finishing second. the win gives handle ton his 21st victory over two seasons and his 10th this year. >> a quick reminder. keep up-to-date all of the news on our website. there it is on your careen. the address, aljazeera.com. that's aljazeera.com. tonight the middle east is in flames. president obama's foreign policies failed the region and the united states say critics. in the panel secret x-ray surveillance on the streets of new york. you may be dosed with radiation and not know it. like most americans - i love football. will injuries of athletes in school weaken our like for the game. >> this is "third rail".

the greater middle east is burping. critics say president obama is not doing much to stop it. maybe because when he try, he may as well be talking to himself. >> i have indicated repeatedly that president bashar al-assad's lost legitimacy, and needs to step down. message. >> maybe he did, a message about american weakness creating a vacuum that russian president vladimir putin fills. >> translation: we think it's an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the syrian government and armed forces fighting terrorism. >> did vladimir putin describe the middle east process as a mistake, is the u.s. to blame for turmoil and violence. joining me is neil ferguson, professor of history, his latest book is the first volume of

authorised biology of henry kissinger. neil, thank you for joining us on "third rail." >> pleasure to be on the show. >> kissinger is 92 years old. he's not an advisor to the president, which is different to the past. he has not taken to the pages. "the wall street journal," he's written a commentary pretty much disagreeing with everything in president obama's policy. i know you said that president obama set off an explosion of sectarian conflict, by trying to create a new balance of power in the middle east. do you look at the chaos and the violence there now as made in the u.s.a. >> i think that would be putting it too strongly, but let's face it, we - if we go back all the way to 2001, the u.s. bendual um swung from one

extreme to the others. and a posture that amounts to - we can't do anything in case it becomes another iraq. that swing of the pendygrass road under obama - that has a hesitation at the beginning of the syrian crisis. you look at the numbers in armed conflict. there's a startling trajectory, and we are in the policies has led to more violence than earlier policies of intervention, it's not the fault of the united states. is it more or different. if you look at the numbers, that would be ignoring hundreds of thousands called if you look at

the effects, it produced a spike in conflict. it tailed off. it stabilized the situation. with the arab spring, the regionered new conflict. introducing more death. we have to have american foreign policy in two administrations. it's pair to say patients, which is a term for dithering, may get worth. a reason for writing a book about kissinger is because it is to remind ourselves of the time the united states played a role of peacemaker, peace broker. we forgot that is the right role to play. the role balanceser is a key to achieve equilibrium. there went be that between the sunni

and shia powers. >> the u.s. doesn't have the option to walk away. to walk away seems to be to be a recipe for trouble. >> i've been to iraq. been in the refugee camps. nothing to show more trips on the ground was a long-term solution, it didn't provide an economy or tradition in baghdad or address the problems. you have the advantage of me serving in the military, i are not argue. my argument is in 2004. if the united states is serious about nation building or state building as it was then. it can't expect the u.s. military to do it all.

we forgot the process, that it cannot be delegated. not all interventions are disastrous, non-intervention can be disastrous. there has to be areas were there can be stabilization or conflict. >> when you talk about callos sis - should they act and behave as an empire. >> it was an empire in denial, doing imperial things, without any real consciousness of the tress dent. if you say we are going to build democracy and states, you need to recognise the consequences that it's a long time scale operation and it's not just military, but requires military. the united states was never

going to do this well. that has implications for what the president can aspire to. let's face it, president bush overreached, and we swung to the other extreme where the president overestimates what can be achieved. an earlier action would have been better than waiting. president obama was decisive in not doing something. sometimes it is the decision. >> he wanted nikoloz basilashvili to go, he requested if, tried the united nation, but didn't wield the means, what happened is he did enough to incentivize the civil war. and to innocent vice other players to get involved. i think the administration was slow to realise what was available at the time or that the disintegration of states, whether syria, iraq or libya

could be worse than author tare can regimes. would an empire handle that differently. if we look at the modern middle east. the problem is that in the post imperial age, when the empires collapsed. the middle east entered a stage of informal empire, where the united states and the soviet union both tried to intervene with disastrous results, and that is where we have been for many years, without recognising what it is that we are trying to do. i think there was a naivety and ha repeated itself when the arab springs degan. >> so should there be democracy in the middle east.

