05 December 2001
Transcript: Defense Department Briefing, December 5, 2001
(Afghanistan: military operations, deaths of U.S. servicemen, use of
B-52 bombers, humanitarian operations, psychological operations)
(6290)
Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke and Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem
briefed.
Following is the transcript:
(begin transcript)
DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL UPDATE BRIEFING
BRIEFERS: VICTORIA CLARKE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PUBLIC
AFFAIRS
AND REAR ADMIRAL JOHN STUFFLEBEEM, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS,
CURRENT READINESS AND CAPABILITIES, JOINT STAFF
PENTAGON BRIEFING ROOM, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
12:29 P.M. EST -- WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2001
(Slides and videos shown in this briefing are on the Web at
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2001/g011205-D-6570C.html)
Clarke: Good afternoon. As you know, today, at approximately 12:30
a.m. Eastern Time, U.S. service members were killed, and 20 more were
injured when a B-52 dropped its ordnance in close proximity to
friendly forces. The B-52 was flying in support of opposition forces
north of Kandahar.
We have an update since this morning and, unfortunately, the number of
U.S. forces killed is now three. As we get additional updates, we will
give them to you. The names are being withheld at this time, pending
the notification of their families. But we do want to offer our
deepest sympathies and concern to the families of these service
members.
And I talked to some of you this morning, but this accident does
underscore what needs to be remembered, and that is that every day,
the men and women of the U.S. military put their lives at risk
defending our freedoms and our way of life. For that, we are very
grateful. And I would repeat what the secretary said yesterday: We did
not ask for this war, we did not start this war. And every casualty
rests at the feet of the al Qaeda and the Taliban.
As we continue with military operations -- and Admiral Stufflebeem
will give you an update in just a minute -- I did want to make mention
of an advancement that took place yesterday.
From the very first days, we have said this war is being fought on
many fronts -- military, humanitarian, diplomatic, financial and
economic. All of these are critical elements. And yesterday the
president announced an important action on the financial front. [
transcript ] The Treasury Department has frozen the assets and
accounts of the Holy Land Foundation, whose money is used to support
the Hamas terror organization. Federal agents also secured the offices
and records of the organization. The accounts of a Hamas-linked bank
and Hamas-linked holding company have also been blocked. As the
president has said, "Those who do business with terror will do no
business with the United States or anywhere else the United States can
reach."
I mention this economic activity because each of these advancements
represents progress in our war on terrorism.
Admiral?
Q: Torie, just two quick ones, if I could. Number one, does that mean
that you now have three dead and 19 injured, or is it three dead now
and 20 injured? Did one of the injured die, in other words?
Clarke: One of the injured on the plane on the way to another medical
facility died.
Q: So you now have three dead and 19 injured?
Clarke: Right. Right.
Q: And also, have you any details at all on the injuries to Hamid
Karzai, the southern Pashtun leader, who apparently was slightly
injured in the attack?
Clarke: We do not. We have heard that Karzai has been out, he's been
visible; seems to be doing fine.
Q: Torie, are there any other of the injured -- this question relates
to what you're talking about -- who would be described in
life-threatening situations, critical condition?
Clarke: You know, we haven't gotten much of a characterization of
their injuries. They are what you might expect as a result of the
munition that dropped in close proximity. And I'll leave that one to
Admiral Stufflebeem to talk about some of those, but we haven't gotten
much of a characterization of the level of the injuries.
Q: Torie, three questions before you leave us. One, where are they
being taken, Landstuhl? Two, what outfit -- Rangers, Green Berets,
Delta, what have you? And three, where do we now stand on the earlier
investigation of why the bomb went awry?
Clarke: They are being taken to other medical facilities in the
region, and we'll just leave it at that. And we also are just saying
these were U.S. Special Forces that died. And I should also mention we
have -- five Afghans? -- in terms of deaths. Five Afghans and a number
of wounded of the opposition groups with whom the Special Forces were.
And finally, the investigation is underway, and we don't have any
progress to report on that right now.
Q: Torie, can you tell us anything about the Special Forces member who
received a gunshot wound yesterday? Have you gotten an update on that
case? What the circumstances were?
Clarke: We checked on that just a little while before we came in, and
it was the result of hostile fire. Other than that, nothing new to
report.
