February 11, 2009 5:39 PM

Senate Panel Unanimously Recommends Gates

(CBS/AP)  Robert Gates won approval by a Senate panel Tuesday to be the next defense secretary after telling the senators the U.S. is not winning the war in Iraq and there could be a "regional conflagration" if the country is not stabilized.

At a Senate confirmation hearing that was long on praise for Gates and short on criticism, the man President Bush picked to replace Donald H. Rumsfeld said he is open to new ideas about altering the U.S. course in Iraq. He said the war would be his highest priority if confirmed as expected.

A vote by the full Senate could come Wednesday or at least by the end of the week.

In a closed-door meeting following five hours of open testimony, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 21-0 to recommend approval of Gates' nomination, said panel chairman John Warner, R-Va.

If confirmed, Gates said he planned to visit U.S. commanders and troops in Iraq "quite soon."

Gates, 63, said he believes Mr. Bush wants to see Iraq improve to the point where it can govern and defend itself and that may require a new approach. "What we are now doing is not satisfactory," Gates said.

"In my view, all options are on the table in terms of how we address this problem in Iraq," he said. He did not commit to any specific new course, saying he would consult first with commanders and others.

Asked directly by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., whether the U.S. is winning in Iraq, Gates replied, "No, sir." He later said he believes the United States is neither winning nor losing "at this point."

But should the U.S. lose, Gates predicted a much wider war, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.

"If we mishandle the next year or two and we leave Iraq in crisis, we will have a regional conflict on our hands," Gates said.

At the outset of an afternoon session of questions about Iraq and other subjects, Gates began by telling the committee he wanted to amplify on his remark in the morning about not winning in Iraq. He did not withdraw the remark but said, "I want to make clear that that pertains to the situation in Iraq as a whole."

He said he did not want U.S. troops to think he believes they are being unsuccessful in their assigned missions.

"Our military wins the battles that we fight," Gates said. "Where we're having our challenges, frankly, are in the areas of stabilization and political developments and so on."

But for most of the session, Gates spoke with the freedom of a man who played no role in formulating the current strategy. He bluntly criticized decisions made early in the war, including the number of U.S. troops, Martin reports.

At the White House, press secretary Tony Snow was pressed by reporters about Gates' answer that the U.S. is not winning in Iraq — one that seemed to be in conflict with the president's own position.

Snow said that Gates' testimony, taken in its entirety, showed he shares Mr. Bush's view that the U.S. must help Iraq govern and defend itself.

"I know you want to pit a fight between Bob Gates and the president. It doesn't exist," Snow told reporters.

Gates was noncommittal on questions about whether and when to begin a U.S. troop withdrawal, saying it "depends on the conditions on the ground." He also said that if confirmed he would go to Iraq soon to consult with U.S. commanders.

Asked later whether announcing a specific troop withdrawal timetable would send a signal of U.S. weakness, Gates said it "would essentially tell (the insurgents) how long they have to wait until we're gone."

The hearing was nonconfrontational, with occasional hints of humor from Gates. Much of the questioning from panel members was focused on whether he would provide independent advice to Mr. Bush, and the former CIA director assured the committee that he would not shirk from that duty.



© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Add a Comment See all 76 Comments
by rsoxfan1123 December 6, 2006 12:56 PM EST
By admitting the mess we're in Gates is hoping to mend some bridges with dems that Junior now has to work with, and at by implication add to the scapegoat legacy Rumsfield has taken with him. The bottom line is that until we wake up and realize what a disaster this is and get our troops home we will continue to waste lives, limbs and dollars in this endless black hole. Future generations will ask why we waited so long to pull out and viliify those that chose to "Stay the Course a Little Longer", much as they are now beginning to point the finger at everyone that voted for this war.
Reply to this comment
by grumpas December 6, 2006 12:50 PM EST
He might as well be confirmed! All Bush knows is how to recycle some tired old Republican's!
Reply to this comment
by bushrocks1 December 6, 2006 12:47 PM EST
Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front being a big one. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.
Reply to this comment
by mh4cbs1 December 6, 2006 2:50 AM EST
patriotic9

sorry about that - I thought you were this other real jerk with patriot in his name. Wasn't you. my mistake
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup December 6, 2006 2:19 AM EST
You as well... good evening all!
Reply to this comment
by atl_993 December 6, 2006 2:17 AM EST
Hope to chat tomorrow. Stay well
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup December 6, 2006 2:13 AM EST
SADLY, you are right I'm afraid.
Reply to this comment
by atl_993 December 6, 2006 2:11 AM EST
there will always be another like him
Reply to this comment
by atl_993 December 6, 2006 2:09 AM EST
then tomorrow when you are logged on you can open up the word document.. copy the text then paste it into the text box here... simple
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup December 6, 2006 2:09 AM EST
besides, I'm not sure I EVER want to exchange dialogue with "STRIPPERFAG" again, anyway!
Reply to this comment
See all 76 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook