friend. and his daughter, ashley, saying this about her dad. heart broken, i owe him everything i am and everything i will be. he will be remembered so well and with so much love. he revealed he had alzheimer's six years ago. he died at 81. thank you for joining us. anderson is next. >> >> good evening. we we xwin with tough talk from the be the directed a eed at no korea and a response from pyongyang that ratchets up the rhetoric. today on a day we learned that north korea may have managed to make nuclear warheads that can fit on a missile capable of strike thing country, here's the president's message to kim jong-un. >> north korea best not make any more threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. he has been very threatening

beyond a normal statement. and as i said, they will be met with fire, fury, and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before. >> fire and fury, like the world has never seen, the president today warned north korea that they best not make any more threats to the united states. it only took the regime a few hours to respond with another threat, saying their military was "examining operational plans to strike the u.s. territory of guam with ballistic missiles." if all of this sounds to you scary and uncertain, you're not alone. we'll hear from a wide range of military experts tonight. the only language to president trump is what president truman said to japan 72 years ago after dropping an atomic bomb. he said if they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the likes of which has never been seen on this earth. the japanese did not act quickly

enough, and three days later the second atomic bomb fell on nagasaki. that is not where we are tonight. the question is, though, did we take a step closer today? we start off with barbara starr tonight at the pentagon. so what more are you learning about this threat against guam? >> reporter: well, what we know is the north korean state news agency issued this statement earlier today. it appears to have come maybe, we're not positive, after president trump spoke. but the north korean agencies saying they're examining their operational plan to strike areas around guam using ballistic missiles. now, how realistic is it? the north koreans do have missiles that could theoretically strike guam. but they have some challenges in being able to have the real capacity to target that far away with precision. some 1800 miles perhaps, but nobody wants to take that bet, do they? guam does have a u.s. missile

defense system on the island. there are about 160,000 americans there, two u.s. military bases. and here's the real problem tonight. this is the direct challenge to what president trump said. he said another threat will be met by fire and fury. they made the threat. now what happens, anderson? >> before we move on, i want to be clear. it is not clear, because it was several hours after the president made the remark that the north koreans made the remarks. are you saying we don't know for a fact that this comment about guam was made after the president's remarks? >> reporter: i don't think we know exactly when it was published at this point. >> in terms of the nuclear development, if north korea does have this capability, it would be obviously very serious move forward for their nuclear program. >> reporter: here's where we are on that. the u.s. intelligence assessment is that they most likely have, in fact, produced a warhead.

the important word there being "produced." is it deployable, can it be put on an operational missile? could you fire the missile or hit a target? there are a lot of challenges ahead. but again, the key point here is north korea continues its march on. they are making progress, making rapid progress in their missile program in their warhead program. the big challenge for them on warheads right now, if they're going to fire these longer range ballistic missiles, can the warhead reenter the earth, withstand the heat and pressure, stay in tact and still hit a target? it's what they still have to achieve. but again, we come back to the question, is anybody really willing to take the bet at this point that they can't do it? >> and this is -- if they do have that capability, miniaturizing, it would have been faster than many people had predicted, no? >> reporter: you know, it would have been faster than you would have thought. let's say roughly a couple years ago.

but over the last two years, you have increasingly heard u.s. military commanders and intelligence officials say they are worried about the rapid progress that north korea has been making. and for the last several months, we heard top pentagon officials say that their working assumption is that the north koreans have the whole package, that they can put it all together, that the u.s. military has to plan against that worst case scenario against that worst case assumption. you have to plan like they have it in hand. >> barbarastarr, appreciate that. sarah, what more are we learning more about the president's comments today? >> reporter: we know that the president has been agonizing for months about what to do about the threats posed by north korea. obviously today we saw very fiery rhetoric from trump. it's the kind of rhetoric that raised alarm bells, even some members of congress. but it wasn't a surprise to