Q: Torie, can you --
Q: So these people were calling in the strikes that hit them?
Clarke: I'll leave that to Admiral Stufflebeem to give you that one.
Q: So you're not answering --
Q: Torie, can you at least confirm Karzai's --
Q: (inaudible) -- to tell about the Navy reservist, whether he'll be
buried at Arlington with his parents or in a separate plot? Can you
address that or at least clarify the situation?
Clarke: Sure. The Army has worked very hard with the family to come to
an agreement where he will be buried in Arlington with his father, in
the father's plot in Arlington, and they will change the headstone to
reflect that.
Q: Was there some change in policy after the Washington Post story and
the appearance of his kin on the Today Show?
Clarke: No. No, there was not. And I did not see the Today Show, but I
understand that in it they acknowledged that these arrangements were
being made.
Q: Will his wife be -- will his wife also be permitted to be interred
there in Arlington?
Clarke: I don't know. I only know about the arrangements to have him
--
Q: Okay. And one of their primary concerns was that a fly- over was
not going to be allowed. What is the disposition of that?
Clarke: The Navy is still reviewing it.
Q: Okay. So the bottom line of what you're saying -- that the Army
secretary's position is unchanged, the one that had dissatisfied the
family? Is it unchanged?
Clarke: Again, I did not see all the comments that the family made.
What I can tell you is the Army has worked hard over the last couple
days to work through this with them, and our understanding is the
family is happy with this resolution.
Q: Can you at least confirm that Karzai was in the region at the time
of the friendly fire incident, that he was meeting with Special Forces
and opposition groups?
Clarke: I really can't. I can't tell you exactly where he was.
Q: And you're saying he wasn't injured?
Clarke: I have said that we have heard reports that he has been out,
he has been visible, and seems to be doing fine.
Q: Torie, this morning the pool reporters were ordered to stay in
their quarters during the transfer of casualties to Rhino base. Can
you explain why the only media in Afghanistan was kept away from that
situation?
Clarke: I actually just don't have much information on it. I know I've
gotten an e-mail or two from a couple of the reporters. So we're
looking into what the circumstances were. Clearly, there was a lot
going on. This was a matter of some nine, 10 hours ago. There was a
lot going on.
Q: Well, whose decision would that have been? Would it have been the
local commander's or is that an edict from DoD to prevent U.S.
television cameras from seeing American injured?
Clarke: I honestly don't know what the circumstances were at the time.
So we're looking into it.
Why don't we --
Q: I have one other --
Clarke: Okay. One more, and then we'll let Admiral Stufflebeem do his
work.
Q: Could you comment on this lawsuit that's been filed by the Air
Force lieutenant colonel who objects to the policy in Saudi Arabia of
requiring women service members to wear the abaya, or to basically
dress like Muslim women when they leave the base?
Clarke: We haven't seen it yet, so I can't.
Q: Well, do you see any irony in a policy like that, that's similar to
the restrictions the Taliban put on women?
Clarke: No, I don't look for irony or anything else. As we get more
information about what might happen -- what we have right now is from
press reports, but we just haven't seen anything yet. So it's not
appropriate to comment on it.
Admiral?
Stufflebeem: Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone.
The first thing I would like to do is to add, on behalf of the
chairman, the sympathies to those that Ms. Clarke has offered to the
family of those who were killed and wounded. You know, the motto of
the Special Forces is to liberate the oppressed. These men died as
heroes and were wounded as heroes, and our thoughts and prayers are
with them and their families.
Let me give you a brief update on the other operations that were going
on yesterday. We're continuing to focus our efforts in the vicinity of
Kandahar and the mountainous regions near Tora Bora. A Marine element,
along with coalition forces, continue patrols in the vicinity of
Kandahar, interdicting lines of communications. And as of this hour,
they have not had any engagements with Taliban or al Qaeda forces.
Yesterday we conducted airstrikes in four planned target areas,
generally around Jalalabad and Kandahar. We used about 100 strike
aircraft. That included about 80 tactical aircraft from sea-based
platforms, 12 to 14 land-based tactical jets, and between eight and 10
long-range bombers.
We dropped leaflets in Kandahar and the Jalalabad area and continued
our Commando Solo broadcast missions. Three C-17s dropped more than
44,000 humanitarian daily rations west of Mazar-e Sharif, bringing our
total to date to more than 2,187,000.
