have a smaller more agile force. You could make up your mind to go and go much more quickly. And Afghanistan is seen by many as a model of this.

So all during the planning phase in Iraq, according to the leaked reports and this sort of back channel that you get, this battle was going on inside the Pentagon. The airmen, office of the secretary of defense and others were saying, why can't you do it with 75,000 troops, two or three divisions? Why do you need -- you know in Desert Storm you had six U.S. Army divisions, a British division, a French division, the Egyptians and the Syrians. Do it with less, you've got all these great airplanes now.

The Army is coming back and saying, yes, but after the war is over and during a war you have all of these prisoners. So that was the debate. Now what's happened on this is very interesting. They actually deployed or gave the announcement of deployment of all these heavy forces.

So you think, ah-ha, the old heavy guys won. But it looks like the war is going to start with at least three of the big Army divisions not there: the first armored, the first (UNINTELLIGIBLE), and the fourth infantry.

BROWN: Is it possible to tell simply by looking at which units are where how this thing will -- at least how the early parts will play out?

CLARK: Well, in a way it is. I mean we know the third infantry division is probably going to race up along the Euphrates and at some point spring across the Euphrates and head to Baghdad. We know the 101st with the helicopters is going to leap ahead to a series of fire basis.

How far it goes, whether it circles around to north of Baghdad and actually tries to occupy the oilfields around Kirkuk or Mosel (ph), we don't know that. And the Marines and the British force, they're probably going to be on the right flank and they're going to go up and they're going to cross the Euphrates early and stay between the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and the Euphrates on up to Baghdad. That's what it looks like.

BROWN: Do you think that this idea that the Iraqis will just kind of roll over and play dead and this whole thing will be over in a week, 10 days, is almost political wishful thinking or is it possible?

CLARK: I think it is possible. But in military planning, you can't bet on the possibility. You have to bet on the hard realities of what's there.

BROWN: Do you bet on the worst possibility? CLARK: Moderate, moderate worst case assumptions of resistance. In other words, we don't believe he has a nuclear weapon. And it's tough to use chemical and biological weapons. He's not going to be able to use that stuff against us day after day after day.

But you have to assume that some of the Republican Guard forces might fight. You can't assume they're all going to surrender. It would be wonderful if they do, but it's a not a prudent military planning assumption.

BROWN: General -- I'll get it right this time -- General Clark -- I suspect we are going to have a lot of time in the days ahead to talk about this stuff. Thank you, sir.

CLARK: Look forward to it, Aaron. Thanks.

BROWN: Same to you, sir. Thank you.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT for Monday from Washington: The U.N. inspectors in Iraq finish up, head for the exits. Just about everybody who can get out is getting out -- that and more as we continue.

Around that world, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Two images are playing off against each other in the Gulf region tonight: two traffic jams representing the yin and yang of wartime, a rush to get military men into the region and a rush to get civilians out. And today in Iraq, U.N. inspectors are packing up and moving out.

Here's CNN's Nic Robertson.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A friendly wave from U.N. inspectors as they left for work, maybe suspecting, but not knowing this was to be their last day of work in Iraq, visiting six sites, including the Al Karama Company, where they searched storage facilities containing computer boxes, a typical day, good access, but no breakthroughs.

Outside the Al Taji barracks, where U.N. experts were overseeing the destruction of two more Al Samoud 2 missiles, heavy military guns were being trucked away, war preparations, it seems, well under way, and not just the military: in Baghdad's food markets, residents stocking up on food. "If there is war, we are ready for it," says this shopper. "And if is there peace, we'll be ready for that as well."

Flashlights popular, too, many remembering the Gulf War, when electricity was cut -- political reaction as war closes in on Iraq acerbic. Foreign Minister Naji Sabri called President Bush a war- monger and accused U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan of violating U.N. resolutions in the U.N. Charter by withdrawing weapons inspector.

NAJI SABRI, IRAQI FOREIGN MINISTER: This means that the U.N. secretary-general has abandoned his sworn responsibility in maintaining peace and security in the world.

ROBERTSON: In total, 134 U.N. weapons inspection staff, including 56 inspectors, expect to fly out of Baghdad early Tuesday morning, bringing to an end 108 days of inspections and apparently any hopes for peace.

Nic Robertson, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we'll talk with columnist Frank Rich about the Bush administration's handling of the situation in Iraq -- that and more as we continue tonight from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: And still ahead tonight: on the front lines, U.S. troops preparing for what now seems an almost certain war.

A short break first. This is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: I'm joined from New York tonight by a very good writer, indeed, a very, very good writer, who for years was the drama critic for "The New York Times" is now an associate editor and columnist there. Frank Rich still reviews drama, though, this time, it's real- life drama, cultural, political, philosophical. And the war to come is a drama in all of those ways, and others, too.

Mr. Rich, it's nice to see you again.

FRANK RICH, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Good to see you.

BROWN: Sir, let me give you an easy one to start and we'll see where it goes.

What scares you tonight?

RICH: What scares me tonight, as I suspect scares many Americans, is simply the unknown.

