O’Reilly: So therefore, the next President of the United States is going to have to make a decision—
Obama: Right.
O’Reilly: About Iran, whether to stop them militarily. Because I don’t believe…. If diplomacy works, fine; but you have got to have a plan B. And, and a lot of people are saying, “Look, Barack Obama is not going to attack Iran.”
Obama: Well, here, here, here—here is where you and I agree. It is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon. It’s a game changer—and I have said that repeatedly. I have also said I would never take a military option off the table.
O’Reilly: But would you prepare for one?
Obama: Well…. Listen—
O’Reilly: Answer the question, Senator.
Obama: No. No, that—
O’Reilly: Anybody can “option.” But would you prepare for it?
Obama: Look, it is not appropriate for somebody—who is one of two people who could be the President of the United States—to start tipping their hand in terms of what their plans might be with respect to Iran. It’s sufficient to say I would not take the military option off the table, and that I will never hesitate to use our military force in order to protect the homeland and the United States’ interests. But—where I disagree with you, is the notion that we have exhausted every other resource. Because the fact of the matter is, is that for six, seven years during this administration, we weren’t working close—as closely as we needed to with the Europeans to, to—
O’Reilly: All right.
Obama:—to create—
O’Reilly: Diplomacy might work—
Obama:—to, to—
O’Reilly: You might be able to sanction economically….
Obama: Sanctions—sanctions….
O’Reilly: Maybe.
Obama: Maybe.
O’Reilly: But that’s, that’s all hypothetical.
Obama: But, but what? Everything is hypothetical. But the question is—are we trying to do what we need to do to ratchet up the pressure on them to change their—
O’Reilly: Okay. We’ll assume that you are gonna ratchet everything you could ratchet up. But I am going to assume that Iran is gonna say, “Blank you, we are gonna do what we want.”
Obama: Yeah. [Laughs.]
O’Reilly: And I want a President—whether it’s you or McCain—who says—
Obama: Right.
O’Reilly: “You ain’t doing that.”
Obama: Okay.
* * *
So what’s happened since this interview? Iran has continued to develop its nuclear weapons program despite threats and overall angst by many people who understand the dangers of having killers with no conscience possessing nukes. After a year and a half in office, President Obama was finally able to get some sanctions placed on that country, primarily freezing Iranian assets abroad, limiting oil sales, and preventing Iranian banks from doing business internationally.
But is there anyone on earth who really thinks that these sanctions are going to stop the nutty mullahs from making a nuclear weapon? Anyone? Al Franken?
No, Iran will suffer some financial inconvenience but still produce those nukes so that they can threaten other countries with them—and perhaps also develop a nasty “dirty bomb” to be handed over to a terrorist kill team.
In other words, we are in exactly the same place with Iran that we were two years ago when I spoke with the President. If Barack Obama has a “plan B,” it is being kept well under wraps. As you just read, he did not want to tip his hand back then, nor is he tipping it now. The result: Iran will get a nuclear weapon soon. The only thing that could prevent that from happening is an Israeli military strike to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities. But the consequences of an attack on Iran would be bloody and severe, perhaps even leading to a world war. That’s what is keeping Obama from setting up any strong backup plans like a naval blockade. The nasty mullahs well understand that America and most other nations do not want the world economy devastated by violence. So they confidently continue enriching uranium, daring the world to stop them.
* * *
O’Reilly: All right, let’s go to Iraq. I think history will show it’s the wrong battlefield, okay? And I think that you were perspicacious in your original assessment of the battlefield.
Obama: And I appreciate that.
O’Reilly: But I think you were desperately wrong on the surge. And I think you should admit it to the nation, that now we have defeated the terrorists—in Iraq—and they—that al-Qaeda came there, after we invaded—as you know, okay?
Obama: Right. Absolutely right.
O’Reilly: And we defeated them.
Obama: Right.
O’Reilly: If we didn’t, they would have used it as a staging ground.
Obama: Yes.
O’Reilly: We have also inhibited Iran from controlling the southern part of Iraq—by the surge—which you did not support. So why won’t you say, “I was right in the beginning, and I was wrong about that”?
Obama: You know, if, if you have, if you have listened to what I have said—and I’ll, and I’ll repeat it right here on this show—I think that there is no doubt that the violence is down. I believe that that is a testimony to the troops that were sent and General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker. I think that the surge has succeeded…in ways that nobody anticipated—by the way, including President Bush and the other supporters. Now, it has gone very well, partly because of the Anbar situation—
O’Reilly: The awakening, right.
Obama:—and the, the Sunni awakening—partly because the, the Shia—
O’Reilly: Well, if it were up to you, there wouldn’t have been a surge—
Obama: Well, look—
O’Reilly: No, no, no, no.
Obama: No, no, no, no. No, no, no, no.
O’Reilly: Look, if it were up to you, there wouldn’t have been a surge.
Obama: No, no, no, no.
