YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Donald Rumsfeld talks to Al Jazeera

Donald Rumsfeld talks to Al Jazeera — Transcript

by Al Jazeera English · 3,851 words · 562 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00mr.
0:12secretary thank you for the time first
0:15of all when you look back to
0:192003 do
0:22you think that the current wave of
0:26change in the Arab world is in any way
0:29related to what the United States did in
0:32Iraq in 2003 I don't
0:36know I couldn't prove it either way I
0:38think that there are people who believe
0:40that and there are people who who see a
0:43an evolving democracy in Iraq in that
0:46part of the world and the end of a
0:48dictatorship as a good thing how
0:52someone can draw a string from that to
0:55something else in Tunisia or Libya or
0:57Egypt I I'm I think only time will tell
1:01and we'll see what the motivation was I
1:04I think that on the one hand it's
1:06exciting and encouraging to see people
1:09in that part of the world reaching out
1:12for a better life seeking
1:14freer political and freer economic
1:17institutions and I hope that when it it
1:21settles down that that's what they'll
1:23have and they just won't have a a
1:25dictatorship
1:26that's different than then some of the
1:29leadership that for example in Libya
1:31that existed with Qaddafi and and to
1:33some extent still does what do you make
1:35of what's going on now in Syria oh I
1:39think that that's a particularly tough
1:42regime and
1:44I think that the they are brutally
1:47repressing the uprising that has taken
1:51place there his
1:54predecessor his father of course in Hama
1:57had killed an awful lot of people back
1:59in his time and my understanding from
2:01reading the press is that a lot of
2:03people are being killed in that area and
2:05others at the present time by the regime
2:09the I'm uncomfortable with the Iranian
2:12regime and and the Syrian regime and and
2:15wish that the people of those countries
2:17proud countries with interesting
2:19histories would have the kinds of
2:21opportunities that they see other
2:23countries providing for their people and
2:26and they don't have it and it's
2:27unfortunate and I would I would be
2:29delighted to see the regime's in those
2:31two countries not be there now the part
2:34of the book that deals essentially with
2:37Iraq and Iraq related issues when I was
2:41reading that part I couldn't help that
2:44on feeling that on the one hand you were
2:47trying to explain on some level what
2:51went wrong in Iraq but
2:53I could not so help feeling that you
2:58were trying to justify some of the
3:00decisions that you either made all that
3:03people thought that you made with regard
3:05to the invasion of 2003 is that a
3:08correct reading no it's it's as I
3:11indicated what I wanted to do was to
3:14take the documentation that existed from
3:16that periods the the memos that I sent
3:19to the President and to people in the
3:21Department of Defense and and to the
3:23members of the National Security Council
3:24and have that record available for
3:28people and particularly historians and
3:30people who were seriously interested in
3:32that period of time and and just lay out
3:36what took place and and there it is it's
3:38there for everyone to see and and some
3:41of it is things that that went well and
3:44some of the things that might have been
3:46done differently and and that's always
3:48true in life I think I mean without
3:50trying to be too provocative there
3:54are probably more people who
3:58are critical of the outcome of Iraq then
4:03otherwise at least in my experience
4:05there aren't I haven't met a lot of
4:08people who in light of what continues to
4:10be the situation in Iraq look back over
4:13these years since 2003 and say Donald
4:16Rumsfeld and Co did a wonderful job in
4:19Iraq how do you react to that well
4:22you know war is an uncertain thing and
4:25no one can predict its length at the
4:27cost or the number of people who will be
4:30lost and it's it's it's the failure of
4:33diplomacy and and it is a because it's
4:38so uncertain it seems to me if you look
4:40at almost any conflict World War 2 Korea
4:43Vietnam you'll find the same kinds of
4:46concerns that
4:48that the enemy has a brain they adapt
4:50and adjust and and as Dwight Eisenhower
4:53said the that a planning is important
4:56but the plan is is nothing because the
4:58plan gets thrown out with first contact
5:01with the enemy and there's no question
5:03but that the length of time Iraq has
5:06taken in also Afghanistan are things
5:09that people talk about and they're
5:11concerned about I personally don't feel
5:14that the United States has the ability
