Pentagon Extends Military Tours; McCain Defends War Policy

JIM LEHRER:

David, what do you think of this idea that's going around of creating a war czar for Iraq and Afghanistan?

DAVID BROOKS, Columnist, New York Times:

Well, when the patriots threw the tea over the Boston Harbor in 1775, or whenever that is, they tried to get rid of a king. I don't think they wanted a czar to replace it.

And we have a president. We have a secretary of defense. We have people who are supposed to be running this war. What do we need a czar for? I just don't understand. We've got generals; we've got a whole apparatus. They're supposed to be running the war. The president should be obsessed about the war. Why do we need czar?

And the only reason I can think of is that they think the president doesn't have credibility to talk about it in public and they want another public face.

JIM LEHRER:

What do you think is going on, Mark?

MARK SHIELDS, Syndicated Columnist:

Jim, the problem with Iraq and the United States policy in Iraq is not an organizational chart. And it's not whether there's vertical lines or horizontal lines or whatever else.

First of all, I thought General Petraeus was the answer to all the prayers, that he was totally in charge, that he had the roadmap to success and all the rest of it. When you have an idea, which is a bad idea, I think, and then you float it…

JIM LEHRER:

You mean the czar idea?

MARK SHIELDS:

… the czar idea, by being rejected by three people, including the general, General Keane, who had been the principal advocate of the surge, and you get Jack Sheehan, Marine general, saying…

JIM LEHRER:

Those guys don't know what they're doing over there.

MARK SHIELDS:

… these guys have no idea what they're doing over there, I mean, it's just one more "the gang that couldn't shoot straight."