We have two videos from operations over the last few days. The first
video is from Sunday, of a strike by an F-18 on al Qaeda troop
positions south of Kandahar.
As you'll see, there was direct hit on a trench system.
The last video is from F-16 strikes on buildings where Taliban troops
were reported to have taken refuge. A U.S. ground forward air
controller, in coordination with opposition group forces, called the
strike in. As you can see, the facility was heavily damaged, while
sparing the civilian facilities around it. These strikes were also
from Sunday.
Q: Kandahar?
Stufflebeem: Correct.
Q: Inside the city?
Stufflebeem: No, outside the city.
Q: Is that same video from a different angle, or two different
buildings?
Stufflebeem: They're actually different F-16s on different facilities.
And with that, we'll continue your questions.
Q: Admiral --
Q: Admiral, a number -- I'm sorry. I understand that these U.S. forces
which were struck called in the strikes. Can you confirm that? And how
far were they from the Taliban forces who were firing mortars at them?
Stufflebeem: Here's what we can say about what we know so far. There
was a forward air controller who called in a close air support
mission. A B-52 responded with JDAM munitions. One of those JDAM
weapons landed somewhere in the vicinity of a hundred meters from
where our troops were at. And that's what has obviously caused the
casualties and injuries.
This mission was called in due to the fighting that was occurring
between opposition groups and those Taliban forces that were dug in.
This is north of Kandahar.
The rest of this, in terms of how that weapon managed to not fall
where the troops intended it to, is under investigation. And it's
going to take a few days to try to find out why that happened.
Q: But you said the Taliban troops were under fire. Weren't the
American forces --
Stufflebeem: This is opposition groups against --
Q: I beg your pardon. The -- you said opposition troops were under
fire.
Stufflebeem: -- groups against -- fire -- yes, exchanging fire with
Taliban.
Q: All right. Were American troops with them also exchanging fire, or
were they elsewhere?
Stufflebeem: Well, I assume that -- I don't know that for a fact,
Charlie. I don't know if U.S. forces were engaged in the fight at that
time. They certainly do take on military forces when they're engaged.
Whether they were in this case, I don't know.
Q: Did they hit Taliban forces with that bomb --
Stufflebeem: Taliban forces were hit. That bomb -- I don't know what
casualties may have occurred on the other side. We're focusing right
now on the fratricide aspect of it.
Q: Admiral, why were so many Special Forces gathered in the same
place? We're sort of led to believe that most operations were
conducted with smaller teams of Special Forces operating independently
of each other. This seems like one large group together. Can you
explain why that many -- and we presume there were probably more than
22 -- why that many were together in one spot?
Stufflebeem: I don't know the specifics of how this came to be other
than these were two teams that were in the same location. You have to
appreciate and understand that as these opposition groups are
collecting their forces together and concentrating their firepower,
that that may tend to bring U.S. forces that are with them in the same
general vicinity. I don't know that to be the case, but that's --
that's likely.
Q: Admiral, can you give us any estimate of how far off the intended
target this bomb landed? And can you just run through what the
possible explanations could be for what happened?
Stufflebeem: I don't know, and no. (laughter)
Q: Can you tell me --
Stufflebeem: I don't even want to talk about that. It's --
Q: It's a satellite-guided bomb.
Stufflebeem: I don't know what the intended target was other than it
was -- it was being called on troops. It was being called on Taliban,
and, if there were al Qaeda forces with them, it was being called on
enemy troops. Where it landed relative to that I don't know and it
will be part of the investigation. And I don't even want to begin to
speculate what the possible causes could be, because it would be more
than we have time for.
Q: Admiral, if I could just follow up, isn't there really just sort of
a, really, a limited number of things that could have happened? The
bomb might have malfunctioned. The coordinates might have been entered
incorrectly. The troops on the ground might not have been where they
thought they may have been. There aren't that many possibilities for
what happened to them, is there?
Stufflebeem: Well, I certainly don't mean to indicate to you that
there are limitless variables here that come into play. But Jamie,
this really does need to be investigated. We really do want to
understand how it happened, to know why it happened, to prevent it
from happening in the future.