5:16to to do nation-building as such I think
5:19that the cultures are so different the
5:21histories the neighbors are different in
5:24the case of Iraq I personally think the
5:27world's a better place without Saddam
5:28Hussein I think the fact that Qadhafi
5:31gave up his nuclear program after seeing
5:34what happened to Saddam Hussein was was
5:36a good thing and I think the fact that
5:40you have a a government there the
5:43Constitution they drafted and a
5:45government that is reasonably respectful
5:48of all the diverse elements in the
5:50country that's
5:52not likely to thumb
5:55its nose at the United Nations as it hid
5:57it's not unlikely to be giving $25,000
6:01to suicide bombers families if they blow
6:04themselves up killing innocent men women
6:06and children now are there disadvantages
6:09you bet and and so in any situation like
6:14that it seems to me there are pluses and
6:16minuses mr. Romm sold just as a
6:19follow-up to what you said you said the
6:21world is a better place without Saban
6:23and surely it was a brutal regime surely
6:26there are people who
6:28it may agree with you there but do you
6:31think that the family's Iraqi families
6:33in their tens of thousands who've lost
6:39relatives civilians they want members of
6:42al-qaeda they were just caught in the
6:44crossfire they were killed by American
6:46firepower do you think honestly that
6:49they share this assessment do you think
6:51that they give a damn whether the world
6:53is a better place they know they're not
6:54better off because they've lost it loved
6:57ones well on the other hand the hundreds
7:00of thousands of people who were killed
7:02by Saddam Hussein's regimes the mass
7:05burial grounds they the people that the
7:09Iraqi people that were Saddam Hussein
7:12used chemical weapons against them I
7:14think quite the contrary they would feel
7:16very much the way I've expressed so I'm
7:18sure there are people both sides of any
7:20issue that's that's the way the world
7:23works but there is no doubt in my mind
7:26but that the world is a better place the
7:31people of Iraq are better off they their
7:34economy's growing the schools are open
7:36they don't have a dictatorial government
7:38of brutal government that's repressing
7:40the people and and sure they're gonna be
7:42people who who don't agree with that and
7:44that's fine but I think objective people
7:48have to now I think there are very few
7:52people who disagree over the issue of
7:54how much of a thoroughly nasty person
7:58Saddam was and as you pointed out he
8:01killed his own people prior to 2003 but
8:04a hundreds of thousand right but after
8:062000 beginning 2003 the estimates are
8:11obviously vary from one source to source
8:13but it's safe to say that tens of
8:16thousands of Iraqis have been killed my
8:18question to you is two
8:21wrongs do not make a right if Iraqis
8:27were killed by Saddam before 2003 Iraqis
8:31were killed by coalition forces and
8:33others after 2003 that doesn't make it
8:36okay does it well the the the loss of an
8:39innocent life ever is is not okay but
8:43but the construct of your question I
8:46think misses the central point which is
8:49central point is that this was a brutal
8:52regime that used chemical weapons
8:54against his own people and his neighbors
8:56that had invaded Kuwait that was
8:59brutally killing large numbers of its
9:03own people and using chemical weapons
9:04against them by weapons
9:08weapons that your government had
9:10supplied it to that regime at various
9:12times you actually were your Metzl done
9:14in the 80s and if all that is false
9:17chemical
9:18weapons was was so to subtract my
9:21knowledge and certainly not by me or not
9:23by the Reagan administration in any
9:25suggestion to the contrary is inaccurate
9:27but you you went you went to battle that
9:30you shook hands with that thoroughly
9:31nasty man and you you supported him
9:34against the Iranians so
9:37why was it bad you should listen you're
9:39posing a question and you should listen
9:41to the response go ahead their responses
9:44this President Reagan and Secretary of
9:46State Schultz asked me to go to Iraq and
9:50meet with Saddam Hussein why
9:53because
9:55he was a nice man no but because our
9:58relationship with Iran was worse they
10:02had taken prisoners hostages from our
10:04embassy and the the relationship there
10:08was a bad one your suggestion that that
10:12that administration or I had anything to
10:14do with supplying chemical weapons to
10:17Saddam Hussein is just beyond the pale
10:20it is just so fault and so in each
10:33other's excited States at any one time
10:36supply here supplied weapons or support
10:40to Saddam Hussein before 2003 the
