Blitzer continues to ask about McCain plan to send more troops to Iraq without mentioning questions about plan's feasibility

On the December 5 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Wolf Blitzer asked all three of his interviewees about Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) plan to "add[] another 50,000 or so troops to Iraq." As Media Matters for America noted, during an October 27 campaign event for Republicans in New Hampshire, McCain called for sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq, which, McCain asserted, "means expanding the Army and Marine Corps by as much as 100,000 people." Blitzer has repeatedly referred to McCain's plan without questioning whether expanding active Army and Marine forces by 100,000 in the "next several months" is realistic.

Blitzer appeared to conflate McCain's position with Sen. John Cornyn's (R-TX) plan, as CNN noted, to send 20,000 to 50,000 additional combat troops or with Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-SC) plan, as McClatchy Newspapers reported, to send 50,000 to 100,000 more combat troops. As Media Matters has documented, critics have questioned the feasibility of McCain's plan to send 20,000 more troops.†

Blitzer asked Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) if he would support McCain's plan even though Blitzer said, "I know you disagree -- I assume you disagree" with McCain's plan. Later, Blitzer noted to Major Gen. William Caldwell, spokesman for the multinational force in Iraq, that McCain has "wanted thousands of additional troops to be deployed to Iraq." Moments later, Blitzer asked: "Do you have enough troops on the ground to accomplish your mission, General Caldwell?" Blitzer also asked former Senator Max Cleland (D-GA): "[I]s it too late to do what Senator McCain or Senator Lindsey Graham or Senator John Cornyn want, to dispatch another 50,000 troops to bolster the current U.S. military presence?"

Blitzer did not mention to any of his interviewees that others who have commented on McCain's plan have stated that it is impracticable. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) wrote in a November 26 Washington Post op-ed that the soldiers for McCain's plan did not exist: "The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq." Gen. John Abizaid, the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, said that McCain's plan might have a "temporary effect ... [but] when you look at the overall American force pool that's available out there, the ability to sustain that commitment is simply not something that we have right now with the size of the Army and the Marine Corps," as Media Matters noted. More recently, the ISG report, released December 6, warned that even at current levels:

The Army is unlikely to be able to meet the next rotation of troops in Iraq without undesirable changes in its deployment practices. The Army is now considering breaking its compact with the National Guard and Reserves that limits the number of years that these citizen-soldiers can be deployed. Behind this short-term strain is the longer-term risk that the ground forces will be impaired in ways that will take years to reverse.

A December 7 Washington Post article reported that the ISG's decision not to recommend additional troops came after it "considered proposals to deploy 100,000 to 200,000 additional troops. Ultimately, though, the panel discovered that there might be only 20,000 available, prompting vigorous discussion that led members to conclude that a substantial surge was unworkable."

Furthermore, an October 30 New York Sun article reported that Frank Gaffney Jr., president and CEO of the Center for Security Policy and a conservative supporter of the war, had argued that "McCain's approach was essentially unworkable." As the weblog Think Progress noted, McCain himself said on the November 19 edition of ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos that his plan would "put a terrible strain on the Army and Marine Corps."

Blitzer has raised the topic of McCain's plan in interviews or in panels at least once on each of the last three editions of Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer and on seven of the 12 editions of The Situation Room on which he appeared between November 13 and December 5.* At no point during these appearances did he note that questions have been raised about the plan's feasibility:

• On the December 4 edition of The Situation Room, Gov. George Pataki (R-NY) said that if he were president he "would tell President [sic] Maliki and his colleagues in government that you have a limited period of time" achieve goals like "pass[ing] petroleum legislation" and "show[ing] a commitment to deliver services." Blitzer responded: "It sounds to me you're closer to Republican Senator Chuck Hagel when it comes to Iraq than you are to Republican Senator John McCain, who wants to beef up the U.S. military presence there, send thousands more troops in."

• On the December 3 edition of Late Edition, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) brought up the idea of a "setting of a date" for withdrawal in Iraq. Blitzer responded: "You know John McCain quite well. He totally disagrees. ... He wants, like Lindsey Graham ... like Senator Cornyn, he wants another 20, 40, 50,000 troops deployed."

• On the December 1 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer asked Rep. John Murtha (D-PA): "Congressman, what do you say to Senator John McCain or Lindsey Graham or John Cornyn, who say the United States can still win in Iraq, but it would require deploying perhaps another 50,000 American forces to go in there and get the job done?"

• As Media Matters noted, later on the December 1 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer asked if McCain's call for more troops in Iraq is "a Profiles in Courage kind of statement." Blitzer also asserted that "[y]ou gotta give [McCain] credit" for his statement because "he totally believes that the United States does not have enough troops in Iraq right now."

• On the November 26 edition of Late Edition, Blitzer discussed Iraq policy with retired Gen. Michael DeLong and retired Brig. Gen. David Grange. Blitzer told DeLong: "Let's talk about various options right now. General DeLong, I'll start with Senator John McCain. He wants the U.S. military to deploy thousands more additional forces to try to ease the crisis, the chaos, in Iraq right now. Is that the answer, to deploy another 20, 30, 50,000 American troops?"

• Later on the November 26 edition of Late Edition, Cornyn noted that he wanted to increase troop levels in Iraq, which prompted Blitzer to note that "Senator McCain agrees with you, and Senator Lindsey Graham, another member of the Armed Services Committee -- they agree the U.S. has to go big, deploying an additional 20,000, maybe more, as many as 50,000 is what you're saying." Blitzer did not ask Cornyn where the additional soldiers would come from.

