Return to Transcripts main page

On the Story

DeLay Discusses New Economic Stimulus Law; Ford, Hobson Talk About Their Visit to Afghanistan

Aired March 09, 2002 - 10:00   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.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I know your heart aches, and we ache for you. But your son and your brother died for a noble and just cause.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN KARL, HOST: The war intensifies, and the country confronts the cost. We'll have the latest on the fighting, and we'll talk to powerful Republican Tom DeLay, the House majority whip, about the war, politics and how life has changed since the terror attacks six months ago.

Plus, two congressmen report on their just-completed trip to Afghanistan.

And former CIA Director James Woolsey talks about the lessons learned in the terrorism fight so far and what next.

All just ahead on CNN's SATURDAY EDITION.

Good morning to the West Coast and all our viewers across North America. I'm Jonathan Karl in Washington.

In a few minutes, the president comes into the White House Rose Garden to sign the economic stimulus bill into law. House majority whip Tom DeLay will also join us with his reaction.

And later we'll talk to two members of Congress just back from Afghanistan and get some insight into the renewed fighting there and the war's next stage. And we'll talk to former CIA Director James Woolsey.

We want your e-mail questions. The address is saturday.edition@cnn.com.

But first, a news alert.

(NEWSBREAK) KARL: We're a couple of minutes away from President Bush's remarks, but joining us first from Houston is House majority whip Tom DeLay of Texas.

Representative DeLay, it's an honor to have you here this morning. Welcome to the show.

REP. TOM DELAY (R-TX), MAJORITY WHIP: Good morning, Jonathan. Glad to be with you.

KARL: And it just so happens that the president will be signing in a few minutes the bill that you've been pushing for months, a scaled-back version of what you've been pushing.

But let me ask you, economic stimulus finally getting signed into law, but the economy seems to be recovering. Too little too late?

DELAY: Well, Jonathan, I really don't want to correct you, but this bill is not an economic stimulus. It may have a slight stimulative effect, but this is a jobs creation bill that helps unemployed workers out there, the expense of which is offset by giving some small business some tax cuts.

The real stimulus package, the one that was passed back in October, has been declared dead today by the Stimulus Daily. You know, we sent three bills to the Senate that was real economic stimulus, that would have created hundreds of thousands of jobs. But it's being declared dead today, killed by Tom Daschle and his Democrats in the Senate.

(LAUGHTER)

KARL: Declared dead, and I see you've got the death certificate there, I imagine that's what we're looking at.

DELAY: That's correct.

KARL: Now, can you bring it back to life? Are you going to be pursuing more tax cuts this year?

DELAY: Oh yes. Well, you know the Republican House has passed a tax cut every year that we've been in the majority, and we're going to do another one this year.

We want to make permanent the death tax, we want to make permanent the marriage penalty repeal. I have a bill that repeals the Clinton tax on Social Security, gives seniors currently retired a zero capital gains and cuts taxes on their retirement benefits.

So we're going to put together another package that will come out in the next month or so, because we think the American people are paying too many taxes. We think that we can do more to get this economy growing again.

KARL: Well, you've proven that you've got the ability, even with that narrow, narrow majority you have in the House, to pass tax cuts in the House. But what makes you think you'd have any more luck this time getting it through the Senate?

DELAY: Well, it is an election year, and I think that the tax cut bill that we'll be putting together will be supported by the president, a very popular president.

And you're going to have some Democrats running in the Senate that are running for reelection that I think their constituents will tell them they would like to see the income tax on Social Security repealed; they would like to have an opportunity to use their retirement funds to take care of themselves in their retirement; and they would like to see the marriage penalty made permanent.

So I think we can build a momentum out there that will get Democrats up for reelection talking pretty strongly to Mr. Daschle.

KARL: And then if they vote against it, you've got an election issue?

DELAY: Well, that's usually what happens, isn't it?

(LAUGHTER)

KARL: And the vulnerable Democrats up for reelection are all from states this year that George Bush carried overwhelmingly.

And by the way -- I don't want to interrupt you, but I think we have pictures right now of President Bush coming into the Rose Garden. We'll hear his radio address right now.

BUSH: Good morning. I'm speaking to you live from the Rose Garden, where I'm about to sign legislation that will give short-term help to workers who've lost their jobs and provides long-term stimulus to create more jobs across our country.

I want to thank the vice president. I want to thank Speaker Hastert, Senator Daschle, Senator Lott, members of the Congress for joining me today as I sign this important piece of legislation. Many contributed to the success of this bill, but none more than the speaker and chairman, Bill Thomas.