people who know the president well, who recognize this is his style. this is his tone. of course, the question tonight is whether this was just tough political talk or whether the administration is ready to take some sort of action. >> right. and do we know, and we may not, was this a planned response? was that phrase scripted that he used, the fire and fury, the likes of which the world has never seen, or power which the world has never seen, was that planned out or something that he said off the top of his head? >> reporter: we don't know exactly whether that was a scripted response. we knew he was having this opioid event today. we expected he would be asked about the situation in north korea and if this is something the president would be prepared to respond to. members of his staff had received a number of requests about how the white house is going to navigate the situation. but this is the kind of talk we've heard from the president before, his signature style how he expresses himself and why people are reacting to such

shock. it's not the kind of tone or wording we are used to seeing from previous presidents. but as we said time and time again on this show, anderson, president trump is not like previous presidents. >> in terms of retaliatory options the white house is considering, do you know? >> reporter: well, they didn't lay out a list of options in response to this latest revelation in terms of how they're going to deal with north korea. but we do know the president has spent quite a bit of time huddled with some senior u.s. officials talking about the situation in north korea. one thing that top administration officials have made clear is they look at north korea as a problem with every option on the table. that includes the military option. >> sarah murray, appreciate that. more reaction to tone and content. here's what senator john mccain told a local radio station late today. >> i take exception to the president's comments, because you've got to be sure that you can do what you say you're going to do.

in other words, the old walk softly by carry a big stick. >> democrat dianne feinstein said eat lating the nor >> she continued, in my view, diplomacy is the only sound path forward. i want to get perspective now from former director of national intelligence james clapper. general clapper, this latest news that north korea is quote, in their records examining the operational plan to strike areas and guam, how do you see how drastic that would escalate the conflict or how dangerous the situation is right now? >> first, anderson, thanks for having me. although i am reminded of the line ascribed to elizabeth taylor's eighth husband, when he said i know what i'm supposed to do but how do i make it different after listening to all the commentary about this all day long? to be serious, the rhetoric

itself is quite serious. and what is bothersome to me is, for decades, we've heard this kind of rhetoric coming out of north korea. typically we ignore it. certainly at a presidential level we ignore it. so the rhetoric itself is not helpful. and i am in agreement with senator feinstein's comments about the way ahead here is diplomacy. certainly the north koreans are going to convey the image of a capability which we cannot confirm they have. my old agency came out with an assessment ascribing the capability to miniaturize a weapon in a warhead. well, we've anticipated that for years. and it's only logical that as they aggressively pursued their missile technology, so would they a weapon to go with it. but in truth, neither they or we

know that these weapons will actually work. so i'm of a mind to -- i'm sort of in the secretary of state tillerson camp of more moderate rhetoric. and i would also appeal to those in the media to tone down the rhetoric, as well. because the rhetoric itself now is becoming quite incendiary. and i don't think it's very productive to engage in this duelling banjo rhetoric back and forth, which is quite provocative. >> did it surprise you that president trump targeted the threats from north korea, i don't know if he meant verbal threats or obviously military threats, or verbal threats about military threats, but saying don't threaten the u.s. anymore or else there's going to be this response. that's targeting -- it seems like one way to interpret it is

targeting the rhetoric that you are concerned about and the u.s. has always chosen to ignore. >> exactly. the issue with coming out with that kind of rhetoric from the presidential level raises the ante. and what we have always done in the past is take the rhetoric emanating from north korea with a grain of salt. when we take it seriously like this and threaten, as the president did, that's a heavy message. and when he says -- speaks of the fire and fury, this is very reminiscent of the rhetoric that north korea uses about transforming seoul into a sea of fire. and i believe they would if they were attacked, if all that artillery and rocketry they have lined up along that dmz. that rhetoric jeopardizes millions of people in south korea, not to mention the regional implications.

