NEWS TRANSCRIPT from the United States Department of Defense<br /><br />DoD News Briefing<br />Victoria Clarke, ASD (PA)<br />Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 4:01 p.m. EST<br /><br />(Also participating was Maj. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, vice<br />director for Operations, J-3, Joint Staff.)<br /><br /> Clarke: Good afternoon, everybody. First of all, I'd<br />like to welcome Major General McChrystal, who is the vice<br />director for operations on the Joint Staff. I won't quite say<br />he volunteered, but he's going to help out on the briefings.<br /><br /> On a very sad note, I'd like to offer the condolences of<br />the department to the families and friends of the U.S. and<br />coalition forces who have died in the first 72 hours of<br />operations.<br /><br /> The Americans are Major Jay Thomas Aubin, Marine Corps,<br />Waterville, Maine; Captain Ryan Anthony Beaupre, U.S. Marine<br />Corps, Bloomington, Illinois; Corporal Brian Matthew Kennedy,<br />U.S. Marine Corps, Houston, Texas; Staff Sergeant Kendall Damon<br />Watersbey, U.S. Marine Corps, Baltimore, Maryland; Second<br />Lieutenant Therrel S. Childers, U.S. Marine Corps, Harrison<br />County, Mississippi; Lance Corporal Jose Gutierrez, U.S. Marine<br />Corps, Los Angeles, California -- (coughs) -- excuse me; and<br />Lieutenant Thomas Mullen Adams, U.S. Navy, La Mesa, California.<br /><br /> We are all very proud of these people, the U.S. and the<br />coalition forces, who are performing with incredible courage and<br />skill and dedication. They're doing an outstanding job, and<br />they're imposing some devastating impacts on the Iraqi regime.<br /><br /> Although much work lies ahead, and you'll hear us saying<br />that repeatedly, coalition forces are making considerable<br />progress. The oil fields in the south are being saved to<br />benefit the Iraqi people. Coalition forces have the key port of<br />Umm Qasr and are making good progress in Basra. The Iraqi<br />forces, including some leadership, are surrendering and<br />defecting in some numbers. I think we have a few recent images<br />here.<br /><br /> It is only a matter of time before the Iraqi regime is<br />destroyed and its threat to region and the world is ended. As<br />we've made clear from the beginning, this is not a war against a<br />people, a country or a religion, and the Iraqi people who are<br />welcoming coalition forces are clear evidence that they know<br />this to be true.<br /><br /> As operations go forward, we'll continue to take<br />extraordinary care to protect civilians. Our targets are<br />military, and we continue to urge civilians to stay home and<br />away from military assets. Additionally, we are prepared to<br />provide as much humanitarian aid as required when and where it<br />is needed.<br /><br /> Very sadly, we are also aware of the reports this<br />morning and this afternoon of journalists who were not embedded<br />with coalition forces that have been killed and wounded. We<br />can't confirm that for you, and we'll leave it up to their news<br />organizations to provide further details.<br /><br /> But it brings me to a very important point. As we've<br />said many time, the situation in Iraq is fluid, it is quite<br />dangerous, there are combat operations underway in a number of<br />areas. We ask all new organizations to exercise restraint,<br />especially with their journalists who are out there operating<br />freely and ask them to exercise restraint. There are risks.<br />Combat operations are moving in a fast and unpredictable<br />fashion. The coalition forces will of course exercise extreme<br />care whenever there are noncombatants. However, reporters who<br />get between coalition and Iraqi forces put themselves at extreme<br />risk.<br /><br /> And finally, I'd like to repeat a caution about the<br />operations overall. As successful as they have been thus far,<br />and as confident as we are about the inevitable outcome, we know<br />challenges and difficulties may still lie ahead.<br /><br /> General.<br /><br /> McChrystal: Thank you, Ms. Clarke. I too would like to<br />extend my condolences to the families of our British allies and<br />those of our families who've lost loved ones in combat over the<br />last days. Operation Iraqi Freedom continues. A Day began<br />yesterday at 1 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. The goal of the air<br />campaign is to neutralize Iraqi leadership; suppress missile<br />threats to our forces and Iraq's neighbors; support our Special<br />Forces operations; to target Republican Guard, Special<br />Republican Guard and Iraqi Intelligence Service operations as<br />well as be on call for combat air control missions for<br />time-sensitive targeting.