>> ideally, it's the best available political system that we have come up with. and a lesson we learnt in the last 100 years is if you go to democracy before the rule of law is in place or you rush to democracy in a sectarian decided society, it can be explosive. we have not understood the phases that have to be gone through. the worst case scenario, as syrians today arges is for a state to disintegrate. civil war and anarchy are worse. in the hope of arriving at a post demo crat accuratic middle east -- democratic middle east

we have failed states, they are at near breakdown. and the non-state, quasi state actors, like the islamic state come along, associate themselves and establish characteristics of a state. we may be underestimating how serious the project of a caliphate is, and underestimating how far this could go. >> when you look at the history of iraq, syria, the middle east. when it comes to foreign intervention, there's not a lot of the examples about what happens. the history is quagmire if one looks further afield at what happens in the balkans, intervention, when it came, success reply ending a nasty conflict. that happened. i don't think the middle east is unique, what we can do is look at the interventions over the last 100 years and see sometimes it worked. and it works hugely successfully

in cases like west germany, south korea and japan. >> ways that the country spend the next 70 years repeating but not achieving. i don't think the position should be we can't do anything if 300,000 died in a civil war in a country like syria. if millions have been driven from their homes, there's nothing we can do. everything will be another iraq or vietnam. that sound of despair is a dangerous road leading to american isolationism. when the united states says there's nothing we can do, it's a few years later it has to intervene, and arguably at a high cost because it waited. >> thank you, the panel is next. >> the way they treat yate citizens of colours, it's not good at a basic level. now you want them rolling through the streets like robocop.

>> our american story is written every day. it's not always pretty... but it's real. and we show you like no-one else can. this is our american story. this is america tonight.

welcome back to "third rail". we'll shift to whether the liberal democrats have a policy. lau laura flanders is a writer and host of a television star. simon is a host of a daily show on comedy center. his show is running at the cherry lane theatre. and a republican strategist, the president and c.e.o. of an agency, a public relations and marketing firm. we are talking about liberals and foreign policy.

do liberals have a foreign policy, specifically bernie sanders. seems he wants is to be a backburner issue, is it okay for a commander in chief? >> it's not okay. if liberals have a defined foreign policies, it's a confusing question. you have to talk about what does liberal mean. if you are in england, that's disarm a. ment -- disarm ement, diplomacy. it's like republican foreign policy. >> you can look at hillary clinton and say she's more hawkish than republicans. >> democrats say they are for diplomacy and disarmament, but pushing forward on the same kind of interventionist foreign policy in the name of human rights, creating a precedent for the global engage: to democrats

have a different foreign policy? >> not different enough. >> i like hint's position. i believe the government, the first thing the government must do is to protect our borders and citizens. if everything else was defunded, the military must stay strong. in today's day and age, we have to strike fear in our enemies. i don't think we have been doing that. that whole scare them before us, kill or be killed is terrifying. it sounds like tony sop ranno's mo. they break their legs before they break ours. i'll be honest. it's hard for me personally. i feel that there's a dual narrative. i love america, it's a great social experiment. it's amazing. in every way. at the same time i turn on the

tv and then i'll see that we are bombing every brown country. they are bombing this kid. i'm hussain - it's a difficult thing for me to deal with. >> you are in the minority. most of the world and americans agree. they are concerned with the fact that u.s. foreign policy seems to encourage terrorist attacks. and we found out how host of our intelligence comes from cellphones and technology. like at what drones are, at the moment. >> absolutely. you said it best. we need a human rights component. >> it's not what most want. >> yes, it is. >> countries that are

enemi enemies. they are as sass nating their own people. we have to look at that. people hate our freedom. i think leaders resent the fact that we are a free country and encourage citizens to speak out. dictators don't like that. >> i don't think they look at us like a character in mean girls. it's wait a second, americans have freedom. can't. >> there was a story about how saudi arabia is not just beheading people, but beheading and crucifying people. this is not an enemy. a number one trading partner. there's no consistency. we have to bleed into their citizenry.

the idea that they can be, being able to tell people how well we have it is important. >> they didn't see footage of men killed in the streets. it may be easier to explain how great some of these things are. >> i think the foreign policy is shaped by look if you shore our notice, we are cool. >> it's a massive double standard. >> if you pull back, history shows it leads to larger conflicts to come. after world war i. before the u.s. pull back, there's a debate. if you don't get involved, it could lead to a large war. would a president lead to something like that. >> he's not seeing evidence that his programme will be pulled back. so far.

