Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Sunday Morning
Insight & Input
Aired March 16, 2003 - 09:30 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.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Time now for "Insight & Input." This is time that you, the viewer, are able to talk to CNN correspondents and contributors about the top news stories, and they will take your questions.
Dana Bash is standing by at the White House, Nic Robertson is in Baghdad, and in Little Rock, Arkansas, our military analyst General Wesley Clark. All of you, thanks for being with us.
I think our first question is from Dale, this is for Nic Robertson. Dale writes in, saying, will resistance vary in the recently denoted four different battle zones? Probably not too much information on that, Nic, but what can you say?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Very difficult to analyze, but the information that we get from outside of Iraq indicates that Iraq is keeping its best troops, the elite Republican Guard, for the capital, for the central areas. That would indicate that fighting perhaps would be stronger in and around Baghdad.
However, it's not clear to us on the ground. We don't get to see -- we don't get taken out to see troop strengths. We don't get to know, officially, which units are located whereabouts in the country. But certainly, the set-up of these four regions, and from what we've been hearing, indicates that the last and strongest stand will be in Baghdad, indicating that perhaps the better troops will be kept in reserve for that.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, CNN ANCHOR: OK, Nic.
We have an e-mail coming in now from Robin in Ottawa, Canada. This is for Dana. "In the event that Saddam doesn't disarm and it comes to war, what steps is the US going to take to stop a bloodbath in northern Iraq between the Kurds and the Turks?"
DANA BASH, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that might be a better question for Nic, who is in the region. But what they have said here all along at the White House is that they are going to try to make this, if there is military action, as quick as possible, and they're going to try as hard as they can to protect the people in Iraq. That includes in northern Iraq.
They are saying, time and time again, they are going in as liberators, not conquerors. And they do have preliminary plans in place to have some kind of protective government to start some kind of provisional government in Iraq, as soon as they possibly can.
NEVILLE: All right, Dana.
COOPER: Thanks.
General Clark, we've got a question for you; this is from Kevin. Kevin asks, "Are the ground troops equipped for a chemical, biological threat and how would they know when to put on the protective equipment."
Obviously, we have heard a lot about a chemical, biological threat. We've already heard a lot about the suits that the soldiers have. Tell us a little bit about them. There's been controversy over the condition of these suits, whether they're well equipped enough, and how do they know when they have to put them on?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I think the suits are good. The masks are good. The key is to get the early warning so you don't put them on when people first start displaying the symptoms of the poisoning or the sickness.
So you have detectors that are with the units. If you're in a stationery position, you put your detectors out upwind of your position so that anything that's wind delivered will come in there. You look for suspicious activity. You look for intelligence indicators, maybe you'll overhear something, or maybe you'll see particular units moving.
It's a very complex network of intelligence gathering that would give us the early warning that we need. And then, we might have to be in a very high protective posture for hours as the situation develops.
COOPER: General Clark, just yesterday, "The New York Times" had an interesting article that some marine units are being issued pigeons as an early warning signal. Is that a sign of preparedness, or is that a sign that maybe the equipment they have is not so good.
CLARK: It's a sign of the military's quest for redundancy at all times. We like to have 15 or 20 different indicators that would tell us that we're under attack. And so if you use a live animal like a pigeon or a chicken, it's the sort of last minute; if something happens to them, it would happen to them at a lower dose. So earlier than a human being would be afflicted. There might be a last minute chance there to get your mask on before you have fatal symptoms.
NEVILLE: OK, General. We have a question now for Dana, coming from Charles in Michigan. He says, "Why is so little attention being paid to alternative plans which target Hussein, such as the proposal of the UAE and the Arab League?"
BASH: I think that is a reference to the proposal to perhaps get Saddam Hussein out of the country altogether, a plan for exile. And the administration has made it very, very clear that that is something that they would welcome with open arms.
As a matter of fact, when they're talking about the kind of disarray at the United Nations, the line here at the White House the past couple of days has been that because of the disunity, or lack of unity, at the U.N., it has made it less possible for the -- to show a united front that could potentially get Saddam Hussein the message, and let him kind of understand that the world sort of means business, and that perhaps he would, if he saw that unity, take action and leave on his own accord. So that is something, the idea of exile is something, that the White House has really supported. But the truth is that they don't see that there is much viability to that plan and, as we're seeing, it's probably -- that's probably the case.
COOPER: All right, Nic Robertson in Baghdad, another question from Dale. He writes in, has the Baghdad regime given any explanation to account for the massive quantity of anthrax and nerve agent allegedly in its possession? What is its official position, if any?
ROBERTSON: Its official position is that it unilaterally destroyed this back in 1991. And that's the context of this report that the U.N. Security Council, or the U.N. Inspectors have just received, outlining for the U.N. how Iraq says that they can go about and verify Iraq's disposal of the VX nerve agent.