10:43answers in government okay but I'm
10:46asking you general course I have you as
10:48you you are asserting that and I'm not
10:51in a position to deny it or validate it
10:53so I'll take that as a validation if you
10:55don't you can you'd like to but you
10:57can't because I am without knowledge
10:59okay fine and it's rare when someone
11:02says that okay it has the benefit of
11:04being true it doesn't not to me because
11:07if you're not validating or not denying
11:09it as a journalist you leaving that open
11:12for me to interpret and based on what I
11:15want to interpret it you're
11:18all shocked and ready to
11:24give me facts that go that validate or
11:27deny categorically what your country has
11:30I was in business in the 1980s and I was
11:33asked to take a period of months and be
11:35special envoy to the Middle East for
11:37President Reagan and I did and and they
11:40what what took place before after the
11:43period of four or five six months that I
11:46was involved others
11:48you'd have to ask others but you can't
11:50draw any conclusions from my lack of
11:52knowledge okay fair enough now weapons
11:54of mass destruction and you say this in
11:57your book you say that you know
11:59initially they was talking about going
12:01into Iraq because of weapons of mass
12:03destruction the weapons of mass
12:05destruction when it began to be clear
12:07that it wasn't going to be easy to find
12:10them then the narrative changed to human
12:13rights and and and democracy how
12:16convinced were you at the time that
12:19there were weapons of mass destruction
12:21in Iraq before 2003 well I wasn't in the
12:25intelligence business but I was
12:28persuaded the president was persuaded :
12:31Powell made
12:33the presentation to the world through
12:35the United Nations
12:36he had more experience dealing with
12:38intelligence matters than anyone in the
12:40administration including this director
12:42of CIA he was convinced he spent days
12:45preparing them the director of CIA was
12:48absolutely convinced that the
12:50intelligence was as good as it can be
12:52it's never perfect we know that the
12:55other thing I should say is that so were
12:57the Democrats in Congress that looked at
12:59the information information and so were
13:03foreign nation's intelligence agencies
13:06and governments UK Germany there was
13:10broad agreement and the UN was aware
13:13that that Saddam Hussein had rejected
13:16some 17 resolutions and and refused to
13:20cooperate with the inspectors of weapons
13:24of mass destruction so there was broad
13:26agreement and and certainly I as well as
13:30everyone I've described believe that was
13:33the case and it turned out it was in an
13:36in large measure if you think about it
13:37Dell fir the man who went in afterwards
13:41he found the people who were still
13:43together who did chemical and biological
13:45and the people who did nuclear weapons
13:47they found the facilities that could do
13:50dual use chemical and biological both
13:53civilian purposes as well as military
13:55and they found precursors and up in from
13:59all they actually found the toxins and
14:01the the protective suits and the Arabic
14:04documents
14:06that showed how to make chemical in
14:08violence but net but you can would not
14:10be stopped right but you cannot
14:12ascertain with certainty after the fact
14:15that there were weapons of mass
14:17destruction that justified the invasion
14:19of Iraq and getting rid of by the way a
14:22thoroughly nasty man that's not the
14:24issue here were there weapons of mass
14:26destruction did they ever turn up in any
14:28way that suggested do you deep down that
14:31the invasion was worth carrying out I
14:34think the invasion was worth carrying
14:36out it was a calculation the president
14:38made based on the intelligence that
14:40everyone looked at and believed and the
14:43speech and presentation that Colin
14:45Powell made to the United Nations but no
14:47weapons of mass destruction have turned
14:49out well they did at Kerr mall they
14:51found the toxins and on the floor in the
14:54basement of sub built floors of that
14:57facility but it is no stock is no stock
15:01price exactly would you be would you be
15:03willing in
15:05any shape or form to tell the Iraqis we
15:09invaded Iraq we got rid of a thoroughly
15:12nasty man who tormented you
15:14whom we had helped at various times in
15:18different ways but I want to apologize
15:21to you as Iraqis for the for the
15:23casualties that you have sustained since
15:242003 since no weapons of mass
15:26destruction F you you want to be the
15:29person interviewed instead of the
15:31interviewer no I responded
