O'Neill: 'Frenzy' distorted war plans account
Rumsfeld: Idea of a bias toward war 'a total misunderstanding'
Tuesday, January 13, 2004 Posted: 10:46 PM EST

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said Tuesday his
account of the Bush administration's early discussions about a possible
invasion of Iraq has been distorted by a "red meat frenzy."

The controversy began last week when excerpts were released from a book on
the administration published Tuesday in which O'Neill suggests Iraq was the
focus of President Bush's first National Security Council meeting.

That started what O'Neill described to NBC's "Today" show as a "red meat
frenzy that's occurred when people didn't have anything except snippets."

"People are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war
in Iraq early in the administration," O'Neill said.

"Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the
Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change
in Iraq."

The idea that Bush "came into office with a predisposition to invade Iraq, I
think, is a total misunderstanding of the situation," Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon.

Bush administration officials have noted that U.S. policy dating from the
Clinton administration was to seek "regime change" in Iraq, although it
focused on funding and training Iraqi opposition groups rather than using
military force.

Retired Army Gen. Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, said he saw nothing to indicate the United States was close to
attacking Iraq early in Bush's term.

Shelton, who retired shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, said the brass reviewed "on the shelf" plans to respond to crises with
the incoming Bush administration.

But in the administration's first six months, "I saw nothing that would lead
me to believe that we were any closer to attacking Iraq than we had been
during the previous administration," Shelton told CNN.

O'Neill, former CEO of aluminum producer Alcoa, sat on the National Security
Council during his 23 months as treasury secretary.

He was pushed out of the administration in December 2002 during a dispute
over tax cuts and growing budget deficits, and was the primary source for
author Ron Suskind's book, "The Price of Loyalty: George Bush, the White
House and the Education of Paul O'Neill."

"From the start, we were building the case against Hussein and looking at
how we could take him out and change Iraq into a new country," O'Neill is
quoted as saying in the book.

"And, if we did that, it would solve everything. It was about finding a way
to do it. That was the tone of it -- the president saying, 'Fine. Go find me
a way to do this.'"

But Tuesday O'Neill said, "I'm amazed that anyone would think that our
government, on a continuing basis across political administrations, doesn't
do contingency planning and look at circumstances."

Several Democratic presidential candidates seized on O'Neill's comments to
argue that the Bush administration misled Americans about the drive to war
with Iraq, where nearly 500 American troops have been killed since March.

Democratic front-runner Howard Dean used them as a jumping-off point to
attack three rivals -- Rep. Dick Gephardt and Sens. John Kerry and John
Edwards -- who supported a congressional resolution authorizing Bush to act
against Iraq.

"I would remind Iowans and others that a year ago, I stood up against this
war and was the only one to do so of the individuals I have mentioned," said
Dean, whose opposition to the war helped propel him to the top of the pack.

Bush repeated his position Monday that his administration turned to war with
Iraq only after the September 11 attacks changed the way U.S. officials
viewed Baghdad's suspected weapons programs.

That Iraq was a concern before that time was evident in July 2001, when
national security adviser Condoleezza Rice told CNN that Saddam "is on the
radar screen for the administration," and senior officials met at the White
House two days later to discuss Iraq.

During the same time, Iraq began dispersing aircraft and air defense
capabilities in preparation for more aggressive U.S. airstrikes to enforce
the "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.

A senior administration official told CNN that early Bush administration
discussions regarding Iraq reviewed existing policies and plans.

Officials were particularly concerned with enforcement of the "no-fly"
zones, where Iraqi air defense forces had been taking potshots at U.S. and
British warplanes since late 1998.

Rumsfeld said Tuesday that Iraq was the only place in the world where U.S.
forces were being fired upon "with impunity," and "clearing it was something
that needed to be addressed."

Richard Perle, a leading advocate of war with Iraq and a member of the
independent Defense Advisory Board that advises Rumsfeld, told CNN the
review was still under way when the September 11 attacks occurred.


Reply via email to