Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

President Bush Ready To Endorse Bigger Army And Marine Corps; Officials Say Big Search For Two Missing Climbers On Oregon's Mt. Hood Is Over; View From Iraqi government As It Carries Out Its System Of Justice; Palestine Violence

Aired December 19, 2006 - 17:00   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And around the world to bring you today's top stories.
Happening now, it's 1:00 a.m. in Baghdad but this battle may be fought back here at home. Are the White House and the Pentagon brass split over the idea of briefly boosting U.S. troop strength in Iraq?

It's midnight in Gaza. Blood gunfights. Kidnappings, assassinations, our Ben Wedeman was caught in the middle of it all early today. Can Palestinians avert a civil war?

And it's 2:00 p.m. in Oregon where they are scaling back the search for missing climbers as winter moves in. Could new high tech survival gear save others who run into trouble in the mountains? I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

But first breaking news we're following. In an interview just published within the past few moments in the "Washington Post" online, President Bush says he's asking his new defense secretary, Robert Gates, to come up with a plan to boost the overall size of the United States military to try to meet the challenges of a long-term global war, he says, against terror.

In the meantime, a short-term boost of troop strength in Iraq is being hotly debated. We have three reporters standing by. Our chief national correspondent, John King, he is here in THE SITUATION ROOM. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon.

But let's go to the White House, first, Ed Henry following what the president has just said for "The Washington Post." This is a significant development with the president now saying he's ready to endorse what the military has long wanted, a bigger army and a bigger Marine Corps.

ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. This is coming less than a week after the army chief of staff has said the military, specifically the army is close to being broken, given how it's stretched thin right now.

Specifically, interesting in this interview with "The Washington Post," we don't have a full transcript. But they've just posted key quotes. And the president says there, that he's instructed his new defense secretary Robert Gates to report back to him with a plan to increase ground forces. Obviously, this is coming at a time when there's a lot of speculation about the president's next move in Iraq. Will he send a so-called surge of some 30 to 40,000 more U.S. troops. The president would not comment directly and obviously would not confirm or deny whether or not he's going to send a surge of more troops. But here he is for the first time saying he has instructed his defense secretary to increase the number of ground forces.

Specifically, quote, "I'm inclined that we do need to increase our troops, the army and marines," the president said in this Oval Office interview. Quote, "And I talked about this with Secretary Gates and he is going to spend some time talking to folks in the building." The Pentagon of course, "come back with a recommendation about how to proceed forward on this idea." Specifically on the question of a surge, again, the president would not comment but said quote, "all options are viable." Wolf?

BLITZER: So if the president does go ahead for this call for a surge, another 20,000 or 30,000 troops, he could couple that by saying, you know what, I'm also going to increase the overall strength of the army and the Marine Corps, to make sure that the surge, albeit temporary, does not break the existing active duty force in the marines or in the army.

HENRY: Absolutely. One of the biggest challenges for the White House in trying to figure out whether they will send a surge of troops is that in order to do it right now in the short term, they would have to extend a lot of army tours of duty. People who were expected to come home soon, they would have to stay longer. That's obviously a difficult issue, Wolf.

BLITZER: Barbara Starr is at the Pentagon.

Barbara, I know you have been covering this story for a long time. There have been a lot of people who have been saying, you know what, the army, the standing army, the standing Marine Corps is simply too small given the requirements out there.

I know that Democratic Senator Jack Reed, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel have had legislation to try to increase the size going back to 2003. The president going forward apparently now, that's what he's telling the "Washington Post." Give us some context.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, this is an issue that has been in the hallways of the Pentagon literally for months now. Something that former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld had been working on. That the army and the Marine Corps have been saying for some time that they simply don't have enough troops over the long haul to carry out the war on terror.

So President Bush's announcement that he is supporting now expanding the size of the permanent active duty military really comes as no surprise. That is something that the military wanted to see happen. But make no mistake, it will take years to recruit and train and get the money for all of the equipment, to substantially increase the permanent size of the active duty military. That is a longer term problem and a longer term solution. The issue on the table right now, though, is would more troops in the near term for Iraq really make any difference?

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STARR (voice-over): The Joints Chiefs of Staff are opposed to a White House option to significantly increase the number of forces in Iraq unless there is a well-defined mission for those units, several knowledgeable sources now tell CNN. General John Abizaid, the top commander on the ground has long been firmly opposed to sending more U.S. troops.

GEN. JOHN ABIZAID, COMMANDER, CENTCOM: The Baghdad security situation requires more Iraqi troops. And that's the direction that we're headed right now.

STARR: The White House says no decision to send troops has been made. So there is no problem.

