making the note that these forces are coming into iraq with the understanding of the iraqi government, the support of the iraqi government. the president meeting with his security team to go over the options for iraq. >> so in effect, the president acknowledging in this let tore congress, these potentially could be combat troops. will they have immunity from any i rack ki prosecution? as you remember, that was a big issue when all of the u.s. troops withdrew at the end of 2011. >> reporter: i think that is unclear at this point that that is a key sticking point. that is why the white house says u.s. forces are not on the ground in baghdad or were not left in baghdad as a residual force as the president pulled those forces out of iraq in 2011. it as we understand, one of the other options that the president is looking at is deploying force to iraq to provide training to iraqi security forces. it's a question that will have to be worked out. >> 275 u.s. troops going to

baghdad right now to protect the u.s. embassy and other personnel. thanks very much. let's check in with chad myers, on double tornadoes in nebraska. >> unbelievable pictures a little bit ago. the storm is not producing a tornado at this point but it could at any time. this is the storm moving up toward sioux city, nebraska. it is tall, 60,000 feet fall. this storm is a significant tornado potential maker for a while it made a lot of tornadoes earlier with a lot of kaj near pill jer, nebraska. there could be tornado all night long, even into the dark of the night. >> we'll stay on top of it together with you, thanks. please be sure to tune in trm for an cnn exclusive town hall event with hillary clinton, tomorrow 5:00 p.m. eastern with a replay 9:00 p.m. eastern. also, special edition of "the

situation room" airing immediately after the town hall event, 6:00 p.m. eastern only here on cnn. remember, you can always follow us on twitter, tweet me at wolf blitzer, tweet the show at cnn sit room. thanks very much for watching. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." now let's step into the kriez with van jones and s.e. cupp. >> whether it likes it or not, president obama will have to order additional military action in iraq. >> there's only one problem. that's exactly what the terrorists want him to do. the debate starts right now. >> tonight on kros fire, can president obama stop the chaos in iraq, even if it means taking the same side as iran? on the left, van jones within on the right s.e. cupp. in the crossfire, victor sink who supports the president.

who broke iraq? what should we do to fix it tonight on "crossfire." welcome to cross fire i'm van jones on the veleft. >> i'm s.e. cupp on the right. let's go inside iraq. >> reporter: launching air strikes on kilo occasions, claim to have killed 200 isis spiders, while more key territory has been captured. the front lines remains an hour north of the capital. isis able to capture telafar. they're making sure shah people know what their fate will be if they dare stand in their way. yet another execution video

emerged, this one showing a bearded man with a weapon standing over five captives. he's calling them dogs. they were border guards and he's ordering them to repeat after him, islamic state to stay. the first two complied. the third tries to formulate the word but unable to do so. he seems to be severely dehydrated and almost unaware as to what's happening around him. he's shoved to the ground, weapon pointed to his throat. he and the four others were killed. the man responsible proudly boasting on facebook. oftentimes we don't know who the victims are. but in this case we did manage to get in contact with the family of the man who was struggling to speak. he was 37 years old. he had three children, two sons and a daughter. and the reason why he had taken the job as the border guard was because he wanted to build them a home. s.e., van. >> thanks for that reporting.

guests who disagree about what's next in iraq. ie isis continuing its killing spree, secretary of state john kerry's solution seems to be call iran for help? >> look. we're open to discussions if there's something constructive that can be contributed by on rab, if iran is prepared to do something that is going to respect the integrity and sovereignty of iraq and the ability of the government to reform. >> seriously. here's just three reasons why this is absurd. one, iran's only objective in iraq is to prop up a shiite regime. talking to iran is the fastest way to send the sunnis running straight into the arms of isis. there is the same regime we're negotiating a nuclear deal with even after their leader bragge on duping the west on deals in the past. and the same aran, these are the guys we trust? the dubs will say there's no

