Patraeus and Crocker on FNC…
General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker were interviewed by Brit Hume exclusively on FNC earlier tonight. Transcript highlight follows…
HUME: Do the rules of engagement that you’re operating under allow you to do what you think needs to be done to suppress this activity on the part of Iran? Or perhaps do you need assistance from military not under your command to do this?
PETRAEUS: Well, they allow us to do what we need to do with inside Iraq.
HUME: Right.
PETRAEUS: Beyond that…
HUME: Is that enough, in your view?
PETRAEUS: Well, that’s what I’m responsible for. And, again, when I have concerns about something beyond that, I take them, of course, to my boss, Admiral Fallon, who is the regional commander. And, in fact, we have shared our concerns with him and with the chain of command. And there’s a pretty hard look ongoing at that particular situation.
HUME: That sounds pretty disturbing, Ambassador Crocker, that we are confronting with Iran now a situation where — I mean, it doesn’t appear we have any diplomatic possibility there, do we, to suppress this activity by Iran? Or do we?CROCKER: Well, I have had a couple of meetings now with my Iranian counterpart, in which we’ve laid out very clearly what our concerns are, and said that what they need to do is align practice on the ground with their stated policy of support for a stable, democratic Iraq.
HUME: You have said, by the way, today that you thought that they believe that a stable, democratic Iraq was in their interest. And at the same
time, though, you said that if it all went to hell over there, that it would be — that they would be, as you put it, a big winner. Which is right?CROCKER: Well, I think you see a collision in Iran between their long-term strategic interests and their narrow tactical desires. Their narrow
tactical desires I would define as trying to administer a defeat to the U.S. in Iraq. The problem they’ve got is that, if they are able to create
circumstances that cause us to reconsider our commitment, the result is going to be a chaotic Iraq that, over the long run, could potentially be dangerous for them, as well.
I listened to the interview. In one hour, he covered the major points of what took 6 hours earlier in the day to say, because the congressmen and women had to make their speeches and lecture the poor guy for 20 minutes before actually asking a question.
Comment by Nobody — September 11, 2007 @ 1:54 am
I caught the replay tonight. As said in the first comment, it was a synopsis of the hours of testimony and it provided a good understanding of the assertions that both Petraeus and Crocker are making. Hume was not confrontational, although he did ask Crocker to point out a contradiction he made in regards to Iran’s interest/influence. In the end it was a briefing for the viewer and it was well done. The politicians/pundits will take plenty of time in dissecting what has been said for the rest of the week.
Comment by FishOil — September 11, 2007 @ 3:33 am
On the question of Iran, I believe Petraeus would not tell us what plans he has now that we all know that country was caught with its plan to destablize Iraq. That would be a guarded secret, though we can surmise what it would be when Bush said earlier that the U.S. will keep all its options. That is in tandem with what Israel would do if Iran ever develops a nucelar weapon. Just remember those crazy words from its juvenile ruler - Ahmadinejad. I hate to see it, but the Persia that I know will be back to the dark ages.
Comment by RGL — September 11, 2007 @ 12:04 pm