Let me just go back to say what I've said before. As a pilot, I can do
everything perfectly with a perfect weapons system and still cannot
account for every weapon going exactly where it's supposed to go. And
that's just a fact of unfortunate life here in this case.
You also need to appreciate that as a close air support mission, this
is one of the potentially most hazardous type of missions that we use
as a military tactic. Calling in air strikes nearly simultaneously on
your own position, on enemy forces that you're engaged in close
proximity to, is a hazardous business and takes very fine control and
coordination and precision. And this is, I think, illustrative of what
we have seen in training when sometimes things just don't work out
perfectly.
Q: Admiral?
Q: But, Admiral, when you think of close air support, though,
traditionally, you haven't thought of B-52s. Can you explain how the
technology has advanced that a B-52 long-range heavy bomber would be
used for a close-air-support mission?
Stufflebeem: Sure. You have to think of it in two -- one weapon system
sort of in two parts, in this case. You have a precision-guided
munition, and you have, in this case, an aircraft with the capability
of very long endurance. Any kind of an aircraft -- nearly any kind of
an aircraft can be brought into a close-air- support mission.
So what has happened is the old technology of the B-52 has been
upgraded with the precision-weapon capability. It now has an ability
to carry a large load of bombs and be on station for a long period of
time. In a case not unlike this one that has occurred, troops come
under fire and need air support, and they'll call what is available.
And it may be that it was the B-52 that was on station and had the
fuel to remain on station when other aircraft may not have. And so --
you know, our technology, our capabilities have upgraded this old
workhorse, if you will, and been able to bring it to bear.
Q: Can you comment on some skepticism about the accuracy of the
so-called "smart bombs", based on what some maybe have formed a
perception of bombs that have gone astray and killed civilians, that's
because they hit in the wrong place, because of the bomb that fell
last week at Mazar-e Sharif, which caused the friendly-fire
casualties, and then this. Is there reason to be skeptical about just
how smart these smart bombs are?
Stufflebeem: No. No reason to be skeptical. We have seen in the
improvements in the technology of our weapon systems and our weapons,
finer or tighter tolerances, in terms of precision. And whenever any
endeavor attains a new standard of precision, that new bar, if you
will, becomes the lowest common denominator. And anything that falls
outside of that becomes an aberration that you would like to explain,
understand and improve upon. And that's certainly the case that we
experienced here.
However, these are human-made, human-designed systems, and therefore,
they're going to have flaws that are going to either be built in or
that are going to occur. We have not perfected a technology that is
perfect in its execution. However, we have come to expect an extremely
high standard with this precision that doesn't really allow for the
realities of what happens when it doesn't meet that standard.
Q: But Admiral, given the hazardous nature and the precision required,
as you mentioned a few minutes ago, should we then be led to believe
that a 2,000-pound bomb, which strikes a lot of people as fairly large
for close air support, that that was the only thing available in this
particular mission?
Stufflebeem: I don't know what aircraft were in the area in an on-call
status. Therefore, I don't know if other aircraft could have been
called in. But I don't believe that there are other aircraft that you
necessarily would achieve a higher degree of precision with.
Clarke: And I'd just --
Q: If I could just -- okay --
Clarke: Let me just follow up on something there. I've cautioned
people about making too many assessments or making too many judgments
at this stage of the game. It's still very early. We're still trying
to get information about what happened. So I'd caution people about
making assessments before we have more information.
Q: If I could follow up, though, could you explain how the soldiers
were evacuated out of there? Was anybody injured as you attempted to
extract them out and take them to -- (inaudible)?
Stufflebeem: The only reports of injuries that have are the wounds
that were sustained due to this weapon. (cross talk)
Q: Could you describe the scene, though, as they were taken out?
Stufflebeem: I can't describe the scene just -- I don't have any facts
on what it was.
Q: If I understand you correctly, the epicenter of where this bomb
dropped was a football field away from where the fatal injuries
occurred. Is that what you're saying? A hundred meters away from these
guys?
Stufflebeem: I think I heard it was about a hundred meters away.
Q: And --
Q: What was the blast area? I'm sorry.
Q: Admiral --
Q: A hundred meters away. And I believe you also described that you
believe that it in close enough proximity to Taliban lines that it may
have created difficulties for them as well.
Stufflebeem: No. I'm sorry. If I gave you that impression, I
apologize. I don't know what the intended target coordinates were. I
don't know how far from those coordinates the weapon hit. I don't have
any information about what may happen on the other side.