We had a president who spoke to us tonight with absolute certitude about what had to be done and what was coming. But the truth is, we don't know what was coming. As someone in my household said this evening after the president's speech, are we going to be attacked in New York? For those of us who live here and have seen the effect from the tragedy of terrorism, we don't take this engagement lightly.

BROWN: You don't necessarily think, then, that the end result of this will make New York and Washington and Cleveland and Philadelphia and Olympia, Washington, safer places?

RICH: We don't know. I don't believe anybody knows. I think it's an incredible roll of the dice, the biggest roll of the dice by an American president that I've certainly seen in my lifetime. And I'm old enough, more or less, to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis.

BROWN: You think more so than the Cuban Missile Crisis?

RICH: The Cuban Missile Crisis as -- I was a kid at the time, but I did live in Washington, D.C. It was very vivid to me. And, of course, I've read about it since.

We knew who the enemy was. We knew what the weapons he had were. We knew all the players. It's quite different from going against the Soviet Union to going against a number of shadowy enemies, dispersed throughout a region that is very treacherous, one of whom we know, Saddam Hussein, although we don't even know for sure what weapons he has. The accounts of that have changed so much over the past few months. But we don't know what is going to come out of the closet in the dead of night, set off by the chain of events that could befall us with this impending war.

There's, of course, another scenario, which is obviously the one the Bush administration believes, which is, it will be like the Cuban Missile Crisis. It will be over in a week and 10 days, as that was. The enemy will be this single enemy who will back down. And the meek will inherit the Earth. I sure as hell hope they're right.

BROWN: Look, you're a smart guy. And no politician can stand up before the American people in a moment like this and say: Look, here's what I hope is going to happen, but, actually, it may not work out that way.

Presidents have to stand up there and say with certainty -- I think you said certitude -- with certitude that this is how it will play out. Your concern -- it sounds to me like you're concerned that we're rattling the cages of these terrorists and they're going to come out and get us. Is that it?

RICH: Well, it's a fear. I don't know what's going to happen anymore than anyone else.

BROWN: Of course.

RICH: I want to believe the government knows more than I do. But, certainly, it's not a secret that -- indeed, "The New York Times" and other places have been reporting it -- that this is looked at as an opportunity buy other people who want to get us, including the remnants -- let's hope they're very few remnants -- of what came after us on September 11.

BROWN: But that same "New York Times," having gone through all of that reasoning, ultimately endorsed the underlying proposition, maybe not exactly the way the president pulled it off at the U.N., but the underlying proposition that, if force was required, force should be used. RICH: Right.

The question there, is force of this sort required to get rid of this guy? I'm willing to accept the president's arguments. And, certainly, I have no doubt that the American military can take him out, or certainly bring about regime change and we hope disarmament in Iraq. I'm not convinced that it had to be done on this calendar, I have to say.

But there's no point in even debating that now. The calendar has been set. It's been set, really, for some time. We sort of always knew this was going to happen in March. And so we have to hope and pray for the best.

BROWN: I think we're all, Frank, hoping and praying for the best tonight. It's such a difficult night, in so many different ways. It's good to see you.

RICH: Nice to see you.

BROWN: Thanks for joining us.

RICH: Thank you.

BROWN: Frank Rich, a columnist for "The New York Times," a wonderful and talented columnist for "The New York Times."

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT from Washington: From the front lines, we'll see how the troops are feeling tonight after the president's speech.

We'll take a short break first. From Washington tonight, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: I thought it crucial tonight to get a sense of how the troops are feeling. So a second whiff, if you will, from our reporters who have joined up with them.

Ryan Chilcote is with the 101st Airborne. Alessio Vinci is with some of the Marines in Kuwait. Frank Buckley is aboard the USS Constellation.

Ryan, let's start with you. What are you hearing?

RYAN CHILCOTE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, the nearly universal feeling here now among the troops is that they will be going to war. They expected the president to issue this ultimatum. And now they're expecting President Saddam Hussein and his sons to stay.

So, basically, they see this as almost the go-ahead to them from President Bush to go to war. The military planners, interestingly, also knew about this speech in advance and were already looking at the speech in terms of a military contact, saying, look, the president's going to make this speech. And they're now watching how Saddam responds to it in a military fashion, whether he just moves his troops around quietly or whether he uses his Scuds, something that they don't necessarily expect him to do.

The feeling among the troops is that, going to Iraq, that's not necessarily something that they want to do, but that it's a necessary evil to make the United States a more safe place, to make the world a more safe place. There's also a pragmatic line of thinking among the troops, which is, look, this is what we came here to do. The sooner we get this job done, the sooner we can go home -- Aaron.

BROWN: Ryan, thank you. Be safe.

Ryan will be among the reporters who are embedded. It's a term you will hear a lot. And they will go in with these units if and when it comes down.

So will Alessio Vinci, who is with the 1st Battalion 2nd Marines in Kuwait as well.

Alessio, good to see you. What are you hearing from your guys?

ALESSIO VINCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, good evening to you, Aaron.