• On the November 19 edition of Late Edition, Blitzer started off an interview with Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) by noting that Levin "suggest[ed], and several of your Democratic colleagues, that the United States should start pulling troops out of Iraq" and that Abizaid disagreed with Levin's position. After Levin's response, Blitzer said: "I'm going to get to that other side of the equation, bringing in more troops, which Senator John McCain, among others, Senator Lindsey Graham supports." Hutchison and Levin then discussed several questions until Blitzer returned to "the other side, Senator Hutchison, as Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, both Republicans, who make it clear the United States has to deploy more, thousands of additional troops to Iraq. ... Do you agree with Senators McCain and Graham, Senator Hutchison?" Hutchison affirmed that she agreed. Then Blitzer who already noted Levin favored "pulling out troops" said: "I want Senator Levin to respond, first to Senators McCain and Graham, who say send in thousands of additional troops."

• On the November 15 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer noted that Abizaid "rejected McCain's assertion that more troops are needed right now," but did not note Abizaid's warning that McCain's plan was not "sustain[able]." Republican strategist Bay Buchanan argued that Abizaid "gave a very honest and forthright testimony." In response, Blitzer noted that McCain's position was unpopular but added that McCain "is being very firm, like Lindsey Graham, his friend from South Carolina, saying, if you want to win, that's what you are going to have to do."

• On the November 14 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer asked Democratic strategist Donna Brazile: "Let's talk about presidential politics a little bit -- John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, these exploratory committees. But McCain has been saying in recent days -- he has been saying it, actually, for a long time -- the United States doesn't need to decrease its troop level in Iraq, needs to increase it right now, if it wants to win. Is that a winning strategy right now, given the mood of the American electorate?"

• As Media Matters noted, on the November 13 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer touted McCain's proposal to send 20,000 more troops to Iraq while ignoring the question of whether his plan is achievable and said of McCain and Graham, "[M]any would regard them [as] a little bit of mavericks."

• Also on the November 13 edition of The Situation Room, after Sen. John Warner (R-VA) noted that Levin would be the chairman of the new Senate Armed Services Committee in January, Blitzer responded: "Levin says one thing, your friend the Democrat, McCain and Lindsey Graham say exactly the opposite. If you want to win in Iraq, you can't start redeploying. You have to send a lot more troops in to get those Iraqi troops up to speed. What do you make of that?"

From the December 5 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: When I was watching the hearings today, I saw among the senators there at least three potential presidential prospects, you being one of them, Senator McCain being another, Senator Clinton being a third. I know you disagree -- I assume you disagree with Senator McCain on adding another 50,000 or so troops to Iraq. You wouldn't support that, would you?

BAYH: No, I would not. I agree with Senator McCain that having more troops initially was very important and, in fact, the failure to do that is one of the reasons that things have gone so poorly. But at this juncture, adding more American troops is not the answer. The Iraqis have to step up. Only they can solve this. That's where we need to focus.

[...]

BLITZER: The -- Robert Gates, the incoming defense secretary, he was also blunt in responding to Senator John McCain, who's wanted thousands of additional troops to be deployed to Iraq. And he was -- and he was asked, Gates, by McCain, whether there had been enough troops deployed to Iraq after the downfall of Saddam. Listen to what he said.

GATES [video clip]: There clearly were insufficient troops in Iraq after the initial invasion to establish control over the country.

BLITZER: He said when he went there in recent months with the Iraq Study Group, commanders on the ground said that they did have enough troops right now. But what's your sense? Do you have enough troops on the ground to accomplish your mission, General Caldwell?

CALDWELL: Wolf, what I'll tell you is we have enough troops to accomplish the mission that we stated we're going to achieve. If you add more troops, there is no question you're going to have a short-term effect. It will enhance security in the short term. But it won't create a long-term solution. And so, our solution is let's continue to work to develop the additional Iraqi security forces that the prime minister wants to add, let's get them online, let's get them trained and equipped. And if we need additional forces, that's where they'll come from, from the Iraqis.

[...]

BLITZER: Is it too late to do what -- is it too late to do what Senator McCain or Senator Lindsey Graham or Senator John Cornyn want, to dispatch another 50,000 troops to bolster the current U.S. military presence?

CLELAND: Yeah, it's way too late. It's way too late. This is Vietnam 1967, '68. This is [Gen. William] Westmoreland asking for 50,000 more troops, a hundred thousand more troops -- 50,000, a hundred more thousand more troops is not the answer, because the answer, ultimately, is not a military one. It is not -- as General [Hugh] Shelton used to say when he was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the American military is a great hammer, but every problem in the world is not necessarily a nail.

* Blitzer did not appear on the November 21, 22, or 24 editions of CNN's The Situation Room; the program did not air on November 23 or 25.

†Clarification: The paragraph originally contained the following sentences: "However, since the December 5 CNN broadcast, McCain has discussed sending more than 20,000 troops. As the Chicago Tribune noted, McCain said on December 6 in response to the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report: 'We must have more troops over there ... Maybe 20,000 more Marines, and 80,000 Army.' " While the item accurately quoted a December 6 Tribune article, the Tribune truncated McCain's quote to change the meaning of McCain's statement. A video clip of McCain on the December 6 edition of Fox News' Special Report and on a December 6 post on CNN.com's blog Political Ticker shows more of McCain's statement: "We must have more troops over there; that has to be accompanied by a larger Marine Corps and Army -- maybe 20,000 more Marines and 80,000 more Army troops -- so we can handle whatever's necessary." It appears that McCain's advocacy for "maybe 20,000 more Marines and 80,000 more Army troops" refers to an overall increase of 100,000 members of the U.S. armed forces, not an increase in 100,000 combat troops in Iraq. Based on the Tribune article, this paragraph also originally distinguished between the purported McCain plan to send 100,000 troops to Iraq and "McCain's original plan to send 20,000 more troops."