Text 3861, 831 rader
Skriven 2007-01-09 23:31:26 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0701092) for Tue, 2007 Jan 9
===================================================

===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Tony Snow
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 9, 2007

Press Briefing by Tony Snow
White House Conference Center Briefing Room

Press Briefing view


12:14 P.M. EST

MR. SNOW: Good afternoon. A couple notes, and then I'll be happy to take
questions. The President's schedule today: Normal morning briefings; he's
consulting with members of Congress, and continuing to work on the speech
for tomorrow night. That is the schedule.

Also, the President has selected Fred Fielding to serve as Counsel to the
President, replacing Harriet Miers. We have a statement out to that effect.
Rather than my reading it out, you can read the statement.

Let's see what else we have. The Domestic Policy Council later today is
going to release a report that highlights some new alternative research
studies that advance stem cell science without destroying human life;
exciting work being done in the area, including an alternative approach to
using embryonic stem cells that was reported just this week. The
President's policy strikes a balance of supporting funding -- federal
funding for research into stem cells, while avoiding federal funding that
would encourage the destruction of embryos. And we encourage you to review
the report.

And I'll take questions. Terry.

Q Did the President consult with the Hill before the military operation in
Somalia?

MR. SNOW: Number one -- let me put it this way: We know that there was a
military -- we can confirm that there was a military operation overnight on
Sunday in Somalia. We refer you to the Department of Defense for all other
details. I don't believe there was a consultation on that. I'm aware of
none.

Q Okay. And on Iraq, switching topics, can you say why the -- what the
President's rationale is for sending in more troops to Iraq when --

MR. SNOW: I will be happy to talk about rationales and everything else once
we have released publicly what the President intends to do.

Q Can you give us an idea of how the President will try to persuade the
public that his plan in whatever form we hear tomorrow night is the right
course when so many Americans, according to polling, are very concerned
about more troops in Iraq?

MR. SNOW: Well, Americans I think are concerned about making sure that we
succeed in Iraq, as are members of Congress. What the President is going to
do is to talk about the situation in Iraq, how it has evolved, how the
challenges have evolved, and he will also talk about the importance of
developing capacity so that the Iraqis have the ability to handle their
security needs and will continue to have a democracy that grows and
flourishes, protecting the rights of all, creating economic opportunities
and the like.

So I think it's important to allow Americans to see not only that, but also
how this fits into the broader war on terror. Iraq is the central front in
the war on terror. Why is it important? What does it mean? What can success
breed? What does failure mean? A lot of those questions I think Americans
want to hear answered, and they will be answered in the President's
address.

Q Those things we have heard before from the President. Is there something
specific now that you will try to do or say or demonstrate that would be
more persuasive?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Bret.

Q Tony, is that all you're going to have on Somalia, as far as pointing us
back to the Pentagon and the ongoing operation?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q You don't have any other details?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q How about how the President found out, et cetera?

MR. SNOW: You know what, stupid me, I forgot to do the process stuff. We'll
try to find out.

Q Okay. Let me change gears then. Senator Kennedy today is going to propose
legislation denying billions needed to send more troops to the war unless
Congress agrees first. This is even before the President lays out his plan.
Can you respond preemptively?

MR. SNOW: No, I really can't. I'll take a look -- we'll take a look at it.
I'm sure that later in the week we'll have an opportunity to respond more
specifically. And I have not -- I haven't looked at it; I don't know if the
President has looked at it; I haven't talked to our Leg Affairs people
about it. Give us a little time to take a look.

Q What about this overall premise that Democrats and some are considering
holding back money to troops --

MR. SNOW: Well, look, Democrats are going to have to make a choice here and
they're going to have to decide where they stand in terms of two issues:
Number one, do you want Iraq to succeed, and, if so, what does that mean?
And, number two, do you believe in supporting the troops as you say, and
how do you express that support? Those are questions that will be answered
in the process of public debate and also -- and a lot of other
considerations. So we'll just have to see how it plays out.