<br /><br /> More than 1,000 sorties were flown against several<br />hundred targets across Iraq yesterday. More than 400 Tomahawk<br />cruise missiles were launched from United States Navy and<br />British ships and submarines. Additionally, about 100<br />air-launch cruise missiles were fired, and 700 precision-guided<br />munitions were dropped by coalition aircraft on targets<br />throughout Iraq.<br /><br /> On the ground, coalition forces continue the main attack<br />towards Baghdad. Ground forces have reached more than 150 miles<br />into Iraqi territory and have crossed the Euphrates River.<br />Coalition forces are advancing north beyond An Nazariyah. As<br />General Franks mentioned, there are between 1,000 and 2,000<br />Iraqi soldiers who have surrendered and been taken into custody.<br /> And although numbers are hard to determine we have seen<br />significant evidence of many Iraqi soldiers simply abandoning<br />their equipment and leaving. Clearly, Operation Iraqi Freedom<br />is moving forward. The success to date is a product of<br />meticulous planning, effective integration of air, maritime,<br />ground and special operations forces, and the impressive<br />accomplishments of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and<br />Coast Guardsmen of the coalition. But the operation is not<br />over. There's a long way to go, and much of the Iraqi armed<br />forces, highlighted by six Republican Guard divisions and<br />special Republican Guard divisions, who may still fight. So we<br />must remain prepared for potentially tough fights as we move<br />forward.<br /><br /> That said, while the progress and timing of the<br />operation remains impossible to forecast, the outcome is not.<br />With that we'll take your questions.<br /><br /> Q: General, you referred to the one thousand, two<br />thousand approximately Iraqis in custody. What became of the<br />8,000 members of the 51st who were said to have surrendered<br />yesterday? Were they just allowed to go home? Or what's become<br />of those?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, we are seeing several phenomenon. The<br />commander of the 51st Division, one of the senior leaders, in<br />fact surrendered themselves individually. We also see soldiers<br />essentially leaving the battlefield or melting away. The unit<br />did not surrender en masse. What we have for numbers is, as<br />General Franks outlined this morning, as of this morning between<br />one and two thousand actually in an EPW status.<br /><br /> Q: So in that specific case you say only the commanders<br />are in custody? There are some who just left or are allowed to<br />leave? Or --<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I don't have any more information beyond what I've provided.<br /><br /> Q: First of all a procedural question, going back to<br />Kosovo. Will you be doing this on an almost daily basis now as<br />long as the war lasts? And then I'll have a question for the<br />general.<br /><br /> Clarke: For the foreseeable future, but we'll see the<br />level of activity and interest. But for now that will be the<br />general game plan -- try to get CENTCOM to brief early afternoon<br />their time, early morning our time, and then someone from here<br />early afternoon.<br /><br /> Q: Right. General, thank you. Welcome. You are going<br />to learn to love us while you're here. Question. You say that<br />the forces are across the Tigris. Any other major --<br /><br /> McChrystal: Euphrates.<br /><br /> Q: Hmm?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Euphrates, sir.<br /><br /> Q: (Off mike) -- any other major land barriers before<br />these troops get to Baghdad? And what's an ETA on the outskirts<br />of Baghdad? Can you give us any idea at all?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, trying to predict the conclusion of<br />the operation or reaching Baghdad would be impossible at this<br />point. The forces have moved with impressive speed thus far, as<br />we outlined, and the product of that is where we are. That<br />said, whenever you actually execute a plan the enemy gets a<br />vote. We've still got significant Iraqi forces in front of us.<br />They may fight, they may not. If they fight, there could be a<br />tough battle to be taken. So trying to predict a time would be<br />really difficult.<br /><br /> Clarke: And I'd just --<br /><br /> Q: Actual hours?<br /><br /> Clarke: I'd just add on to that -- General Myers I<br />think yesterday was the one who said we are making good<br />progress. There are still a lot of unknowns out there. And<br />I've already picked up a tendency to look and seek for hard and<br />fast benchmarks. It's -- we won't be predicting those, and we<br />will be constantly cautioning as much progress as we are making,<br />bad things could still happen.<br /><br /> Q: You missed the first part of the question. Any more<br />natural barriers, or are they going to be speeding across mostly<br />desert towards Baghdad?