harm in talking, but talk is cheep until it's very, very expensive. >> what's really expensive is rushing into wars an military conflict and doing what george w. bush did. we're going to talk about that tonight. we've got victor sink who worked under president obama. we've got daniel plut ka. i want to start with you. i assume you probably agree with s.e. that we shouldn't be talking to aran. but iran is right there on the border. what should we be doing? >> i have no objection to talking to iran. i've said the same to you before and i think it's true. i have absolutely to trouble with telling the iranians they need to stop killing people in syria, that they need to stop supporting ma lish yas in iraq. but if we think they're going cooperate with us to fight isis

in iraq and sear syria, i think we're making a serious mistake. >> lindsey graham, who is on the other side of this thing, i want you to hear from him and tell me why he's wrong. >> the iranians can provide some assets to make sure baghdad doesn't fall. >> and the reality is we're getting word now that there have been talks between the united states and i ran. lidcy graham says it's the right thing to do. what's wrong with his understanding. >> i disagree with senator graham respectfully about the difference between stall lynn's russia and the ayatollah's iran. they have been trying to kill americans for the last 30 years. that have been one of their most important missions. >> don't you think that in a situation like this where you have these kind of muchers just tilg people and putting it up on u youtube that we should take

whatever help we can get. >> the truth is exactly the way i see it laid out, that the iranians are a big part of the instability in the region. without the iranians isis wouldn't be in i rack or syria. >> it feels like president obama keeps putting us in these intenable situations where we have to rely on the word eesz worse actors. in syria we took russia's help. and now we might rely on iran? i mean why are we trusting these untrustworthy actors. >> i don't think we're trusting untrustworthy actor ps. iran debate gets away from the point of what's happening inside of iraq. what's happening is a terrorist group that were unleashed largely by the chaos that came into iraq after we started a war in iraq. don't forget that mali ki is iran's guy. at this point we need to focus

on the fact that this terrorist threat is real to iraq and the region and we need to be worried about it. but the petty micromnging of who we should partner with -- >> i don't think it's petty. clearly you cannot argue that these are not trustworthy guys. you're not making the case that iraq is playing it straight with us. >> what this has to do with, just as in 2006 to 2008, we were able to work with all sorts of countries around the region to increase stability inside iraq. even iran wanted that at that time. they encouraged secretary governance. >> the reason that he's able to do that, the reason he's relying on the iranians is because we pulled out, lock stock and barrel. >> that is an astonishing thing to say. the reason he's relying on the iranians is because we took out a government in iraq and installed government and then took out governments that would be aligned with iran.

>> i know you're not a -- >> so dam was a terrible dictator. that's a direct product of the war. >> don't you think he has a point though? here you had -- we didn't like saddam hussein but there was a balance there between iraq and iran. bush goes in, blows this guy out, puts in maliki who everybody knows is a lap dog for iran and the guy does horrible things. don't you have to take some responsibility for the fact that it didn't go well and the vacuum that's been created wasn't created by us going in there. >> excuse me, but in 2011 when we pulled troops out of iraq we were in a stable, good situation. nobody was calling him a lap dog for iran then. to the contrary, he was most supported by the 0 bam ma'am administration in the white house. there's nothing wrong with that. i don't have any objection to that.

but i will stay that in an unstable situation when there is a power vacuum, we pulled out and the iranians pulled in. >> it was created when we went in -- >> you cannot argue. >> you want to start the clock in 2011? >> joe biden said in to 11 that iraq could be one of the obama administration's greatest successes because of the stability of the region. now there's instability and it's bush's fault? >> i believe somebody said we would be greeted as liberators. >> we made a choice both in afghanistan an iraq to go to war. in both cases wes wer taking out big enemies of iran, no friends with the taliban and islam. on the iraq side, the consequences have been dire because it's empowered and enabled iran inside iraq, and

that was true when we were there with 160,000 troops. >> i'm sorry, do we also push iran to kill 160,000 people? have we also pushed them to develop a nuclear weapon? >> open up the space for iran to conduct -- >> may i do something on ghaf of your audience. every time i come here we have this incredibly dry conversation about whether bush was right or wrong in iraq. i think we could argue that until the cows come home. but in the interest of talking about the problem that faces us today in iraq, let's talk about what it is we need to do there. >> i can agree with that. whether we went in or how we got out, that date is not useful to how we got there today. >> it's arguing over how you got pregnant. >> you know what with, i'm going to take you up on your offer. we're going to come back and talk about what to do next. i think there's way to fix this situation. but first, today's "crossfire"

quiz, when did iraq become an independent country, 1898, 1932 or 1956? we're going to give you the answer when we get back after the break. did you know, your eyes can lose vital nutrients as you age?

[ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite to help replenish key eye nutrients.

ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. ocuvite. help protect your eye health.

welcome back. now the answer to our crossfire quiz, i rack has been independent since 1932. now tonight as president obama is getting briefed by the military on his options in iraq, i want us to stop with some of these false choices we've been getting bombarded with. you've got the liberals saying

blame bush, don't do anything. gu the conservatives say blame obama and start bombing. we've got to pull the rug out from under isis. these nut jobs got power because the reasonable sunni leadership got sick sick of malik ki. it's going to be hard to do that if we start bombing their towns and killing their kids. we've got daniel pletka. you said you wanted to start talking about solutions. let's start with this. you're a sunni leader, a moderate sunni leader. you've got butchers from isis to your left, you've got malik y bullying you. isn't there a danger that we start bombing these isis folks who blended into the population, start killing kids over there

and push the sunnis away from us? >> i understand why you're asking the question and i think there's real merit in asking these sorts of questions before we make any decisions. we need to understand how to bring the sunnis back into the iraqi government. the problem is we have very little leverage in iraq because we left everybody out to dry. we don't have to ie agree about that. i can tell you that that's the perception in iraq. so the sunnis feel that we left them, maliki feels we left them. there's not a lot of trust. one of the ways we're going to rebuild the trust is doing something about isis. sunnis are going to be the victims of isis as shiite. >> we've got isis in iraq promising to deliver the next 9/11 in new york. the president claimed that al qaeda is decimated. he's returning the detained terrorists from gitmo. and it feels like on our side at least the war on terror is alive

and well. why is president obama under the illusion that it's over? >> well, i don't think he is in any way. he has gotten us out of the illusion that the way to deal with the war on terror was massive deployments of forces into countries that we didn't understand what strategies wouldn't work. he's 0 focused on getting the guys who are going to target us and that is going to include isis. it's a real threat inside of iraq. i agree with danny we have to think about hard about it. i do think there is the po potential for limited targeted use of air power. when you see columns of isis moving across the country side, that is the kind of thing that's good for air power. you can't go into cities with the air power. america can't fix iraq ffr we couldn't do it with 160,000 troops. we can't do it now. iraqis are going to have to do this and the political leadership is going to have to find the way to bring the sunnis

back. >> we' agree for this. i don't think there's a role for u.s. troops on the ground except targeting and avoiding the bombing of the villages, intelligence, those sorts of things. the problem is if we let things go too far, all of people that want to fight against the people we don't like aren't going to be empowered. we're not helping them, only the bad guys are getting help. >> we need to be helping them smartly. and the way to help them smartly is to not just rush in and say we'll take over and do it for you, we'll deal with the hard problems because you won't make the hard decisions. we have the make it clear to the leaders that you have got to find an exclusive way to govern. and that has been sorely absent from maliki from the beginning. >> we all agree.

what's great is we all agree that the current situation can't no stand. we've got to deal with isis. that's important. would you say that president obama needs to make the case both here at home to the american people, to congress, and to our allies that we need some kind of intervention? it's a case he did not make in syria, he didn't make it at home, to congress or let's focus on isis. this is about a terrorist group taking over ungoverned territory. in both sir why and iraq. and the way you build -- >> and world willpower. >> you engame countries on their common interests. this is one of those unusual situations where countries have a common interest. so, yes, he needs to do that.