As you've seen, Bret, there is disagreement within both parties about how
to proceed. But I think one of the unifying elements can be, when the
President does lay out the way forward, it offers an opportunity for
everybody to have a full and thoughtful debate about this. Right now many
of the debates continue to be conducted in a vacuum -- anticipation that
the President is going to say something. And it makes more sense to wait
until the President lays out not only military, but also diplomatic,
economic, and other actions that he intends to take, and to put them in the
broader context of the war on terror and also the context of the security
of Americans right here on our own soil.

Q Last one for me. Yesterday you hinted that the President is going to
essentially lay out specifics of why Iraq is important to the U.S. as far
as our safety. Is that accurate?

MR. SNOW: Well, specifics -- no, we've often described what happens if you
have a failed state in Iraq, and we'll continue to make the point, which
is, if you've got a failed state in Iraq -- let's draw the image for the
American people again -- got Iraq; on one side to its east is Iran, to the
west is Syria, two primary terror states who have made it clear that
they're going to go after democracies throughout the region. That would
include Lebanon, that would include the Palestinian areas. They're trying
to send a message that democracy cannot succeed in that part of the world.
They're trying to intimidate their neighbors.

If you have an Iraq, with the world's second largest oil reserves, capable
of generating incredible amounts of revenue that terrorists can use both to
blackmail the West and also to purchase weapons that can be used against
anybody else, that creates a situation that's a direct threat to us. So
that's really what I was talking about. There is not going to be sort of a
roster of specifics, but it is worth reminding the American people of what
the stakes are and how they do fit in to the larger war on terror.

Yes, Martha.

Q Back to Kelly's question. The President, beginning in November of '05, I
believe, gave a series of speeches on the strategy for victory in Iraq. The
American people didn't seem to buy that, the situation in Iraq went
downhill. Do you worry about the President's credibility? And is there
anything in this speech, or in this plan, that is really, truly new, or is
it trying things that have already been tried before?

MR. SNOW: Martha, I will let you judge it, and I will let you ask questions
once we've laid it all out. The President understands, and I think you
understand, that a war is not a fixed thing that proceeds along a
predetermined or straight path, and as situations change, you must adjust.
One of the key changes in Iraq last year was the bombing of the Golden
Mosque in Samara and the subsequent flaring up of sectarian violence within
Iraq. A year ago a lot of people were feeling optimistic, including members
of both parties on Capitol Hill, including people within the military,
because here you had the prospects -- you had free elections in Iraq,
things seemed to be moving along a pretty good path.

So it's interesting, you can pick whichever wedge of time you want, but
there has also been some change in public opinion since late 2005, and in
early 2006 there was a sense of optimism. But guess what. The terrorists
did succeed in unleashing sectarian violence, and now that has created a
new set of realities that one must contend with. The President will talk
about that.

I'm simply not going to try to give you a general characterization of how
it will be received. My sense is that the American people want to hear what
the President has to say. And we're going to spend a lot of time talking
about it, because it's not a simple, you know, one-bullet-point plan.
There's a lot in it, and as a result, we are going to have an opportunity
to take a look at each and all of the aspects.

Q On sectarian violence, is that something the United States should have
been prepared for? Or, like the insurgency, you can argue that, who knew?
Should they have been prepared for sectarian violence, because we had a
letter from Zarqawi, who basically laid out his plan to foment sectarian
violence?

MR. SNOW: Well, I don't know, Martha. Apparently, people in Iraq were not
quite prepared for it either. The fact is, it happened. And whatever
backseat generalship one might wish to practice, the fact is we have
important business in Iraq with very high stakes, and the focus now is to
figure out a way forward that is going to lead to success.

Jim.

Q Tony, as you said, a public debate will probably ensue here after the
President's speech --

MR. SNOW: You think? (Laughter.)

Q Yes.

MR. SNOW: Good chance.

Q And so often in debate, obviously, language is very important. To your
mind, is there a difference between an increase in troops, an escalation in
troops, a surge in troops? Because in the last 24, 48 hours these words
have all started to become weighted.

MR. SNOW: It just started to become weighted? I think a lot of times people
are going to try to find a one-word characterization that allows them to
make a political point without perhaps diving into the details in trying to
give a proper --

Q Well, what's the difference between an escalation and a surge?