Also here today are working men and women, small-business people, who make this economy run.

We're seeing some encouraging signs in the economy, but we can't stand by and simply hope for continued recovery. We must work for it. We must make sure that our recovery continues and gains momentum. We want a recovery that is broad enough and strong enough to provide jobs for all our citizens.

The terrorist attacks of September the 11th were also an attack on our economy, and a lot of people lost their jobs. Since then, many laid-off workers have been relying on unemployment benefits, which normally end after 26 weeks. The bill I signed this morning will allow the extension of jobless benefits by another 13 weeks and even longer in states with high unemployment rates. This will allow those who lost their jobs in the recession or in the aftermath of the September the 11th attacks more time to pay their bills and support their families while they look for work.

And in order for people to find jobs, businesses need to be hiring. So this new law will provide tax incentives for companies to expand and create jobs by investing in plant and equipment. This measure will mean more job opportunities for workers in every part of our country, especially in manufacturing and in high-tech and for those who work for small businesses.

This bill also stimulate economic growth by extending operating loss rules and by granting some alternative minimum tax relief.

The city of New York suffered a great tragedy on September the 11th and still faces major economic consequences. The bill I signed into law today provides over $5 billion in tax relief to aid in the recovery of lower Manhattan by helping businesses to get back on their feet so they can start hiring again. The people of New York have shown great courage and perseverance, and America stands with them.

This Monday marks six months since the attack on America. For the families of the victims, these have been six months of sorrow, and America will never forget their loss.

In our war on terror, these have been six months of determined action. We have destroyed terrorist camps; we've disrupted terrorist finances. We've toppled a terrorist regime and brought thousands of terrorists to justice.

We are strengthening our nation's defenses against attack. And today we are acting to help workers, we're acting to create jobs, and we're acting to strengthen our economy.

Thank you all for coming. And it's now my honor to sign this important piece of legislation.

(APPLAUSE)

KARL: So I don't know if you're seeing the pictures as well, Congressman DeLay, but we saw there at the president's side not only Speaker of the House Hastert and Trent Lott, Senate Republican leader, but also Tom Daschle.

DELAY: Well, Mr. Daschle deserves a little credit for it. He did pick it up and pass it in the Senate.

What he also deserves credit for is killing real stimulus, and real stimulus is lowering the marginal tax rate down to 25 percent. Real stimulus is giving corporate America and business America the kind of capital that they would need to invest in more jobs. And Mr. Daschle also deserves credit for killing that.

KARL: Now, the president also has sent you in Congress a budget -- a budget that is $100 billion in the red. Was that a mistake for the president to send the first out-of-balance budget in several years?

DELAY: No. I think the president did what he had to do based upon what he had to work with. I think we can look at his budget, and we'll probably, in the House at least, pass the budget more or less what he sent us. But we're going to work very hard to get toward balance.

You know, we've worked hard to balance this budget, particularly against a president before President Bush that didn't want to balance the budget. And so, we don't -- we think it's very important for us to work as hard as we can and see if we can't get to balance, see if we can't continue the fiscal responsibility that we've been able to impose to keep paying down the debt.

You know, we have paid over $450 billion down on the debt on our children, and we want to continue to do that. We also want to bring fiscal restraint to spending but, at the same time, provide the president what he needs to fight this war.

KARL: And now, speaking of debt, the president wants you to raise the debt ceiling, so he's now raising the possibility of adding more debt, which is what an out-of-balance budget obviously does. Are you going to give him that, are you going to give him that raised debt ceiling?

DELAY: Well, I think we're going to have to raise the debt ceiling on the debt created by Social Security surpluses, which let me explain to you, Jonathan. What that means is we are collecting more in payroll taxes than we need to pay Social Security benefits. That creates a debt.

Now, we paid down the debt on other government instruments. I mentioned $450 billion. We think we could lower the debt ceiling on the public debt while we have to raise the debt ceiling on the Social Security debt.

KARL: All right. Well, Congressman DeLay, we need to take a quick break.

What impact will September 11 have on the election year and the battle for the control of Congress? Your e-mail questions for House majority whip Tom DeLay when SATURDAY EDITION continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: Six months after the terrorist attacks, the remains of victims are still being pulled from the rubble of the World Trade Center. This week, the bodies of two more police officers were recovered.

And we're with Representative DeLay, the House majority whip.

