[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2003, Book II)]
[December 15, 2003]
[Pages 1721-1732]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference
December 15, 2003

    The President. Thank you all. Please be seated. Thank you for coming 
to this, the last press conference of the year 2003.
    Before I begin, I do want to talk a little bit about a meeting I 
just attended. Rend al-Rahim is here--
she's the representative from the Iraqi Government, the interim 
Government, to the United States--as well as Dr. Khadir Abbas, who is the interim Minister of Health. We just had an 
interesting discussion in the Roosevelt Room about the health needs of 
Iraq, about the future of the health care system in Iraq. And we were 
joined by doctors, Iraqi doctors who were anxious to work with their 
fellow counterparts here in America to enhance educational opportunities 
and to get caught up on the latest technologies in health care. The 
thing that struck me about the meeting was the kind of joy that they 
expressed about being free. It was a touching meeting, and I want to 
thank you all for coming.
    And Doc, I want to thank you for your good 
work. We are making progress together in improving the lives of your 
citizens with better health care. Immunization rates are up. People are 
getting better health care. He was reminding 
me, I think

[[Page 1722]]

the budget of Saddam Hussein's Government for 
health was, like, $16 million, less than a dollar per person. And of 
course, we're spending a lot more than that now on health care in Iraq. 
But it was a very meaningful meeting. I want to thank you--please thank 
those good docs for being there.
    This weekend's capture of Saddam Hussein 
was a great moment for the people of Iraq. Iraqi citizens have lost a 
source of fear, and they can now focus with confidence on the task of 
creating a hopeful and self-governing nation. With the capture of the 
former dictator, the enemies of a free Iraq have lost their leader, and 
they've lost any hope of regaining power. The nightmare of the Ba'athist 
tyranny is finally over.
    The terrorists in Iraq remain dangerous. The work of our coalition 
remains difficult and will require further sacrifice. Yet, it should now 
be clear to all, Iraq is on the path to freedom, and a free Iraq will 
serve the peace and security of America and the world.
    This achievement comes at the end of an extraordinary year for our 
country, abroad and here at home. In 2003, we have become a safer, more 
prosperous, and better nation. Our Armed Forces, joined by our allies, 
continue on the offensive against terrorist enemies around the world. We 
continue our systematic hunt for Al Qaida leaders and Al Qaida cells in 
many countries. I want to thank the Congress for standing behind our 
military with needed resources and for giving vital support to the work 
of reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    America's economy is growing at a robust pace and beginning to 
generate new jobs for America, American workers. I want to thank the 
Congress for passing my jobs-and-growth package, which is doing just 
what it was supposed to do. And we will continue pursuing a progrowth 
agenda next year.
    In this year of accomplishment, we passed Medicare reform. American 
seniors can now look forward to prescription drug coverage, more 
choices, and a stronger Medicare system. I want to thank the Congress 
for coming together to get the job done.
    This session of Congress has also produced vital action on homeland 
security, healthy forests, global AIDS relief, housing assistance, 
adoption, Amber alerts to capture kidnapers and rescue their victims, 
and protection of children from partial-birth abortion. Members of both 
political parties can take pride in the important goals we have met by 
working together.
    We have a great deal to show for our efforts in 2003. Yet, 
unfinished business remains. The majority in both Houses support a 
comprehensive energy bill as well as reforms in class action to curtail 
junk lawsuits. The House also passed a medical liability reform bill. It 
is stuck in the Senate. These measures were blocked, and they are 
needed. They are needed to help America become more prosperous, and 
they're needed to help America be a better place. When the House and 
Senate return in January, there will be more to do, and I look forward 
to working with them. I've got a few ideas about what we can do together 
in the year 2004.
    As we end 2003, we have a lot to be thankful for, especially for the 
fine men and women who wear our country's uniform and who will spend 
their holidays far from home. I hope all Americans will keep these brave 
men and women in their thoughts and prayers during this blessed season.
    I will take some questions, starting with AP man [Terence Hunt, 
Associated Press].