But the U.N. doesn't think Iraq's analysis to do this will provide accurate results. So, really, it's all embodied in that. Iraq has put forward an additional number of names of scientists who were involved in the chemical weapons industry. However, the U.N. has also responded to that, and said it knows that there are many more scientists involved in that particular area than Iraq has already declared.
So some minor specs, but the U.N. really needs a lot more on this before it can really know for sure what's happened to those past stocks.
NEVILLE: OK. We have an e-mail coming in now for General Clark from Gerald in New York. He says, "Why are we so forthcoming about publicizing our battle plans? Recently, we announced that we intend to frighten the Iraqis by a prodigious show of force in the first two days of the war. Wouldn't their knowledge of this plan aid in their preparation to sit out that 'storm'?"
COOPER: That's a good question.
CLARK: Well, I think this is a continuing question. But if you get down and look at what we've said, we've really disclosed very little about our battle plans. Anybody that looks at US military doctrine and what we've done in the last four wars we've fought would see that we're going to have a lot of strikes up front.
The fact is, the Iraqis don't know where we're going to strike, what we're going to strike with, exactly when we're going to strike, and how we're going to follow it up. So all of the key tactical information that they would need to be able to respond militarily and take defensive measures or whatever to these attacks, they're missing. And that information is not being disclosed.
NEVILLE: OK. And Nic, this is some really developing information coming in across the CNN desk here right now. I want to ask you this question. Apparently, Secretary of State Colin Powell is saying that if he were a journalist, if he were an inspector, he would get out of Baghdad now, out of Iraq now.
ROBERTSON: Well, I think there's a number of journalists here that are considering their situations. A high priority, not only for us at CNN, but for all the journalists here, is safety.
Following safety you have to analyze, will you be able to do your job and will you be able to report the stories? What will happen to your transmission equipment? What -- will you actually be able to broadcast your signals and bring the information? Will you be free to report the information, to report what's going on in its full context?
So, of course, a lot of journalists here right now analyzing that situation very carefully, and weighing some very, very heavy personal decisions.
NEVILLE: OK. Nic Robertson, Dana Bash, General Wesley Clark, thank you so much for being here this morning for "Insight & Input".
COOPER: It's always interesting to hear what viewers want to know, and it's nice to give them the opportunity to ask the questions directly.
NEVILLE: It really is.
COOPER: All right. Thanks for your e-mails. Appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired March 16, 2003 - 09:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Time now for "Insight & Input." This is time that you, the viewer, are able to talk to CNN correspondents and contributors about the top news stories, and they will take your questions.
Dana Bash is standing by at the White House, Nic Robertson is in Baghdad, and in Little Rock, Arkansas, our military analyst General Wesley Clark. All of you, thanks for being with us.
I think our first question is from Dale, this is for Nic Robertson. Dale writes in, saying, will resistance vary in the recently denoted four different battle zones? Probably not too much information on that, Nic, but what can you say?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Very difficult to analyze, but the information that we get from outside of Iraq indicates that Iraq is keeping its best troops, the elite Republican Guard, for the capital, for the central areas. That would indicate that fighting perhaps would be stronger in and around Baghdad.
However, it's not clear to us on the ground. We don't get to see -- we don't get taken out to see troop strengths. We don't get to know, officially, which units are located whereabouts in the country. But certainly, the set-up of these four regions, and from what we've been hearing, indicates that the last and strongest stand will be in Baghdad, indicating that perhaps the better troops will be kept in reserve for that.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, CNN ANCHOR: OK, Nic.
We have an e-mail coming in now from Robin in Ottawa, Canada. This is for Dana. "In the event that Saddam doesn't disarm and it comes to war, what steps is the US going to take to stop a bloodbath in northern Iraq between the Kurds and the Turks?"
DANA BASH, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that might be a better question for Nic, who is in the region. But what they have said here all along at the White House is that they are going to try to make this, if there is military action, as quick as possible, and they're going to try as hard as they can to protect the people in Iraq. That includes in northern Iraq.
They are saying, time and time again, they are going in as liberators, not conquerors. And they do have preliminary plans in place to have some kind of protective government to start some kind of provisional government in Iraq, as soon as they possibly can.
NEVILLE: All right, Dana.
COOPER: Thanks.
General Clark, we've got a question for you; this is from Kevin. Kevin asks, "Are the ground troops equipped for a chemical, biological threat and how would they know when to put on the protective equipment."
Obviously, we have heard a lot about a chemical, biological threat. We've already heard a lot about the suits that the soldiers have. Tell us a little bit about them. There's been controversy over the condition of these suits, whether they're well equipped enough, and how do they know when they have to put them on?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I think the suits are good. The masks are good. The key is to get the early warning so you don't put them on when people first start displaying the symptoms of the poisoning or the sickness.
