Bremer & Blitzer on Obama's "weak" Middle Eastern diplomacy

[grasswire]

Transcript from 9/13/12

BLITZER: .... Certainly, the unrest in the Middle East continuing in Cairo even as we speak, spreading as far as Iraq where hundreds of angry protesters flooded the streets today.

Joining us now is Paul Bremer, the former top U.S. official in Iraq.

And, Mr. Ambassador, thanks very much for coming in.

PAUL BREMER, FORMER U.S. ADMINISTRATOR IN IRAQ: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: How worried are you about U.S. diplomats right now throughout North Africa and the Middle East? You were endangered when you were in Iraq as all of us remember starting back in 2003.

BREMER: Yes. Let me say, first of all, that I send my condolences to my colleagues who served and died in Libya, and Americans tend to forget that there are American diplomats putting their lives on the line all over the world every day. I think we should be concerned because what we are seeing now is the spread that started in two countries. Today, it moved to three or four more, including Iraq, which is quite a ways from North Africa.

And that spread is eerily reminiscent of what we all went through in the late 1970s.

BLITZER: In Iran?

BREMER: In -- well, not just in Iran, we had an ambassador killed in Kabul followed by the embassy in Islamabad being burned to the ground, followed by the takeover in Tehran. I mean these kinds of things have a way of spreading. And I think they are a mark of the fact that the administration has basically conveyed weakness in this region. And weakness always begets trouble.

BLITZER: So what should the administration in your opinion be doing?

BREMER: What it should be doing is what they're starting to do now. It took them a while to find their voice. I mean the president in his first Rose Garden speech said nothing about the attack in Egypt. There seems to still be confusion in the administration as to what exactly our relationship with Egypt is.

But the key problem is that the people who are opposed to us are Islamic extremists. The administration seems to be having trouble finding its voice recognizing this reality.

BLITZER: This is what I don't understand. The administration has launched -- President Obama has approved not only the killing of bin Laden, which was a sign of -- a decisive act, as you well know, but more drone attacks, these targeted killings of suspected terrorists out there whether in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere, than all of the Bush administration combined. Isn't that an act -- a decisive act?

BREMER: Yes, but very restricted and very targeted. And the problem is weakness towards the states, towards states that are hostile to us.

(CROSSTALK)

BREMER: Starting with Iran.

BLITZER: But the sanctions are brutal right --

BREMER: Including China.

BLITZER: The economic sanctions and the diplomatic sanctions are really -- the people in Iran are really feeling these economic sanctions.

BREMER: Yes. But we are trying to persuade one person. Ayatollah Khomeini to stop his nuclear program, and he hasn't stopped it. So the sanctions, though they're tough, have had no effect on the purpose, which is to stop -- we're not doing them to hurt the Iranian people. We are doing them to have them stop the nuclear --

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: But what about -- what about the --

BREMER: International Atomic Energy -- just --

BLITZER: The covert operations against Iran. The cyber warfare, the other covert -- they've been pretty decisive.

BREMER: They have not stopped the nuclear --

BLITZER: They've set it back, though.

BREMER: They have not stopped the nuclear --

BLITZER: They haven't stopped it but they've set it back.

BREMER: Look, Wolf, you can -- you can make all the arguments you want about it but the pervasive view in this region, as we have seen with these attacks, is that we're weak. We have -- the administration has unwisely pulled our forces all out of Iraq. So we have very little influence there.

BLITZER: The Bush administration --

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: The Bush administration had that timeline as you well know.

BREMER: They pulled them all out. They had an opportunity to keep them there this year and they didn't.

BLITZER: The Iraqis said they didn't want them.

BREMER: Look, the administration made it pretty clear they didn't want it.

BLITZER: The Iraqis said they weren't going to give immunity to U.S. military personnel.

BREMER: There was a deal -- there was a deal to be made and they didn't make it. Then we're fighting for the first time, I am aware of, a war on our own self-imposed deadline in Afghanistan. Look, you know this part of the world, this part of the world understands strength and is very quick at receiving weakness.

We wouldn't have people going over walls in embassies all across this region if there wasn't a sense that America was withdrawing from the region and making ourselves look weak.

BLITZER: Was the --

BREMER: So these are -- these are consequences. That's what happens when you look weak.

BLITZER: Was the Arab Spring in your opinion worth it as far as the U.S. is concerned? In other words, is the U.S. potentially better off today following the removal of Gadhafi in Libya, Mubarak in Egypt, and what's going on potentially in Syria, Bashar al-Assad whose days presumably are numbered? Is the U.S. better off with these dictators gone or was it better off before?

BREMER: No. We're better off with them gone. And I think President Bush is the person who said first that we spent 40 years in this region with a policy that basically said we prefer stability to change. And I think the president correctly saw and Obama has embraced it as well that in fact change is in our long-term interest.

It was always going to be difficult. It was never going to be -- it's -- now the dictators are gone and now we have a bright light of democracy there. And one of the things this shows, particularly in Libya, is how unresolved the consequences of the Arab Spring still are. I mean there's a lot of work still to be done. This is not easy stuff.

BLITZER: Not just in Libya but in Egypt as well.

BREMER: And in Egypt.

BLITZER: Arguably the U.S.' steak in Egypt is a lot more important than in Libya right now.

BREMER: I agree. I agree it is.

