Like a carny barker hawking geek shows, peek shows, freak shows, and funhouse tickets, Vets for Freedom Executive Director Pete Hegseth patters for the Bush/McCain surge propaganda roadshow. When he's unchallenged and uninterrupted, and the rubes are all quiet and mesmerized, he's very slick. Hegseth is a veteran who served in the 101st Airborne Division in Iraq. He's a TV-ready pitchman who wears a shiny flag pin on his lapel; and he is fully committed to holding the Bush/McCain line against all facts and reason.
Last night, he met his match on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, as he faced off and fell flat at the feet of a VoteVets.org co-founder and Iraq War veteran Jon Soltz. Soltz launched into a salvo of history and histrionics that collapsed Hegseth's calm composure and trashed his talking points. When Hegseth praised the success of the surge, Soltz called it a huge failure that represented nothing more than a bugle sounding a retreat from the real culprit on the real front lines of the war on terror: Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan.
Then, when Hegseth tried to recover, Soltz turned into the heckler from heck, interjecting more facts and logic and refusing to be talked over or cut off, even by leather-lunged Matthews.
And then Hegseth made a critical error. In the face of a withering cross-examination by Matthews on the subject of whether the U.S. should remain in Iraq for 100 years, and at what cost, Hegseth bowed his head and snickered.
"That's not funny!" snapped Matthews. Hegseth never recovered. After that, Soltz throttled down, calmly moved in, and mopped up. Let's go to the videotape. Feel free to follow along with my draft transcript of the favorite bits.
Chris Matthews: What was the mission of the surge?
Pete Hegseth, Vets for Freedom: "The intent of the surge was to bring the violence down to a level where Iraqis could take advantage of it politically. And so with violence dropping in the neighborhoods, Iraqis have been able to first secure their own neighborhoods with Iraqi security forces, and second, Iraqi politicians have had the ability to pass key legislation, which is exactly what they've done.... Iraqis have taken advantage of this and passed important political benchmarks that Congress had set. And also, at the neighborhood level, where I saw -- when I was in Baghdad a month ago -- the streets are open, shops are being opened, homes are being rebuilt. There is true reconciliation happening at the neighborhood level as families return."
Matthews: Jon, your view of the mission and its success, or not?
Jon Soltz, VoteVets.org: "The surge has been another failure, because the purpose of the surge was for Iraqi domestic politics. And the two major Shia militias in the country are at war with each other: the SCIRI militia, which is the Badr Corps/Hakeem group, versus the Mahdi army, which is Sadr's group. And the bottom line was, the surge was supposed to disarm these militias. It never happened. And that's why they've been going to battle with each other the entire last week. The core issue in Iraq is the Shia revolution and the control of the Shia Arab state for the first time in the history of the Middle East. And this administration wants to sell us on, you know, Al Qaeda in Iraq. The surge has been a huge failure, because it's been a policy of retreat from bin Laden and Afghanistan."
McCain: U.S. could stay 100 Years in Iraq, if "Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed."
Matthews eventually steered the debate toward an assessment of Senator John McCain's "100 years" statement on Iraq. At a town hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire on January 3, 2008, Mr. McCain stated that he could foresee an American role in Iraq that could last 100 years, much like the long-term U.S. presence in South Korea and Japan, where "Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed."
Here is a videotape of McCain's "100 years" statement, posted on YouTube.
'It Won't Begin.'
Matthews: "John McCain has talked about a long U.S. presence there in a peaceful mode, where we're not taking casualties -- not wounded, not KIAs. When would that begin? When would that period of tranquil U.S. presence -- military presence in Iraq -- commence?"
Soltz: "It won't begin. It won't begin. It absolutely won't begin in Karbala."
Mathews: "Jon, let me go to Pete first."
Hegseth: "People said it would never begin in Korea. People said it would never begin in Germany."
Soltz: "These are totally different countries."
Hegseth: "People said these things could not happen."
Soltz: "This is like a Lebanon."
Hegseth: "Jon, allow me to finish."
Soltz: "You've got multiple groups in this country. This is not Germany. I've lived in Germany; it's a homogeneous population. You cannot compare Iraq to Germany and Korea."
Hegseth: "Jon, Iraq is, historically speaking, Iraq is a non-, asectarian country, where Sunis and Shia get along."
'How Many Years of Combat Over There?'
Matthews: "The Democrats are talking about keeping our troops there, beginning to pull them out, eventually getting them out by say, 2010, the year after they're in. So, give me -- that's a ballpark of two years. What's the Republican ballpark? How many years of combat over there?"
Hegseth: "Hopefully not that many more. I mean, I think we're already moving into an advisory role. We're already moving into a role where we're providing air power for Iraqi forces in Basra without our troops on the streets. That's an important differentiation."
Matthews: "But if we're providing air power, you gotta bet that the other side's gonna be shooting at us."
Hegseth: "Would we not give air power to our allies when they're fighting an enemy of ours?"
Matthews: "Sure, but won't they be shooting back, if we're shooting them?"
Hegseth: "Sure, but it's much different to have guys in B52s than..."
Matthews: "No, you're missing the point. As long as we're grounded over there -- on the ground -- we're gonna have incoming artillery, we're gonna have IEDs."
Hegseth: "Sure."
Matthews: "Because we're the enemy of the people we're shooting at."
Hegseth: "Well, not, not necessarily."
Matthews: "Well, you can't have a one-sided war where we're just shooting at other people and they're not shooting back at us."
Hegseth: "We are shooting back when we have to."
Matthews: "No. Listen closely. Can you imagine the American people in a combat presence or any kind of military presence in Iraq where we're killing Ar -- people on the other side -- and they're not trying to shoot at us?"
Hegseth: "Ah, where we're standing alongside the Iraqi government and taking the fight."
Matthews: "And we're not getting shot at?"
Hegseth: "Well, no. You're going to get shot at if we're taking the fight to our enemies and Iraq's enemies."
'Well, When Does This 100 Years Begin?'
Matthews: "John McCain says we will stay there 100 years without getting shot at. When does that commence?"
Hegseth: "That's if we have an Iraqi government that can do the vast majority of the fighting out front."
Matthews: "Well, when does this 100 years begin?"
Hegseth: "It's already begun. And 100 years -- that statement is misconstrued over and over and over again."
Matthews: "No, that's not what he said. Jon, you do it. He said 100 without casualties. I'm just wondering when we start not getting casualties."
[Hegseth bows his head and snickers.]
Matthews: "That's not funny."
Hegseth: "No, it's not. But it's not talking about leaving without any casualties."
Matthews: "He said no casualties, no wounded, no KIA."
'Retreat from Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan'
Soltz: "It's never going to happen. Chris, they misunderstood this problem from the beginning. This is not a problem of troops and tactics. It's a problem of diplomacy and strategy. And when General [David] Petraeus speaks tomorrow, it's up to Democrats to broaden this debate, to talk about the fact that the Army has been decimated by this war. To talk about the fact that Bush and McCain have had us in a policy of retreat from Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan for the last six years. To talk about the fact that we're never going to get anywhere in Iraq politically until we deal with the Israeli/Palestinian situation, until we directly negotiate with Iran. It was Iran that helped stopped the fighting last week in Iraq."
Matthews: "I guess the American people are going to have to make a decision in this election. Do they choose a longer duration of military role in Iraq, in fact an unending presence of military in Iraq? And do they think that some day it will turn peaceful?"