Trial of Saddam Hussein

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. What's the United States going to do 
with Saddam Hussein after questioning him? Will he be turned over to 
Iraqis for trial? And based

[[Page 1723]]

on what you know now about mass executions and hundreds of thousands of 
graves, do you think that execution should be an option?
    The President. He will be detained. We will work with the Iraqis to 
develop a way to try him in a--that will stand international scrutiny, I 
guess is the best way to put it.
    I shared my sentiments today with Prime Minister Martin of Canada. 
He asked me about Saddam Hussein and his trial. I said, ``Look, the 
Iraqis need to be very much involved. He was the person that--they were 
the people that were brutalized by this man.'' He murdered them. He 
gassed them. He tortured them. He had rape rooms. And they need to be 
very much involved in the process, and we'll work with the Iraqis to 
develop a process.
    And of course we want it to be fair. And of course we want the world 
to say, ``Well, this--he got a fair trial,'' because whatever justice is 
meted out needs to stand international scrutiny. I've got my own 
personal views of how he ought to be treated, but that's--I'm not an 
Iraqi citizen. It's going to be up to the Iraqis to make those 
decisions.
    Q. And the question of execution?
    The President. Yes, I said I have my personal views, and this is a 
brutal dictator. He's a person who killed a lot of people. But my views, 
my personal views, aren't important in this matter. What matters is the 
views of the Iraqi citizens. And we need to work, of course, with them 
to develop a system that is fair and--where he will be put on trial and 
will be brought to justice, the justice he didn't, by the way, afford 
any of his own fellow citizens.
    Steve [Steve Holland, Reuters].

U.S. Policy in Iraq

    Q. Thank you, sir. Will Saddam's capture accelerate the timetable 
for pulling U.S. troops out and increase the likelihood of getting more 
foreign troops involved?
    The President. We will stay the course until the job is done, Steve. 
And the temptation is to try to get the President or somebody to put a 
timetable on the definition of getting the job done. We're just going to 
stay the course. And it's very important for the Iraqi people to know 
that. I've expressed that to Rend; I've 
told that to the Iraqi citizens with whom I have met on a regular basis.
    I tell them two things: One, you can count on America remaining 
until the job is done. And it's important for them to hear that, because 
there will probably be some that will continue to test our will. They'll 
try to kill in hopes that we will flee, and the citizens of Iraq need to 
know we will stay the course. I also tell them that now is a chance to 
seize the opportunity and show the world that which this Government 
believes, and that is, you're plenty capable of governing yourself.
    And the level of the troops in Iraq will depend upon the security 
situation on the ground, and those decisions will be made by our 
commanders. I have not changed my philosophy of how a President ought to 
act during wartime, which is to set the strategy, lay out the goals, and 
empower the military people, both civilian and uniform, to make the 
decisions necessary to achieve the objective. And they will make those 
recommendations about troop levels and what is necessary to--go ahead--
you've got a followup? This is part of the holiday spirit, to give you a 
followup. [Laughter]

Possible Expansion of Coalition in Iraq

    Q. [Inaudible]--opportunity to get more foreign troops involved?
    The President. Well, listen, we're constantly working to get foreign 
countries involved, but I want to remind you we've got over 60 nations 
involved now. When you hear me talk about ``our'' efforts, I'm talking 
about the efforts of a lot of countries. We've got a large coalition 
involved, and of course we will accept the willingness of nations to put 
troops on the ground.

[[Page 1724]]

We're continuing to work, whether it be troops on the ground or 
construction contracts or loans. We're constantly reaching out to more 
nations to get them involved in the process.
    And after all, there is a reason why nations should be involved in 
the process. A secure and free Iraq is in their national interest. A 
free country, a peaceful country in the heart of the Middle East is in 
the interest of all nations. This is a transforming event. The emergence 
of a peaceful Iraq will transform the region in a positive way that will 
make it more likely that the world is peaceful. And that we're 
constantly talking about that message and encouraging people to 
participate.
    Gregory [David Gregory, NBC News].