Well, it was 4:00 in the morning here, of course, when the president delivered that speech. And we were listening to that speech together with the commander of this battalion, Lieutenant Colonel Ricky Grabowski (ph), who basically said that this speech was a warning shot to Saddam Hussein, but a also warning to the troops here that the order to move up north could come up now very, very soon.

The colonel also said that he was still hoping that, while he believes that the war was actually imminent, he was also hoping that it could be resolved swiftly, meaning that, perhaps -- hoping, perhaps, that the Iraqi military would heed the president's call not to obstruct in the U.S. military campaign and eventually capitulate to advancing U.S. forces.

As far as the Marines, most of them were, of course, asleep. We do understand this morning, speaking to some of them as they woke but, that some of them did listen to the speech on their little portable radios here. There's no television at this camp -- most of them welcoming the president's speech. They've been here more than a month. They is pretty much an idea that now it is -- that the time to wait is over and that, eventually, the order to go up north will come in a matter of days -- Aaron.

BROWN: Alessio, same words: Be safe when this thing starts to play out. Thank you very much, Alessio Vinci, with the Marines.

Frank Buckley, I guess, got the long straw here. He's on the USS Constellation. And Frank joins us from out in the Gulf tonight.

Frank, hello to you.

FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Aaron.

Really a remarkable thing. We're out here in the Persian Gulf and we're able to watch live, with some of the sailors, airmen and pilots, the actual broadcast of the president's comments. We watched it live here on a ship at sea. And we are with the men of VS-38, the Fighting Red Griffins, one of the S-3 jet squadrons.

And, as you might expect, the reaction from the men that we talked to immediately afterward, very supportive of their commander in chief. These people here on the USS Constellation have been on station here in the Persian Gulf since mid-December. This is about the time when they were supposed to be rotating out of the Persian Gulf, if this was a normal deployment, headed home.

So, really, what has been on the mind of many sailors and airmen here is, they just want to know what's going to happen. Will they be going to war? Will they not be going to war? They're getting pretty frustrated, frankly, with the diplomacy and not knowing exactly what was going to happen next.

So, one pilot this evening told me, this is a sense of relief for many people, that now they at least have a sense of a timeline that they will be probably being called into action -- Aaron.

BROWN: Gentlemen, all, thank you. And be safe out there, should this go down. Thank you very much.

Before we go to break here, just a quick check of a couple of headlines -- a lot of newspapers remaking their front pages, of course. But we have got a couple in. And we'll show you.

"Chicago Sun-Times": "Saddam Has 48 Hours." I suspect we will see a lot of that. That's a cool picture, though, isn't it -- now, don't pan quite so quickly off of it -- on the front page of the "Chicago Sun-Times"?

And then now -- I'm sorry. Now you can go ahead and move. "The Guardian," a British newspaper: "Diplomacy Dies."

And we've got one more in the list there? "San Francisco Chronicle" -- I can tell by the typeface. "Bush's Ultimatum." It certainly was that, 48 hours to get out of Dodge.

We'll take a break. We'll wrap it up for Monday night in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: We had some poll numbers not long ago, polling that took place after the president's speech.

Some of the people who were surveyed had heard the speech. Others had not. And that is something just to keep in mind as we run through this; 66 percent say they approve of the president's decision to go to war, 66 percent, if Saddam Hussein does not leave. Yesterday, that number stood at 64 percent. So, statistically, that's pretty much a wash. When asked if the United States had done all it could do diplomatically, 68 percent said yes. That stood at 54 percent in February. A lot has happened since. Polls, of course, are no substitute for talking to people, or at least talking to lots of people. It's not that pollsters don't talk to people. They talk to them all the time. But this is a quick-flash poll of where the country is after the president's speech.

And we'll continue to do polling and it will get a little bit more sophisticated. And what we would expect to see, over time, at least, is a lot of support for the president, at least in the early- going. And if it goes well, it will probably stay there. And if it doesn't, then that's lots of trouble, political and otherwise, for the country, for the soldiers, and for the president as well.

A couple of other newspapers have come in and we'll end on those.

"USA Today" -- I can't take off my glasses. I need binoculars for this: "Invasion Nears, Bush Gives Saddam 48 Hours to Leave." "As War Looms, Young Soldiers Confront Fear." That's OK. That's a nice honest headline under that young man's face. Who would think that a young soldier or an old soldier or any soldier in a moment like this would not be dealing with their own fears? That's "USA Today"'s headlines. If you're traveling around the country and you're staying in a good hotel, that will end up in your front door.

Go ahead, pan over. Show me what else is there. How we doing on time, guys?

OK, "San Francisco Chronicle," I guess we showed you that. "U.S. to Hit From Every Direction." I would expect you'll see a lot -- another nice picture on the front page there, "Soldiers Waiting." I think you will see a lot of reporting in your newspapers, and from us as well, over the battle plan, at least as reporters understand it, how this will play out, at least in the first 48 hours. So, we're mindful of what General Clark once told us, which is that the plan doesn't last all that long.

We'll be back tomorrow at 10:00. We hope you'll join us then.

Until then, good night for all of us at NEWSNIGHT.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Level Raised to Orange>