O’Reilly: You and Joe Biden—
Obama: No.
O’Reilly:—no surge.
Obama: Hold on a second, Bill. If you look at the debate that was taking place, we had gone through five years of mismanagement of this war that I thought was disastrous. And the President wanted to double down and continue on an open-ended policy that did not create the kinds of pressure on the Iraqis to take responsibility and reconcile—
O’Reilly: Well—
Obama: Well, look, that—
O’Reilly: Come on—
Obama: Well, what I have said is—I have already said, it’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.
O’Reilly: Right. So why can’t you just say, “I was right in the beginning, and I was wrong about the surge”?
Obama: Because there is an underlying problem with what we have done. We have reduced the violence—
O’Reilly: Yeah?
Obama: But the Iraqis still haven’t taken responsibility. And we still don’t have the kind of political reconciliation. That we are still spending, Bill, $10 to $12 billion a month—
O’Reilly: And I hope that, if you are President, you can get them to kick in and pay us back. And I’ll—and I’ll go with you.
Obama: Let’s go.
O’Reilly: We’ll get some of that money back.
Obama: Yeah. [Laughs.]
O’Reilly: All right, let’s go to Afghanistan.
Obama: All right.
O’Reilly: Look, there is no winning the Taliban war—
Obama: Yes?
O’Reilly:—unless Pakistan cracks down on the guys that are in—Pakistan, okay?
Obama: And you and I agree completely.
O’Reilly: Okay, yeah? And we all know that.
Obama: Right.
O’Reilly: You gave a speech in Denver—a good speech, by the way.
Obama: Thank you.
O’Reilly: But you bloviated about McCain not following them into the cave. You are not going to invade Pakistan, Senator, if you are President. You are no
t gonna send ground troops in there, and you know it.
Obama: Here, here, here is, here is the problem. John McCain loves to say, “I will follow ’em to the gates—to the gates of hell.”
O’Reilly: But he is not going to invade either.
Obama: Well, that—and, and the point is, what he—what we could have done is—
O’Reilly: No, no, not “could.” Let’s—what do we do now?
Obama: What, what we can do—
O’Reilly: Yeah?
Obama:—is stay focused on Afghanistan—
O’Reilly: Yeah?
Obama:—and put more pressure on the Pakistanis.
O’Reilly: Like what?
Obama: Well, for example, we are providing them military aid, without having enough strings attached. So they are using the military that we use—
O’Reilly: For nothing.
Obama:—for—to Pakistan. They are—they are preparing for a war against India.
O’Reilly: So you are gonna pull them out, and let the Islamic fundamentals take ’em over?
Obama: No, no, no, no. What we say is, “Look, we are gonna provide them with additional, uh, military support—targeted at terrorists. And we are gonna help build their democracy and provide—”
O’Reilly: That’s exactly what we are doing now—
Obama:—the kind of funding—
O’Reilly: Right.
Obama: But, but we are not—
O’Reilly:—and he is doing that now.
Obama: We, we haven’t—that’s not what we have been doing, Bill. We have wasted $10 billion with Musharraf without holding him accountable for knocking out those people.
O’Reilly: All right. So you are gonna—again—more diplomacy—and we need it, absolutely. Try to convince the Pakistani government to take a more aggressive approach—
Obama: And what I would, and what I would—
O’Reilly:—and, and to say, “If you don’t, we will pull the plug.”
Obama: And, and what I will do is—well, if we have bin Laden in our sights—
O’Reilly: Yeah?
Obama:—we target him, and we knock him out.
O’Reilly: But everybody would do that.
Obama: Well, I mean—
O’Reilly: I mean, that would be the biggest win Bush could have—
Obama: Of course.
O’Reilly:—is if we could do that.
Obama: And that is—
O’Reilly: But you can’t send these ground troops in, because then all hell breaks loose—
Obama: We can’t—we, we—we can’t have, uh, uh…. That nobody talked about some full-blown invasion of Afghanistan. But the simple point that I made was, we have got to put more pressure on Pakistan—to do what they need to do.
O’Reilly: I mean, well, I gotta tell you. I don’t—I don’t think the administration—
Obama: I don’t think, I don’t think you and I disagree on this.
O’Reilly: No, but they have put an enormous amount of pressure. And NATO doesn’t fight in, uh, in Afghanistan—I don’t know whether you know that or not.
Obama: Well, first—
O’Reilly: The Germans won’t fight.
Obama: Well—
O’Reilly: The French will, because of Sarkozy.
Obama: They will. They—
O’Reilly: But the Germans wouldn’t allow it, and the others won’t.
Obama: Right.
O’Reilly: So it’s all on us, again. Why? Well, why won’t the Germans fight against the Taliban?
Obama: Well, you know part of the reason?
O’Reilly: What?
