No Champagne Brunch

Sunday November 21, 2004

Guests:
Sen. John McCain of Arizona: Member of the Armed Services Committee
Michael Sheuer: Former CIA Analyst, Author of “Imperial Hubris”

Subjects:
Iraq, Iran, and The War on Terror


Given the guests on the show, one could be optimistic that some straight answers were going to be given in regard to Iraq and al-Qaida. Mr. McCain has a solid reputation of being a straight talker and one who is not afraid to disagree with his party when he sees things differently. In regard to the second guest, I recently found out that Mr. Sheuer was the author of “Imperial Hubris” and wanted to hear what someone inside the classified circle of information had to say about what is being done and what will be done in regard to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.

Mr. Russert began his interview with Mr. McCain with questions about Iran. If any part of the sections about Iran from Richard Clarke's “Against All Enemies” is to be believed, our decisions and policies toward Iran are of the gravest of importance. Mr. Russert asked the Senator if we were close to military action with this country. Absolutely a question that needs to be asked, but to think that we are even remotely considering entering into another conflict is reckless and short sited.

As the conversation carried on, Mr. Russert asked, “What is our timetable? How much time do we have for Iran to stand down?” First of all, do we actually think that Iran is going to stand down because of some threat from the U.S.? He made it sound like military conflict between the U.S. and Iran is inevitable by the way he phrased the question. Secondly, at this time, it would be the most profound military error the United States has ever made. We don't have enough troops in Iraq to create a sense of security there, even with the massive redeployment of U.S. troops throughout the world so how would we fare with Iran? You can see where I am going with this.

Another frightening prospect that was brought up was the potential a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear sites. McCain's answer fit his style - logical and responsibly hawkish - and he said that “…from a practical standpoint, it would be difficult,” due to the fact that the facilities are spread all over Tehran. He also said that we want to avoid such a conflict at all costs, and I believe Mr. McCain. However, that this prospect is on the table is just plain scary and I don't trust that someone like Paul Wolfewitz to make a decision that avoids war. I could carry on about Iran for pages, but I will try to stay with a simple critique of the show.

In discussing Iraq and troops, Mr. McCain was straightforward in saying that we need more there, simple. It's unfortunate, but he's right. We need more troops. One thing with Mr. Russert, when he strongly disagrees with something, he won't let it go and follow up questions come firing from him. From seeing him do so many interviews, I rend to feel that he agrees when he moves on.

We could go point by point through the interview, but if you're reading this, then you've probably already have seen the show. It must be said that the notions of “will of the people” and “non-partisan” really don't exist in the United States anymore. Let's face, the will of the people is really the will of the politicians that the people have elected. As for 'non-partisan,' whether it be politicians or journalists, everyone today leans one way or the other. John McCain, I feel, is one of the few politicians left who considers the will of the people at all. And Tim Russert, refreshingly, peppers Democrats and Republicans alike about their views. For example, anyone who viewed the South Carolina Senate debate series and then voted for Jim DeMint is just an idiot. That's the way I see it.

This week's second guest was Michael Sheuer, a former CIA analyst who worked in the Osama bin Laden unit. First, I think the CIA encouraged Mr. Sheuer to get out there and start speaking up. I think the agency resents for the most part that they now have to tow a company line and it's not their own, it's Mr. Bushes. The author of “Imperial Hubris” is now out from behind the wall of anonymity and answering questions and here he is on Meet The Press.

First, when I see interviews with people like this, my sense is that these people give honest answers that we don't want to hear. They have objectified the subjects for which they gather intelligence and then deal with their targets with cold hard pragmatism. With this said, Mr. Sheuer's statements were downright sobering…this was no Sunday brunch.

Mr. Russert started off the interview with a requisite excerpt of Mr. Sheuer's book, which said that we were losing the war on terror. Mr. Sheuer affirmed this and went on to explain that our enemies feel like Americans are out to destroy their religion. Well, unless that perception is changed, which I don't see happening anytime soon, we will be at endless war.

Mr. Sheuer touches on this:
His agenda is not to destroy America, Mr. Russert. He simply
wants us our of his neighborhood. He wants us out of the Middle
East…. My point here is that America has a choice between war
and endless war with the forces led by Osama bin Laden.

This reflects what people like Tom Friedman have suggested which to do, which is address the poverty and lack of education and HOPE that Muslims have. Frankly, we don't care about the Muslim community's lack of hope, and unless Mr. Bush pays more than lip service to their plight, we're at endless war. The war on terror is this generation's Cold War. And this climate of fear is going to be nurtured within the American public. Control of information is our government's goal so that political agenda can be run through without meaningful opposition.

Out of habit of interviewing politicians, Mr. Russert asked Mr. Sheuer about what someone said in regard to the analyst ranting about not being able to be heard, suggesting some kind of political agenda at work. This line of questioning was an error in judgment on the part of Mr. Russert. This should be a discussion devoid of politics, but he felt the need to bring it into the equation unnecessarily. However, what makes Mr. Russert one of the top commentators in politics is that he question the words of the people he is interviewing, which he did here with Mr. Sheuer's appearance on Hardball.

I found it interesting that Mr. Sheuer, thoughout the interview, addressed Mr. Russert as 'sir.' This said to me that this man isn't used to being in front of a camera answering questions and hence, his answers aren't indirect answers to questions like most politicians.

“There's a great deal of killing to be done,” says Michael Sheuer. There is nothing to gain politically in this statement; it's hard and cold… and true.