>> you mentioned secretary tillerson. i want to read what secretary tillerson said about north korea the other day. because it seems like he's trying to deescalate tensions, which you spoke to. he said, we do not seek a regime change. we do not seek a collapse of the regime. we do not seek an accelerated unification of the peninsula. we do not seek an excuse to send our military north. we're trying to convey we're not your enemy, we're not your threat, but you are presenting an unacceptable threat to us and we have to respond. that seems in stark contrast to what the president said today. >> it absolutely does. and, again, that doesn't help either have this inconsistent voices coming out of the leadership of this country. i think secretary tillerson is exactly right. we need to tone down the rhetoric about regime change and all this, as desirable as that might be, that -- all that does is amp up the paranoia and the

siege mentality that prevails in pyongyang, which i observed when i visited there three years ago. >> you flew there to secure the release of two americans. in political science 101 class, we learn about rational actors, some states are considered rational actors, others are not considered rational actors. do you think north korea is a rational actor? >> on their scale, they are ration rational. if you're sitting in pyongyang looking out, all you see are enemies. particularly when they look to the south, they realized the armed forces of south korea buttressed by the united states, they are no match for that and they understand that. and that's why this nuclear capability is their ticket to survival. it's the only thing they have that merits recognition by the rest of the world. so they're not going to give up

those nuclear weapons. i think we need to talk to them and we need to have dialogue with them but accept the fact that they are a nuclear power. >> do you think it's time for direct talks with north korea, which is something that past administrations have avoided, they tried to make it a number of countries, not giving north korea the one on one discussions? >> i absolutely do. i've been an advocate for establishing an intersection in pyongyang, much like we had in decades, we had in havana for decades, and to deal with the government of cuba that we didn't recognize. this is not a reward for bad behavior. it's to have a diplomatic presence there, and also to gain greater insight into north korea, and one of the reasons it's such a problem for us is because we're not there. and third, to serve as a conduit as information to north korea. i don't think their demands to

at least talk about a peace treaty, because all we've had is a cease-fire for 64 years on the korean peninsula. as the north koreans look at it, they see that the south koreans are on a hague trir trigger rea invade them to conquer their country. >> it's also interesting when you look at things from china's perspective. they did vote this weekend for more sanctions, but from their vantage point, it's interesting to realize their concerns are a, about instability on their border and if there's military conflict, obviously there's instability. but also just the idea of a unified korea that has u.s. troops and is oriented towards the united states, that is a concern for china, as well. >> exactly. the chinese don't like kim

jong-un's behavior. they don't like the missile tests and the underground nuclear tests. but what they dislike more is the thought of exactly what you suggest. that is a reunified korea forcefully reunified by the way, and violently imploding north korea with millions of north korean refugees pouring into china and having the republic of korea buttressed by the united states right on their border, that is even more unacceptable to the chinese. just as the chinese voted for the u.n. security council resolution, they voted for this one. both of which have sanctions. the issue is, will they enforce them? their enforcement of security council resolution 2270 was, shall i say, uneven. so it would be a real test now to see whether the chinese enforce this most recent

security council resolution. >> just finally, i'm sure you've looked at this and seen the war games and how this all plays out, again, not to ratchet up rhetoric or scare tactics in any way, but just -- you mentioned it a little bit. i mean, seoul, south korea is quite close to the north. just the impact of a regional conflict, military conflict, using whatever weapons that north korea has to south korea, to japan, what are we talking about in terms of -- >> you're talking about incomprehensible death and destruction. it would be a violent and just a terrible tragedy that would mean death and destruction, both in the north and south, and perhaps regionally. so it would be apocalyptic. >> and obviously with 30,000 u.s. troops there, they are

also -- >> not to mention the dependence of those servicemen and the hundreds of thousands of dual korean-u.s. citizens who are there, as well as of course, millions of republic of korea citizens, whose lives would be at risk. >> general clapper, i appreciate you being on tonight. thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. when we come back, we'll dig deeper into what the military picture would look like for dealing with north korea, as well as the terrible cost that general clapper was mentioning involving nearly every one of the options. coming up at a time when everyone needs to trust in the president, new polling shows not many people do in this country. we'll see whether that extends to some die hard trump supporters as we continue.

dj: hey siri, remind me to csiri: okay, i'll remind you. [door crashing] [reminder ding] dj: already on it. ♪ [siri ding] ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. this august visit your local volvo dealer to receive sommar savings of up to $4,500. this august visit your local volvo dealer it's just a burst pipe, i co(laugh) it. no.