Saddam Hussein

    Q. Mr. President, good morning. When Saddam emerged from his hole on 
Saturday, he told a U.S. soldier that he was willing to negotiate. Might 
there be room for negotiation, perhaps in exchange for a public 
statement to the Iraqi people that may serve your interest? And 
secondly, this soldier also said to Saddam, reportedly, that President 
Bush sends his greetings. You say this is not personal, but you've also 
pointed out this was a man who tried to murder your father. What is your 
greeting to him?
    The President. Good riddance. The world is better off without you, 
Mr. Saddam Hussein. I find it very interesting that when the heat got 
on, you dug yourself a hole, and you crawled in it. And our brave 
troops, combined with good intelligence, found you. And you'll be 
brought to justice, something you did not afford the people you 
brutalized in your own country.
    And what was the first part of the question?
    Q. I know you'd scoffed at the idea of negotiation. What I'm asking 
you----
    The President. Oh, yes, yes. How do you know I scoffed at it? 
Laughing does not mean scoffing, but--[laughter].
    Q. Oh, I know, I'm just saying----
    Q. There were others who were scoffing. [Laughter]
    The President. Okay.
    Q. If you were to do something that you might view as constructive, 
like making a public statement, a video statement?
    The President. David, it's just way too early to tell. First of all, 
I don't trust Saddam Hussein. I don't believe he'll tell the truth. He 
didn't tell the truth for over a decade. I just can't believe he's going 
to change his ways just because he happens to be captured. And so I 
don't think we ought to trust his word.
    I think what needs to happen is, he needs to be brought to justice, 
and the Iraqi citizens need to be very much involved in the development 
of a system that brings him to justice. And there needs to be a public 
trial, and all the atrocities need to come out, and justice needs to be 
delivered. And I'm confident it will be done in a fair way.
    Terry [Terry Moran, ABC News].

France and Germany

    Q. Mr. President, do you believe that the capture of Saddam Hussein 
will bridge some of the differences, the bitter differences that have 
arisen in the world over Iraq? Or do you believe that the Iraq war marks 
a dividing line, perhaps a long-term dividing line, between those 
countries which fought to topple Saddam Hussein and those which did not?
    The President. Interesting question. I think that--well, first of 
all, as I want to repeat, there's over 60 nations involved in the 
reconstruction of Iraq now. So there's a--a lot of people are 
participating, and we're out working to encourage others to participate.
    You're talking--what you're talking about is France and Germany, if 
the truth be known, if I might clarify your question to me. Look, France 
and Germany--I have reached out to them. They've reached out to us. It's 
in our national interests we work together. A whole and united and 
peaceful

[[Page 1725]]

Europe is in this country's interest, and we look forward to working 
with them on a wide range of issues, whether it be intelligence sharing 
or in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. I want to remind you, Germany 
has committed troops to Afghanistan. It's in this country's interest 
that Afghanistan emerge as a peaceful country. Germany is contributing 
to that effort. There's a lot of areas where we do work together.
    We had a disagreement on this issue about Saddam Hussein and his threat. I obviously felt like September the 
11th changed the equation to the point where we needed to deal with 
emerging threats and deal with them in a way that would make America 
more secure. And they didn't see that; they didn't agree with that point 
of view. I can understand that. And we are now reaching out to them, by 
the way--Jim Baker, as you know, will be 
going to both those two countries tomorrow, I think it is, to encourage 
them to work with us on debt relief, all aimed at encouraging the 
development of a free and peaceful Iraq.
    So, no, I don't agree that this is a dividing line. I think this is 
a disagreement on this particular issue. And I know that we can work 
together on a variety of other issues, and I'll cite one example, Iran. 
I was most pleased that the French and Germans as well as the Brits 
delivered a very strong message to the Iranian Government about the 
development of a nuclear weapon. It was a message that we agree with, 
and that is: Don't do so; otherwise there will be international 
consequences at the United Nations. And it was a very important message 
to be delivered. We agreed on that. And working together, it made it 
easier for us to send that message.
    John [John Roberts, CBS News]. Working my way across here.

President's Course of Action/2004 Elections

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. The capture of Saddam Hussein is 
something that has been universally applauded. But there still remain a 
lot of lingering questions about the postwar phase of Iraq. This 
administration has stated that it would like to see an interim Iraqi 
Government stood up by next June, the ability to be able to begin to 
draw down troops if that's possible. Even a political novice would have 
to say, well, there appears to be some political component to all this, 
some way of making real progress ahead of the November elections.
    The President. Yes, well, people can read whatever they want to read 
into it. My job is to keep America secure. That's my job. I've got a 
solemn duty to do everything I can to protect the American people. I 
will never forget the lessons of September the 11th, 2001. Terrorists 
attacked us. They killed thousands of our fellow citizens. And it could 
happen again, and therefore, I will deal with threats, threats that are 
emerging and real.
    We gave Saddam Hussein plenty of time to 
heed the demands of the world, and he chose defiance. He did. He said, 
``Forget it. I don't care what the United Nations has said over a 
decade. I don't care about all the resolutions passed.'' He chose 
defiance. We acted. And I acted because I--I repeat--I have a duty to 
protect this country. And I will continue to protect the country, so 
long as I'm the President of the United States.
    A free and peaceful Iraq is part of protecting America, because, I 
told you before, and I truly believe this, this will be a transforming 
event in a part of the world where hatred and violence are bred, a part 
of a world that breeds resentment.
    And you know, look, we're going into an election; there's going to 
be plenty of time for politics. And people can debate all they want. I'm 
going to do my job. That's what I'm going to do. I'm going to do my job 
to make this country safer, and I believe we're making good progress 
toward that objective.
    Angle [Jim Angle, FOX News].