Congressman DeLay, you had an interesting statement earlier this week in response to Senator Tom Daschle, who was raising some question about the future direction of the war. Your statement was one word, and it said "disgusting." I'm wondering, can you elaborate?

DELAY: Well, I think it's not the time to be questioning this president on how he is carrying out the war. George W. Bush, thank God we have him as president right now and thank God that we've got all of the people that he has, really strong individuals that around him, fighting this war. And thank God, we have got the kind of military -- in spite of the fact that the Clinton administration tried to devastate the military, we've got a military that is carrying out this war and doing some pretty amazing things.

And for Democrats to play politics -- it's time to try to play little games here and there by suggesting, or planting a suggestion with the American people that maybe this president is not doing the right thing, I think is disgusting. I think we ought to be united. I don't think we should be playing politics.

I think we've got one focus and one focus only, and that is to protect our citizens and bring security to this country. And that means we have to go find these terrorists, rout them out and go after those governments that are protecting them. And that's what the president is doing.

KARL: Now, John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, possible candidate for president in two years, put out a very sharply worded or said a very sharply worded response to you when he was up in New Hampshire. Let me read you a little bit of what John Kerry said.

He said, "Let me clear tonight to Senator Lott and to Tom DeLay. One of the lessons I learned in Vietnam, a war they did not have to endure, those who try to stifle the vibrancy of our democracy and shield policies from scrutiny behind a false cloak of patriotism miss the real value of what our troops defend and how we best defend our troops. We will ask questions and we will defend our democracy."

That from John Kerry, obviously trying to make much of the fact that he is somebody who has served in war, he is somebody who has seen battle. What do you say to John Kerry?

DELAY: Well, the last I remember, Senator John Kerry was against the war in Vietnam even though he served in it, and went around the country undermining the military overseas in trying to fight this war and giving aid to those that were trying to run the war from Washington, D.C.

If we had had the leadership of a George W. Bush back in the Vietnam War days, we probably would not have lost that war. We would have gone in and won it. We would have given our soldiers the kinds of weapons that they needed. We would not have the rules of engagement that the liberals put on them. We would have allowed them to win this war.

And that's what happening here. George W. Bush is giving our military all of the support that they need. They are giving the military all of the weapons that they need, and giving them the international support from a coalition that they need. We're going to win this war because we are focused on it and we have a resolve to win it.

KARL: What about Kerry's point, though, that Congress is supposed to ask these question? I mean, we are talking about expanding the war in to several countries. Isn't it Congress's duty to advise and consent? I mean, isn't this what Congress does?

DELAY: Yes, Congress should be asking questions behind closed doors. Congress should be informed and briefed by the executive branch and by the Pentagon behind closed doors. If Congress finds something going awry, then Congress should say so behind closed doors. And if they don't get it fixed, then they can go to the media.

What's going on here is Mr. Daschle, Mr. Kerry and others are going to the media, are questioning in the media and undermining our resolve, or trying to undermine our resolve, for politics.

I just don't think that's the responsible way to go. And I found out -- or I notice that they also feel it, because they have been backpedalling ever since they've been making those statements, because the American people have reacted vehemently against this kind of playing politics.

KARL: All right, I -- speaking of politics, I want to come back to the domestic scene. Obviously, Dick Armey has said he is not running for reelection. Is it a done deal? Are you the next majority leader in the House of Representatives?

DELAY: No, it's not a done deal, Jonathan. This is a race that's run all year long. Right now I'm very fortunate not to have an opponent but that doesn't mean I won't get one. And this election isn't until after November when all of the members come together and vote for their leadership.

KARL: But you are a candidate now, right? And do you have any doubt that you have the support to be elected?

DELAY: Well, I'm interested in leading this aggressive, dynamic Republican majority, that's for sure.

KARL: Great. Well, Congressman, we'd like you to stay just for a couple of minutes. We have one more break we want to get in, and I've got a couple more questions. Thank you very much.

DELAY: All right.

KARL: We'll have more with House majority whip Tom DeLay when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Our objective is not revenge, it is not retribution. Rather, it's to protect our country and our people from further attack. It is just that simple. You cannot defend against terrorists by hunkering down. You simply must go after them. That is the only proper defense, is an offense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KARL: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld laying out the military's mission in the war on terror.

We're continuing our discussion with House Republican leader Tom DeLay.

Congressman DeLay, I want to move quickly to the Middle East. Yesterday is being called black Friday, the deadliest day yet of fighting between the Israelis and the Palestinians, 17 dead yesterday.