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I don't want to talk about the<br />operational details of their route. They crossed the Euphrates<br />very, very successfully.<br /><br /> Q: Well, general, since --<br /><br /> Q: General, the Iraqis obviously already know. Could<br />you give us the furthest point of advance by says at least the<br />3rd Infantry and the 1st Mech. Just kind of pinpoint it a<br />little bit for us on the map?<br /><br /> Clarke: Let me jump in there for a second. Operations<br />are on the way. A lot of parts and pieces are moving as we<br />speak, and clearly strategic surprise -- isn't something we've<br />got. There is still tactical surprise, and we are going to try<br />hard not to stand up here and paint a picture for the Iraqi<br />regime of exactly where we are and exactly what we've got going<br />at any moment in time.<br /><br /> Q: I just mean ballpark sort of --<br /><br /> Clarke: Yeah, even ballpark. Brett?<br /><br /> Q: General, you singled out six Republican Guard<br />divisions and special Republican Guard divisions, the most loyal<br />troops. Some of those obviously in and around Baghdad. I<br />understand they have been targets -- they were on the target<br />list. Is there any assessment on the troops around Baghdad of<br />what you are seeing with that resistance right now?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, nothing we can pin down at this point.<br /> We are continuing to gather effects of operations today.<br /><br /> Q: If I could follow up to where yesterday Secretary<br />Rumsfeld said the Iraqi leadership is essentially losing control<br />of the country. Is there more -- can you characterize it<br />further today on command and control what you are seeing in<br />here?<br /><br /> Clarke: It's really more of what he was talking about<br />yesterday. They appear not to have a lot of control over all<br />the parts and pieces you would expect them to. There seems to<br />be confusion in the command and control, and I'll leave it at<br />that.<br /><br /> Thelma.<br /><br /> Q: All along, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld has before<br />this ever started warned that it could take six days, six weeks,<br />or even six months. And this morning in the president's radio<br />address he had again warned that this could take a long time. I<br />wonder if it's time to remind the American people that this may<br />not be wrapped up any time in the next few days -- it could be a<br />considerable period?<br /><br /> Clarke: I wouldn't put a timeframe on it, because we<br />just don't know. But we've said from the very beginning, even<br />well before the start of military operations, there are a lot of<br />unknowns. There are a lot of bad things that can happen. And<br />we'll take it one day at a time. And the only thing that is of<br />great certainty is what the outcome is: the end of this regime.<br /><br /> Q: (Off mike) -- regarding the journalists who have<br />been killed, any information that would suggest that they died<br />as a result of U.S. military fire? And are you taking any steps<br />to try to mitigate the risk to journalists who aren't actually<br />embedded with U.S. troops?<br /><br /> Clarke: We've heard several different versions of what<br />may have happened to different sets of reporters, and it's very<br />unclear to us right now what has happened in different places.<br />What is very certain is they are journalists who were not<br />embedded with coalition forces. And as we have warned<br />repeatedly, again weeks before the start of this operation, it<br />seems like it's stating the obvious, but it is very, very<br />dangerous out there, especially when people are wandering freely<br />between coalition and Iraqi forces. So we have no evidence to<br />suggest what you said. We have lots of evidence to suggest that<br />it is very dangerous out there. And I will say again to news<br />organizations -- and I talked to bureau chiefs today -- we<br />really, really urge you to exercise restraint with your<br />journalists that are out there operating freely.<br /><br /> Q: But we have --<br /><br /> Q: Does the U.S. military -- has the U.S. military had<br />to go rescue any journalists under fire who were not embedded?<br />And has that resulted in any risk to U.S. troops?<br /><br /> Clarke: We will get -- try to get you more information.<br />I've received some information that U.S. forces may have<br />MEDEVACed one journalist, but we'll try to get you more<br />information as the day goes on.<br /><br /> Q: One last thing about the -- can you bring us up to<br />date on whatever your state of knowledge is on the Iraqi regime,<br />Saddam Hussein or anyone else in control? Do you know where any<br />of those people are? Is there any evidence that anyone is<br />leaving or defecting or making contact with --<br /><br /> Clarke: I don't have information about specific<br />individuals, but I'll repeat what I said before: We continue to<br />see evidence of confusion, of not a real solid grip on the<br />command and control aspects that you would expect at this time.