MR. SNOW: Well, why don't we talk about characterizations once we have a
plan?

Q Because I think it's part of a conversation that's going on right now.

MR. SNOW: I understand that, and, guess what -- it's a conversation, as
I've said before, that is a bit in a vacuum and I'm not going to get into
the business of preemptively characterizing something that we have not
released in full detail.

Q But, somehow, "escalation" has become this Democratic word -- the
Democratic Party language.

MR. SNOW: Well, ask the guys who do their focus groups. They're going to
have an answer for it. Look, the President is talking about a way forward,
and rather than getting involved in trying to assess a description of a
plan that has yet to be released publicly and, therefore, about which I am
not in a position to characterize publicly, it seems a little silly for me
to start quibbling about adjectives without discussing what they
purportedly describe, don't you think?

Q Well, the President apparently told Gordon Smith and others yesterday
that the 20,000 troop increase/surge/escalation is part of the deal. So
that's why I'm asking specifically about -- we are going to see some kind
of increase.

MR. SNOW: Rather than looking for a one-word handle, look at the policy.
And, actually, this is your challenge -- you guys do words for a living;
figure out -- rather than trying to ask Democratic or even Republican
lawmakers what the proper descriptive term is, you figure it out. I mean,
you're going to have an opportunity --

Q I'm trying to, but that's what --

MR. SNOW: Yes, but what you're doing is you're listening to what other
people are saying and saying, is that the right one? Well, I can't help you
on that.

Q Yes, that's exactly what I'm doing --

MR. SNOW: Can't help you on that one.

Q -- I'm listening to other people describe it, and I'm asking the
administration, what's the proper word?

MR. SNOW: I understand. But what we will say is, look at it, then we'll
talk.

Q Do you have a problem with the word "escalation"?

MR. SNOW: As I said, look at it, we'll talk.

Q Could you take us behind the scenes a little bit of these meetings that
the President is having with the lawmakers? Is he now giving final details
of his plan, or is he still listening to advice? Just a little bit of the
atmosphere.

MR. SNOW: Well, no, because as we've been saying, these are meetings where
the ground rules are, we don't tell who is in them and we don't tell what's
going on behind the scenes, but they're free to go out and give whatever
characterization they may. The important thing to do is to wait until
you've got a chance to see the full thing. Look, there are going to be
opportunities for members of Congress, Democratic and Republican, to
characterize their conversations with the President. It's a good and
healthy thing that they're happening.

And furthermore, the President has made it clear that conversations are
going to continue to take place. The address the President is going to give
to the nation is not the end of the debate, it is the beginning of an
important consideration of how we move forward in Iraq in a way that we
send a message to the world that the United States is here to finish the
important work of securing liberty, and issuing the definitive refutation
of terrorist tactics and strategies. And that is the basis on which I think
both parties can fruitfully work together.

Q Can you talk about where the address is at this point? You said the
President was looking at preliminary drafts. Is it pretty much done? Is he
just --

MR. SNOW: We're getting pretty close.

Q Because he still has consultations going on?

MR. SNOW: There are some, but also just -- now it's the point of going
through and looking at language and saying, you know, I want this point,
or, let's emphasize this one, or, what about this issue? It is more now at
the sort of fine-tuning point. But on the other hand, anybody who has ever
done a term paper knows you keep working until the very end. And my guess
is that there will continue to be tweaks and practices into tomorrow.

Q Is it fair to say, though, even as he still continues to meet with these
lawmakers, his mind is essentially made up?

MR. SNOW: What I would direct you to do -- there are two things. I have
noted before that when you're talking about a war, the idea that you have
your mind made up, that you have absolute -- this is in stone, this is it
-- what you have is a framework for moving forward. And within that
framework, there are going to be plenty of opportunities for people to talk
and to share their opinions. And the President has made it clear from the
very first consultations with Democrats and Republicans that he intends to
have more talks. So, to that extent, I think we are going to be open-minded
and always looking for good ideas and good, constructive advice.

