Speaker 1: I would be much more aggressive about going after those
Speaker 1: that attack our US forces.
Speaker 2: Do you think to date that our response has been
Speaker 2: too soft?
Speaker 1: I think it's been a little bit too selective. I mean,
Speaker 1: we hit some AMMO dumps, we hit some other targets.
Speaker 1: I want to go after those who are firing missiles
Speaker 1: at our troops and make sure they understand that when
Speaker 1: they fire a messile, they're going to die.
Speaker 3: Like you said yesterday, I feel like Leon Panetta, lifetime Democrat,
Speaker 3: saying that while you've got a sitting US Democrat president
Speaker 3: at war more or less is pretty strong language. He's
Speaker 3: calling out Joe Biden's administration and saying, how come we're
Speaker 3: not hitting them back harder? That's former Secretary Defense under
Speaker 3: Obama Leon Panetta.
Speaker 4: That among several topics we'd like to discuss with Jeff mccauslin,
Speaker 4: CBS News Military consultant, Jeff, how are you, sir?
Speaker 2: Very well, guys, Happy holidays.
Speaker 4: Excellent, any and same to you and yours. Any thoughts
Speaker 4: on leon Putete's statement there? It seems pretty pointed to us.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, I had to totally agree with leotidea quite
Speaker 2: frankly and concerned me that our news coverage seems to
Speaker 2: have primarily focused on what's going on in the God
Speaker 2: the Strip with his horrific there's no two questions about it.
Speaker 2: But at the same time, US forces in Syria and
Speaker 2: Iraq have been struck seventy six times. In one case
Speaker 2: there was a report that an explosive lad had drone
Speaker 2: in a US barracks and I think it was near
Speaker 2: our Biel and luckily that to pick your bomb did
Speaker 2: not detonate, but that could have been devastating. And yes,
Speaker 2: we have done some air strikes, and yes we've done
Speaker 2: some C one thirty gunship strikes in return. But we
Speaker 2: need to do something to get this to come to
Speaker 2: a halt, and do so as quickly as possible. Otherwise
Speaker 2: we all need to realize if there was a catastrophic
Speaker 2: event in which a number of US soldiers were killed
Speaker 2: or injured, well then we would see escalation going vertical,
Speaker 2: very very rapidly. And also we need to be concerned
Speaker 2: about the increasing of violence down the Red Sea, where
Speaker 2: in the last few days Houthi rebels have attacked three
Speaker 2: commercial ships. The USS Carnea destroyer was involved in providing
Speaker 2: them assistance and also shooting down a number of drones
Speaker 2: and as well accepted several missiles that the Hooties have
Speaker 2: fired towards Israel.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the Political has an article with a DoD official
Speaker 3: speaking anonymously. You'd be hard pressed to find another time
Speaker 3: that US ships have been this challenged in the region.
Speaker 3: So this is as hot as it's ever been. You
Speaker 3: probably as a military guy, not not wanting to criticize
Speaker 3: the Secretary of Defense, but we played a clip of
Speaker 3: Lloyd Austin a little bit earlier where he said, we
Speaker 3: will not tolerate these kind of attacks.
Speaker 2: Well, I think by.
Speaker 3: Definition we are tolerating these kind of attacks, aren't we.
Speaker 2: Well, when you get to seventy six, it sort of
Speaker 2: suggest to me that you're kind of tolerating those attacks.
Speaker 2: And we also need to be very clear with the
Speaker 2: American public, and that is these roughly thirty four hundred
Speaker 2: soldiers that are in a Rock and Syria for example,
Speaker 2: about nine hundred and Syria, about twenty five hundred in Iraq.
Speaker 2: They are there. They their mission has nothing whatsoever to
Speaker 2: do with the ongoing hostilities in Gaza. They are there
Speaker 2: still conducting counter ISIS operations to defeat the last elements
Speaker 2: of ISIS in the case of the US forces in Iraq, oh,
Speaker 2: by the way, and they are there at the invitation
Speaker 2: of the Iraqi government. So I think the other thing
Speaker 2: we need to do is to get pretty pretty hard
Speaker 2: for the Iraqi government and say, look, if you like
Speaker 2: our forces in your country to provide assistance and defeating Isis,
Speaker 2: which cully threatens the sovereignty of your nation, then your
Speaker 2: forces as well. Your forces as well need to be
Speaker 2: heavily involved in ensuring these kinds of attacks on Americans
Speaker 2: that are helping to defend you do not occur.