the presideissues presented to the president. it's sort of a myth that democratic foreign policy is anything to do with isolation. the track record doesn't show if. what if we say war is not an option and we demand diplomatic table. what happened if we try it. we don't know what the result will be. >> there's a fight in the battle between security and civil liberty. used. >> the new york city police department facing a lawsuit over x-ray vans. >> innocent on the outside. airports. >> they can see inside cars, trucks, buildings. >> the civil rights group is raiding concerns about privacy and health. >> the public demos next to

nothing about the programme. >> are you worried about getting blasted? >> i don't think we have privacy as citizens, we have the internet, social media, put our stuff out there. >> if i told us these things had 40% more active waves than what you go through at the airport. does that bother you, do you have a right to say "i don't body." >> there's a lot of things out there harming us. the radioactive ways is a side effect for a tool used for public safety. we have to support safety officers in keeping us safe. >> this is a fan that can pull up. x-ray through a vehicle and a wall of a house and see inside without you knowing it. >> i heard the theory.

if i have nothing to hide, do as you must. people say that until it effects them. until we have people pulling our photos. i never had the confidence to take a photo of myself and put it on. that's my own body issues. some of my history and stuff is blasted out there. that's not cool. it's everything from the music that we listen to to google selling. every time we log into gee mail. how do they know i'm looking for a big screen. i send my wife an email - it's like we are monitored at every corner. i don't think it's cool. we'll have a problem until our stuff is put on. >> the military had them first. is this an example. >> it's a little unseemingly that it's technology and equipment used on arabs. we didn't worry when it was

afghan students. i'm concerned about radiation. if in the course of it it weakens my bones. i think we are blurring distinctions here. the key point that is made in the clip is, you know, the people have a right, and that is to do with the success of policing. if there's no trust between police and the policed there's not going to be effective policing. that's what we know here. >> has it worked. >> i'm throwing it out there. with the state of the boston bombing, has it worked. >> the n.y.p.d. has no questions. the only reason we know about this, is they are taking it to court to ask and answer questions, and they lost in court. they have appealed that trying to not answer. >> it was interesting that the commander said we are not using it to scan for weapons, if you scan for weapons, it would not be the worse thing. >> do you worry about the police

and the u.s. becoming militarized. they are in the police force here. it's like foreign battles are testing grounds for what the police are inheriting. they are no longer officer friendly, they are special ops. >> i think this police department needs to use technology that is a little more savvy or technologically advanced than a smaller town in iowa. the police department spies on muslims in the city. they never said they have an incredible lead. i need to know if you can give me the results. i would love them. >> x-rays are - i have a radiologiy appointment in three weeks. they did it online. it is scary, like it's not radioactive vans aside. let's call it robocop, policing of the future.

i'm talking about police 1.0. it's not at a good level with the n.y.p.d. hashtag i can't breathe. i'm talking at a basic lex. the police and the police department and the way they are treating citizens - united states citizens of colour, it's not good at a basic level. now you want them rolling through the streets like robocop. i'm not cool with that. to. >> again, i don't know. we say it's okay to centre red light cameras, speed cameras, we are watched. that's every citizen, it doesn't anything. >> are you okay with that? >> am i okay with that? >> i think that you have to be a crime committed before you are guilty of something. >> you want to find a high tech solution. that's the same case for wars, for intelligence.

it's not person to person. it's going in the same direction to justify the equipment. what are we doing for it. leading to effective solutions. >> thank you for coming, appreciate it. straight ahead. would americans watch football if we took the violence out of the game. the game.

before we go, i want to football. i'm a parent. i have five kids. my wife and i do not want them to play the game. yet i know i glorify football by watching it in our home every weekend. a lot of parents had this conversation. i wonder if we can make football a little less dangerous, especially when kids are involved. when you look at the numbers of those hurt, it's stark. around 1.1 million kids played high school football. half suffered injuries, more than 130,000 concussions. there have been fatalities, five

last year,ate the year before, and six so far in 2015. white the odds of a high school football fatality are tiny, as a parent, would you let your kid take the chance or risk damage to the break-inar body. n.c.a.a., is responding to a cry of corn. u.s.a. football, the governing body is offering safety programs and information on the website. let's be real, violence is inherent in american football. people tune in for great plays, including a lot of big hits. to make football safe, you have to limit contact or stop it. how much can you dial it back without changing the game and the fans ready tore that. it's one thing to say you want change, accepting the consequences that would upend

america's popular sport - now now if eu moves forward with its plan o help refugees and countries struggling to cope. hello i'm darren jordan in doha with the world news from doha. jimmy morales is on his way to winning the election in guatemala. >> the syrian president session he's open to solutions to the political war in syria. plus. >> it was exactly 30 years ago that this awfnl