Has Ariel Sharon gone too far? Does the U.S. need pressure him to engage in a cease-fire and come to the negotiating table?

DELAY: Not at all. I think that would be pretty contradictory and send a contradictory message to world. When terrorists attack American citizens, we go after them wherever we find them, as Don -- as Secretary Rumsfeld had just said. And we can't go back in into Israel and say, "Mr. Sharon, you shouldn't go after terrorists that are attacking your people."

I think he is doing the right thing. I think Sharon has a horrible situation on his hands. And the terrorists are being aided and abetted by Arafat, and we should join Sharon in helping him stop this terrorism.

We can never get to peace and in Israel or peace anywhere around world until we stop terrorists. And we should be supporting Israel and supporting Sharon in stopping terrorists wherever we can find them.

KARL: Now, when it comes to the war, your support for the president, you've given him A's across the board. On domestic issues, though, your colleagues have told me have you been frustrated behind the scenes about the lack of involvement from the White House on issues like the stimulus plan, campaign finance reform, even aviation security.

What is the frustration you have had with level of, kind of, strategic involvement from the White House?

DELAY: Oh, I haven't had any frustration. The president has been very supportive of our ability to bring safety to the aviation industry and to our airports. I have worked very closely with the president on a very comprehensive, visionary energy plan that's sitting over in the Senate.

We passed over 50 bills that are sitting in the Senate right now, and Mr. Daschle doesn't seem want to bring them forward, bills that we have worked with the president on.

I am in the process right now of working with this administration on welfare reform package. Welfare reform is vitally important. It's the biggest success we've had as a Republican Congress, getting 9 million people off of the welfare roles and lowering poverty for the first time in history. It is pretty impressive, and we want to continue that, and we're working with the president on that.

There is lot of things that we're working with the president on. Certainly, when you're working with people, and as many people as we work with, there is always discussion, if you will, of how we go forward.

But I am very proud of this president, not just on his waging this war, but his domestic agenda has been pretty impressive in a little over a year.

KARL: We only have about a minute left, but I've got a couple of e-mails I wanted to get to you, a couple of good questions.

One from James in Knoxville, Tennessee. He says, "How can we give we give tax breaks and keep the budget under control and wage a war on terrorism without running huge deficits?"

DELAY: Well, that's pretty simple. The American taxpayer is paying too much in taxes. And the tax breaks that we are talking about are tax breaks like lowering capital gains or lowering the marginal rates that will stimulate the economy, that will put more capital in the markets, which means there are more jobs, which means there are more people paying taxes, which means there are more revenue coming into the government.

So what we are trying do is strike a balance, by balancing the budget, fighting the war and making sure that we're not taking in any more hard-earned money from our American families than we need to run the government.

KARL: Well, we'll be watching as you try to strike to balance. Again, Congressman DeLay, we thank you for joining us.

DELAY: Thank you, Jonathan.

KARL: Take care.

Still ahead, political cartoons of the week, my take, and your e- mails for two congressmen just back from Afghanistan and former CIA Director James Woolsey about the war and what lies ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: An important source of information about the news of the day, the war and the terrorism investigation can be found online at cnn.com, or AOL keyword CNN.

It's time for a check of the hour's top stories. Here's Kyra Phillips in Atlanta with a news alert.

(NEWSBREAK)

KARL: Joining us are two members of a congressional delegation just back from Afghanistan. In his home state of Ohio is Republican Congressman David Hobson, who led the delegation, and in Memphis is Democratic Congressman Harold Ford of Tennessee.

Welcome to both of you.

REP. HAROLD FORD (D), TENNESSEE: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

REP. DAVID HOBSON (R), OHIO: Thank you.

KARL: Chairman Hobson, start right with you. You were actually -- and this is an amazing story. You were in the command center in Afghanistan when the battle in Gardez started on Monday. What did you see?

HOBSON: Well, Harold and I were both there and all of our committee. It was a very tense scene but a very organized scene. These people are trained, they know what they're doing, and they were carrying out their mission. And we were there for a number of minutes, as they were carrying on their routine. And we could see some of the video up to our left in the room.

But I felt very comfortable there that they were carrying out their mission, and I think Harold did too. They had to usher us out because they had a procedure they had to do that they had to have absolute quiet in the room. So we left the room. But it was a very impressive visit.

KARL: Well, Congressman Ford, clearly the fierceness of the resistance from the Al Qaeda forces there in Gardez caught the troops on the ground by surprise. Did you get a sense for that in that command center?