Q After yesterday's session, and yesterday's were just Republican senators
who came, correct?

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q Thad Cochran came out and said, well, I told the President I'd be able to
support him, but I was alone, I didn't hear anybody else saying that. Is
that an accurate reflection of what happened?

MR. SNOW: You know, as I said, we permit people to come to the sticks and
say what they wish. Our ground rules are, we don't talk about it, so I
don't talk about it.

Q I'll try and make you talk about it.

MR. SNOW: You'll fail.

Q Is this real consultation, Tony? Senators went in yesterday and came out
saying that the President had, effectively, told them what he was going to
do, that he was clear about his intentions. Some of these senators had not
been in before to talk to the President about his plans for Iraq. So how
can you characterize this as consultation?

MR. SNOW: Thank you. As you said, what you're trying to do is to get me to
characterize the conversations they've had, and I can't do it, Sheryl.

Q No, I'm asking you to say -- do you believe this is genuine consultation?

MR. SNOW: As I said, Sheryl, it's one of these things that the President
has made it clear that he's going to have exchanges of views, but I'm not
taking you in the room with them.

(Cell phone rings.) (Laughter.) Does Martha have a hip-hop ring tone?
(Laughter.) Play that funky music, white girl. (Laughter.)

Q A nice musical interlude from Martha, but, seriously --can we talk about
this issue of consultation? Is the President really soliciting views, and
do these lawmakers -- are they having an input into his thinking?

MR. SNOW: Yes, of course. And as I've said before, Sheryl, look, the
President still has to make choices and he still has to make decisions, and
he still has to lay out a proposal with a way forward. On the other hand,
he has made it very clear to one and all that he's interested in hearing
from people, he's interested in ideas, and that will continue.

Q But the speech is 30 hours away. That's not that much more time for --

MR. SNOW: I'm not saying that the President is going to go back in and
shred it and start over. Again, what I'm saying is the President still
continues to have an open mind because this is a way forward. This is not,
wave a wand and it's all going to happen. This is a way of talking about
the important business of building capacity on the part of the Iraqis to
take care of their own security, and to build a strong, independent
democracy that really does, as I said, stand as the definitive refutation
of terror; and also the example to other countries in the region that hope
freedom and democracy are possible and are things that they all ought to
pursue.

Go ahead, April.

Q Tony, how far does the President go into the issue of public opinion in
weighing this out and in making this new way forward? And, also, what
singular group or person has the most influence on the President in his
thinking on the way forward?

MR. SNOW: The second question is unanswerable. The President has received a
great deal of input from a lot of people, and to try to single one out is
probably futile.

As far as public opinion, the President will not shape policy according to
public opinion, but he does understand that it's important to bring the
public back to this war and restore public confidence and support for the
mission.

Q But the public doesn't want to go back to the war. They want to go away,
they --

MR. SNOW: No, April, you --

Q -- the midterm elections, did people -- did they or did they not vote for
leaders who basically said they wanted to --

MR. SNOW: April, let me ask you a simple question: Do opinions change?

Q Yes, they do.

MR. SNOW: Do they change on the basis of arguments?

Q They change on the basis of results.

MR. SNOW: Exactly, they change on the basis of results. That is absolutely
right. So that's what --

Q The results have been more deaths. We went in supposedly to stop the war
on terror -- I mean, to stop terrorism around the world, as a result which
stemmed from the 9/11 issue. And everyone is saying now, look, you have
more people dying than they did in 9/11, and you have more U.S. soldiers
dying and the world is not as safe.

MR. SNOW: I'm not sure the world is less safe. The world is -- I guarantee
you the world is less safe if the United States withdraws and leaves a
vacuum in Iraq. I guarantee it. And I guarantee everybody in this room is
going to be less safe, and everybody in this country is going to be less
safe. And that is the challenge the President faces, and it is worth
explaining that to the American people.

You see, I think Americans believe in liberty, believe in this nation's
destiny as a country that does advance the boundaries of liberty not simply
because it is a good and noble thing, but because it is good for us and it
is good for future generations. And the President will talk about how this
advances that not only noble goal, but one that is of great interest to
everybody who worried about their kids on September 11th, as you and I did,
and who worries about how our families are going to be secure in the
future.