TONY SNOW, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: But the idea that there's a decision and a squabble would be wrong.

STARR: But what if the White House ideas calls for increasing in combat forces by up to 30,000? Mainly to deal with security in Baghdad? That means troop levels in Iraq could rise to the highest levels ever. Perhaps nearly 165,000.

The generals worry more boots on the ground might mean just more targets. Attacks by extremist elements of the Jaish al Mahdi militia now identified as the most dangerous group in the country are still a major concern. The debate may be defense secretary Robert Gates' first test of wills.

GEN. DAN CHRISTMAN, U.S. ARMY, (RET): What you've got is a professional military that I think almost to a senior officer has said please don't do this but a political inclination to do just the opposite. And I think that clash between military and civilian cultures is looming to be a very, very great divide.

STARR: The joint chiefs also warn that the military can't handle an increase for more than a few months. And in Congress, some Democrats say it's just too late.

REP. IKE SKELTON, (D) ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: The time for a troop increase, larger troop increase was about three and a half years ago, when we initially went into Iraq.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

STARR: And Wolf, as we've discussed before, many generals, many experts say sending more troops, what happens if you do that and the violence doesn't ease up? Then what do you do? And many senior commanders believe now sending more troops will not be a solution unless there's also political and economic progress in Iraq -- Wolf. BLITZER: Barbara, thanks very much. Let's get some more perspective on what's going on. Our chief national correspondent John King is here.

When I read this interview that just went online on "The Washington Post," Peter Baker interviewing the president, saying the president is now ready to go forward and expand the size of the U.S. military, the first thing that went through my mind is this in effect is a slap on Donald Rumsfeld because for six years he's wanted to do things with a so-called leaner, meaner, small U.S. military. He was reluctant to expand the size even in the face of a lot of generals in the army and the Marine Corps saying we need more ground troops.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: One of the big questions in town has been will there be real policy change when Rumsfeld goes out and Gates comes in? Here is more evidence that yes, there will be more policy change.

You are absolutely right. One of the whole debates about the Iraq War has been the Rumsfeld doctrine versus the Powell doctrine. The First Gulf War was fought under the Powell doctrine. Send in more troops.

Whenever you send troops into battle, go with overwhelming force so there is no question. Rumsfeld preferred the transformation military, leaner, meaner, rely on technology. Everyone would say in Iraq right now that approach simply hasn't worked.

By the president doing this so quickly. Remember, about 10 days ago, we were talking about he was inclined to do this, wanted to hear what Bob Gates said about it. Bob Gates has only been on the job 48 hours. So the president moving so quickly is clearly evidence that they're reopening the books.

BLITZER: It's an enormous expenditure to actually go out and recruit thousands of forces and then train them. And as Barbara accurately points out, before he's guys are ready to be dispatched, it takes a while. So we shouldn't expect any overnight success.

KING: This has nothing to do with short-term challenges of Iraq. This has to do with a long term assessment of if you're going to have wars like Iraq and continue to have troops in Korea, troops in Japan, troops in Germany, troops in Africa, troops ready to go anywhere else around the world, you simply need more of them, because whether they are in a three and a half year and running, now, war, there is great strain.

And as Barbara noted, it's not just the people. It will take two or three years to recruit and train them and get them up to speed. Wolf, if you talk to military commanders or members of Congress who follow this, they say this country is going to have to spend tens and tens and tens of billions of dollars on new humvees, new rifles, new tanks, new planes, new everything. Because all of the equipment as well has been significantly stressed by this war.

BLITZER: What are you hearing about this apparent, apparent split or disagreement between officials in the White House and the Joint Chiefs on a surge, an additional 20,000, 30,000 troops going into the Baghdad area to try to bring some semblance of peace there?

KING: The fact that it's being leaked that there's a disagreement, a difference between the Joint Chiefs is extraordinary and again, I think a sign that Donald Rumsfeld has left and the chiefs feel more emboldened to speak out publicly.

But form a policy standpoint it is obviously significant. Will the president increase troops by 20,000. But look for this to have the reports of this split to have a huge political impact. I spoke to Harry Reid's office, the incoming Senate majority leader just a little bit ago. He had said on the record over the weekend, he would be inclined to support a surge in troops if they had a plan that he could accept.

Now, given the published reports that the generals at the Pentagon are doubting this, Harry Reid's office says he's reassessing that. So look for the Democrats to say, Mr. President, you have always said from day one you rely on your military commanders. F they don't want to do this, why would you?

KING: Important footnote, of course, the president hasn't said he will do that. We do know he is just seriously considering it.