[[Page 1726]]

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Until recently, a growing number of 
Americans and a couple of Presidential candidates were saying it might 
be time to think about getting out of Iraq. I know you said that you 
intend to stay the course, but I wonder what your view is of such 
sentiments, how concerned you are about that view among the public, and 
whether or not you think Saddam's capture should change people's 
thinking?
    The President. You know, I think Saddam's 
capture should make it clear to the people of Iraq, most importantly, 
that he's through, that people can no longer--no longer have to hold 
back their sentiments and their feelings toward living in a free society 
because he might reemerge. That's the most important thing about this 
capture, is that he can no longer provide any excuse for some who were 
afraid to act.
    And I can understand why people would be afraid to act in Iraq, 
afraid that Saddam might come back. After all, he's a torturer and a 
killer. I met with a doctor today. The guy took me aside and he said, 
``I want to thank you. My dad was murdered by Saddam Hussein.'' A lot of people share that sentiment, by the way, 
because it's happened to them. And you can understand why people feared 
him. After all, he stayed in power by fear, by ruling through fear.
    And you know, Jim, I will make the decisions based upon what I think 
is right to achieve the objectives I've outlined, the objectives I 
outlined prior to freeing Iraq from Saddam Hussein, and that is to make this country more secure and the 
world more free.
    And I'm confident people aren't going to agree with every decision I 
make. I understand that, and I don't expect people to agree with every 
decision I make. But regardless of whether they do or not, I'm going to 
continue making the decisions in the way that I think is best for the 
country. And there will be ample time to have the debate about whether 
or not it's the right strategy or not. I look forward to the debate. I 
look forward to making my case to the American people about why America 
is more secure today based upon the decisions that I've made.
    As I said, there's ample time for politics. I know you all want to 
jump the gun. It makes exciting news. It makes the stories more 
interesting and more vital from your perspective. Let me just--so that 
we can get this straight early in the process, I take my job seriously. 
I will do my job, and I look forward to the political debate later on. 
So I'm confident during the numerous press conferences I'll be having 
next year, just like I had this year, that you'll be asking me questions 
about this political statement or that political statement. And my 
answer is going to be the same until I'm ready to engage, and that is--
let me just tell you what the strategy is of this administration--forget 
politics--the strategy that I've outlined in order to do my solemn duty, 
and my duty is not only to keep the country more secure but more 
prosperous and a better country as well.
    Dana [Dana Milbank, Washington Post].

Federal Deficit

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. The dollar has fallen quite sharply. 
Wall Street is increasingly worried about the deficit--sorry--Wall 
Street is increasingly worried about the deficit. Will you have a 
specific plan for reducing the deficit, or will economic growth alone 
take care of the problem?
    The President. Yes. No, I appreciate that question. Josh 
Bolten laid out a plan that will shrink the 
deficit in half in a 5-year period, and that's based upon reasonable 
growth assumptions. And it's a plan that depends upon Congress to 
continue to hold the line on spending.
    We have a deficit because of, one, a recession, two, a war. I want 
to remind you all that in order to fight and win the war, it requires a 
expenditure of money that is commiserate with keeping a promise to our

[[Page 1727]]

troops to make sure that they're well-paid, well-trained, well-equipped. 
And so we've exceeded--we've spent a lot on defense budgets in order to 
win the war. We've also spent a lot of money to secure our homeland.
    And then of course, there was the tax relief, a stimulus package 
which was necessary to make sure that we had ample revenues coming into 
the Treasury in the first place. See, without the tax relief package, 
there would have been a deficit, but there wouldn't have been the 
commiserate--not ``commiserate''--the kick to our economy that occurred 
as a result of the tax relief. And the tax relief is working.
    When the Senate finishes its work on the appropriations bill, we 
will have held discretionary spending to 4 percent, and that's what we 
agreed to with the Congress during the budget negotiations.
    I want to remind you of a fact that I think you'll find 
interesting--or maybe you won't find interesting, but I find it 
interesting--that non-military, non-homeland-security discretionary 
spending was at 15 percent--increase from year to year was at 15 percent 
prior to our arrival; then it was at 6 percent, 5 percent, and 3 
percent. So we're working with Congress to hold the line on spending. 
And we do have a plan to cut the deficit in half.
    Sanger [David Sanger, New York Times].

Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction/North Korea

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, it's been 9 months now, 
and still there is relatively little evidence of WMD in Iraq. In 
retrospect, if you think back over the year, would you have been better 
to make more of your--of the argument that you've made in recent times, 
that democratization in the Middle East was the reason to go to war, 
rather than WMD?
    And since the CIA has been telling you that North Korea does have 
two or more weapons, what lesson should Kim Chong-il draw from the 
capture of Saddam Hussein?
    The President. Very deft at weaving in two questions there. Here's 
what I took away from September the 11th, 2001, that any time a 
President sees a gathering threat to the United States, we must deal 
with it. We can't pick or choose like we used to, could in the past. In 
the old days, oceans protected us from harm's way, and a President could 
stand back and say, ``Well, maybe this gathering threat is an issue. 
Maybe it's not.'' After September the 11th, that complacency, I guess 
may be the right word, no longer is relevant. And therefore, I began to 
assess threats.
    And the threat of Saddam Hussein was a 
unique threat in this sense: The world recognized he was a threat for 12 
years and 17 resolutions, I think it is--I believe it was 17 
resolutions--for the resolution counter, give me a hand here--17? 
Seventeen resolutions. And he ignored them. He just treated the U.N. as 
an empty debating society, as if their resolutions meant nothing. This 
is a person who has used chemical weapons before, which indicated to me 
he was a threat. He invaded his neighbors before. This is a person who 
was defiant. He's a deceiver, and he was a murderer in his own country. 
He was a threat.
    And so I went to the United Nations, as you recall, September the 
12th, 2002, and said to the United Nations, ``Let's work together to 
disarm this man. You recognized he had arms. 
We recognize he's got arms. Let's disarm him.'' And 1441 came about. 
It's when the world spoke in--through the United Nations Security 
Council with one voice and in a unanimous voice said, ``Disarm, or there 
will be serious consequences.'' In other words, they agreed that Saddam 
was a threat, and so we moved to disarm him. In other words, there were 
serious consequences because he was defiant.
    Since then, David Kay has reported back that 
he had weapons programs that would have put him in material breach of 
1441.

[[Page 1728]]

What that means, of course, is that had David Kay been the lead 
inspector and had done the work that he did prior to our removal of 
Saddam, he would have reported back to the U.N. Security Council that 
Saddam was, in fact, in breach of the Council resolutions that were 
passed.
    Secondly, North Korea--one of the things, David, I think you've seen 
about our foreign policy is that I'm reluctant to use military power. 
It's the last choice. It's not our first choice. And in Iraq, there was 
a lot of diplomacy that took place before there was any military action. 
There was diplomacy prior to my arrival, diplomacy during my time here, 
and we tried all means and methodologies to achieve the objective, which 
was a more secure America, by using diplomatic means and persuasion.
    In North Korea, we're now in the process of using diplomatic means 
and persuasion to convince Kim Chong-il to get 
rid of his nuclear weapons program. And that's changed by altering the 
dynamics between the United States and North Korea this way, by inviting 
other parties to be stakeholders in the process. And that's been 
successful thus far, of convincing others that they have a stake in the 
process.
    This started in Crawford with Jiang Zemin, 
where we held a joint press conference, and he stepped out and said that 
we share a common goal, and that is a nuclear-weapons-free Peninsula--
and as you know full well, that the relationship has evolved beyond just 
a statement, where we're now coparticipants in the process of convincing 
Kim Chong-il to change his ways. And that's 
exactly where we are in the process. And I'm pleased with the progress 
we're making, and I hope, of course, he listens.
    Suzanne [Suzanne Malveaux, Cable News Network].

