CNN Crossfire - Interview with Senator James Inhofe

CNN CROSSFIRE

Interview with Senator James Inhofe

First in the CROSSFIRE tonight is Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, member of the Senate Arms Services Committee, as well as the Select Committee on Intelligence.

BEGALA: Good to see you, sir. Thank you. Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

SEN. JAMES INHOFE (R-OK), ARMS SERVICES COMMITTEE: Thank you, Paul.

BEGALA: As you well know, better than I, the weapons inspectors gave a preliminary report today. It was mixed. On the one hand they said Iraq had been cooperating...

INHOFE: Any surprises?

BEGALA: Yes, I thought was more hawkish than they led to believe by the leaks. But there was certainly no smoking gun.

And in fact, let me read you a comment out of "USA Today," what our intelligence officials, not U.N. bureaucrats, what American intelligence officials say is this: "Intelligence officials said repeatedly in interviews in recent days that they have no unqualified 'smoking gun' evidence that would prove Iraq has chemical and biological weapons or a program to develop a nuclear bomb."

Should we send your constituents into battle when we don't have...

INHOFE: First of all, I'm so tired of listening to people talk about the smoking gun that has nothing to do with it. There never was supposed to be a smoking gun. Even back in 1991 when they were operating under this Resolution 687, they said, they're under the obligation to expose everything they have, destroy everything they have, open the doors. And they haven't done that. And so how you to find a smoking gun?

If you did need a smoking gun they have found one. They have found smoking guns. First of all, we know that there is some 15,000 chemical rockets. They've only found 12. Where are the other 14,988? They're out there somewhere.

They also—we also know they have some 6,000 nuclear or chemical bombs. So we know those things are out there. And we know that they have already found some. If you have to have a smoking gun, they found 12 smoking guns. Let's do it.

BEGALA: That's enough. Go ahead.

INHOFE; No, no, that isn't enough there are so many more out there. They're not cooperating. They're not opening up and not showing—they're not doing what they're supposed to be doing. And if we sit around and wait for another six weeks or another six months, you're not going get any more cooperation than we have had since 1991.

NOVAK: Most Americans, what they think of, when they think of weapons of mass destruction, they think of nuclear weapons. And I want you to listen to what Mohammed ElBaradei, the director general of the IAEA, the international agency said. Let's listen to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOHAMMED ELBARADEI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, IAEA: We have today found no evidence that Iraq revived its nuclear weapon program since the elimination of the program in the 1990s.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOVAK: And I think everyone I talked to is a scientist said there is no nuclear weapons program. So there is not a cause for war, is that correct?

INHOFE: Well, Bob, first of all, why do you really distinguish between a chemical warhead, nuclear warhead, a biological warhead...

NOVAK: Isn't there a difference?

INHOFE: ... because you can—as was stated by Richard Butler just in the last week, we do know that they have missile warheads that would hold up to 140 liters of VX, which enough to kill a million people. So if you kill a million people with a chemical or biological agent, does it make much difference?

NOVAK: How do they deliver them among the United States? They can't, can they?

INHOFE: Sure they can. You mean how can Iraq do it?

NOVAK: Iraq, yes.

INHOFE: I wish we knew. Wouldn't that be great if we did know?

NOVAK: But they don't have those missiles.

BEGALA: A missile goes 400 miles and by my calculation Iraq is a hell of a lot more than 400 miles away.

INHOFE: That isn't true. That isn't true. The Al Hussein missile goes further than that. And by the way, that would reach every capital in that whole region out there.

How do you know they don't have a missile? We know one thing for sure, China has been trading technology and systems with Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, North Korea now for years and years. Indigenously? No they're not going to have one. But they're getting dangerously close to having one. We can all have reason to suspect. Why would they not if they're trading with these countries?

It was your guys back during your president, Bill Clinton's time in 1998...

BEGALA: He was your president too, we're all Americans.

INHOFE: Well, you make that determination...

BEGALA: I just—you look like American to me. United States senator.

INHOFE: That's when they said—and this was Bill Clinton's intelligence group—said it was going to be somewhere between 5 and 10 years before the North Koreans would have a missile—a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) rocket. Seven days later on August 31 of 1998 they fired one.

Now if they were that far off then, how do we know, how you to really know they're not ready to have something? And I think this administration has a responsibility. If you sit around and wring your hands as they're all doing now until something happens to a major American city, then it is too late.

NOVAK: President...

INHOFE: I really think that Rumsfeld said it right. He says the consequences of making the wrong decision now is not like it was in conventional war days.

NOVAK: On that point, Senator, president is going to make this decision. And Ari Fleischer his spokesman was asked today about the president's position and this is what he answered.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FLEISCHER: He does not want to lead the nation to war. He hopes it can be averted. But he is also clear about the fact that one way to save American lives is to present—prevent Saddam Hussein from engaging in something that can be far, far worse than the price that we have already seen on September 11.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOVAK: Now, since he does not—I think everybody agrees he does not have either the nuclear weapons or the ability to deliver them, what is this something that is far, far—what is far, far worse than what happened on September 11?

INHOFE: Far, far worse would be a nuclear warhead on a missile that hits an American city. I was talking to your crowd before this things and I said, If you remember on tv the two planes going into the world towers, if they had had the weapon of choice of a terrorist, which is a nuclear warhead on a missile, then we would be talking about 2 million people, not 3,000 people.

That's far, far worse.

BEGALA: Well, let me actually show you an ad from a peace group that is running right now that suggested there is no direct threat to the American mainland. This seems to be now what the debate is about. Does Saddam Hussein pose a direct threat to the United States of America, not to neighboring capitals, but to our country.

Let me play you this ad and ask you to respond.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, TRUE MAJOIRTY AD)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've got nothing to do with 9/11; nothing to do with al Qaeda. Its neighbors don't think it is a threat. And invading Iraq will increase terrorism, not reduce it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BEGALA: Pastor Peck (ph) was America's ambassador to Iraq. He says --

INHOFE: I know him too.

You know, what—I would just love to believe that. I just think that would be a great euphoric thing. I asked some of your people here who were marching in the anti-war thing, I said, You know if the choice is go to war or have peace, we want peace. We all want peace. I would be marching out there with you.

But if the choice is go to war or end up with an American city hit by weapon of mass destruction, then the choice is easy. So I think it's a tough thing. We will sit around and listen to guys like this and what are you going to do if this happens?

BEGALA: Senator Jim Inhofe, that will be the last word. Thank you for joining us very much. Always good to have you on CROSSFIRE.