BLITZER: And the caveat, the generals are saying they don't want to do it unless there's a clearly defined mission that they understand and they can accomplish. They're still not convinced that mission is there.

KING: The generals are making clear that they are asking tough questions.

BLITZER: Right. As they should. Thanks very much, John, for that. Jack Cafferty always asks tough questions. He's with us in "The Cafferty File" -- Jack.

JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: It's because I don't have to answer them. Some call him America's mayor. And tonight, Rudy Giuliani's presidential exploratory committee is scheduled to throw its first major fund-raiser. It's early, very early but the former New York mayor is the frontrunner in the race for the Republican presidential nomination for 2008.

Here's how he'd fare against some of the top Democratic contenders if the election were held today. A new CNN poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation shows Giuliani in a statistical dead heat with Senator Hillary Clinton, 46 percent Giuliani, 48 percent for Clinton. And Giuliani and former Vice President Al Gore are tied at 46 percent each.

Nevertheless, some Republicans are very concerned that Giuliani could face a difficult campaign because he's a liberal on social policy. He supports abortion rights, gun control and immigrant rights. They worried that he wouldn't appeal to some of the more conservative groups in the Republican Party like the evangelicals. But after President Bush, maybe Republicans need to be looking at candidates like Giuliani who would appeal, presumably, to a wider base. Giuliani's advisers say that his strategy would be to emphasize his experience after 9/11 and his tough views on national security and Iraq.

So here's the question -- could Republicans nominate a social liberal like Rudy Giuliani for president? E-mail your thoughts to CaffertyFile@CNN.com or got to CNN.com/CaffertyFile. My guess is, if the Republicans have any chance, Wolf, in 2008, they're going to have to lean on a candidate who has a little broader appeal than just that narrow right wing conservative base that Republicans have depended so heavily on in the past.

BLITZER: Rudy Giuliani may or may not be that guy. John McCain. They're a bunch of Republicans out there. Including another guy from New York, George Pataki thinking about it apparently right now as well.

CAFFERTY: I'll bet you a ham sandwich that that ain't happening.

BLITZER: All right. Thanks, Jack. Jack Cafferty will be back in a few minutes.

Up ahead, significant changes for the search for those two missing climbers on Oregon's Mt. Hood. We're going to take you there live for details about what rescuers are saying now.

Also, a recent cancer scare for the first lady, Laura Bush. The White House just now releasing details of her surgery and her prognosis.

Plus, big changes in Washington's other situation room. That would be the one over at the West Wing in the White House. We're going to show you the unveiling. Our SITUATION ROOM, their situation room. A lot of situation rooms. Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Rescue officials now say the big search for those two missing climbers on Oregon's Mt. Hood is over. But they're still looking for what they call little clues as to the men's fate. Let's go back to CNN's Rob Marciano. He is joining us from Hood River in Oregon with the latest.

What did we learn today about this search today, Rob?

ROB MARCIANO, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Well, the Air National Guard has gone home, Wolf so that the big choppers, the Chinooks and Black Hawks who have been airlifting rescue teams high into the mountain the past several days. They've gone to their home bases around the state to regroup and to stand by and be called upon at anytime when things do develop.

Two fixed-wing aircraft have been up and around the mountain throughout the day to look for some of those clues, look for what they're calling a self-rescue where the climbers may very well just pop their heads out of a cave or crevice or crack in the mount where they may be held up and say "Here I am." That didn't happen and there were no other clues.

Family members were also taken on the same reconnaissance flights where they took pictures of areas where they think those climbers are.

Today was a good day. Still is a good day to fly above about the 2,000 foot mark. Things are fairly clear. But as you know, as days go by, the time, the number of days pass, compared to when they should have been down at Timberline Lodge, the question bears, when do you stop looking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHERIFF JOE WAMPLER, HOOD RIVER COUNTY, OREGON: This office is not going to give up until somebody tells me that the risk of doing this thing outweighs the results. And until I hear that, I'm not giving up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARCIANO: He is resolute and he's got a big heart, that sheriff. And he continues to comfort the family members and continues to search for Brian Hall, Nikko Cooke still up on the mountain. As you know, Mr. James was flown down. His body was flown down yesterday. Some clues from his body. One, he had a shoulder injury. A dislocated shoulder, indicated what everybody thought, there was an injury and that's where the problems arose.

Also, a camera was found. Some of the pictures on that camera indicate, one, the route they took which was up Eliot Glacier, up the dangerous gully. They summitted and then ran into problems, and also what kind of equipment they had which is what they thought, they were traveling light to go fast, they had enough equipment to get up and down the mountain in a couple days. But how much did they have to survive for over a week. How much fuel to melt snow, how much food to keep themselves sustained and keep that energy up. That is the question here.