Q And on Somalia. What is the administration's thought about the
containment of al Qaeda in Somalia, since you're not getting into other
issues?

MR. SNOW: I think that, again, without talking about military issues, it is
pretty clear that this administration continues to go after al Qaeda. We
are interested in going after those who have perpetrated acts of violence
against Americans, including bombings of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania,
and we will continue to conduct whatever operations we can to go after
that. We've made it clear that this is a global war on terror, and this is
a reiteration of the fact that people who think that they're going to try
to establish safe haven for al Qaeda anyplace need to realize that we're
going to fight them.

John.

Q Thank you, Tony. Two questions on the budget, if I might. First, given
the published reports that Karl Rove is betting people that there's no way
the administration is going to raise taxes, can we now say --

MR. SNOW: Taxes on Social Security.

Q Taxes on Social Security -- can we now say that taxes are off the table
in the negotiations?

MR. SNOW: We never said that they are on the table. What's happening is
that there's -- here's what's been going on. Hank Paulson, the Treasury
Secretary, has been asked by the President to find out a way to work with
members of Congress to deal with something everybody knows needs to be
addressed, which is the Social Security system is unsustainable in the long
run and, ultimately, unless somebody fixes it, it's going to betray old
people and it's going to bankrupt young people. You've got to fix it.

The President has made it clear he doesn't want to raise taxes on Social
Security, but he's also said, you got a better idea, let's hear it. The
people have interpreted that as a way of saying, oh, there they are,
they're going to go ahead and permit a back-door tax increase. So far we
haven't heard of anybody proposing tax increases. We'll let the debate
proceed. But you know what the President's bright lines are; he believes
that it's important to have an investment component that allows people to
take advantage of the far superior rates of return that one gets investing
in the marketplace rather than any system like Social Security where, if
the fund doesn't have the money you were promised to have, you don't get
it. You've got no recourse. So it's important to deal with those problems.

Q Understood, but why don't you simply say, instead of, I'm not ruling it
in or I'm not ruling it out, that it's being ruled out?

MR. SNOW: Well, think through it, John. It's interesting to see what people
may have to propose and to listen to everybody's proposals. The President
has already made his.

Q A follow-up question on it. The Financial Times reports today that the
administration is more than considering raising the contributions that
richer Americans -- and I'm quoting from the FT -- make to sustain
Medicare. True or false?

MR. SNOW: I'm not aware of that. But -- I'm not aware of that.

Q Venezuela President Hugo Chavez said today he's going to nationalize the
country's utilities -- utilities that have a significant American stake in
them. Any response from the White House?

MR. SNOW: Well, nationalization has a long and inglorious history of
failure around the world. We support the Venezuelan people and think this
is an unhappy day for them.

Q Tony, this goes to your previous acknowledgment that the President is
aware of public anxiety about the situation in Iraq. What would your
guidance be to a public that has seen the President stand under a "Mission
Accomplished" banner, proclaim an end to major combat operations, the Vice
President talking about the "last throes" -- how should the public go into
viewing this speech tomorrow?

MR. SNOW: I think the public ought to just listen to what the President has
to say. You know that the "Mission Accomplished" banner was put up by
members of the USS Abraham Lincoln. And the President, on that very speech,
said just the opposite, didn't he? He said it was the end of major combat
operations, but he did not say it was the end of operations. Instead, he
cautioned people at the time that there would be considerable continued
violence in Iraq, and that there would be continued operations for a long
period of time. That single episode has been more widely mischaracterized
than just about any aspect of the war.

Q We can debate whether the sign should have been there, whether the White
House should have not had it there, but the fact is he stood under it and
made the speech.