<br /><br /> Q: Have you seen any evidence of Saddam Hussein gone? Has he appeared anywhere?<br /><br /> Clarke: I've heard -- probably heard as many different<br />stories as people in this room have -- five or six different<br />stories and who knows? Who knows? Carl?<br /><br /> Q: General, could I ask you a question --<br /><br /> Clarke: No, let's go to -- Carl?<br /><br /> Q: Torie, and general, either one of you -- can you<br />tell us how far shock and all has gone? Is there more shock and<br />all left? Are we going to see more today? If you don't want to<br />put a specific on it, but is there some left in the barrel<br />there?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Yes, sir, there's as much left in the<br />barrel as required. The air campaign has been directed at a<br />number of targets, importantly at the beginning the Iraqi<br />command and control capability, the regime leadership, and then<br />weapons of mass destruction and their capability to execute<br />those. And that's tied to command and control as well. It will<br />continue to target additional parts of the force as long as<br />resistance in there to include Republican Guards and special<br />Republican Guards, the intelligence. It is -- we are waiting to<br />get the feedback on how well that's working, and there is a lag<br />time in that. We are hitting targets effectively and with<br />precision, and pleased with that. But it takes a little while,<br />as Torie just described, to get the feedback on how much we've<br />affected it -- because we know they have redundant capabilities<br />in many areas.<br /><br /> Q: You should have been able to get some BDA today<br />though. The skies are pretty clear -- you could take a look at<br />it. How successful?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Well, sir, we can see whether or not we<br />have hit targets in many cases, and we are still gathering that.<br /> But we are running an effects-based campaign that is partially<br />kinetic, partially non-kinetic, partially information<br />operations. And so what we judge effectiveness by is not just<br />whether there is a hole in the room of a building, but whether<br />or not the function that that element did before ceases to be<br />effective.<br /><br /> Q: Are we likely to see another show like last evening?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I won't predict the future, but I will<br />say that it will happen as much as required.<br /><br /> Q: Torie, can I add the show last night and the weapons you outlined --<br /><br /> Clarke: You know -- let me stop you for a second. I<br />know I am not always as careful with words as I should be. It's<br />not a show, it's not a game. And I just think people should be<br />really, really careful with the words.<br /><br /> Q: All right. The campaign we saw unfold last night --<br />"show" was not my word, by the way. (Laughs.)<br /><br /> Q: (Inaudible.)<br /><br /> Q: (Inaudible) -- over the last month we've had<br />(inaudible) about 3,000 precision-guided bombs would rain down<br />on Baghdad on the first night. This is the New York Times put<br />that in play. Your math lays out maybe a thousand weapons at<br />most, if conservatively. Was that the -- was the original plan<br />a much greater number, or was this always kind the state of<br />play, roughly a thousand or so? Because that set the stage for<br />this expectations of shock, awe, whatever you want to call it.<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, a couple things. First is, to go back<br />in shock and awe as a concept, the idea is very precise, and<br />some people I think misinterpreted shock and awe for a wave of<br />fire and huge destruction. In fact, in an effects-based<br />campaign, as this was, we can achieve much shock and awe by<br />hitting just critical points. In fact, a perfect shock and awe<br />would hit as few as possible to create those effects.<br /><br /> So, the answer is, we believe we are having effect, but<br />it's tough to do that. Whether it will go forward in numbers --<br /><br /> Q: Could I have a follow-up?<br /><br /> Clarke: Well, let me just add on one point to that. If<br />you go back to our objectives, our objective very clearly is to<br />break the back of the Iraqi regime while causing as little<br />collateral damage as possible. That's what our objective is.<br />What is so important about the plans is its ability to scale-up<br />and scale-down.<br /><br /> Q: General Franks today mentioned, he doesn't think<br />about strategic targets. He thinks about emerging targets. In<br />the long run, might emerging targets, command-and-control on<br />Iraqi or Republican Guard units, might those be more important<br />in the long run than the CNN kind of shock and awe we've been<br />seeing out of Baghdad.