Avalanche teams are assembled and on standby up at the 6,000 foot base, Cloud Cap waiting for avalanche risk to go down. That window of opportunity is closing, as is the weather opportunity. Today is a good day, tomorrow will not. We've got a storm coming in.

It's not going to be devastating storm, but any storm in the Pacific Northwest in the Cascades this time of year at elevation will not only bring the snow but it will bring wind 30, 40, 50, maybe even 60 miles an hour. So it's unlikely they will fly any aircraft tomorrow and probably Thursday as well -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Are they still letting any climbers go up Mt. Hood right now, or have they just told everybody to stay away?

MARCIANO: They're on standby at the two, one at Timberline Lodge at the south side of the mountain at about 6,000 feet. And two at the Cloud Cap Inn which is on this side, the north side of the mountain, those teams are pretty much regrouping today. So there has no organized group of rescuers up the mountain, other than the two fixed- wing aircraft.

The avalanche danger is still considerable, Wolf, so that has been the major issue. Where they think these climbers are is extremely steep, difficult terrain and has added at much as 10 feet of snow over the past two weeks in numerous avalanche and snow slides in the past several days. So it's just difficult terrain to get to. To answer your question, no, there has been no organized group of rescuers climbing up that mountain today.

BLITZER: All right. Thanks for that, Rob, we're going to check back with you as we get more information. Rob Marciano is our man on the scene at Hood River in Oregon.

Coming up, could technology have made a difference for the missing climbers on Mt. Hood? We're going to show you some potentially life- saving tools in our "Welcome to the Future" report.

Plus, the first lady, Laura Bush, having a malignant skin tumor removed last month. Why are we just finding out about it right now? We'll talk about it with our White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux. Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: CNN's Paula Zahn has a special town hall meeting coming up later tonight. The subject -- race in America. Paula is joining us now live from Beaumont, Texas with a little bit of a preview.

Paula, why Beaumont, Texas?

PAULA ZAHN, CNN HOST: Well in all honesty, we had planned to be in Vidor, Texas, a town that we have profiled last year - excuse me, last week, which we were looking at - its history as a sundown town. Those are towns where many decades ago blacks were encouraged to be off of the street at nighttime.

And the town is very much living with the scars of that legacy. And we had planned to do the town hall meeting in Vidor. And the mayor recently rescinded his offer. So we have come to Beaumont, where we will also include members of that community here as well as members of Vidor to talk about it.

Interestingly enough, I came back from meeting the mayor of Vidor who has expressed to me that he very much resents the fact that Vidor today is still used in his words as a symbol of racism in America. He said at one time, that was justified, but not today. And I think what we'll see here tonight is a well-rounded representation of the kinds of issue blacks and whites deal with on a daily basis here.

BLITZER: Talk a little bit about the specific issues you want to raise tonight. ZAHN: Well, I think the Michael Richards tirade at the comedy club got us all thinking about how much racism might lie below the surface of a lot of folks in this country. And I think tonight, what we're going to try to do is explore with local leaders what the manifestation is of bigotry is here, if they even view racism as alive and well here.

We also have some national leaders, including Reverend Al Sharpton to weigh in -- We don't want to focus in and pick on Vidor, Texas. That's not why we're here. We are using it as a reflection of what is happening all over the country so we have also broadened the discussion out on a national level as to how our country is dealing with issues of race, particularly, black and whites. And I'm sure you will hear tonight that a lot of whites also feel that they have been victimized by racism at the hands of blacks.

BLITZER: It's entitled "Out in the Open, Racism in America," a special PAULA ZAHN NOW. It airs right after THE SITUATION ROOM at 8:00 p.m. Eastern. You will be live tonight. Paula, important work that you're doing. Thanks very much for doing it and we'll be watching.

And coming up, just in, President Bush says he wants a bigger U.S. military to fight a long-term war against terrorism. But what about the short-term? Are the battle lines being drawn between the White House and generals on the issue of a temporary troop boost in Iraq? We'll hear from a former Pentagon insider.

And we'll also hear from our Ben Wedeman, he got caught up in the Gaza gun battles as Palestinians edge perilously close to a civil war. We'll tell you what's going on in that front. Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: To our viewers, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM where new pictures and information are arriving all the time.

Happening now, President Bush planning to expand the U.S. military to meet the challenges of the war on terror. The "Washington Post" quoting the president as saying he's ordering the new defense secretary Robert Gates to come up with a plan for increasing the size of ground forces, amid allegations by some that U.S. troops are simply stretched too thin right now.