BLITZER: Mr. Ambassador, thanks for coming in.

BREMER: Nice to be with you again.

BLITZER: Thank you.

[spanone]

1. they are taking the President's strength in foreign policy and swiftboating it.

ala reagan / jimmy carter

[grasswire]

2. thanks to DUer take7 for finding the transcript

A lot was lost in the "crosstalk" segments. I was actually impressed with Blitzer for pushing Bremer, hard.

[Mutiny In Heaven]

3. Looks like Blitzer did well

It's taken a look at Romney's gung-ho foreign policy ideas to get the mainstream media acting like the journalists they're supposed to be, but there's definitely a crumb of true objectivity creeping through now.

[Gabi Hayes]

4. today he had wolfowitz!!!

actually mildly rebuked him for lying about obama's ''apologizing,'' weak-kneed foreign policy.

can't wait to see if analysts take these two lying war mongerers apart. how DARE they.

only talking they should be doing is to a special prosecutor

[laundry_queen]

13. I saw that, and I was like WTF?

Did Wolf start watching the Newsroom too? LOL.

Maybe they are ashamed a fake news show does a better job than they do.

[dogman]

5. Where is the missing 6.6billion dollars Mr. Bremer?

Why are liars and thieves treated as if their opinion matters?

[Kindly Refrain]

6. Bremer was the guy who had to flee Iraq in total shame.

Real credible guy.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Bremer belongs in jail. n/t

[sabrina 1]

8. Bremer, the man who lost billions of Iraqi dollars, and who failed so miserably

in Iraq, sparking one of the most bloody periods of that horrific war when he tried to censor their new 'democratic' newspapers, causing one of the most influential and powerful leaders there to rise up against him. He cost the lives of untold numbers of people, and AIRC he left in disgrace.

What is he doing on National TV unless it is to answer for his war crimes?

The Neocons are circling the wagons, in fact I've just seen that the insane Michael Ledeen has been blogging and revealing a strange amount of knowledge of events in Iran, knowledge no one outside of Iran appears to have.

These people SHOULD have prosecuted, they have been left to continue to undermine this country and I believe that is what they are doing now.

This is what happens when you let criminals go free.

[grasswire]

9. where is Ledeen blogging??

Egad.

[sabrina 1]

16. He has his own blog and he is constantly quoted with great admiration on

PJ Media I discovered. I hope someone is keeping an eye on this radical, insane moron. He was behind the disastrous policies that got us into the mess we are in right now with all of our wars.

But he's not satisfied with all the killing we've done of Muslims yet, he's disappointed in Obama and wants to see more carnage and mayhem, dealt to the Muslim by the US.

I'll have to look this all up again since they are coming out of hiding now to try to undermine this President in his efforts to avoid any war with Iran.

But this is the lunatic who wants to turn the Muslim World into a 'cauldron'. He has stated that the US has to be 'brutal' in their crushing of all these countries. It is insane talk yet somehow these rabid, very sick individuals were given power to put their horrific policies into place.

As Brezinski said about him 'he's the stupidest man ever', stupid yes, but as someone said 'be very fearful of anyone who is imbued with a sense of missionary zeal' when it comes to the ME.

Michael Ledeen's own writings should disqualify him from ever getting anywhere near our government.

I'm sure he was thrilled to see the flames in Libya and elsewhere as they want Obama gone. They want someone they can manipulate, like Bush, to complete their PNAC plans and Romney, having no ideas of his own, will suit them just fine.

As I said, I hope someone is keeping an eye on these nutcases, they will do anything to achieve their goals.

[progressivebydesign]

12. I can't BELIEVE they're giving Romney access to Intel right now. n/t

[sabrina 1]

17. And he I'm sure, is being 'advised' by the old Neocon war criminals.

This is why you need to prosecute war criminals. Leaving to roam around free is dangerous, and now they are back, and they intend to undermine the policies of this administration regarding war and peace in the ME.

Ledeen said the other day in one of his blog posts that he was glad there had been no success with the peace plan eg. Of course he is. He wants war, and more war, lots of dead Muslims and he wants OUR military to do his dirty work. He of course has never been anywhere near any of the wars he is so enthusiastic about.

[grasswire]

15. Ledeen's daughter was a freeper

She was posting on freerepublic from Iraq. I think she was one of those Republican kids who were given billions of dollars to hand out here and there.

[moondust]

10. When all you have is a hammer,

everything looks like a nail.

Bomb them into submission, boys!

[progressivebydesign]

11. I fucking HATE when I'm right!! I called this yesterday.

I knew that once they trotted out Darth Cheney on 9/11, it begins. The election is no longer Romney vs. Obama, it is NEOCONS vs. Obama. They told ROmney to stand down, and they're going with the terror, fear, psych ops, and covert work in the ME to create unrest and then regardless of how the President responds, GOSH.. there is Bremer, and Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld, and Cheney, on TV telling us how WEAK the President is.

Well fuck them.. Romney???? Would anyone trust ROMNEY? Or those ghoulish money-driven neocon amateurs that destroyed Iraq and made off with billions of dollars in unmonitored slush funds????

So they wont' have Bush at the Convention, but they'll have his blood thirsty advisors as surrogates now???

[grasswire]

14. so you think Obama is now running against the PNAC?

And Romney is their stooge because he thinks they can take him to victory?

Hmmmm.