Iraqi Reconstruction Contracts

    Q. Mr. President, you have justified your policy in awarding prime 
Iraq contracts to members of the Coalition Authority because of their 
sacrifice with the war in Iraq. At the same time, your administration 
has indicated some room for negotiation. Your critics have called this 
retaliation and even blackmail. How do you respond to that, and how is 
this policy helpful in generating international support?
    The President. There are over 60 nations involved in Iraq. Let's 
make sure everybody--let's all start from the same basis, if you don't 
mind. So there is international support. When you say there's over 60 
nations involved in Iraq, that means that there's international support 
in Iraq. Again, I think you're talking about one or two countries, if 
I'm not mistaken. And we're reaching out to them, and we want them to 
participate. But the idea of spending taxpayers' money on contracts to 
firms that did not participate in the initial thrust is just something I 
wasn't going to do. And you know what? The American taxpayers understand 
that. They understand that clearly. That's not to say there's not other 
ways to participate, and we look forward to including them in the 
process.
    Stretch--Big Stretch [Bill Sammon, Washington Times]. I'm sorry. 
[Laughter]

Howard Dean

    Q. I know you said there will be a time for politics. But you've 
also said you wanted to change the tone in Washington. Howard Dean 
recently seemed to muse aloud whether you had advance knowledge of 9/11. 
Do you agree or disagree with the RNC that this kind of rhetoric borders 
on political hate speech?
    The President. There's time for politics. And, you know--there's 
time for politics, and I--it's an absurd insinuation.

Immigration Policy

    Q. In that case, sir, can I follow up on something unrelated? 
[Laughter] Tom Ridge recently seemed to discuss something you had talked 
about pre-9/11, and that is finding a way to legalize some of the

[[Page 1729]]

illegal immigrants in this country. Could you clarify your policy, what 
it is, short of blanket amnesty?
    The President. Yes. Well, first of all, I have constantly said that 
we need to have a immigration policy that helps match any willing 
employer with any willing employee. It makes sense that that policy go 
forward. And we're in the process of working that through now so I can 
make a recommendation to the Congress.
    Let me also clarify something. This administration is firmly against 
blanket amnesty.
    Let's see here. Judy [Judy Keen, USA Today].

Situation in Iraq/War on Terror

    Q. Mr. President, do you have a sense yet of how involved Saddam 
Hussein was in planning and directing attacks on coalition troops? 
Should the American people expect that those attacks will now decrease, 
or should they be prepared that they might, in the short term, get 
worse?
    The President. To answer your question, we're--the Defense 
Department will try to learn more from Saddam Hussein as time goes on. And secondly, I believe there will be 
more violence, because I believe there's holdovers of Saddam that are 
frustrated, and I believe there are foreign terrorists that cannot stand 
the thought of a free Iraq emerging in the Middle East. This is a--a 
free Iraq will be a defeat for those who believe in violence and murder 
and mayhem. And they will try to resist us there.
    And that's--I do believe that there are going to be some people who 
are persuaded that since Saddam Hussein has been captured, that he will 
never return, and therefore, they need to be a part of the emergence of 
a free Iraq and a free society and that there--and it's going to be very 
important for the Iraqi authorities to reach out to those people and 
talk about a system that guarantees minority rights and a system which 
says that for some the future is bright.
    And I think when people begin to realize that, when people begin--
that were--I would call them fence-sitters--when people begin to realize 
that the Saddam regime is gone forever and that the new society that 
will emerge will be a fair society, it will protect people, and protect 
people from the--protect them based upon their own religious views, for 
example, guarantee them rights--that's what I mean by ``protect''--that 
it's more likely people will begin to sign on to the future of Iraq. And 
that's positive. It's a very hopeful thing.
    But there will be terrorists, and they want to fight us. Remember 
this is--Iraq is a battle in the war on terror. The war on terror is 
being fought on many fronts, and some of them obviously more visible 
than others. Obviously, the Afghanistan front was a visible front. Iraq 
is a visible front. The Philippines, for example, is a front in the war 
on terror against Abu Sayyaf, and we've had fairly stealthy operations 
there to bring the leadership of Abu Sayyaf to justice.
    The war on terror encompasses more than just military action, of 
course, or the use of special force strike teams. Cutting off money is 
an important part in the war on terror. And so, Judy, it's very 
important for people to put this--Iraq in a broader context about a war 
that will continue on.
    The reason I bring that up is that these--the enemy, the terrorists, 
the killers may continue to try to strike in Iraq. They think they may 
be able to defeat us there. Yesterday was a clear signal to them that 
they won't be able to.
    The other thing that's happening in Iraq that's positive, and I 
think this--some of you, your papers and broadcasts have picked this 
up--is that the intelligence on the ground is getting better. It's 
getting richer. There's--what they call actionable intelligence, to 
which our military's responding on a quick basis, is improving. And 
that's a very important development