FORD: No. As the chairman said, it was very organized. It was intense in the room. And in some ways, we were embarrassed to be there because we thought we might have been in the way. But our generals and, certainly, all of the other commanders present had a great sense of control.

Quite frankly, one of the great things about our military, you saw these young people leading this effort, leading this effort in the mountains to bring about the capture of Al Qaeda and, quite frankly, the elimination of Al Qaeda. And one of the tenets of our military is that when one of ours goes down, we find them and bring them home. And you could feel that courage, you could feel that energy in the room.

But perhaps most important, we walked away having a greater understanding of the kind of commitment it will take on our behalf, not only at this moment -- Chairman Hobson, who chairs the Military Construction Committee on the Appropriations Committee, he and the ranking members now have a greater understanding.

And two, I think we understand the broader commitment we'll have to make from a humanitarian standpoint. The kind of water and irrigations systems and infrastructure we may have to help put in place there, particularly in Afghanistan. Because one of their steepest natural changes is that they lack natural waterflows in and out of that area, which makes it difficult to farm and makes it difficult to generate energy.

So a great challenge not only with the war and even afterwards. And we got a terrific sense of the -- terrific perspective of that on this trip. KARL: Well, Chairman Hobson, that sounds like a long-term commitment from the United States in Afghanistan. Are we prepared to do that? Is Congress prepared to support that, fund it?

HOBSON: Well, I think the more congresspeople that go to Afghanistan, they will understand how difficult this problem is.

For example, Harold will tell you we drove 45 miles, we didn't see a tree, we didn't see a horse, a cow; nothing growing, and it was desolate wherever we went. We saw a couple guys on little burros. That's about all we saw in the 45 miles.

And Kabul is an absolute disaster. There's nothing there. There are no stores. There's some street vendors, but there's no two-story building other than maybe the embassy or the agency building that is being occupied.

So we're going to have to be there not only in a military role -- it may be a lesser role -- but we're going to be there in an international role.

And this is a -- I think one of the things that you haven't mentioned and people don't talk about, this is a coalition.

FORD: Right.

HOBSON: There are more people there than just Americans. There are more agencies there doing humanitarian work and other types of work than just the U.S. And it's very important that that coalition stay there and complete this job or we're going to have to go back in another few years and do this all over again. And it would just be a waste of time and money and people's lives.

But let me go back to one thing. They knew this was going to be tough when they went in there. Somebody got a lucky shot, a silver bullet shot on that helicopter. It's an old helicopter and it's slow, but it was a silver bullet shot.

But our military, when that happened, put together a package, reacted to a situation and planned it out and went back in and got those people out safely; and have continued this mission with every bit, if not even more, vigor and strength than they had before to make sure this is done.

Remember, this is a part of the world that the Russians never conquered. So this is a major military offensive and a major success so far.

KARL: Well, Congressman Ford, as we see, eight deaths in this incident. I mean, is there going to be a tougher sell as this war goes on? The U.S. has not been used to taking casualties for a long time. This was eight soldiers. There could be more. As Chairman Hobson said, this is a place that defeated the Soviets.

FORD: Four days on the ground in Central Asia doesn't make me a military expert. I'll leave those decisions to our commanding general and certainly to General Franks.

But I will say that I'm confident, after watching and listening to our generals, listening to and spending time with many of soldiers, these young people from across the nation who have committed themselves, I have great confidence that our training and preparation will certainly lead us to victory.

I want to pick up on one last point that Chairman Hobson made as it relates to a long-term commitment. I might add that one thing that I did see in Kabul that excited me was a huge Tennessee volunteer flag.

(LAUGHTER)

I don't know how they got one, but they had one up hanging.

We talked with the prime minister of Kyrgyzstan who talked with us in depth about drug trafficking being the most significant source of funding for some of these terrorist organizations. And Chairman Hobson engaged the prime minister on how we, as America, could better coordinate our effort to help them to suppress the drug trade and, frankly, suppress the re-rise, or re-emergence rather, of terrorist organizations.

In addition, we talked with him about access to medicine and hospitals and education and how we could bring about a greater equality between men and women in that society. Chairman Karzai, the interim chairman, whom we had dinner with and met privately with afterwards, exudes the kind of vision and confidence that, really, you think of when you think of a Nelson Mandela. We expressed to him our concerns about his personal safety.

