PERSPECTIVE ON THE PERSIAN GULF : This General Is No Custer : Leadership: Schwarzkopf does not favor war and would not rush into battle. But if war is ordered, he wants an all-out effort and the public’s support.

Question: You have been quoted as saying that “war is a profanity,” and in this crisis you have criticized others for their impatience. But in your career you have also been an advocate, when war comes, of bringing overwhelming force to bear against your adversary. Can you reconcile these views?

Answer: I don’t think they’re contradictory at all. As you know, I’ve been involved in two wars--two tours of Vietnam and then the Grenada thing. I have very vivid memories of the men under my command. I have very vivid memories of visiting them in hospitals, and vivid memories of seeing them die.

The simple fact of the matter is, when wars are fought, people are going to get killed, and people are going to get maimed, and there’s going to be pain and suffering on the part of civilians, and all of that goes with war. As I consider myself to be a moral, ethical, Judeo-Christian-valued human being, therefore, I can’t be in favor of war.

In my case it goes even further than that. I’m an infantryman. I do love my troops, as only a soldier loves another soldier. War means that those troops are going to be put into a situation where they’re going to get killed.

Therefore, I’m not one to go rushing into battle. I’m not a Gen. Custer. I’m really not. These people who say, “The greatest day of my life was my first day in battle,” scare me.

On the other hand, I am a soldier. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and to obey the orders of my leaders duly appointed over me, and I did so with the sure knowledge that as a military commander I could be asked to go to battle and protect those things that we as Americans believe in.

So I guess my attitude is, I would love to see everything done to avoid war. But once committed to the battle, then I certainly don’t feel that we should hold back anything. Because by holding back, what we are doing in my mind is endangering our own forces and causing more losses on our side.

Let me give you an example. I was on the Cambodian border in 1965, an experience I will never forget. I was with the Vietnamese airborne. We had this situation where the enemy was attacking out of Cambodia. And when you got them on the run and you finally prevailed, they ran across the border and said, “Olly-olly-in-free,” and we weren’t allowed to attack them. I just don’t want to ever have to fight another war that way. It just doesn’t make any sense.

Q: What about your adversary? What do you sense about the way he thinks about the use of force?

A: I’ve done as much studying as I can about Saddam the man, Saddam the personality, and you know, since a very early age he has not hesitated, himself personally, to use force--assassination, murder, that kind of thing--to attain his goals.

I guess the $64,000 question right now is: Is this a case where he would sacrifice his nation rather than be perceived in the eyes of the world or of the Arabs as having backed down? I think it’s a flip of the coin.

Let’s face it, none of us know enough about Saddam Hussein--I don’t think even those closest to him know enough about Saddam Hussein--to make that judgment.

Q: The U.N. Security Council is about to pass a resolution that says to Iraq, in effect: Withdraw by Jan. 15 or else. Is any military purpose served by such an ultimatum?

A: I think there’s definitely a military purpose served by that.

I really think that up until this time, not only Saddam Hussein but his entire military chain of command and certainly the people of Iraq felt that there was a pretty good chance that we were not really committed to going to war. I think that when the United Nations ultimatum is passed, that should send a very clear signal to the Iraqi people, the Iraqi military and the Iraqi leadership that the world is committed, if it has to come to that, to fighting.

Q: Does it mean that the United States will not attack before the 15th? Doesn’t that deprive you of surprise?

A: Yeah, I’d say it means that. But on the other hand, it doesn’t say when we will attack, either.

Q: Along with the debate in Congress, public-opinion polls also show a slackening of support for this operation. Is that a worrisome trend?

A: I’m not too sure that we’re saying that there’s not support for the military over here as much as it is a mixed bag as to how people would like to see this outcome occur.

Yeah, you bet it bothers me because it will bother my troops.

You know, it absolutely is not fair to a young man or a young woman to send them to battle and not have them be supported by their country. I don’t think anybody wants to go to battle when their country isn’t supporting them.

Q: If war comes, what would be your strategic goal? Must Saddam Hussein be overthrown? What about his war-making capabilities?

A: The only directive I have is to deter and defend, OK. That’s where I am right now.

A lot of people have said that their nightmare scenario is a partial withdrawal with the Iraqi military system (intact). Then people would carry that one step further and say we would need to do something about that. But I don’t think it has to be a military solution only. There are other alternatives.

Q: Is that a nightmare scenario for you?

A: No. My nightmare scenarios have very much to do with my troops. My nightmare scenario would be if we were to take thousands and thousands of casualties and accomplish nothing.

Q: If the goal is primarily to liberate Kuwait, is it necessary or justifiable to attack Iraq as well?

A: I really would prefer not to get into that in too much detail.

When you go to war, you’re going to go to war all the way. That’s exactly where I come from. No more Cambodian border situations for me.

Q: With all these things in mind, is time on the side of the United States in this crisis?

A: At the present, I think time is on the side of the world coalition. I really don’t think there’s ever going to come a time when time is on the side of Iraq, as long as the sanctions are in effect, as long as the United Nations coalition is in effect.

See Story: A1