So you have detectors that are with the units. If you're in a stationery position, you put your detectors out upwind of your position so that anything that's wind delivered will come in there. You look for suspicious activity. You look for intelligence indicators, maybe you'll overhear something, or maybe you'll see particular units moving.
It's a very complex network of intelligence gathering that would give us the early warning that we need. And then, we might have to be in a very high protective posture for hours as the situation develops.
COOPER: General Clark, just yesterday, "The New York Times" had an interesting article that some marine units are being issued pigeons as an early warning signal. Is that a sign of preparedness, or is that a sign that maybe the equipment they have is not so good.
CLARK: It's a sign of the military's quest for redundancy at all times. We like to have 15 or 20 different indicators that would tell us that we're under attack. And so if you use a live animal like a pigeon or a chicken, it's the sort of last minute; if something happens to them, it would happen to them at a lower dose. So earlier than a human being would be afflicted. There might be a last minute chance there to get your mask on before you have fatal symptoms.
NEVILLE: OK, General. We have a question now for Dana, coming from Charles in Michigan. He says, "Why is so little attention being paid to alternative plans which target Hussein, such as the proposal of the UAE and the Arab League?"
BASH: I think that is a reference to the proposal to perhaps get Saddam Hussein out of the country altogether, a plan for exile. And the administration has made it very, very clear that that is something that they would welcome with open arms.
As a matter of fact, when they're talking about the kind of disarray at the United Nations, the line here at the White House the past couple of days has been that because of the disunity, or lack of unity, at the U.N., it has made it less possible for the -- to show a united front that could potentially get Saddam Hussein the message, and let him kind of understand that the world sort of means business, and that perhaps he would, if he saw that unity, take action and leave on his own accord. So that is something, the idea of exile is something, that the White House has really supported. But the truth is that they don't see that there is much viability to that plan and, as we're seeing, it's probably -- that's probably the case.
COOPER: All right, Nic Robertson in Baghdad, another question from Dale. He writes in, has the Baghdad regime given any explanation to account for the massive quantity of anthrax and nerve agent allegedly in its possession? What is its official position, if any?
ROBERTSON: Its official position is that it unilaterally destroyed this back in 1991. And that's the context of this report that the U.N. Security Council, or the U.N. Inspectors have just received, outlining for the U.N. how Iraq says that they can go about and verify Iraq's disposal of the VX nerve agent.
But the U.N. doesn't think Iraq's analysis to do this will provide accurate results. So, really, it's all embodied in that. Iraq has put forward an additional number of names of scientists who were involved in the chemical weapons industry. However, the U.N. has also responded to that, and said it knows that there are many more scientists involved in that particular area than Iraq has already declared.
So some minor specs, but the U.N. really needs a lot more on this before it can really know for sure what's happened to those past stocks.
NEVILLE: OK. We have an e-mail coming in now for General Clark from Gerald in New York. He says, "Why are we so forthcoming about publicizing our battle plans? Recently, we announced that we intend to frighten the Iraqis by a prodigious show of force in the first two days of the war. Wouldn't their knowledge of this plan aid in their preparation to sit out that 'storm'?"
COOPER: That's a good question.
CLARK: Well, I think this is a continuing question. But if you get down and look at what we've said, we've really disclosed very little about our battle plans. Anybody that looks at US military doctrine and what we've done in the last four wars we've fought would see that we're going to have a lot of strikes up front.
The fact is, the Iraqis don't know where we're going to strike, what we're going to strike with, exactly when we're going to strike, and how we're going to follow it up. So all of the key tactical information that they would need to be able to respond militarily and take defensive measures or whatever to these attacks, they're missing. And that information is not being disclosed.
NEVILLE: OK. And Nic, this is some really developing information coming in across the CNN desk here right now. I want to ask you this question. Apparently, Secretary of State Colin Powell is saying that if he were a journalist, if he were an inspector, he would get out of Baghdad now, out of Iraq now.
ROBERTSON: Well, I think there's a number of journalists here that are considering their situations. A high priority, not only for us at CNN, but for all the journalists here, is safety.
Following safety you have to analyze, will you be able to do your job and will you be able to report the stories? What will happen to your transmission equipment? What -- will you actually be able to broadcast your signals and bring the information? Will you be free to report the information, to report what's going on in its full context?
So, of course, a lot of journalists here right now analyzing that situation very carefully, and weighing some very, very heavy personal decisions.
NEVILLE: OK. Nic Robertson, Dana Bash, General Wesley Clark, thank you so much for being here this morning for "Insight & Input".
COOPER: It's always interesting to hear what viewers want to know, and it's nice to give them the opportunity to ask the questions directly.
NEVILLE: It really is.
COOPER: All right. Thanks for your e-mails. Appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