with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just because of a claim. i totally could've - no! switching to allstate is worth it. with a stunning 4k displaydow and graphics thates. bring them to life. peter! you still with us? the dell inspiron 15 7000 gaming. dell, as real as it gets. restlessness... extreme anxiety... pacing... a constant urge to move. if someone you know is suffering from schizophrenia they may also be struggling with akathisia: a common side effect of some schizophrenia medications. learn more at myakathisia.com. get your ancestrydna kit.here. spit. mail it in.

learn about you and the people and places that led to you. go explore your roots. take a walk through the past. meet new relatives and see how a place and its people are all a part of you. ancestrydna. save 30% through august 15th at ancestrydna.com. the unpredictability of a flaree may weigh on your mind. thinking about what to avoid, where to go, and how to work around your uc. that's how i thought it had to be. but then i talked to my doctor about humira, and learned humira can help get and keep uc under control... when certain medications haven't worked well enough. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions,

and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. raise your expectations and ask your gastroenterologist if humira may be right for you. with humira, control is possible. whaef you think should be done about a nuclear armed north korea, it is safe to say the president's remarks has moved the country rhetorically closer to military action. we're taking a closer look what that might entail. cnn's brian todd sets the stage. >> reporter: president trump's defense secretary issued a dire warning about armed conflict on the korean peninsula. >> it will be a war more serious in terms of human suffering than anything we've seen since 1953.

it will involve the massive shelling of an ally's capital, which is one of the most density packed cities on earth. it would be a serious -- it would be a catastrophic war. >> reporter: kim jong-un has a million-man army and bolstered his infantry and artillery near the dmz. much of those forces are in underground bunkers, ready to fire on seoul at the first whiff of an attack by the u.s. >> the number of missiles that they have that they could launch into south korea could cause a lot of damage. >> reporter: there are about 28,000 u.s. troops in the region. the u.s. and south korea would win that war experts say, but studies suggest tens of thousands killed in the first couple of days. >> it would be a nasty tight. they have been therefore, so they know the terrain.

>> reporter: brian todd, cnn, washington. >> it's not the thing you want to think about, but it's the sort of thing that military planners must think about. perspective now from lieutenant general mark hurtling, rick francona and john kirby. general, the president's comments today, how concerned are you about what's unfolding, the pace of it, the rhetoric of it? >> we should own the clock on this, anderson. this should be under our control in terms of the tempo. there's been a lot of emotion on this. this is a threat that has dire consequences where we haven't -- where we were just beginning to make steps to put together an alliance with china and russia potentially on this or make steps forward. the president does not have support of congress on this, and as you can tell by the reaction tonight, the will of the american people is unsure on this. this also comes s at a time whe

there's challenges to president trump's approval and honesty levels by the american people. all of this is happening and coming together at a very tough time. it's having that truthfully is being based on some reports in terms of improvements in technologies that have been around for a couple of years. a general when he was in korea said that they had the potential to do some of these things. so this is something that's been around. we should be owning the tempo opposed to increasing the emotion. having been a guy who has worked the war plans in the pentagon or the contingency plans for korea and having been a colonel that's exercised on the ground in korea, this would be a tough, challenging fight. and secretary mattis, i think was underselling it in his predictions of how devastating a conflict on the peninsula would be. >> as you said, someone who has war gamed this out and been on the ground doing exercises,

eric, can you talk about why it is so difficult and give a sense of the difficulties involved? i remember talking about the terrain between south and north. so from a ground standpoint, but also from just the missiles alone. >> it's a constricted terrain, it's mountainous, a lot of ravines and caves the north koreans have most of their artillery set in caves. it would be very difficult. when we were fighting in iraq or afghanistan, it was relatively easy in a desert environment to have larges of airport and missiles hitting the targets we wanted to hit once we found them. in this environment, it would be very difficult, and the difference also between the middle eastern fights is the fact that north korea has a little under 10,000 tubes of artillery and rocket launchers to include the potential for nuclear weapons, as well. none of that doesn't mean we should take the military options off the table, but i don't think

we've concerned ourselves with, what is it that kim jong-un has as a capability, number one. we're beginning to see that. but also more importantly, what is his intent? we sort of know what he's trying to do. he's trying to sustain his regi regime. i'm not sure we've war gamed enough with this administration what that means to counter his actions and what we're trying to do in terms of a strategic end state. >> admiral kirby, what happens now that north korea has threatened a u.s. territory? does that heighten expectations the president could order military action? the president was saying, don't threaten the u.s. anymore, which is a different kind of threat for the u.s. to be making than others who made it. i think president clinton once said, if they struck, that there would be a cataclysmic response. >> it's difficult to know from his statement today whether he was referring to a physical threat or a verbal threat.