Q: I know, but as the bomb dropped, whether it was the right place or
the wrong place, I thought you indicated that it somehow dropped
between friendly and hostile forces. You're not indicating that?
Stufflebeem: I don't know that. I don't know that.
Q: Were there other bombs that dropped at a near-simultaneous place,
but found their correct targets, the Taliban forces, and inflicted the
casualties on the Taliban?
Stufflebeem: I don't know that either.
Q: Well, there were Taliban --
Q: You said Taliban --
Q: Taliban were killed.
Stufflebeem: Well, sure, this has been -- this was a fight that was
going on, and so they were exchanging fire --
Q: But by that bomb?
Q: But not by the bomb?
Stufflebeem: I don't know. I don't know. And I've only focused on just
this weapon, because of the fratricide. So I've not examined, you
know, what else was going on there.
Q: Are there other weapons --
(cross talk)
Stufflebeem: I don't know, Mik. I --
Q: But Admiral, can I ask a little bit more about Jack's question?
It's about 70 yards, I believe -- a hundred meters. Isn't that
correct?
Q: No.
Q: A hundred yards --
(cross talk)
Q: Okay. It reinforces the question I want to ask. That's a long way
away. Is somebody in danger a football field away?
Stufflebeem: A 2,000-pound weapon is a devastating weapon.
Q: At what --
Stufflebeem: As a pilot, when I would drop a 2,000-pound weapon, I
wanted at least 4,000 feet of separation from that weapon when it went
off.
Q: Admiral?
Q: Could you describe that, then, at this blast area? Is that that
large --
Stufflebeem: It could.
Q: Admiral? Most the wounded were taken to base Rhino for the triage
-- pardon me. How many of the 19 remaining wounded are listed as
critical now?
Clarke: We don't have it yet. We've not gotten characterizations of
their condition or the status.
Q: Admiral? The questions were talking about why B-52. More
specifically, why were not AC-130s, the most precise ground attack
weapon you've got over there, in the mix, given the number of Special
Forces troops involved?
Stufflebeem: I haven't gone back and looked at the AC-130s or the
MC-130s specifically. It does not have the same endurance that a B-52
has. It may in fact have been flying on the ATO [air tasking order]
for the day, and it just happened to be it was not in this location or
it may have been out of the window that it was on station. So I don't
know.
Q: Can you give us some perspective on the number of bombs dropped to
date, and how many of those were precision-guided so we can make a
judgment here of ratios? If it's just about 11,000 bombs total -- are
there like 60 percent precision-guided?
Stufflebeem: Let us take that question and get back to you.
Q: You would guess --
Stufflebeem: I have not looked at the numbers lately.
Q: Admiral?
Q: When you're talking about that third service member who died -- you
say he died on the plane. Was that on the plane to Rhino base or on a
plane out --
Clarke: On a plane to another medical facility.
Q: And do you know how long after the incident that was that he died?
Clarke: No, I don't.
Q: Who performed the evacuation or extraction of the force? Was it --
were those Marine forces from the forward operation base?
Stufflebeem: It was a combination of -- well, it was Marines, for
sure. Marines from the forward operating base responded, and a combat
SAR responded from Pakistan. I'm not sure if those were Marine or
Army. For sure Marine, and may have been Army as well.
Q: Admiral, do you know if Karzai was among the two teams of Special
Forces on the ground? And the Special Forces who called in the
strikes, were they in communication with those who were injured, or
did they know of their whereabouts?
Stufflebeem: I don't have any information on the whereabouts of Mr.
Karzai at the time that the weapon went off or where he was in
relation to the Special Operating Forces. The forces that were killed
and wounded were in fact the group that called in the strike.
Q: And were they aware of the location of the other Special Forces who
were injured in the situation?
Stufflebeem: As I understand it they were in the same area, so yes,
they would have known that.
Q: Admiral, could you explain in a little more detail what the
procedure is for targeting these weapons?
I take it they're targeted while the plane is in flight, not before it
takes off. What happens? Do the guys on the ground radio to the plane?
Or can you go just go through the steps?
Stufflebeem: Well, I'll only do so very briefly, just for the sake of
time.