<br /><br /> McChrystal: I think that's a great question and gives<br />an opportunity to discuss flexibility. As we demonstrated the<br />other night, the key to having a very effective effects-based<br />campaign is to be flexible, i.e., not to have a program over<br />day after day that you hit automatically. Instead, what they<br />are doing is seeing what needs to be struck next, either<br />lethally or non-lethally. And so I think that's exactly what<br />you're seeing right now.<br /><br /> Q: What role with SOF are we playing? Is SOF playing<br />the same role as it did in Afghanistan?<br /><br /> Clarke: (Off mike.)<br /><br /> (Laughter.)<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, the role is different but the same.<br />They are leveraging combat power. The key role of Special<br />Operating Forces is to take very mature, well trained people and<br />leverage power, i.e., it's not desirable that they get in direct<br />firefights themselves, but instead they use air, they work with<br />coalition allies, they use information. And a small force has a<br />disproportionate effect on the battlefield. And that's what<br />we're having right now.<br /><br /> Q: General?<br /><br /> Q: And could you -- on the map that you showed us, you<br />identified the airfields H2 and H3 and showed Special Forces<br />near them. Are they in control of both of those airfields?<br />Could you describe for us what the green line is, what the<br />represents? Could you talk to us a little bit about the<br />fighting in Basra? Could you tell us about Scud hunting?<br /><br /> Q: Just pick two!<br /><br /> (Laughter.)<br /><br /> Q: And could you talk to us about non-lethal weapons?<br />And now I'm done. And I'll remind you as you go through.<br /><br /> Q: Just do the first two.<br /><br /> McChrystal: My mind is like one of those old computers.<br />They can only take a certain amount.<br /><br /> Q: I'll prompt you.<br /><br /> McChrystal: All right, the airfields out in the west,<br />there are H1, -2, -3 and -4, and they stretch into Jordan. I<br />won't comment on which are under our control now. Clearly we<br />have special operating forces in the west.<br /><br /> Q: But you said there was one as of yesterday. Has that number grown?<br /><br /> McChrystal: I won't discuss -- there are still forces<br />operating, and I think we put them at risk if we talk too much<br />about exactly what they're doing.<br /><br /> Q: Okay, and the green line that was on the map, what<br />does that represent? It has a sign that says "green line."<br /><br /> McChrystal: That is the line between the<br />Kurdish-controlled part of northern Iraq and the remainder of<br />Iraq.<br /><br /> Q: Okay. And, I'm sorry, the Scud-hunting, how's that<br />going? Have we seen Scuds launching, or are we finding Scuds --<br /><br /> McChrystal: Well, we've seen those Scuds launching, and<br />that's -- that was what I was involved in during the 1991 war.<br />It was a combination of ground forces and air suppression over,<br />and then of course intelligence. We're doing a different job of<br />it this time, but so far, there have been no Scuds launched,<br />which is very positive to date.<br /><br /> Q: And you --<br /><br /> (Cross talk.)<br /><br /> Q: Wait, wait. May I have one --<br /><br /> (Cross talk.)<br /><br /> Q: (Inaudible) -- Basra and --<br /><br /> Clarke: He had two and a half.<br /><br /> Q: But everybody's interested. (Laughter.)<br /><br /> Clarke: Go ahead. You can ask your question.<br /><br /> Q: Can you talk to us about the strategy of dealing<br />with a large city like Basra, and then basically sealing it off<br />once you have destroyed the organized force, and then moving<br />rapidly beyond -- same strategy today in Al Nazariyah -- the<br />risk that you take of having potentially a hostile city behind<br />you, several of them, as you stretch out your lines of<br />communication and resupply? High-risk strategy?<br /><br /> McChrystal: It depends upon the situation, sir. And<br />I'd let General Franks characterize it in each case. Clear, we<br />try to avoid combat in cities because of the effect on civilians<br />and potential damage to infrastructure as well. In cases where<br />we can bypass or isolate and continue the operation forward and<br />hope then that that element or that location falls without<br />pitched combat, I think that's in everyone's best interest. And<br />the commander on the ground weighs whether or not the enemy<br />forces in the city are any kind of threat to his lines of<br />communication.<br /><br /> Q: But aren't you leaving a boiling pot behind<br />potentially, if the reception of American forces is different<br />than you hope it's going to be? It leaves something that can<br />interrupt your resupply, something that can hit you from the<br />rear.