One of the things I've suggested to President Bush upon our return is that we convene some sort of economic summit with Central Asian leaders in Washington, perhaps, in the near future to begin to lay the groundwork for a MacArthur-like plan that was implemented in Japan or Marshall Plan implemented in Europe. What would Europe and Japan be like without those plans not only having been implemented but being executed and forcefully and as successfully as they have been?

We in America, along with our coalition partners, and Chairman Hobson is right, I think have a responsibility if we want to prevent the kind of attacks and the kind of terror we saw September 11 and the kind of threats we continue to see surfacing around the globe.

KARL: Chairman Hobson, can you give us about a 30-second preview. You're about to go to Guantanamo Bay to look at the POW camp down there or the prisoner camp down there.

What's the purpose of the trip, and what do you expect to do?

HOBSON: Well, as the chairman of the Military Construction Committee, we're going to spend approximately $20 million or a little more down there on that facility. And I want to -- and some of the money has already been spent. And I want to go down and see how it's being spent. I want to see what the conditions are. And that's part of my responsibility as the chairman of the Military Construction Committee. I've got to go and look and make sure that things are going right. That's part of the oversight of our committee.

I want to just say one other thing. If you'll notice, and you talk to House members, House members I think, are united in what we're doing in Central Asia.

FORD: I want to go on that trip with you to Guantanamo Bay, Mr. Chairman. So if you've got an extra seat, think about the young guy.

HOBSON: All right.

KARL: We'll see if we can get you a ticket, but now we have about a minute left. Harold Ford, I've got a couple of questions for you.

HOBSON: Well, Harold is a good guy to go along.

KARL: Fred Thompson is not running for reelection in Tennessee. Politicians frequently try to be coy when they're really made up their mind. I wonder if you could tell us right now, are you going to run for Senate in Tennessee?

FORD: If I do, Jonathan Karl, I want you to be the press secretary. I want you to make the first contribution to the campaign.

In all seriousness, Tennessee has been used to and been a beneficiary of the kind of independent and pragmatic leadership that Senator Thompson has offered.

One of the things that we'll see in the coming days and coming weeks here, that a number of politicians, including me, in this state, initiating a conversation with all Tennesseans. I plan to start here in my own congressional district, travel the state in the next week or so and make a decision in the very near future.

Senator Thompson's shoes are large and will be difficult to fill. Again, he was independent, pragmatic and engaging, and that's the kind of leadership this state deserves.

KARL: So we can expect a decision from you on whether or not you will run for Senate within the next week?

FORD: Let me know when your resignation letter at CNN is ready Jonathan Karl, and I'll make my decision.

(LAUGHTER)

KARL: Congressman Ford, thank you very much. Chairman Hobson...

HOBSON: He's good, isn't he? Harold's good.

KARL: Yes, he's unbelievable.

(LAUGHTER)

Thank you very much.

Just ahead, as U.S. troops and fighter planes try to uproot the enemy in Afghanistan, we'll talk with two military and intelligence experts about what could be ahead in the war against terrorism.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: Cartoonists zeroed in on the fighting in Afghanistan and the fallout back home.

Mike Thompson of the Detroit Free Press puts Uncle Sam on the psychiatrist's couch, saying, "I keep dreaming this conflict will be quick and painless. What's wrong with me?" The doctor answers, "Gulf War syndrome."

A New Yorker cartoon has a man coming home for the day, calling out, "Sweetheart, I'm ho --," stopping short when he spots a metal detector and his easy chair cordoned off in the living room.

And Wayne Stayscal (ph) of the Tampa Tribune has a man in full combat gear striding through an airport. "I thought I heard the National Guard was pulling out of airports?" asks a woman. The man, rifle and all, says, "They are, ma'am. I'm the pilot."

The Pentagon says it expects Operation Anaconda to be over in a matter of days. But are Al Qaeda fighters digging in for the long haul?

Joining us from Madison, Wisconsin, is CNN military analyst Retired Brigadier General David Grange, and here in Washington, former CIA Director James Woolsey.

We thank you both for joining us.

Mr. Woolsey, question to you about this battle in Gardez. I think what's interesting here is what it says about what happened in Tora Bora. Was there a strategic mistake made in Tora Bora, where the U.S. relied too much on surrogate fighters and we didn't seal off the board with Pakistan?

JAMES WOOLSEY, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Well, possibly. But the most important thing about this war is, I think, how quick the Pentagon learns from what happens. They didn't put enough targeting teams on the ground, for example, up north of Kabul. Very early in the air war, they saw that the air munitions were not being effective. They got some more teams over there quickly, and the air munitions were devastatingly effective.