Also, a significant change for the search for the missing climbers on Mt. Hood in Oregon. Officials now saying the big search is over. But the hunt for small clues goes on as they try to learn the fate of Brian Hall and Jerry Cooke.

And she's keeping her crown and heading to rehab. Twenty-one- year-old Miss USA Tara Connor is agreeing to seek help after reports of heavy partying in New York clubs. Connor was believed to be on the verge of losing her title. But pageant co-owner Donald Trump says she deserves a second chance and can be a role model to young people with substance abuse problems. I'm Wolf Blitzer, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Back now to our top story, President Bush telling the "Washington Post" he wants to increase the size of the U.S. military to fight a long-term war on terrorism. That comes amid a sharp debate over a short-term boost to U.S. troop strength in Iraq. Sources telling CNN that top generals in the Pentagon and on the battlefield oppose that idea. The White House denies there's a rift between the president and the joint chiefs.

Joining us now, retired U.S. Army Colonel Pat Lang, former head of Middle East intelligence over at the DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Pat, thanks very much for coming in.

COL. PAT LANG, U.S. ARMY (RET.): My pleasure.

BLITZER: First of all what do you make of the president, all of a sudden, the day after Donald Rumsfeld leaves, Robert Gates comes in saying we're going to build up the U.S. Marine Corps and the army?

LANG: Well I think the desire to do that has been present in the army and Marine Corps leadership for a long time. They know that they're overextended, they don't have enough people to accomplish the task. And people are being rotated in their units back to Iraq or Afghanistan too often, it's destroying family life.

BLITZER: Well why didn't they do it before?

LANG: Well I think it's a matter of personalities and the president indicated --

BLITZER: Because Rumsfeld opposes?

LANG: Yes, I think that's right, essentially.

BLITZER: His notion when he came in, the U.S. can do a lot of this supposedly on the cheap with a smaller, meaner military machine. You don't need the overwhelming strength that Colin Powell and other commanders thought was required?

LANG: Secretary Rumsfeld's idea of how big the army and the Marine Corps need to be, especially the army, was very, very small and very reliant on light forces and fancy weapons, things like this. As a matter of fact, he's been planning to build the army down even farther after the current warfare stops.

And this kind of theory with regard to war has been pretty much disproven in Iraq where you need a lot of people, you know a lot of weapons and tanks, you need all these things. You don't want to have a fair fight, you always want it to be an unfair fight in your favor.

BLITZER: It was certainly the case in the first -- when you were at the Pentagon during the first gulf war when the U.S. deployed a half a million troops to liberate a small country like Kuwait. I never could understand why 150,000 would do the job in Iraq, but that's another subject. Let's talk about this proposal for a 20 to 30,000 man surge to go in over the next six months to a year, to bring stability to Baghdad?

LANG: Well I think it's not a good idea. Because the reason I think that is it's too big a risk. It's too big of a gamble because if you pull a lot of units out of their place in the rotation queue to go back to Iraq or Afghanistan, in this case Iraq, and you put them in Baghdad for a decisive battle against the Sunni insurgents which will inevitably, I think, slop over in the Mafia militia business because we're trying to put together a coalition that would make them unnecessary in Maliki's government. If you do that, you'll have done something which means that you either have to win or it will be perceived everywhere that you've lost and that's a tremendous gamble.

BLITZER: Can the U.S. still win in Iraq?

LANG: I don't think you can win militarily. I think the insurgencies, all the different insurgencies and the fighting between the Shias and the Sunnis has gotten to the point where the e fact that we can pacify this in military meetings is really to be out. What needs to be done here is a really aggressive persistent attempt by large scale diplomacy to resolve the different interests across the region so that we can get people to actually stop fighting each other.

BLITZER: I went back and took a look at what you told me back on May 24, 2004, that's two and a half years ago when you were interviewed by me. And you were pretty much on. You were really concerned about his notion of having some autonomous zones, if you will, a Kurdish zone, a Shiite zone, a Sunni zone.

And you said if the U.S. were to go in that direction and let it happen that would be a recipe you said for creating civil war and leading the Middle East in chaos. Is that worst fear that you had then being materialized right now?

LANG: Yes it really is. There's a lot of talk about how some people think we should partition Iraq and things like this. Actually, we're past the point of what I said there. Iraq is in fact partitioning itself. It's in the process of doing that right now.

And the danger is, is the process continues that all of the outside players who are allied to people inside will join in the fighting, you'll have a tremendous regional war. There's some people who think that wouldn't be a bad idea, but I think it will be a disaster.

BLITZER: What should the U.S. do right now, give us the advice if you were still in the DIA, the advice you would give the commanders, the commander in chief, if you will, seeing the deck that we have right now, the hand that we have, that we're holding, what should the U.S. do right now?