For a close air support mission, a forward air controller on the
ground, who has the perspective of what is occurring there that would
cause them to want that support -- either they're under heavy fire or
they wish to achieve some sort of a condition -- and can see where it
is they wish to have the heavy munitions dropped, they determine those
coordinates. They contact the aircraft on the radio. They pass the
coordinates of where they are located; they pass the coordinates of
where they wish the weapons to be placed and when they wish to have
the weapons dropped. That then is a procedure that is turned around in
the cockpit of the aircrew -- the aircraft. The aircrew will respond
if they are not able to achieve those conditions, either in locations
or time, or anything else that they don't quite understand. But once
they've got that, they'll move as quickly and as precisely as they
possibly can to meet that time. It's a time-sensitive targeting
process.
Q: Do they have to type the coordinates into a keyboard or --
Stufflebeem: That's correct.
Q: Admiral, can you tell us what's the latest on what's going on
around Tora Bora? What are U.S. forces doing, whether in the air or on
the ground, to support any of the Afghan opposition groups who are
forming up to in fact go after or in fact are attacking those caves
around Tora Bora?
Stufflebeem: I only know in a general sense. Their mission, as has
been other special operating forces, make contact with opposition
groups, determine what their needs are, what their requests might be,
and to develop intelligence and do reconnaissance. So they are there
to help facilitate the airstrikes with or for the benefit of the
opposition groups, as well as to determine through this intelligence
gathering the potential for planned targets.
Q: And what, precisely, are these planned targets that they're going
after in that region, and what kind of BDA have we had over the past
several days?
Stufflebeem: Well, they are trying to determine locations of al Qaeda,
and specifically al Qaeda leadership and remaining Taliban that might
be in the area. The reports from that region are -- is that many of
these forces may have or have taken up refuge in caves and tunnels. So
we are working to determine where these bad guys are and then to bring
strikes on them.
In terms of bomb damage assessment, I have very little. In terms of
hit assessment, we have been very effective and have had a lot of
precision in hitting the areas that have been called.
Q: Admiral, one -- one more. To what extent are U.S. forces on the
ground working with, supporting, or leading the Afghan opposition
troops on the ground there, supposedly attacking these cave complexes?
Stufflebeem: The understanding I have, and I would say that it is
incomplete, is that they are supporting opposition groups, they are
not leading opposition groups.
Q: And are you aware that any of the opposition groups have actually
made it to any of the tunnel cave complexes, that actual human beings
who are in the opposition, with or without American forces with them,
have actually gotten into these complexes?
Stufflebeem: I have seen reports where they have entered some caves. I
don't have any more information other than that, than that local
opposition groups from local villages in this area who are -- who know
the terrain have gone into some of the caves to confirm whether or not
somebody, you know, was or might be there.
Q: And reports that top Taliban -- top al Qaeda leaders, including,
perhaps, even the son or son-in-law of Osama bin Laden, have been
killed?
Stufflebeem: Well, I've seen reports, single source reports about al
Qaeda who may have killed. We have not been able to confirm any of
that.
Q: Admiral, can you tell us the success rate of the JDAM munitions so
far in this campaign? And is the JDAM any more or less successful or
accurate depending on the plane from which it's dropped?
Stufflebeem: That's a good question. It's also very technical. It's
going to take a lot of data, analysis-gathering, which is building and
not yet being consumed, I guess is the right word. So I don't -- I
don't know how to -- I can tell you that we know that it's a
generation's improvement over dropping unguided bombs. I think that's
relatively obvious. But in terms of is one aircraft or one weapons
system better at doing this than another, no.
Q: I'm just curious if the B-52 is not your first choice for dropping
a JDAM, if you have a target in very close proximity to friendly
forces.
Stufflebeem: No. Not at all. And that's what I was hoping I was trying
to convey in the sense that there's two parts to this. The B-52 may be
an old workhorse, but it is updated with the newest in technology of
this JDAM weapon system. So I don't perceive -- I have not seen any
data that would indicate -- that a JDAM dropped from a B- 52 is any
difference in its precision or reliability than it is from an F-15 or
and an F-14.
Q: Admiral, was weather -- was weather a factor at all? I mean, was
there cloud cover that would have prevented laser-guided bombs. Or was
it -- or do you know?