[[Page 1730]]

because, as you notice, when there's a hole in the ground and a person 
is able to crawl into it, in a country the size of California, it means 
we're on a scavenger hunt for terror. And the best way to find these 
terrorists who hide in holes is to get people coming forth to describe 
the location of the hole, is to give clues and data.
    And we're on it. Our military is responding, and our intelligence 
services are doing very good work. And it's just a long process that 
requires patience and perseverance. And yesterday's arrest of this 
tyrant and killer was a good example of persistence and fine tuning 
intelligence and gathering information and the hard work necessary to 
find people who are willing to hide in holes.
    Other Stretch [Richard Keil, Bloomberg News].

Economic Growth/Monetary Policy

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. At the outset you said that you will 
pursue next year, the election year, a progrowth agenda. Up until now, 
``progrowth'' in this administration has largely been synonymous with 
tax cuts. Can you rule out the possibility of further tax cut proposals 
next year?
    The President. You know, Stretch, it's a trick question. [Laughter] 
It's not very generous of you during the holiday season. [Laughter]
    First of all, I'm pleased with the economic growth that we've seen. 
I believe the economy is strong. I believe it's getting stronger. I'm 
pleased with the productivity numbers. I appreciate the fact that 
durable--orders for durable goods are up. It looks like the 
manufacturing sector is strengthening.
    And what I've been referring to, in terms of progrowth, are an 
energy bill, good tort reform coming out of the Congress. I thought we 
had a chance to get some this year. It got stuck, unfortunately, in the 
Senate. In my judgment, it was a mistake. It was a mistake not to let 
class-action lawsuit reform go forward. It was a mistake not to get 
asbestos reform, a mistake not to get medical liability reform. All 
three of those measures, in my judgment, obviously, are justifiable 
reforms at the Federal level which would have made a difference in terms 
of a progrowth environment. We need more regulatory relief. We certainly 
need to send a signal to the capital markets that we're going to 
maintain spending discipline. Dana talked about the deficit. He also 
mentioned the strong dollar.
    And by the way, I didn't answer that part of your question. I'll get 
back there right now. Part of the economic policy of this administration 
is a strong dollar policy. We fully expect markets to set the dollar. 
But we have a strong dollar policy, which is, in our judgment, good for 
the economic vitality of this country. And so we'll see, is the answer 
to your question.
    Yes, Ed [Ed Chen, Los Angeles Times].

Trial of Saddam Hussein

    Q. Mr. President, you said earlier this morning that in a trial, 
that all of Saddam's atrocities be brought up. He was in power more than 
30 years--probably would make for a long rap sheet. Do you believe----
    The President. Well, Ed, you're not supposed to prejudge.
    Q. I'm just counting the years.
    The President. Okay, good.
    Q. Do you believe that the invasion of Kuwait in 1990 should be 
included, as well as his assassination attempt against former President 
Bush?
    The President. Ed, that will all be decided by the lawyers. And I 
will instruct this Government to make sure the system includes the Iraqi 
citizens and make sure the process stands in--withstands international 
scrutiny. But we'll let the lawyers handle all that, and as you know, 
I'm not a lawyer. And I delegate, and I'm going to delegate this to the 
legal community, which will be reviewing all this matter.
    Tamara [Tamara Lipper, Newsweek].

[[Page 1731]]

Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction

    Q. Thank you, sir. Given your skepticism about Saddam Hussein's 
ability to tell the truth, do you think his interrogation might help 
resolve any lingering questions about what he did with his weapons of 
mass destruction and his ties to terrorist groups?
    The President. I don't know. I would think not. I mean, 
he's a deceiver. He's a liar. He's a 
torturer. He's a murderer. I can't imagine why he would change his 
attitude, since he'll be treated humanely by the U.S. coalition--U.S. 
troops. And you know, I would be very skeptical of anything he said, one 
way or the other, I might add. You just don't know. He's a--he's just--
he is what he is. He's a person that was willing to destroy his country 
and to kill a lot of his fellow citizens. He's a person who used weapons 
of mass destruction against citizens in his own country. And so it's--he 
is the kind of person that is untrustworthy, and I'd be very cautious 
about relying upon his word in any way, shape, or form.
    Yes.
    Q. Mr. President----
    The President. Yes, Bob [Bob Deans, Cox Newspapers].