<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I wouldn't speculate. I think the<br />commander on the ground really has the feel to make the<br />assessment in each case.<br /><br /> Clarke: And they also have the ability to scale as needed and appropriate.<br /><br /> Barbara.<br /><br /> Q: General, we saw some early morning bombing over<br />Baghdad at dawn Baghdad time. Should we take from that that<br />you're now confident enough you have taken down the air defense<br />system enough over Baghdad and over Iraq to have daylight<br />bombings?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Ma'am, we have the capability to operate<br />any time. We still respect the air defenses in the Baghdad<br />area. And of course as you know was known as the super "missile<br />engagement zone," or MEZ. But the air defense is there already<br />-- an integrated system of air defense artillery, radars,<br />command and control communications and surface-to-air missiles.<br />If you can take down parts of that and degrade it, then it gets<br />more feasible to operate effectively in day or night. We are<br />still respectful of what they have.<br /><br /> Q And if I could also follow up. Secretary Rumsfeld<br />yesterday again spoke about communications that elements of the<br />administration have had with Iraqi leadership, and that that was<br />key to your decision-making on going forward in the campaign if<br />they were to surrender that might be a good sign. Has there<br />been any sign beyond the Republican Guard that you spoke about<br />that any member of the senior leadership in Iraq was responding<br />to the overtures from the Bush administration?<br /><br /> Clarke: I'd say two things. One, for quite some time<br />now, with a variety of tools -- the president of the United<br />States speaking very openly, the leaflets, the commando solo --<br />a variety of ways, a variety of conversations and discussions,<br />we have been communicating with the leadership saying, End this<br />now -- save your lives, save the Iraqi people's lives. So we<br />have communicated with them consistently over a range -- with a<br />range of tools -- and we'll continue to do this. I am not going<br />to characterize individual conversations, but discussions are<br />ongoing, and there is still an opportunity for some people to do<br />the right thing.<br /><br /> Q: General, have you found any evidence -- have the<br />special operations forces operating in western Iraq found any<br />evidence of Scud either missiles or launchers of fueling trucks<br />or anything that might suggest there are any Scuds left out<br />there?<br /><br /> McChrystal: To my knowledge we have not discovered any to this point.<br /><br /> Q: General, could I ask -- in the air strikes that have<br />targeted the Republican Guards, can you say whether you are<br />going after headquarters and leadership as opposed to fielded<br />forces? And if you are, why would you not go after forces that<br />you may have to fight?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I wouldn't give the operational<br />details of exactly what we are targeting. We are trying to have<br />effects-based outcomes on those organizations as well.<br />Sometimes destroying the internal command and control of a<br />division fragments its combat power more quickly than anything<br />else. But I think that's as far as I would go.<br /><br /> Q: Without disclosing the location of where you<br />actually crossed the Euphrates, can you tell us did you cross at<br />a place where there were already bridges in place, or did you<br />bridge over the Euphrates at some other point and cross?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, in fact we were able to utilize bridges that were already in place.<br /><br /> Clarke: Tom Bowman.<br /><br /> Q: Can you get into the weapons of mass destruction<br />sites? They were listed the first night of the air campaign.<br />How many were struck? What do you expect was there? Are there<br />chem, bio or long- range missiles? And did you use any special<br />kinds of weaponry -- incendiary devices, for example, to take<br />them out?<br /><br /> Clarke: If you go back to what Secretary Rumsfeld<br />talked about yesterday, and General Franks went through it again<br />today, clearly one of our top priorities, one of our top<br />objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number<br />of sites. I won't go into details which ones they are, where<br />they are, but it is a --<br /><br /> Q: More than 10? Less than a hundred?<br /><br /> Clarke: No, I will not give you a ballpark, but I will<br />do two things. One is just underscore what a priority that is<br />for us; and, two, try to manage expectations. We know with<br />great certainty the Iraqi regime was extraordinarily skilled at<br />hiding the stuff, at dispersing the stuff in very small amounts<br />in underground bunkers. So I want to manage expectations. It<br />could be difficult to find and exploit this stuff.