Speaker 4: Getting back to the attacks on both commercial and military
Speaker 4: ships in the Gulf, is there any doubt in your
Speaker 4: mind that these so called Hoosi attacks are at the
Speaker 4: behest of the Iranians.
Speaker 2: Well, there's no doubt that the iradience have provided military
Speaker 2: assistance to the Houthis. There's no doubt in many ways
Speaker 2: the Huthis are a proxy of Iran And that being said,
Speaker 2: are they there actually orchestrating this particular individual attack, and
Speaker 2: that I would have some doubt. My guess is the
Speaker 2: Iranians are clearly aware of what's going on. They sort
Speaker 2: of may have occouraged it, it may not be involved
Speaker 2: in the CID planning of a particular in the individual attack.
Speaker 2: But we also know that elements of the Iranian Revolutionary
Speaker 2: Guard leadership has visited Rock in the last few days.
Speaker 2: And I always wonder when we talk about Iran, is
Speaker 2: Iran doing this ran doing that this is a bifurcated leadership,
Speaker 2: and that you have the army and the government of
Speaker 2: Iran that's one thing, then you have the Revolutionary Guards,
Speaker 2: the Koods force doing something else. And several times we've
Speaker 2: seen over the last several years, the right hand and
Speaker 2: the left hand may not know what the other one's doing.
Speaker 4: Right, fair enough, I'm not the expert on asymmetrical warfare
Speaker 4: that you are, but I find my self searching for
Speaker 4: a reason the houthis given you know what they are
Speaker 4: and what they're fighting for, would think, hey, I know
Speaker 4: what we ought to do, let's provoke the United States.
Speaker 4: I can't imagine they would do that on their own.
Speaker 2: That's exactly right. And also even for the Iranians, I'm
Speaker 2: a little unsure what the Iranians think they are accomplishing
Speaker 2: by encouraging these Shiite militia groups just to strike US forces.
Speaker 2: You know, do they assume that by doing so, eventually
Speaker 2: we're just going to immediately evacuate and leave the region
Speaker 2: with a table between our legs. That's not going to happen.
Speaker 2: So in doing what they're doing right now, a really risk,
Speaker 2: really dramatic escalation, and that's why I crossed the entire region.
Speaker 2: We need to be concerned about that as this fighting
Speaker 2: is resumed. Yes, we've seen the attacks by the houthies. Yes,
Speaker 2: we've seen the attacks by forces in Iraq and Syria.
Speaker 2: We've also seen a rapid increase in violence on the
Speaker 2: West Bank. About two hundred and fifty Palestinians have been
Speaker 2: killed on the West Bank since this war began, in
Speaker 2: conflict with Israeli defense forces and settlers. And oh, by
Speaker 2: the way, it's Beala in southern Lebanon. His recommenced rock
Speaker 2: and artillery strikes into northern Israel. So the possibility that
Speaker 2: this war could rapidly escalate and become a more regional
Speaker 2: war still is out there, and the law of this
Speaker 2: goes on that probability, I fear raises. Well.
Speaker 3: I've followed some of these attacks. I mean Wall Street
Speaker 3: Journal had a good article about one of them where
Speaker 3: I guess it was a drone and a bomb that
Speaker 3: lodged in the ceiling of one of our barracks and
Speaker 3: it didn't go off. Well, if it had exactly, we'd
Speaker 3: be at war with Iran, wouldn't we.
Speaker 2: Pretty likely if you had a significant number of US casualties.
Speaker 2: There's no two ways about it. That's why things even
Speaker 2: more important that we respond in concert with our Iraqi allies,
Speaker 2: because we had a couple of cases where the Iraqis
Speaker 2: actually have complained when we did respond, even in a
Speaker 2: limited fashion, that we were doing so in their knowledge
Speaker 2: and therefore we were in some ways violating our sovereignty. Well,
Speaker 2: I kind of get that. But on the other hand,
Speaker 2: the Iraqi government has a full responsibility to protect our
Speaker 2: forces since they're in their country, as I said before,
Speaker 2: hoping to defend that sovereignty.
Speaker 4: CBS News military consultant Jeff mccauslan on the line, Jeff,
Speaker 4: if we can pivot to Gaza for a minute, I'm
Speaker 4: you know, I see virtually every single headline on the
Speaker 4: fighting includes, for instance, the New York Times Israeli forces
Speaker 4: enter southern Gaza's largest city as fear grows for civilians.