Obama: Part of the reason is, is that we have soured our relationship—with the Europeans—after Iraq. And you know, when I went over to Europe…and if you listen to that speech in Berlin—which you know, a lot of your buddies had a good time making fun of—
O’Reilly: I don’t have any buddies, but—[Laughs.]
Obama: [Laughs.] But if, if you listen to what I said, one of the things I said in that speech is, “You cannot think that the Americans are gonna just carry all the weight on this thing. You guys have to step up to the plate.”
O’Reilly: So when you are President—?
Obama: But, but Bob Gates, the secretary of defense—who, by the way, I think is a, is a serious guy in this administration and has, and has helped—
O’Reilly: A good guy.
Obama:—helped, helped straighten out some of the foreign policy problems—he himself has acknowledged that part of the problem is, politically, there is, uh—there is enough anti-Iraq sentiment in there—in, in Europe—
O’Reilly:—to poison the well for Afghanistan.
Obama:—to poison the well for Afghanistan.
O’Reilly: So you are gonna change all that with a magic wand? Come on.
Obama: I am not gonna—no, I am not gonna—no, I am not gonna change all that with a magic wand. That, that—I am not gonna change anything with a magic wand. What I am gonna do is I am gonna, uh, engage in the kind of liberal diplomacy—and change our policy in Iraq to send a signal to the world, the central front on terror right now is in Afghanistan, and the hills between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
O’Reilly: Yeah, but you can’t, you can’t change a thing in Iraq, uh, uh, if it’s gonna benefit Iran. And, and that’s—
Obama: Yeah, that I agree with you.
O’Reilly: That’s gonna be your minefield as you go on—
Obama: But, but Bill, uh, you and I probably agree on the fact that Iran is one of the biggest beneficiaries of us going into the Iraq in the first place—
O’Reilly: It has been, but not now. Now, now they are paying a big price for miscalculating—
Obama: Well—
O’Reilly:—the resolve of our country.
Obama: I, I will say that the, that the fact that the Shia militias have folded up—right now—is a good thing.
* * *
Where do I start with this? First of all, that was the only time so far that I have heard President Obama admit he had made a mistake. As you see, he said the surge worked, but he, of course, had forcefully opposed it. Two years ago, that was the big headline that came out of this interview.
Because Iraq remains an unstable situation, the President has been patient in withdrawing U.S. troops from this troubled country. That measured policy has angered the Far Left. I think we should give Mr. Obama credit for not caving into that constituency, which is misguided on Iraq. In light of all the blood and treasure the United States has spent there, we simply cannot let Iraq go down the drain. But we should never again get involved in this kind of morass.
As for Afghanistan, it’s obviously a colossal mess. But, do you know what? That’s nobody’s fault. The place is just impossible. About ten years ago, American Special Forces and some Afghan allies defeated the thuggish Taliban in about ten minutes. Since then, the situation has deteriorated into an absolute debacle.
After a decade of our involvement, most Afghan police are arrogantly corrupt, the army rarely fights, and the President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, is an incompetent weakling who is probably a criminal. Certainly, his brother, who runs the province of Kandahar, is a thief and a drug lord. Just as President Bush was before him, President Obama is stymied. The Taliban, hiding in plain sight by dressing in civilian clothing, are able to kill at will, terrorizing the population at night. NATO forces, no matter how brave and skilled, can’t protect the Afghan people because there are not enough NATO forces. That means that the poor Afghani folks are afraid to support the Americans and NATO, which could mean death even though the allies are sincerely trying to help them and deny the terrorists an important sanctuary.
The Taliban can also hide out in Pakistan, and NATO forces can’t cross the border to kill them. In addition, some Pakistani intelligence big shots are actually supplying the Taliban with arms and logistics. Can you say chaos?
In a controversial move, President Obama took month
s to announce his decision to send more troops to Afghanistan but simultaneously undermined this move by promising to begin pulling U.S. forces out of there in July 2011. On hearing that, the Taliban broke out some humus and pita bread, or whatever it is they eat, and celebrated.
Then the Afghan commander, General McChrystal, got sandbagged by the dopes at Rolling Stone, and the world finally focused on what is an awful situation.
We should all be praying that General David Petraeus can pull off another miracle in Afghanistan and stabilize the country. If he does not do that, the Taliban will continue to brutalize millions of innocent people (especially women), and al-Qaeda terrorists will once again have room to roam. Remember, the reason NATO is in Afghanistan at all is because the Taliban partnered up with al-Qaeda before the attacks on 9/11. Nothing much has changed in that relationship.
If NATO fails in Afghanistan, the defeat will be on President Obama. It is his war now, just as Vietnam became LBJ’s war, even though that war began under President Kennedy. I believe President Obama realizes the danger to him here. That means General Petraeus will get what he needs to do what he does. But this thing is hanging by a thread; absolutely anything could happen. In fact, Michael Scheuer, a former CIA agent who headed the bin Laden unit, writes that the Afghan war is already lost:
Pinheads and Patriots Page 16