Stufflebeem: I do not know. And I don't know why the choice of the
weapon. I think what they were looking for was maximum blast effect,
and that's why the 2,000-pound weapon, and --
Q: Can either of you update us on what, if anything, has been
determined about what happened in the previous errant-bombs episode
near Mazar-e Sharif? Has there been -- have you gotten any feel for
what happened there?
Clarke: No.
Q: No.
Clarke: Very little new information.
Stufflebeem: No, we've asked, and the investigation -- they're still
studying that to try to determine --
Q: But Admiral, a JDAM wouldn't be affected by weather. I mean --
Stufflebeem: No, his question --
Q: -- you don't choose --
Stufflebeem: -- was having to do with comparing that to a laser-guided
bomb as opposed to a GPS-guided.
Yeah.
Q: Admiral, pending the outcome of this investigation, have you made
any changes in your use of weapons, have you put the use of JDAMs on
hold, or is it business as usual? Are you continuing to use them with
no hold on that till the investigation's done?
Stufflebeem: Yeah, there are no restrictions on the use of JDAM that I
am aware of. I don't know that Central Command is not looking at that.
I think as part of the investigation, they'll ask a lot of questions
to try to reduce these numbers of variable possibilities. But the
JDAM, in it testing and in its use, has proven to be an extremely
precise and very effective weapon. And the fact that we now have had
two weapons that didn't land where they -- or we would intended that
they would go, well, we need to understand more about why that
happened before we can say we really might have a problem.
Clarke: Yeah, two --
Q: Admiral.
Clarke: We're going to have two more questions, and let me just follow
up on that again. People are trying to draw conclusions here when we
don't have enough information. And as many improvements as there have
been in the technologies, technology is not perfect. It never will be
perfect.
Next to last question.
Q: Torie -- I mean, Admiral, to what extent do you think the Taliban
are actually being flushed out of their hiding places? Are they on the
run, in the open?
Stufflebeem: Well, certainly around Kandahar, we're seeing reports of
Taliban digging in, building or erecting defensive positions. They are
also on the run, and this strike that we showed the video of is where
Taliban were intending to take refuge when that strike was called onto
those facilities.
But we also are watching, as you are, the number of individuals who
are exiting the city and trying to make their way into Pakistan. And
we don't know that Taliban or former Taliban aren't in there as well.
So I think that you continue to see this fluid situation around
Kandahar and the mixed bag of reports.
(cross talk)
Q: (inaudible) -- clarify this.
Q: Some housekeeping?
Clarke: Wait. Hang on, Matt. Again, don't make generalizations. I
think the secretary and General Myers were very careful yesterday to
say there are different kinds of pockets or resistance. So don't
generalize one big group.
Q: Torie, this morning, you said -- you seemed to suggesting that one
of the air strikes yesterday did hit a cave-and-tunnel complex or you
think that there may have been al Qaeda leadership, but it sounds like
the admiral's saying something a little bit different; could you
clarify?
Clarke: We have -- no, I think it's the same. We have some reports,
but we don't have any specific information about names or positions or
anything like that.
Stufflebeem: So single reports and no verification.
Clarke: Right.
Q: Admiral?
Q: Just a housekeeping issue?
Clarke: Yeah. This is the last question.
Q: I know you may not know what the exact circumstances were at Camp
Rhino, where it's reported that, in fact, U.S. pool members were
locked up and kept away from covering the treatment for the medevac
treatment for these soldiers that were injured. But is it the Defense
Department/Pentagon policy to prevent media coverage of any U.S.
military killed or injured?
Clarke: No.
Q: And if such an event occurred, would the Pentagon try to rectify
that situation?
Clarke: What we will try -- what we try to do, and we will continue to
try to do, is provide access and facilitate media coverage of this
very unconventional war. If something could impede or hinder
operational security or could put lives at risk, then we will not let
something go forward. But as a general course, as a general principle,
what we're trying to do is facilitate coverage. And we would not --
again, I -- let's not talk about specifics here, because we don't
know. But as a general principle, we want to facilitate coverage, and
we will.
Q: So you really have no information right now that any reporters were
impeding anything or --
Clarke: Right. I've just gotten a couple -- I just got a couple of
calls on it, and we haven't had a chance to run it down. But I will.
Thank you.
Stufflebeem: Good afternoon.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