MR. SNOW: You're right, after people had been on a 17-month deployment, and
had said "Mission Accomplished" when they're finally able to get back to
their loved ones, the President didn't say, take down the sign, it will be
bad. Instead what he did is he talked about the mission. And I would direct
you back to the speech he gave then, Peter, because the President --

Q No, I know --

MR. SNOW: Well, then, you know that the President has made it clear that in
a time of war you are going to have different phases and you're going to
have different responsibilities. I think what the American people will ask
themselves is, do we want to win this war? Do we understand what the costs
and dangers of not succeeding in Iraq are? And do we think that this is a
sensible way forward, given what we know?

The American people now know a lot more about Iraq and about the realities
of the region than they did before. This is a serious plan that's got a lot
in it. And I think the idea of sitting around and trying to sort of play
polling questions or whatever is inviting, but it's a lot less interesting
than asking yourself the simple, basic, important question: Do you think
it's going to work?

Q I guess another way to ask the question, Tony, would be, why does the
President find himself in a position right now to, as you put it, to have
to bring the people back to the war?

MR. SNOW: Because what happened last year was the -- how should I put this
-- the ignition of sectarian tensions, primarily in the Baghdad area, the
vast majority of it a 35-mile radius around Baghdad. But it's the sort that
has shaken the confidence of people within Baghdad and people around Iraq,
because suddenly you have these groups engaged in a sectarian violence that
they had not been engaged in before. And there had been great hopes just
months before that, in fact, we would be in a position to be recalling
people. So what happened is that there was a development that people had
not fully anticipated. And I will allow the President to give his own
analysis of the situation tomorrow, and you can judge it.

Q Tony, could you tell us how much it will cost a month to fight a war in
Iraq under the President's new plan? Because I understand there's going to
be a lot of initiatives to put Iraqis to work, to try to shore up --

MR. SNOW: It's a great way of trying to get me to divulge details before
their time, so, no. But we'll get back to you.

Q Is this something that will impact the street? Is this is a significant
increase in cost?

MR. SNOW: Okay, you want me, without details, to answer a question, will
this move the street. You've got to be kidding me.

Q -- go into details.

MR. SNOW: Well, I know, and you know what, when we're ready to share the
details, we'll share the details. I can't do it right now.

Q Tony, at least twice in this briefing you've said that the President
would lay out how Iraq could become the definitive refutation of terrorism.
What would make a democracy in Iraq more definitive than democracy in the
United States, Britain, France, Israel, India, other places that are open
societies that have been the subject of terrorism? What's the difference?

MR. SNOW: I think what's happening is that you have seen a deliberate
attempt on the part of al Qaeda, and also on the part of players within the
region, to try to use everything within their power to destroy that
government in its infancy. That's different. The United States now has a
long history of democracy. A number of other countries have long histories
where they didn't have to work through these kinds of problems. This is one
where it is clear that members of the terror network have decided that this
is where they want to make an example, this is where they want to make a
stand. And for that reason, success there would serve as, I won't say "the"
definitive, but "a" definitive refutation of their tactics and aims.

Q I'd like to ask you a question -- we've danced around this a little bit
-- the question here about "mission accomplished." Does the President worry
at all about his own personal credibility as the messenger, as the person
carrying this message? He has given a number of speeches, all of which were
designed to tell the American people, I have a plan for victory. And I
think that hasn't worked out the way he had hoped, and you're asking them
to, again -- almost hear him again to say much the same thing.

MR. SNOW: Well, let me ask you -- I'll turn it at a different angle. If you
had asked any other President in American history during a time of war
whether they had a credibility problem because they had not foreseen
changes on the battlefield, you probably would have had plenty of cause. I
mean, Abraham Lincoln constantly guessed from Manassas straight through
until the final months of the war. You had George Washington going from
defeat to defeat to defeat to defeat to victory, and there was considerable
consternation.

So there's the notion here that it is incumbent upon a President to have
perfect knowledge of what the conditions on the battlefield are going to
be. It's important for a President to have the determination to succeed.
Winston Churchill -- was Winston Churchill responsible for the Blitz? What
Winston Churchill did was talk about the conditions for victory. And the
President, adjusting to constant changes on the battlefield, is adjusting
and talking about conditions for victory, and that's the most important
thing to do.

