Following is a transcribed excerpt from Fox News Sunday, Feb. 23, 2003.
TONY SNOW, FOX NEWS: A group of activists, including many Hollywood stars, has formed an outfit named Win Without War. They argue that it's possible to neutralize Saddam Hussein peaceably.
Joining us from New York to discuss war, peace and Saddam Hussein is actress and comedian Janeane Garofalo, a leader of Win Without War.
JANEANE GAROFALO, ACTRESS: Oh, I'm not a leader of Win Without War.
SNOW: OK, well, you're...
GAROFALO: I'm just in Win Without War, which is 32 million people. A very, very, very small portion of them are actors.
SNOW: All right. Well, there. We've got that straightened out.
SNOW: Let's try to walk through issues of war and peace. Let me first begin with a question about pacifism.
Do you believe there is such a thing as a just war?
GAROFALO: God, that's a tough one. I guess everybody always looks toward World War II being the definition of the ultimate just war.
I suppose, but I absolutely would not say that this war in Iraq is a just war. The Anglo-American war in Iraq has been going on for many years. I mean, we can go back as far as the Carter doctrine, when in the Mideast they started nationalizing their own oil, thereby strengthening OPEC, and we decided to do something about that. And then in the '90s, the Anglo-American war really revved up against Iraq.
SNOW: OK, well, the reason -- I just want to try to establish a philosophical base line.
SNOW: Let's talk about factual matters. Saddam Hussein, has he been a mass murderer?
GAROFALO: Yes, there's been a lot of people who have been mass murderers. And I think Turkey also, who we've been negotiating with, has one of the worst human rights records in the world.
Also, the sanctions, you could say, have been responsible for mass murder.
SNOW: OK. Well, just I want to tick through these and then we can go through them.
GAROFALO: And he was also a human rights violator when he was our ally, don't forget.
SNOW: You're absolutely right.
GAROFALO: He was our ally and a bad guy until August 2, 1990.
SNOW: And I think you will agree that that was a mistake, was it not, to have him as an ally?
GAROFALO: Oh, sure, yes, yes, yes. Absolutely.
SNOW: Good, OK. A threat to neighbors, a man who has waged war twice on neighbors, correct?
GAROFALO: Yes, but I don't know that his neighbors think he's a threat now. In fact, I think a lot of people would say his dastardly deeds peaked in the late '80s.
SNOW: Well, Kuwait and Iran both beg to differ, and they've both been on the record recently saying that they'd prefer not to have him in.
GAROFALO: Well, they definitely prefer not to have him in. And nobody's arguing that Saddam should be removed, nobody's arguing that the Iraqi people deserve to be liberated.
But I don't think they're too happy about the Turks coming in, the Kurds. I don't know that that's going to be too liberating for them.
SNOW: Well, we'll get into predictive -- again, let me just tick through these and then we can get to the other things.
SNOW: Eager to obtain weapons of mass destruction, do you think he is?
GAROFALO: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear that question.
SNOW: Do you think he is eager to obtain weapons of mass destruction?
GAROFALO: Yes, I think lots of people are eager to obtain weapons of mass destruction. But there's no evidence that he has weapons of mass destruction. There's been no evidence of him testing nuclear weapons.
We have people that are in our face with nuclear weapons. We've got Iran and North Korea. We've got a problem with Pakistan. You know, I don't know what to say about that.
There's a whole lot of people that are going nuclear. And I think that Saddam Hussein is actually, with the evidence, the least able to use nuclear weapons and the least obvious offender in that area at this moment.
SNOW: OK. All right, so we've now laid this down. You argue that we should not go to war because of unilateralism, correct?
GAROFALO: Yes and no. And I also argued the Clinton administration was big on unilateralism, and I think the Clinton administration's Iraq policy was despicable.
SNOW: Why didn't you protest it then?
GAROFALO: I absolutely did. I did not support Operation Desert Fox, it's just that you didn't know me very well back then. Nobody, really, was interested in listening to me back them.
It wasn't very hip to...
SNOW: Well, perhaps let me change the question, then. Why wasn't there an organized anti-war movement under Bill Clinton?
GAROFALO: Oh, there was, and Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins were at the forefront. You know, the thing is, this Hollywood thing is such a straw man, it's such a waste of people's time. But...
SNOW: Well, that's why we're not talking Hollywood.
GAROFALO: I know, and I thank you for it. I thank you for it.
SNOW: You're responding to arguments I haven't made.
GAROFALO: I thank you for not bringing it up.
GAROFALO: But Operation Desert Fox, there was a lot of protest, just as there was a lot of protest for the first Gulf War.
SNOW: OK, now, here's the question. You've said that Saddam Hussein is a mass murderer, he's somebody who has gone after weapons of mass destruction. You agree that the world would be better off without him in power.
Why do you think a regime of inspections would unseat him?
GAROFALO: Well, actually, I think -- well, I think it's been abundantly clear that whether he complies to inspections or not is irrelevant. As it was to the Clinton administration, it's irrelevant here. This particular administration, as the Clinton administration did, they wanted into Iraq. Diplomacy last, war first.
But I think that...
SNOW: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait a minute.
SNOW: I mean, the Clinton administration did not go into war with Iraq.