The Presidency/Capture of Saddam Hussein

    Q. ----when you asked the American people for their support 3 years 
ago, there was no way anyone could have imagined the nature of the job 
you would have before you. If you had known then what you know now, sir, 
would you have wanted the job? Would you have had any hesitation----
    The President. That's an interesting question.
    Q. ----about asking the American people for it? Now, I have to ask 
you since we're here, sir, have you chatted with your dad since Saddam 
was captured?
    The President. He called me--let me answer your first question. I 
absolutely would have wanted the job. I have come to realize this job is 
a magnificent job because you have a chance to use the position of the 
United States of America to achieve peace and freedom. And that is a 
rare opportunity for any person. I put together a fantastic 
administration to help me with this task. I feel very comfortable in the 
job because I've got great advice and advisers to whom I--get good 
advice from great advisers to whom I listen. I am comfortable delegating 
the awesome responsibilities of, in this administration's case, war two 
times to incredibly capable and brave people.
    At home, this job affords the opportunity to capture what I call the 
American spirit and to call people to serve in their communities and 
their neighborhoods and to help people who hurt. It's a fantastic 
opportunity to try to lift up this country so everybody can realize its 
full potential. I absolutely would seek the office again, and I intend 
to do so in '04, by the way. [Laughter]
    I talked to my Dad. He called me Sunday morning. I got the call from 
Donald Rumsfeld Saturday afternoon and 
made the decision there, until I was more certain about the facts, that 
I would talk to very few people. I talked to Condi and asked her to call Andy, and I talked to Vice President Cheney. Because what I didn't want to have happen is that there 
would be this rush of enthusiasm and hope and then all of a sudden it 
would turn out not to be the person that we would hope it would be. So I 
didn't talk to my family. I told Laura, of 
course, and pretty much went to bed early Saturday night.
    And Condi woke me at 5:15 in the 
morning, which was okay this time. [Laughter] Just don't do it again. 
[Laughter] But she said that Jerry Bremer had just called her and they were prepared to say this 
was Saddam Hussein, in which case we got 
dressed and hustled over to the Oval Office to start making calls. One 
of the calls I did receive was from my dad, and it was a very brief 
conversation. He just said, ``Congratulations. It's a great day for the 
country.'' And I said, ``It's a greater day for the Iraqi people.''

[[Page 1732]]

    And that's what I believe. I believe that yesterday was a day--or 
Saturday, when we captured Saddam, it was a 
day where America is more secure as a result of his capture. But more 
importantly, Saturday was a great day for the people who have suffered 
under this tyrant.
    He is--I believe, firmly believe--and you've heard me say this a 
lot, and I say it a lot because I truly believe it--that freedom is the 
Almighty God's gift to every person, every man and woman who lives in 
this world. That's what I believe. And the arrest of Saddam 
Hussein changed the equation in Iraq. Justice 
was being delivered to a man who defied that gift from the Almighty to 
the people of Iraq. And justice will be delivered to him in a way that 
is transparent and for the world to see. And so I told my dad, I said, 
``It's a great day for America, but it's a better day for the people of 
this country,'' and that's why.
    Thank you all for coming. I'll see you Thursday, coats and ties. 
[Laughter] This year, Gregory, don't take any silverware. [Laughter]

Note: The President's news conference began at 11:15 a.m. in Room 450 of 
the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building. In his remarks, he 
referred to Rend Rahim Francke, head of Iraq's Interest Section in the 
U.S.; Prime Minister Paul Martin of Canada; James A. Baker III, the 
President's personal envoy on the issue of Iraqi debt; Joshua Bolten, 
Director, Office of Management and Budget; David Kay, CIA Special 
Advisor for Strategy Regarding Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction 
Programs; Chairman Kim Chong-il of North Korea; former President Jiang 
Zemin of China; National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice; Assistant to 
the President and Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card, Jr.; and L. Paul Bremer 
III, Presidential Envoy to Iraq. A reporter referred to Democratic 
Presidential candidate Howard Dean.