Q Tony, I apologize if this has been asked at some point before, but the
President has clearly consulted with a wide variety of people on troop
levels in Iraq. What happened to the statements that he had made for years
that the people who decided troop levels in Iraq were the generals on the
ground?

MR. SNOW: Well, he's talked to them, too. And as you probably know,
generals are not of one mind. Generals are independent individuals, as
well, and there are a number of opinions within the ranks of the military
about this.

Q That "he's talked to them, too" is not good enough, because really what
he had said previously was that those were the people who make the
decisions, and those were the people that he was listening to. And now,
very clearly, he's talking to people outside of the military, people on
Capitol Hill, generals not in Iraq -- he's talking to a wide variety of
people on the issue. What happened to this rule, a real hard and fast rule
that he --

MR. SNOW: No, no, it wasn't a hard and fast rule. What he was trying to do
was, again, talk about his confidence in generals, and he still has it and
he still consults with --

Q Well, he --

MR. SNOW: Let me continue. There also, though, is -- every day I get
questions, what about the polls, what about Congress? Well, guess what.
When you're trying to build consensus -- now when what the President is
trying to do here is lay the foundation for consensus, moving forward in
Iraq, it is important to consult people and to take into account a wide
variety of ideas so that you have taken advantage of every possible insight
you can. It is obvious that the two Baghdad security plans didn't work.
And, therefore, you have to ask yourself why, and, how do we move forward.

The other part is that you have to ask yourself, how can we work better
with the Iraqis and how can we work better at making them effective? And
that also entails a series of conversations with them.

So, in broadening -- and, furthermore, let me add, even before we got to
this point, there were still regular invitations of people who had
differing views on the region to come in, because the President, whether it
is apparent to one and all, constantly takes a look at the situation and
tries to assess and reassess and to figure out not merely how it impacts
what's going on in Iraq, but within the neighborhood and within the broader
diplomatic and economic community.

Q Was it a mistake in earlier years, then, to rely so strongly on the
advice of generals in Iraq on troop levels?

MR. SNOW: The President asks for the advice of generals and others in the
military on troop levels to enact policy recommendations that he himself
has set. And he will continue to do so.

Q Tony, you were saying earlier that the President wants the American
people and members of Congress to ask themselves the question, do we want
to win in Iraq. Does the President want the Iraqi people to understand that
his policy is also stating to them that their country is lost if this --

MR. SNOW: I think there are more positive ways of doing it. The Iraqis
understand that it is important for them to step up and succeed. Again, the
end point of this -- when we talk about the President's policy, what you're
aiming at is an Iraqi government that's fully capable of handling all the
responsibilities, from the rule of law to security to economic rules, and
so on.

Q What message does he want them to take away --

MR. SNOW: Again, wait until tomorrow night, and you'll have an answer.

Q Is he going to address the Iraqi people directly?

MR. SNOW: As I said, just wait.

Q You may have already addressed this, but have you guys decided how you
proceed after the speech? You have the Georgia event. Is that the start of
a series of speeches out in the country? And also, do you continue
consultations with members of Congress on how to implement what he's
talking about?

MR. SNOW: As I said, on the procedural matters, I will allow you to wait
and see what the President says tomorrow. We need a sock puppet for this
now. (Laughter.) But the fact is that -- make it more interesting, at least
briefly -- but let me -- he will be speaking to troops. And we're going to
talk about this a lot. This is not, give one speech, dust your hands off
and walk away. This is the beginning of an important process for the
American people and for the political community to think seriously about
it. So you're going to be hearing more about it, absolutely.

Q Will there be a military tour, though --

MR. SNOW: As I said, we'll release the schedule when the schedule is ready
to be released.

Paula.

Q Does the White House have any comment on the universal health care plan
that has been announced by the California Governor?

MR. SNOW: No. We tend to let states go ahead and make their own policies.