SNOW: The Bush administration has been engaged in, I think you would concede, a pretty furious round of diplomatic negotiations.
GAROFALO: I absolutely would not concede that at all. I would not concede that at all.
SNOW: Well, how do you get 18 European nations on your side without picking up the phone and making some calls?
GAROFALO: Well, yes, I guess it's a lot of coercion and arm- twisting. I would say -- I would say that it has been the idea since 1990, '91 to go into Iraq and to have hegemony over the region, redraw the map. Oil is a part of it, not all of it.
But 9/11 has been a way to reinvigorate the plan that the right- wingers and the ideologues and people like the people at the American Enterprise Institute and...
SNOW: Well, OK, whoa, whoa, whoa. This seems highly fanciful. Go in, occupy the region and redraw the map?
GAROFALO: Yes. Oh, don't pretend that this is like some crazy conspiracy theory and I'm...
SNOW: Well, but it strikes me as a little far-fetched. I mean, the British tried to do it in the beginning of the century.
GAROFALO: Well, what is far-fetched...
SNOW: But you...
GAROFALO: What is far-fetched about wanting hegemony over the region? Since the 1940s, American diplomats and government people have been very vocal about the fact that there is a lot of wealth to be obtained in that area and it behooves anyone to be in charge of that area.
SNOW: Well, wait, wait, wait.
GAROFALO: And it behooves anyone -- yes.
SNOW: No, I'm just curious about it, because again, the idea of hegemony -- trade relations are a way to build wealth.
SNOW: Hegemony is a way to build trouble. And the United States has no record...
GAROFALO: Yeah, absolutely, hence my problem.
Oh, I just spit. Sorry.
Hence my -- I'm foaming at the mouth, Tony.
Hence my problem with it. I also...
SNOW: I'm happy I've been able to get you so passionate about this.
GAROFALO: You've gotten me all flumoxed.
But I also resent Rick -- you know, Senator Santorum's assertions that this won't be particularly costly or lengthy. This is going to be economically devastating for us.
And also, the assertion that inaction breeds terrorist strikes, that is ridiculous. Action in Iraq will make us decidedly less safer.
SNOW: OK. A lot of the case that you and others have made are built on predictions, that there will be an uprising in the Arab street, for instance.
SNOW: Well, how will this be the case? There was no uprising in the Arab street after the Gulf War. There was no Arab uprising in the Arab street after Afghanistan.
You've got Saddam Hussein, who is the foremost killer of Muslims on Earth. He's killed a million Muslims. Osama bin Laden, even in trying to rally people to his side, has called him an infidel. I've been in the region twice in recent months. I've spoken to five heads of state and numerous foreign ministers, all of whom who have no love for the guy.
Why on Earth would the Arab street rise up in favor of one of its worst enemies?
GAROFALO: They're not in favor of one of its worst enemies. They have as much distaste for Americans as they do for Saddam. They're not happy about the sanctions. They're not happy about the Palestinian question. They're not happy about the military installations near sacred sites.
And to say that there's been no uprising since the Afghanistan, with about 6,000 or 7,000 Afghani civilians dead, that is ridiculous. There are 2 million pilgrims at the hajj who have no love for the American idea of going into the heart of the Arabian world in Iraq.
SNOW: You know this for a fact? You're...
GAROFALO: What are you -- I know as much for a fact as you guys know for a fact. I know as much as anybody who has access to information on the Internet, a library, satellite dish, international news.
SNOW: The information seems to be, in many cases -- and now I'll see if you'll concede this -- that people in that region, like you, want Saddam Hussein out of power. They just want to make sure if we do it, A, we do it, and B, the United States stays the course and provides economic aid so that we can put democracy in the region.
GAROFALO: That would be great if they stayed the course and provided economic aid. They apparently left out budgeting money for Afghanistan, which was a bit of a blunder.
I think Afghanistan has not proved to be successful right now. You have mercenaries protecting Hamid Karzai 24 hours a day. You've got extremists on the border of Afghanistan and in Pakistan, who could very well get their hands...
SNOW: So you think they're better or worse off than when they were under Taliban rule?
GAROFALO: No, I think that they're basically in sort of the same position in the rural regions right now. I think, obviously, democracy is ideal. You know, it would be wonderful if they could live free and have sovereignty.
I don't think making Iraq a U.S. military garrison is going to accomplish that. I don't think they're going to be happy after getting -- you know, Hans von Spanik said prior -- Hans von Spanik, who used to be head of the oil-for-food...
SNOW: Program, that's right.
GAROFALO: ... program, said that it's going to cost at least $100 billion right now to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. That's not even counting what's going to happen after the war.
SNOW: OK. Two quick questions.
SNOW: If people are dancing in the streets of Baghdad after a war...
GAROFALO: OK, what are you going to say? "Are you going to apologize?" Everybody asks me that...
SNOW: No, I'm not asking you if you're going to apologize. Are you just going to say, "Well, I guess I was wrong"?
GAROFALO: I would love to be wrong about this, Tony.
GAROFALO: There's no glory in being right about catastrophe.
SNOW: And final question: If U.S. troops are called into battle, will you support them?
GAROFALO: I support them now, and I supported them then, and I support them safely all the way home.
SNOW: All right. Janeane Garofalo, thanks for joining us.
GAROFALO: Thanks, Tony.