And here, I think they saw a lot of Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters get away because they were relying almost exclusively on Afghan troops to contain them in Tora Bora. And so here, they're doing it differently.

It seems to me that the key thing is, the fog of war means there are always going to be mistakes made. The question is, how quickly can you change? KARL: But if it was a mistake in Tora Bora, was that the fog of war or a strategic mistake, you know, kind of a risk-averse approach that the U.S. has had for a while, not willingness to face the possibility of casualties, you know, reluctance to put people on the ground?

WOOLSEY: It's possible there was a flavor of that. But keep in mind, they've just been very successful using only special operations forces, relatively limited number but very, very able, together with principally Afghan troops to take the cities. And so, they were probably going with what they had done successfully immediately in the past.

But whatever the reasons, they're learning quickly and changing quickly, and that's the key thing.

KARL: General Grange, you've been a special operations fighter. You know what it's like in situations somewhat like this.

What do you think happened in Gardez? How did the U.S. seem to be caught by surprise? You know, the fierceness of the resistance seemed to be genuinely a surprise.

BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I don't know if it was a surprise as much as, you know, the enemy forces had a good hit on a helicopter. There were some casualties, a fallen comrade. And we react to that, just like what happened in Mogadishu in that regard. It was just a small piece of the overall campaign that kind of drug some things down.

Moving into the area, there were some problems with convoys, with both the Afghan and coalition forces moving in, where there were some mortar fire, where they had a problem with counter-mortar capability. But those are small things that happen.

And, you know, when you have a plan and once you step out of the helicopter or jump out of the parachute door, plans change immediately. What you find on the ground is what's reality, and that's what you have to adapt to. And I believe that the forces adapted to that very well now.

KARL: Now, given the fierceness of the fighting there, I mean, what do we think is going on in Gardez? I mean, do we think that senior leadership is there? I mean, could bin Laden be there?

WOOLSEY: It's purely a surmise, but the fact that a lot of these fighters seem to have been infiltrating even after we got there from Pakistan, the border regions there in Pakistan or perhaps other parts of Afghanistan, may mean they were ordered there or they had something to protect. I think that's one of the things, as well as some background leaks and so forth from various people in the Pakistani military and intelligence, suggests that maybe there is someone there.

Who knows who it is? Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Mullah Omar, some senior group of Al Qaeda. But it strikes, I think, a lot of people that it's curious and very interesting and, in some ways, fortuitous that we're able to take on a large number of these fighters, because they were flooding back into the area where we were already attacking.

KARL: I'd like to ask both of you, start with you, General Grange, the story in the "Los Angeles Times" today about this list of potential target countries for a nuclear strike. Apparently it's the first time such a list has come public.

It lists seven countries. The axis of evil, obviously, but also China, Russia, Syria, Libya.

What do you make of this? Is this really something new, or has there always been kind of a list?

GRANGE: Well, you know, we have never ruled out first strike with any kind of weaponry that we have in our arsenals. And I think it would be a very extreme case that we would use nuclear weapons. But again, if someone did something of chemical, biological weaponry on our people, our facilities, our country, our forces that were in a staging area, in a buildup getting ready to do an operation, we could very well respond.

But we have never -- so we've never ruled it out, but I think we'd be very hesitant to do it.

KARL: But, James Woolsey, I mean, the whole idea of nuclear deterrence was deterrence with Russia. And apparently this strategic document talks about, you know, the plans that could be used against these seven countries. Is that new? Is that something...

WOOLSEY: Well, the Pentagon is always doing contingency planning for everything. And the doctrine of deterrence, sort of mutual- assured destruction that we worked our way into during the Cold War, is gone with the wind. We don't need to deter Russia anymore. They're becoming a democracy, and they are more or less a friend.

I think what these are are contingency plans for places where weapons might be used if there were a threat from weapons of mass destruction, say, in Iraq, buried nuclear weapons or biological weapons that were just about to be used and could not be gotten at any other way than by a small nuclear weapon, something like that.

I don't think people ought to be too surprised that there are contingency plans of this sort. That's the military's business. You would hate it if they weren't making contingency plans and they...

GRANGE: If there wasn't a contingency plan, yes.

WOOLSEY: ... just sort of started thinking about things at the last minute. That's the real danger.

KARL: All right, James Woolsey, General Grange, we have to take a quick break.