LANG: First of all, we should keep our force in Iraq at about the same size right now because that's one of our biggest bargaining chips, that we have this force present here. BLITZER: About 140,000?

LANG: Something like that. We should try to sort of hold what we have, keep training Iraqi troops. There's going to be an Iraqi government of some kind. We need to have some kind of relationship with it. At the same time, I think we should go around to all of the people around there, the Iranians, the Turks, Syrians, all the people who can cause trouble...

BLITZER: The Saudis?

LANG: Them, too. And figure out what it is that we can trade them for their cooperation. And it can't just be about Iraq because if you want people to deal with you just about the issue that's important to you and not the issues that are important to them, they have no reason to talk to you. So we have to have a broad agenda on negotiations with all the players to resolve this so they'll stop fighting and then we can leave.

BLITZER: Pat Lang, thanks very much for coming in.

LANG: Always my pleasure.

BLITZER: Pat Lang, United States Colonel, Army, retired joining us here. Thanks very much. And coming up, every day as the death toll rises in Iraq, the work of Iraq's insurgents play out on the screen in some very graphic images.

Now CNN's Ryan Chilcote looks at how Iraq's justice system responds to the violence -- Ryan.

RYAN CHILCOTE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we've all seen images of the Iraqis on the street killed as they go to work or school, we've even seen the insurgent videos as they commit their crimes. Now for the first time, we get a view from the Iraqi government as it carries out its system of justice.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHILCOTE (voice-over): A rare glimpse into the murky world of Iraqi justice. This time, it is Iraq's little-seen justice system carrying out the ultimate punishment that its former president now faces. Never before seen video, 13 inmates condemned to die for crimes ranging from burning bodies, to rape and murder. Video provided by Iraq's elected government that it says shows the final steps down death row.

Here a man ironically named Saddam hears his final judgment. Saddam, a voice pronounces, the central criminal court has issued your death sentence. The men are then seen lined up in Iraq's death chambers. Thick nooses around their necks before the video goes to black. Every day, Iraqi television is rife with images of ruthless carnage on the streets. Now newscasts are showing these images from death row. The first chance for Iraqis to see their government's ultimate justice.

The images may also provide insight into the fate of Iraq's former dictator, condemned to die in November, down to his last appeal. No word on when a decision will come. If denied, then according to law, Saddam's final statement and death by hanging will also be recorded on video. We don't know for sure how many executions the Iraqi government has carried out since reinstating the death penalty in 2004. They're usually carried out in secret with numbers believed to be in the dozens.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CHILCOTE: The hangings don't always go according to plan. "Time" magazine reports one time the rope broke and the condemned man fell to the floor. A development some eyewitnesses called divine intervention and led to a debate as to whether the man's life should be spared. Forty minutes later, he was strung up again -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Ryan thanks for that, Ryan Chilcote reporting from Baghdad.

Coming up, new efforts to end the bloody gun battles in Gaza that have Palestinians on the brink of a civil war. CNN's Ben Wedeman is there, he's one of the most experienced reporters in the region. He'll have the latest for us.

Plus, ours isn't the only state-of-the-art SITUATION ROOM. The White House unveiling its own brand new situation room after a major overhaul. We're going to show you what they did and why they did it. Stay with us because you're in this SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: In Gaza, two main Palestinian factions are now trying to scramble back from the edge of the cliff. They've just agreed to yet another cease-fire, hoping to put an end to the bloody gun battles that have brought Palestinians dangerously close to civil war.

CNN's Ben Wedeman was caught in the middle of it all earlier today -- Ben.

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, the fighting began before dawn in Gaza and went on sporadically all day long.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WEDEMAN (voice-over): It's time to run for your life. The cease-fire is collapsing. This gun battle between Palestinian police and the Hamas militia broke out as school children were out on a lunch break. Shopkeeper Haddad Alian is closing up. I'm going home, he tells me. I'm afraid. We're done with. It's never been this bad. Hopes the truce between the Fatah-controlled police and the Hamas militia would hold are fading fast.

As gangland-style warfare seems to take hold. Elsewhere in Gaza City, vendors pack up another gun battle brewing just up the street. As members of Palestinian military intelligence angry over the killing of a comrade try but fail to trash a Hamas banner. They were interrupted by more gunfire. Every new death brings new cause for revenge. A vicious cycle of killing and counter-killing no one seems able to stop. At this funeral for a Fatah member killed in clashes with Hamas, curses for the militant Islamic group. As they head to the graveyard, yet more shooting, we run into the first open door.