<br /><br /> Q: Any kind of special bombs and missiles used to take<br />some of this stuff out, incendiary type weapons?<br /><br /> McChrystal: And that's a great question. In fact the<br />whole weaponeering process that we use in our very, very<br />meticulous targeting process identifies every target --<br />identifies the best munition to use. In some cases a munition<br />that might potentially help destroy any agents that might be<br />there is an option. There are many other options. But in<br />addition to the correct munition from that standpoint, we also<br />balance that against potential collateral damage, potential<br />unintended casualties of civilians. So a lot goes into the<br />calculus that determines exactly what munition is used.<br /><br /> Q: When you mention the hard target category of weapons<br />of mass destruction and the capability to execute them, what are<br />you really talking about? Do you -- can you explain that?<br />Because I don't think you're actually bombing stocks of<br />chemical weapons. What are you bombing?<br /><br /> McChrystal: That's a -- I would not go into the<br />specifics exactly, but we are taking great care not to achieve a<br />negative effect with something we're trying to hit.<br /><br /> Q: Did you hope to see some of these sites with ground<br />troops as opposed to bombing it because of the concern maybe<br />about some sort of a chemical plume, let's say, or something?<br /><br /> McChrystal: I think exactly. Every weapon of mass<br />destruction location has its own inherent built-in danger to it,<br />either if it's stored incorrectly -- even just going in. And so<br />as we go after each of those, we'll look to secure them and<br />we'll look to then render them safe in a very -- in a way that's<br />not dangerous for our coalition forces going in, or to the<br />surrounding area.<br /><br /> Q: Clearly some you feel safe to bomb as opposed to seize?<br /><br /> McChrystal: I won't -- I won't identify which we might<br />feel safe to bomb and which we wouldn't.<br /><br /> Q: The Iraqis have set trenches full of oil on fire all<br />around the city today, which is a traditional way that the<br />Russians have tried to create some sort of primitive air<br />defense. Would you speculate for us on what you think they're<br />doing? Do they not know that the United States has JDAMS?<br />Other than making pollution --<br /><br /> Clarke: If the general wants to speculate about it from<br />a military operations standpoint, I'd encourage him to do so.<br />My personal opinion for a long time has been that they intended<br />to do this for a very different reason. I don't think they<br />truly thought it would impede our planes or our precision-guided<br />weapons. I think for a long time, because their propaganda,<br />their disinformation, their lies and deception are such a big<br />part of the apparatus, I think they've plan for a long time to<br />do that to try to create very dramatic images of what it looks<br />like is happening in Baghdad.<br /><br /> What we know with certainty is that we have carefully<br />chosen every target. What we know with great certainty is that<br />we have chosen every target towards our objective of breaking<br />the back of the regime and keeping the collateral damage and the<br />noncombatant casualties to an absolute minimum. So I personally<br />am quite confident it was for a very different reason.<br /><br /> Q: Don't there have to be explosions before fires are<br />started? I mean, that's sort of -- if there isn't a bombing<br />campaign at that time, I don' t know how stupid the Iraqi people<br />or the international community is, but -- how that washes. Is<br />there --<br /><br /> Clarke: Well, one of the -- who knows right now what<br />the Iraqi people are seeing or hearing. But -- and also we<br />aren't -- we are trying to keep tabs, but it's hard to see what<br />people in the other parts of the world are seeing, or how it is<br />being characterized to them. But the images in and of<br />themselves can be dramatic. We are trying very hard to explain<br />to people how careful the targeting process was, how we tried to<br />hit certain targets with certain purpose, how we are not doing<br />those things. The very placement of some of these trenches<br />gives you an indication of what they were thinking, putting<br />trenches near hospital and mosques and schools, which are<br />clearly not targets for us.<br /><br /> So, in general --<br /><br /> Q: Is there any military reason -- does it impede any<br />aspect of anything you do, General?<br /><br /> McChrystal: I believe there could be a belief that any<br />obscurant could assist them, but it is -- I do not believe that<br />it will have the effect they may hope.