Sunday, April 9, 2006

Seymour Hersh's Warhead

On Sunday, Wolf Blitzer talked to Seymour Hersh about his article, "The Iran Plans," in The New Yorker.

Transcript

(Excerpts)

BLITZER: Here's, among other things, what you write in the article: "A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was 'absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb' if it is not stopped. He said that the president believes that he must do 'what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,' and that 'saving Iran is going to be his legacy.' " So what's your bottom line? Do you believe, based on the reporting you did for this article, that the president of the United States is now aggressively plotting military action, a preemptive strike against Iran?

HERSH: The word I hear is messianic. He thinks, as I wrote, that he's the only one now who will have the courage to do it. He's politically free. I don't think he's overwhelmingly concerned about the '06 elections, congressional elections. I think he really thinks he has a chance, and this is going to be his mission.

More...
BLITZER: Here's the most explosive item in your new article in The New Yorker magazine. And I'll read it: "The lack of reliable intelligence leaves military planners, given the goal of totally destroying the sites," the nuclear sites in Iran, "little choice but to consider the use of tactical nuclear weapons. 'Every other option, in the view of the nuclear weaponeers, would leave a gap,' the former senior intelligence official said. 'Decisive' is the key word of the Air Force's planning. It's a tough decision, but we made it in Japan."

Now, this is an explosive charge, an explosive revelation, if true, that the United States is seriously considering using a tactical nuclear bomb or bombs to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities.

HERSH: What you just read says this. If you're giving the White House a series of options, and the option is to get rid of an underground facility -- the facility I'm talking about is Natanz, 75 feet under hard rock -- if you want to tell the White House one sure way of getting it in a range of options is nuclear, what happened in this case is they gave that option, the JCS, the joint chiefs.

And then, of course, nobody in their right mind would want to use a nuclear weapon in the Middle East, because it would be, my God, totally chaotic. When the JCS, the joint chiefs, and the planners wanted to walk back that option, what happened is about three or four weeks ago, the White House, people in the White House, in the Oval Office, the vice president's office, said, no, let's keep it in the plan.

That doesn't mean it's going to happen. They refuse to take it out. And what I'm writing here is that if this isn't removed -- and I say this very seriously. I've been around this town for 40 years -- some senior officers are prepared to resign. They're that upset about the fact that this plan is kept in. Again, let me make the point, you're giving a range of options early in the planning. To be sure of getting rid of it, you give that option.

More...
BLITZER: And you're saying that some senior military officers are prepared to resign?

HERSH: I'm saying that, if this isn't walked back and if the president isn't told that you cannot do it -- and once the chairman of the joint chiefs or some senior members of the military say to the president, let's get this nuclear option off the table, it will be taken off. He will not defy the military in a formal report. Unless something specific is told to the White House that you've got to drop this dream of a nuclear option -- and that's exactly the issue I'm talking about -- people have said to me that they would resign.

BLITZER: Do you want to name names?

HERSH: Are you kidding?

BLITZER: I'm giving you the opportunity.

HERSH: No. You know why? Because this is a punitive government right now. This is a government that pretty much has its back against the wall, as you've been saying all morning, in Iraq.

And in the military -- you know, one thing about our military is they're very loyal to the president, but they're getting to the edge. They're getting to the edge with not only Rumsfeld but also with Cheney and the president.

BLITZER: The British foreign secretary, Jack Straw, was asked earlier today about this nuclear option, if you will, to deal with Iran's potential nuclear program.

Listen to what Jack Straw said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: It suggests that plans are indeed under way by the Americans, if necessary, to hit various facilities in Iran.

JACK STRAW, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: The idea of a nuclear strike on Iran is completely nuts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Of course, the idea of a nuclear strike on Iran is nuts.

And of course, SEYMOUR HERSH IS NUTS.

This guy is trying to whip people into a frenzy and get them to believe that the "messianic" Bush is going to nuke Iran.

That's ridiculous.

I think that the Bush Administration, with virtually the rest of the world at its side, is going to be tough on Ahmadinejad's Iran.

However, the suggestion that a nuclear strike is imminent is crazy. Hersh says Bush thinks he's the only one with the will to do it. That means it would have to be done rather quickly since Bush has roughly two and a half years left in office.

A nuclear strike on Iran is insane. Hersh and the nutjobs that buy into his nuclear warnings have lost touch with reality.

We are a nuclear power. No option should ever be off the table when it comes to military planning.

The Pentagon, if it's doing its job, ought to have plans to deal with any potential threat from any country.

We may have a plan to nuke France or Canada or Mexico, but that doesn't mean it's going to happen.

It would be negligent if we didn't have preparations to strike Iran if it became necessary.

I am sick of the lib press seeming to do everything imaginable to undermine and discredit this Administration, because in the process, they put Americans at risk.


_______________________________

After the Hersh segment, Blitzer played an interview that he did with John Kerry last Thursday.

This is priceless.

BLITZER: The Democrats -- clearly, the Republicans have problems with the public opinion polls. The president certainly has low job approval numbers.

This question was asked recently in our CNN poll: Do Democrats in Congress have a clear plan for Iraq? Twenty-five percent said yes; 68 percent said no, in part because, I think, a lot of people think the Democrats are all over the place when it comes to Iraq.

KERRY: Well, I have a clear plan for Iraq, period, a clear plan.

Oh my God! Kerry is still saying he has a plan!

That's funny.

I'll make a prediction.

The Bush Administration is more likely to launch a NUCLEAR strike on Iran in the next thirty months than John Kerry is likely to come up with a clearly defined plan on anything.

No comments:

Post a Comment