(on camera): We've taken cover inside a vegetable store here in Gaza City. There's gunfire going on outside between members of Palestinian security and unknown others somewhere out there.

(voice-over): Gunmen told us if we videotaped anymore, they'd shoot us. So all we could do is set the camera on the ground and let it roll. Recording as this city descends into chaos.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WEDEMAN: Wolf, efforts are under way, by for instance, Jordan's King Abdullah to intercede to stop the fighting between Fatah and Hamas. But so far, those efforts have yet to meet with any success -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Ben Wedeman reporting for us. Ben thank you very much. What a story. We're going to continue to stay on top of that. That Palestinian fighting amongst themselves.

We're also learning more about that cancer scare involving the first lady Laura Bush. The White House now says she had a malignant skin tumor removed from her right leg shortly after Election Day last month.

Joining us now, our White House correspondent, Suzanne Malveaux, she's with us in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Suzanne, this was a surprise, the first lady had this form of skin cancer, was removed, but they didn't tell us about. What's the story behind the story?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: You're absolutely right Wolf and I talked to the press secretary of the first lady who said, look, you know it was a private matter, she didn't feel like she needed to disclose it. But quite frankly, she was found out. I mean it happened shortly before Election Day. A reporter noticed a bandage that was on her leg, as asked her about it.

The press secretary said it's a sore and then later we found out that it was a sore that wasn't going away. She got a biopsy, later discovered that it was cancer and had this growth that was actually removed. The reason we found out about it last night was another reporter saw her at this Hanukkah party and again there was a big bandage that was on her leg, asked about it, and her office decided this was the time to come clean with the procedure.

BLITZER: You know there's one rule -- I covered the White House for a long time, for the president, the vice president, whatever medical condition they have that might go wrong, that immediately is supposed to be shared with the press corps, with the news media. But there's a separate set of rules for the family, if you will, including the first lady.

MALVEAUX: Well absolutely because really she has the same legal medical privacy rights that you and I do. That's something that the White House talked about today. That's something that her office as well talked about. So she felt that she had a sense to keep that to herself, but we have seen in the past, some first ladies, Betty Ford as you know who revealed her alcoholism. Nancy Reagan, her breast cancer, there has been some precedent for being a little bit more open, but as you know this White House isn't always that way.

BLITZER: I suspect we will be hearing from the first lady down the road Laura Bush and she'll talk about the dangers of skin cancer. She's gone through it now and what all of us should be doing to make sure we avoid the sun at least too much. Suzanne thanks very much for coming in.

MALVEAUX: Sure.

BLITZER: And big changes being unveiled at the other situation room here in Washington. That would be over at the White House in the west wing, they're situation room. That initially grew out of the Cuban missile crisis and President Johnson used it extensively during the Vietnam War.

More recently it's where President Reagan strategized the final days of the cold war. But in terms of technology little had changed over the years until now. The new White House situation room is state-of-the-art, with features including flat-screen monitors, laptop computer hookups, ceiling cameras to show documents on the table and even sensors to detect cell phones which are prohibited.

The updates were so badly needed that when this SITUATION ROOM debuted here on CNN in August 2005, White House officials told us at that time that our technology, meaning our technology here at CNN was putting their technology to shame. Glad the White House finally catching up. We're going to have a lot more on the White House situation room coming up in our 7:00 p.m. eastern hour, Ed Henry all over this story.

Up ahead, it's the gear that could save your life. High-tech devices experts say every climber should have. We're going to show you in our "Welcome to the Future" report what is going on.

Plus, Jack Cafferty wondering could Republicans nominate a social liberal like Rudy Giuliani for president? Jack with "The Cafferty File" and your email. That's coming up right here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Could the right tools have made the difference for those climbers still missing on Oregon's Mt. Hood? There are some high tech devices experts say no climber should be without. Let's turn once again to Carol Costello. She has our "Welcome to the Future" report. Carol? CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Hi Wolf. Hello to all of you. Today rescue workers talked about a camera with pictures they found near Kelly James' body. The pictures showed three happy climbers lightly but well equipped. It's the lightly part that's worrisome. It may have cost them their lives.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO (voice-over): As the search grows more desperate, uneasy questions keep popping up, could the climbers have saved themselves if only. Did the thrill of the climb override the need for life-saving equipment?

(on camera): Is it sort of like riding a roller coaster, it's that sense of danger that makes it even more exciting?

WILLIAM BAER, CLIMBING EXPERT: Yes, absolutely. But it's also in your control. The errors that happen oftentimes are human errors, in this situation I think it was just one of those things that was unpreventable.