Speaker 4: I mean, every headline includes the concern about civilian deaths,
Speaker 4: and certainly only a monster would like civilian deaths. But
Speaker 4: to what extent does Israel have options given the shape
Speaker 4: of the battlefield and the nature of the enemy. If
Speaker 4: you accept that their goal is righteous and that's to
Speaker 4: wipe out Hamas, I think they.
Speaker 2: Ask some options. I mean, Tom Freeman, I thought an
Speaker 2: an article in The Times a few days ago, said,
Speaker 2: May what is you want to do is just for
Speaker 2: the moment, declare ceasefire. We will declare a ceasefire, and
Speaker 2: we'll continue that ceasefire when you released all of the
Speaker 2: hostages number one and you announced that you're going to
Speaker 2: surrender and impact dismantle Hamas, okay, and then that'll be
Speaker 2: the end of the war. And that puts the onus,
Speaker 2: if you could say, diplomatically or politically on Hamas, Okay,
Speaker 2: you want this to continue, after all this has happened,
Speaker 2: after all these civilians unfortunately been killed in the hostilities.
Speaker 2: That's one thing you could do. The second thing I
Speaker 2: think the Israelis could do would be take a page
Speaker 2: out of our playbook back during the surge, and that
Speaker 2: is if you talk to folks that were involved in
Speaker 2: that what we tried to do was focus our efforts
Speaker 2: militarily on a laser effort to take out the leadership
Speaker 2: of the al Qaeda and the other groups for your opposing.
Speaker 2: But we had a political effort whereby we were trying
Speaker 2: to identify in a rocky partner, which we kind of
Speaker 2: did that we could then create a political end state.
Speaker 2: And if you will peel the population away from the
Speaker 2: terrorists group, I fear too oftentimes we talk about Palestinians
Speaker 2: and Hamas as interchangeable nouns. Well, they're certainly not. So
Speaker 2: to find that political partner, whether it's a Pan Arab group,
Speaker 2: whether it's the UN, whether it's the Palestinian authority, if
Speaker 2: they could be resurrected that you could show as your
Speaker 2: political partner to shape an in state. They might offer
Speaker 2: the Palestinian people a better future, and in doing so
Speaker 2: you drive a wedge between them and the terrorist group Hamas.
Speaker 3: So before we get off the phone with you, I
Speaker 3: want to nail this down so I understand your thinking
Speaker 3: on it. So in the early eighties, as you know,
Speaker 3: we had hundreds of Marines killed in a terrorist attack
Speaker 3: there in Lebanon, and Reagan said, okay, we're out of there.
Speaker 3: You don't think that would happen. You don't think that
Speaker 3: would happen if there were a whole bunch of soldiers
Speaker 3: killed in a rack or Syria or wherever. You don't
Speaker 3: think we would pull out?
Speaker 2: Well, never say never. I mean, we certainly did that
Speaker 2: under Reagan. We certainly did that in Somalia after Blackhawks
Speaker 2: down in the Clinton administration. So there is some precedent
Speaker 2: that being said in those picure cases, I think you
Speaker 2: have to also step back and say why were those
Speaker 2: forces there? And by the time the Marines had that
Speaker 2: terrible tragedy, they'd interviewed a young Marine corporal and he asked, somebody,
Speaker 2: what's our What is our mission here in this ongoing
Speaker 2: civil war in Lebanon outside of providing targets for Syrian artillery?
Speaker 2: What are we doing here? And so the real question
Speaker 2: what was the mission came to the forefront. Same in Somalia.
Speaker 2: I think the mission in the Rock, which you would
Speaker 2: examine against, you know, holding ices, trying to help continue
Speaker 2: to establish a rock on a more firm putting, is
Speaker 2: a substantially greater mission than we face in those days.
Speaker 2: And also the loss of prestees on the part of
Speaker 2: the United States pulling out and therefore allowing the Iranians
Speaker 2: to declare a tremendous victory. He was, I would certainly
Speaker 2: hope we wouldn't do that in that regard and give
Speaker 2: them that kind of victory.
Speaker 4: CBS News Military consultant doctor Jeff mccauslin, Jeff, always enlightening.
Speaker 4: Thanks a million.
Speaker 2: Take care of guys Armstrong and Getty