We will have more with both of our guests when we come back in just a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VICTORIA CLARKE, PENTAGON SPOKESWOMAN: We have always said that the further this went on, the harder it would get. The people who are left fighting, the Al Qaeda, are among the toughest, the most violent, the most committed to fighting this out to the end.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KARL: Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clarke reminding that there is no easy road to victory in Afghanistan.

We're continuing our conversation with CNN's military analyst, Retired Brigadier General David Grange, and former CIA Director James Woolsey.

Mr. Woolsey, there were some really disturbing stories last week about the possibility of a dirty bomb, a so-called dirty bomb or some kind of a nuclear devise falling into the hands of terrorists. This, coupled with the idea of a shadow government in case that were to happen in Washington, D.C.

You have been CIA director, you live in Washington, D.C. What do you make of this?

WOOLSEY: Well, the shadow government business is quite old. There's been contingency plans for moving Congress, the executive branch, judiciary out of Washington in the event of a nuclear war back during the '80s for a long time.

And I think all that is happening here is that, in view of the possibility of a terrorist getting hold of more likely a dirty weapon of some sort, but even conceivably of some type of nuclear device, it is only prudent for the president and, I would think, also the Congress and the judiciary also, would want to make plans for being able to keep the functions of the federal government working out of town.

KARL: And one of the things that we've heard -- there is the dirty bomb scenario, but there is also occasionally the talk of a so- called suitcase bomb, nuclear device. How real is that threat? I mean, are those devices out there and available?

WOOLSEY: Well, I don't know how available they are, but both the Soviets, during the Cold War, and we developed a so-called atomic demolition munitions, very small nuclear weapons for, say, blowing up a bridge in an emergency, let's say. And the Soviets have had some of those.

And General Lebed, two or three years ago said in Russia that some of those were unaccounted for. The Russians denied it then. The government denied it then, and they deny now. But these stories tend to persist, and one doesn't really know what to think of them. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether some of these leaked out to Russian organized crime or someone sold them to some terrorist. It's not impossible. And we just have to be prepared for everything in this war.

This war is going to go on for a long time, and we're going to have worries like this for years.

KARL: So, General Grange, as far as this contingency plan goes, what is -- is there a plan in place? Should the Pentagon be actually destroyed instead of damaged? I mean, we talk about the Congress, the executive branch. What about the military?

GRANGE: The military has always had a plan for contingencies when there is heightened awareness, when there's threats to the continuation of the command and control of the armed forces, just like in the executive branch.

Right now, split-based operations are ongoing, where you split the command and control. I don't believe Congress is doing that now, but they have the contingency plans as well. But the military has always had, and the military takes quite a lead before the rest of the government in this.

KARL: Now, James Woolsey, we only have like 30 seconds left, but Iraq is something you've been talking a lot about. Does the U.S. move sometime soon in some way against Iraq, and do we do it even if our allies are not with us?

WOOLSEY: I don't know how soon, but I believe we -- and I think we need the Turks with us, and we will have them and the Kuwaitis and probably the British -- do need to see to a change of regime in Iraq sometime within the next year. Every month it gets more necessary because Saddam gets closer and closer to having nuclear weapons.

I don't know what exact tactics would be used, whether we can count on domestic rebellion, but I think we ought to have enough forces in the area to do it ourselves if we have to. And we don't need a lot of coalition partners...

KARL: You don't need the French or the Germans...

WOOLSEY: We do not need the French.

KARL: James Woolsey, thank you very much for joining us. General Grange, good to have you on the show yet again.

GRANGE: Thank you.

KARL: Take care.

When we come back, my turn.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: Shortly after the Democrats took over the Senate, Senator Robert Byrd was given a card to be cracked open if the president, the vice president and the Speaker of the House all died.

Byrd, the president pro tem of the Senate, would then become president of the United States. The secret code inside the card would confirm his identity.

September 11 demonstrated the executive branch, with such continuity of government plans, is prepared to deal with a catastrophe. But Congress, which last week complained it did not know about the so-called shadow government, is not. On September 11, I witnessed firsthand the chaos as Congress evacuated with no clear plan.

Now Congress is debating what to do if more than one-fourth of the House is killed, presumed dead, or missing. It's a sickening thought, but in the post-September 11 world, it's the kind of situation that is no longer unthinkable.

Thanks for watching SATURDAY EDITION. I'm Jonathan Karl in Washington. Just ahead, PEOPLE IN THE NEWS, profiles of survivors of September 11, right after a news alert.

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