15:34interview you've had a long time he
15:36didn't sit back and and listen give me
15:38something to listen to I asked
15:41you a question would you apologize to
15:43the Iraqi I've heard the question three
15:45times and the answers of course not the
15:47president made a decision that at the
15:49time was the right decision it made
15:50sense it was based on the best
15:52information available and and the people
15:56of Iraq today are vastly better off than
15:58they were there now does everyone regret
16:00the loss of life on both sides you bet
16:02how many people do you think have been
16:04killed in Iran I'm not gonna get into
16:06that how many people were killed before
16:082003 well you said it you said hundreds
16:11of thousands so we've Assembly you've
16:13seen the killing fields they were
16:14terrifying I mean no no one is arguing
16:16about that I'm asking you about how as
16:19the former Secretary of Defense who was
16:21Secretary of Defense when Iraq was
16:23invaded are you in a position to tell me
16:25how many Iraqis up until at least the
16:28time you stopped being a member of the
16:31administration who were killed in Iraq
16:32yeah one doesn't know but if you think
16:34of what the insurgents did where they
16:36chopped off people's heads not American
16:40soldiers but Iraqi insurgents and and
16:43foreign insurgents in that country al
16:45Qaeda and and others jihadists chopped
16:48off people's heads drag people through
16:51the street walked
16:53into markets with suicide vests on and
16:55kill large numbers of people how many
16:57people did they kill I don't know nobody
17:00knows but they killed a lot of people
17:02now what and the value they put on human
17:05life is very different from the value
17:06American to what extent humans what
17:09we're not talking about Americans we're
17:11talking about the Bush administration
17:12here to what extent do you think that
17:15those criminals that you just talked
17:18about and the policy is that your
17:21administration at that time pursued in
17:23Iraq were equally responsible for the
17:25killing of innocent Iraqis because for
17:28it you did not secure the borders of
17:31Iraq going into Iraq with a hundred and
17:33thirty thousand one hundred and forty
17:34thousand which many people in the
17:36Pentagon at the time told you was not
17:38enough you
17:41keep making assertions which are
17:42fundamentally false there was never any
17:44no one in the Pentagon said they were
17:46not enough the president went around the
17:48room he asked every one of them do you
17:51have everything you need you have the
17:53numbers you want we went back and forth
17:55with the commanders in Iraq and the and
17:57at CENTCOM asking him do they want
17:59additional forces and the answer was no
18:02and every time they wanted him when it
18:04was yes they were increased okay so does
18:06that make the numbers right does that
18:08make the numbers he went into Iraq with
18:09the right do you want to yell or do you
18:12want to have an interview you have a
18:14choice the other choice your your your
18:17being true to form no but yes you ask
18:20you know say yes yes do you think that
18:24the numbers you went into Iraq the
18:26numbers of US troops that you want into
18:28Iraq with did absolve you from the
18:30responsibility of tens
18:33maybe hundreds of thousands of innocent
18:35Iraqis killed by the coalition and those
18:39criminals that you talked about where
18:41are you going to start look
18:44you can characterize my answers any way
18:46you want and you do it in a pejorative
18:48way no no you don't at all you obviously
18:53use you are of that nature it's clear
18:57that your that your being that you like
18:59to do that no don't
19:03talk about you're not respectful you're
19:05just talking over and over and over you
19:08have you have you have just discouraged
19:11me as a member of al Jazeera but that's
19:13okay just give me a straight answer how
19:14did that disparage I said you're not
19:16being respectful you're just talking
19:18over and over and over and that's what
19:20you're doing okay I'll listen anyone
19:21listening to this program can see that
19:23okay that's what you did secretary you
19:28know I listen to you and I think to
19:30myself someone's not about me so my
19:32secretary this is a god you're not going
19:34to listen questions you're not gonna
19:35believe you
19:36yes if you want to attack me personally
19:38fine but give me an answer to my
19:40question
19:41why should I do everything you want and
19:43you won't do a thing I want Alisa view
19:46of oh really and that gives you the
19:48privilege to be the way seriously
19:52I'm being serious this