Q And Social Security -- a moment ago, you talked about how the President
feels very strongly about the opportunity to have personal savings
accounts, and that when you have these talks, that there's no preconditions
set. So one of the ideas is to allow for these, but rather than have it
carved out, to have it as an add on. So is this among the --

MR. SNOW: As I said, I'm not going to get into characterizing, A, because
Hank Paulson is driving it, and, B, we're allowing anybody to say whatever
they want. And we're not going to assess the President's conditions -- the
President's proposals have been pretty clear, and now we want to see what
other people have to put on the table.

Q Isn't there a difference between saying, we'll allow anyone to say what
they want, or, the President is listening to your ideas, and actually
incorporating any of those ideas?

MR. SNOW: Well, what's interesting is the President has made his proffer.
If somebody else wants to put another proposal on the table --

Q Two related questions. One, the global war on terrorism started from
Afghanistan, and now there is a war going on, global war between the two
Presidents, President Karzai and President Musharraf, as far as border
crossings are concerned, because Pakistan is saying that they want to build
these land mines along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and President
Karzai is objecting to it --

MR. SNOW: Goyal, I'm not going to get into disputes between states, both of
whom are allies. It is clear that the issue of border crossings is one of
shared interest and concern, and it is important to make sure that
terrorists are unable to -- that at least there's a greater capability of
intercepting terrorists who try to make their way from the border regions
into Pakistan.

Q And second, there are allied forces or NATO forces in Afghanistan that
are angry at the British forces because British made a deal with the
Taliban, and Assistant Secretary of State Mr. Richard Boucher also said
that there is no need, there was no need for any negotiations with Taliban.

MR. SNOW: The Taliban is clearly trying to reorganize. It has also been
getting smashed in engagements with NATO forces in the southern parts of
Afghanistan.

Les.

Q Tony, thank you. Two questions. Tomorrow Congressman Ted Poe, who, as you
know, is a Republican --

MR. SNOW: No, I didn't, but thank you.

Q -- and from Texas -- he's also from Texas, -- will hold a news conference
about the 250,000 petitions asking presidential pardon for U.S. Border
Patrolmen facing 10 year prison sentences because they shot a fleeing
Mexican drug-pusher in his buttocks. Does the White House believe that the
White House believe that the President's fellow Texan and fellow Republican
was wrong to do this?

MR. SNOW: I think -- you know Les, I thought I brought my points on that --
why don't you ask that -- because that will be entertaining to do tomorrow,
and I want to get back to you on it. I thought I had packed that with my
materials today, but I didn't.

Q The AP reports that the U.S. Army sent letters to 75 officers who were
killed in action encouraging them to reconsider -- to consider returning to
active duty. And while General Richard Cody has apologized for this
computer error, there's no report of anyone being disciplined for this. And
my question: What does the Commander-in-Chief of the Army have to say about
this horrendous error, and about what else such computer errors could do?

MR. SNOW: I'd refer that to the Pentagon, Les.

Q Tony, how much did the Fielding appointment have to do with the
expectation that there will be a number of congressional investigations?

MR. SNOW: No, everybody keeps trying to -- look, members of Congress are
going to have to decide whether they want -- how they want to respond to
the President's open and repeated offers to cooperate on key and important
issues. We've also said that if people want to try to mount a series of
investigations, we're going to be prepared. But Fred Fielding is a guy of
enormous experience and competence. It is gratifying to have a guy of his
quality coming into the White House. And he wants to come in because he
sees this as a place where there's a lot of constructive work to be done
over the next two years in the war on terror, on domestic policy, on judges
and a number of other things. And as White House Legal Counsel, he's going
to have a real hand in all of those things. That's the reason he expressed.

Q Tony, we haven't talked about Jack Abramoff in a long time, and there's a
new photo showing him with the President.

MR. SNOW: The President said he didn't know Abramoff, wasn't buds, and my
guess is there are plenty of photos around town with Jack Abramoff and
Democrats and Republicans.

Q What about the change in interpreting entrance records to the White House
as being the property of the White House and not of the Secret Service?

MR. SNOW: That is a fairly abstruse issue, and I will see if I can get you
guidance from the Office of Legal Counsel. I don't want to tap dance around
that. I'll try and get you a straight answer.

Thank you.

END 12:52 P.M. EST
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070109-2.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)