<br /><br /> Q: General, could I ask you a question about activities<br />in the north? We haven't heard much, other than that there are<br />special operations forces there. Can you tell us whether the<br />oil fields in the north have been secured, and also, any details<br />that you might have on the raids against the terrorist camps up<br />there?<br /><br /> McChrystal: At this point we continue to have special<br />operating forces in the north. In fact, there was a strike as<br />part of last night's operation against the facility that you've<br />written about before, Khurmal. We're still gathering battle<br />damage assessment from that.<br /><br /> In regards to the oil field, that is not yet in coalition hands.<br /><br /> Q: Is there -- has there been any sabotage there like we've seen in the south?<br /><br /> Clarke: Not seen evidence of it yet.<br /><br /> McChrystal: Right, no evidence.<br /><br /> Clarke: Let's go over here.<br /><br /> Q: General, you said that the troops are making good<br />progress, but by the evidence of the names that were read at the<br />beginning of this press briefing, apparently it's not a complete<br />rollover. Can you give us any idea where the coalition forces<br />are meeting the most resistance? And can you give us any<br />details of what the fighting has been like?<br /><br /> McChrystal: I would leave it to CENTCOM to describe<br />that, because I think they'd do it better that we have. I think<br />the speed of the advance will indicate that any engagements<br />there have been have been settled fairly rapidly.<br /><br /> Q: General, will the north remain a special operations<br />area, or will there be regular army forces with ground troops<br />moving in larger numbers?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, I won't really add to what the<br />chairman said. There will be a northern option or part of<br />Operation Iraqi freedom, and whatever operational forces we<br />decide to use will be seen as it unfolds.<br /><br /> Clarke: Let's take Tammy, and then we'll go way back.<br /><br /> Q: Is there any evidence so far that any of the<br />resistance encountered by advancing troops has been directed<br />from Baghdad, or perhaps are the units on the ground responding<br />to standing orders in place? And then, also, have U.S. forces<br />encountered any caches of WMD of any kind?<br /><br /> McChrystal: We have found no caches of weapons of mass<br />destruction to date. It is difficult to say what causes the<br />engagements from the Iraqi forces.<br /><br /> Clarke: Way in the back.<br /><br /> Q: Torie, and for the general, is it your belief that<br />Saddam is the only really cohesive force holding the Iraqi<br />defenders together -- in other words, that the demise of Saddam<br />or the demise of his leadership circle would translate<br />automatically into immediate evaporation of resistance? Or is<br />there some scenario where you could see Saddam going away but<br />the fighting continuing?<br /><br /> Clarke: (To Gen. McChrystal.) I'll try, and then you can follow up.<br /><br /> As I've said before, who knows about Saddam Hussein?<br />There are five, six, seven different reports about what his<br />status might be. Clearly, we're having an impact on the<br />leadership. As I said before, and the secretary has said<br />repeatedly, there is confusion, there doesn't seem to be the<br />vigorous, robust command-and-control direction that you would<br />expect.<br /><br /> So, clearly, we're having an impact on the leadership,<br />and I think we'll just leave it there.<br /><br /> Q: What about the strikes on the Ansar al-Islam in the<br />north? Could you tell us the extent -- if those were cruise<br />missile strikes, and were there also (inaudible) strikes?<br /><br /> McChrystal: Sir, they were Tomahawk Land Attack Missile<br />strikes that went into the Khurmal facility.<br /><br /> Q: Sir, what about the four KIA that were reported<br />today? Has that been sorted out, whether there were four?<br /><br /> Clarke: Mixed reports. Don't have anything for you on it.<br /><br /> Thank you.<br /><br /> Q: Could I get a clarification, General, real quick?<br />You said -- were special operation forces on the ground used to<br />laze targets in any of these strikes?<br /><br /> McChrystal: (Off mike.)<br /><br /> Q: Do you have any evidence that Tomahawks went into Iran (inaudible) Iran?<br /><br /> (No audible answer.)<br /><br />"THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS PREPARED BY THE FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE INC.,<br />WASHINGTON, D.C. FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE IS A PRIVATE COMPANY. FOR<br />OTHER DEFENSE RELATED TRANSCRIPTS NOT AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS<br />SITE, CONTACT FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE AT (202) 347-1400."