COSTELLO: William Baer teaches people to climb inside and out. He blames the sudden change in the weather for the tragedy on Mt. Hood. Kelly James, Brian Hall and Jerry Nikko Cooke seemed to have everything they needed. Pick axes, bedding, food, rope, maps, and a cell phone, and decades of experience between them. But other climbers say they should have had one more thing, easily available life-saving technology.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's never not necessary.

COSTELLO: Mitch Jackson an avid climber who works at a sporting goods store, Tents and Trails in Manhattan, says that necessary thing would be an avalanche tracker. Example, a jacket with a transmitter in the sleeve.

MITCH JACKSON, TENTS & TRAILS: They can use radar with this and this will reflect back the radar signal. Similar to like what a bat does when it's looking for bugs. It will send out a signal and what bounces back, it knows that there's something there.

COSTELLO: There are other impressive devices as well. Avalanche beacons worn on the outside of your coat, sending off signals down to 35 meters so if you're buried beneath the snow, pinpointing you becomes easier. Wow, that is awesome.

JACKSON: And there it is, I am point one meters away.

COSTELLO: As far as we know, the two missing climbers did not carry one of these devices with them. They did have a cell phone which is how they located Kelly James. A positive, but it could not pinpoint his location exactly. When it was found near his body, it was wet and unoperational.

(END VIDEOTAPE) COSTELLO: Also, climbers usually never leave somebody alone behind. They usually travel in even numbers so an injured climber need never be alone if two others are able to set off for help -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right Carol, thanks very much. We all live and learn and useful information for those who want to be climbers.

Can YouTube help fight crime? One police department in Canada is hoping the popular video sharing Web site will help solve a murder. Let's turn once again to our internet reporter, Abbi Tatton -- Abbi.

ABBI TATTON, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, this is security video from a Hamilton, Ontario bar, showing two men arriving for a concert on November 16th. Two men Hamilton Police Service have identified not as suspects but as persons of interest in a murder that took place later on that night in a nearby parking lot. Detective Sergeant Jorge Lasso thought that young concert goers might be able to identify the men if only he could reach them.

So on December 6th, Lasso uploaded this video to YouTube along with about 65,000 other people that upload video to YouTube each day. Lasso had seen his own children use YouTube as a source of information and thought he'd give it a try. So far, it's been viewed 14,000 times or so. Police have not identified the men although they are hopefully.

This comes at a time when police departments around the country are expanding their use of the internet and crime prevention and crime solving. Detective Sergeant Lasso believes that his is the first department in North America to use YouTube in this way -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Abbi, thank you for that. Up next will Republicans nominate a social liberal like Rudy Giuliani for president? Jack has your e-mail when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Check back with Jack Cafferty for "The Cafferty File." Jack?

CAFFERTY: Wolf, the question this hour is could Republicans nominate a social liberal like Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City for president. He's having his first big fundraiser tonight and apparently is thinking about taking a shot at this thing.

Peg writes this, "I'm still registered Republican but not happy about it. As long as the evangelicals rule, so a Republican social liberal like Rudy might keep me in the party. I'm not a right wing evangelical, but I am a committed Christian. A Lutheran, I love this line, we're quieter, but just as Christian. I resent the attitude in my party that seems to imply if you're not evangelical, you're not good enough."

Andrew in Little Rock, Arkansas, "The Republicans won in 2000, 2002, 2004 by appealing to the most conservative part of their party. One bad election is not enough to convince them that pandering to right- wingers is not a winning strategy."

Joyce in Yardley, Pennsylvania, "Giuliani may get out of the gate, barely, but he'll never get the nomination. Unless the press fails us like they did in the run-up to the war, relevant facts about his manner of governing will get the attention they deserve. I lived in New York for 40 years, including Giuliani's time as mayor. Americans are impressed with his leadership in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Personally, I saw it as him finally doing his job."

Jan in Alexandria, Virginia, "Could Republicans support a social liberal? I've been waiting for years for Republicans to see the light and reject the tedious control issues of the evangelicals. Giuliani's the right man for the times. I may be able to return to the Republican Party if he runs."

And Greg in Grapevine, Texas, "Does anyone wonder why only 25 percent of the electorate bothers to vote? The 75 percent of us in the middle, those that agree with Giuliani's position on security and social issues, have been disenfranchised by the lunatic fringe on both the left and right who control the political agenda. No wonder the Republicans are worried."

If you didn't see your email here, you can go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile where we post a bunch more of them online -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And a lot of people like to read them. Jack, see you back here in one hour, 7:00 p.m. eastern, much more of THE SITUATION ROOM. In the meantime, "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT" starting right now. Kitty Pilgrim sitting in -- Kitty.

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