19:54is worthless this is not an interview
19:57you're her reigning that's what you're
19:59doing I'm listening to you just give me
20:00an answer well I'm like goodness we've
20:02had a sudden change not amazing I
20:05suppose you're gonna drop all this on
20:07the cutting room floor that's what you
20:09do with it I suppose if you don't like
20:10it now
20:12what would you give me your question in
20:14a in a neutral way just once my question
20:17is do you think you you attacked you
20:20criticized the criminals and I don't
20:23think there's any disagreement there
20:24that a lot of innocent people were
20:26killed by Al Qaeda and the the jihadists
20:29and others there's no disagreement about
20:30that my question to you is to what
20:33extent do you think ok I'll answer you
20:35that your approach every day is question
20:37yeah first
20:40of all you said that I was told over and
20:42over again by people to increase the
20:44number of troops and I pointed out that
20:46that's factually not true that the
20:48President and I and and the people
20:51involved asked the commander's over and
20:54over again how many troops did they need
20:56and they got every single truth they
20:59asked for was it the right number is I
21:01think part of your question buried in
21:04there somewhere and
21:05and the answer is it probably was for
21:08much of the time there's no way you can
21:10secure the borders we can't secure the
21:12borders in the United States of America
21:14you've been listening to the debates
21:15borders are not securable they're porous
21:19and you have neighbors like Syria and
21:21you have neighbors like Iran and people
21:23were pouring in from different other
21:25other countries and and and you the
21:28Iraqis tried to stop them the Iraqi
21:31security forces we tried to stop them to
21:33the extent you could but it's not
21:35possible it's not me you could have put
21:37in four times the numbers of people and
21:39what would have happened you would have
21:41been charged with occupying the country
21:44to take their oil and all of this
21:46propaganda that the other side was
21:48promoting and and these implication that
21:51by a few more troops you could have
21:53sealed those borders I think is
21:55factually inaccurate well I mean we're
21:57not talking about a few more troops
21:59we're talking about the difference
22:00between a hundred and thirty thousand
22:01one hundred and forty thousand maybe if
22:04you had deployed a larger number of
22:07troops and tried to secure the border
22:10even decreasing even decreasing the toll
22:14among Iraqi civilians even by one
22:17thousand don't you think that would have
22:18been worth it they did try it we did
22:20increase the number of troops and they
22:22did try to secure the borders and they
22:23did provide a great amount of money to
22:26the Iraqi security forces to try
22:28organize them and train them and equip
22:30them and in border patrols to have them
22:32do it we sought help from other
22:33neighboring countries too to assist as
22:36well but I mean the fact that the fact
22:38that he only had about a hundred and
22:40thirty one hundred and forty thousand
22:42you have the as you say these wide
22:45borders that went mostly unprotected you
22:48knew for example the Syrians didn't want
22:51to be didn't want you in Iraq the
22:53Iranians didn't want you in Iraq did you
22:56at any time during the preparations
22:58think that if we go in with this number
23:00we're leaving ourselves and the Iraqis
23:02wide open for foreign interference in
23:04Iraq there were extensive discussions by
23:06the military planners on that subject
23:08and the
23:10conclusion they came to was that the
23:12number of troops that went in was what
23:14they believed was appropriate how about
23:15you do you think that was the right I
23:17certainly agree with what the military
23:19commanders recommend how do you feel
23:22when people go around with regard to
23:25what happened in Iraq saying Donald
23:28Rumsfeld should be held accountable
23:30before a Criminal Court or I mean the
23:32president made a decision I was the
23:34Secretary of Defense we executed the
23:37decision in the best way we could and
23:39and it was consistent with our US
23:42policies it had been the policy of our
23:45government during the Clinton
23:46administration the Congress had passed
23:48regime change legislation during that
23:50period and President Clinton had signed
23:52it
23:54thank you

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Donald Rumsfeld talks to Al Jazeera by Al Jazeera English, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 3,851 words across 562 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.