but just rushing in and having the americans say we will fix it for everybody -- >> that's fair. but too often when the president says we need to build alliance an talk an have political reconciliation, those are excuses not to do anything. then things spiral out of control. >> i will challenge both of you. because both of you seem to be more interested in military solutions earlier reather than later. i think people are watching saying, are you crazy? we are going to get pulled back in. the last time we rush need war with no plan to win peace, that was the problem with george w. bush. he picks malaki, there was in plan to win the peace. don't you think people advocating like yourself for ad

hoc hawk ish /* /- add hawkish situations. >> i think this is understanding what positions are and isis threats our national interest. we need to have a plan, you're right. but we won't own it in the same way. so we need to tell the iraqis, just as you said, just as you said, what they need to do. but we can't have our action be contingent on them doing the right thing. >> i think americans are worried that this could be a slippery slope. >> stay here. we want you at home to weigh in on the fire back questions. tweet yes or no using the hashtag crossfire. i'm outraged about what california is telling college

student to do before they have sex. nobody ever stomped their foot and asked for less. because what we all really want... ...is more. there's a reason it's called an "all you can eat" buffet. and not a "have just a little buffet". that's the idea behind the more everything plan. it's more of everything you want. for less. plus, get the droid maxx by motorola for 0 down. get more with our best plans

on the best network. for best results, use verizon. [ male announcer ] it's one of the most amazing things we build and it doesn't even fly. we build it in classrooms and exhibit halls, mentoring tomorrow's innovators. we build it raising roofs, preserving habitats and serving america's veterans. every day, thousands of boeing volunteers help make their communities the best they can be. building something better for all of us. ♪ that would be my daughter -- hi dad. she's a dietitian. and back when i wasn't eating right, she got me drinking boost. it's got a great taste, and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a delicious taste. grandpa!

[ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost. i got more advice than i knew what to do with. what i needed was information i could trust on how to take care of me and my baby. luckily, unitedhealthcare has a simple program that helps moms stay on track with their doctors and get the right care and guidance-before and after the baby is born. simple is good right now. (anncr vo) innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

time for the outages of the day. the latest solution to the college rape crisis comes to us from cookie, california. a new bill mandates a consent, a verbal or written yes before and during each sexual encounter on state college campuses. in addition to this sounding ridiculous and probably being unforcible and unworkable, it also shows that college rapes

aren't because of the mere miscommunication. rapists are aware they are unwanted. this is more about proving after the fact that someone committed a crime instead of trying to prevent the attacks in the first place. colleges have systematically disarmed young women. many barring them from using even pepper spray to defend themselves and now they think the answer is a written contract. shameful. >> okay. i'm a californian and i think that's pretty silly. on the other side of this thing, outraging millions of people this month when he wrote a kol em that blamed the soaring number of sexual assault victims on the school themselves. claiming that universities quote make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges. now i don't know a single rape survivor who feels like the response she got from her school

or society amounts to any kind of privilege. in fact far from it. now he is doubling down on the dumb. responding to u.s. senators who wrote this. i think i take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. no. implying that the majority of survivors coming forward are asking for it or see sexual humiliation as a privilege that theus, that the definition of not taking sexual violence seriously and it is outrageous. >> definitely a problem you and i can agree needs working on. should the u.s. form a stra teeth uk alliance with iran regarding iraq. quickly, what do you think of the results? >> i think people robe the iranians are out to kill american citizens. out to suppress their neighborhood. out to do no good. >> i think they know they are no friends of the united states but we might have a common enemy in

this particular moment. >> the debate will continue on-line at cnn.com/crossfire. >> erin burnett out front start right now. >> next breaking news, white house just releasing a letter notifying congress troops are sent to iraq. president obama meeting with his top advisors at this moment. a live report from the white house. plus a man with intimate knowledge of the situation in iraq. president george w. bush's envoy, out front. at four towns damaged by incredibly severe tornadoes, rescue operations under way. we're going there live. let's go outfront. good evening, everyone. out front tonight, breaking news, american troops heading back it iraq. soldiers are sent