clear ly they have issue adverbial threat, assessing and carefully examining potential plans. they certainly threatened that they're looking at guam. we have to take that seriously, anderson. this is a u.s. territory, 160,000 american citizens on that side, about 12,000 troops and families, two military bases. it's a strategic hub for the pacific region. what's not clear is whether they can hit guam with effectiveness or precision. but again, we've got to take him serious hi. we have to take these threats seriously and we have to be ready for that. so the rhetoric simply did amp up today in a very unhelpful way, and it was all avoidable. the president didn't need to go there today, especially in the wake of the fact that he has his secretary of state in the region, who has indicated we're not after regime change. we are willing to explore the notion of negotiations and direct talks. he's got this great win at the u.n. security council just a

couple of days ago that prompted a sharp response from the north, but a significant win for the international community, galvanizing pressure. all that was moving in his direction. this was a step back. >> colonel francona, what's so interesting that the secretary of state, rex tillerson, just previously a few days ago had made a very different kind of statement towards north korea, essentially trying to lower the rhetoric, make u.s. intentions clear, what the u.s. is not interested in doing in terms of regime change and north korea. >> what he didn't do is state the position specifically. what are we willing to live with? are we willing to live with a north korea armed with a nuclear tipped intercontinental ballistic missile? from what i'm reading, we're saying we're not but i don't know what we're prepared to do about it. by using this kind of hang wage, we're playing right into kim jong-un's hands. what he wants is deterrence.

that's why he embarked on this program. he didn't embark on this nuclear weapons program to destroy the united states. he embarked on this program to protect his country from his perceived threat from the united states. general clapper laid this out very well how the north koreans look at the rest of the world. when you look out from north korea, you see enemies all around you. what's the best way to deter an enemy? a nuclear weapon. i think secretary tillerson is willing to talk to that, saying we understand what you want. let's see how we go forward from here. but i would hike to hear the absolute bottom line what is the united states willing to live with? >> we have to get a quick break in. just ahead, as kim jong-un and president trump trade warnings, senator john mccain has more to say on this. wait so you got rid of verizon, just like that? uh-huh. i switched to t-mobile, kept my phone-everything on it- -oh, they even paid it off! wow! yeah. it's nice that every bad

decision doesn't have to be permenant! ditch verizon. keep your phone. we'll even pay it off when you switch to america's best unlimited network. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event before it ends. choose from the is turbo, es 350 or nx turbo for $299 a month for 36 months if you lease now. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. and in this swe see.veryday act, when we give, we receive. ♪ what's critical thinking like? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers)

what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter. morgan stanley

more now on tonight's breaking news. the u.s. and north korea trading n threats. north korea saying it's looking into possibilities for striking the u.s. territory of guam. as we mentioned earlier, senator john mccain reacted to the president's comments this afternoon. here's more of what he said. >> i think that the ruler in pyongyang is not crazy, but he certainly is ready to go to the brink. the great leaders that i've seen, they don't threaten unless they are ready to act. and i'm not sure that president trump is ready to act. >> i want to bring back our military panel now. general hurtling, if you're south korea or japan tonight, what steps are you taking in

this potential escalation? >> there is an air defense umbrella over both japan and south korea right now, anderson, that would prevent any kind of ballistic missiles, for the most part, getting in. that's not 100% insurance, that's sort of hike what goesli goes on during israel. they can get most of them, but every once in a while one falls through. going back to what secretary mattis and general clapper said, it is dangerous in seoul, south korea. it's a packed city of 10.5 million people with over 100,000 americans, as well. any kind of disaster of an explosion in that city would cause an unbelievable human trauma and also cause medical issues across the board and it would be very tough to fight it. so yeah, they're prepared for this kind of thing. they've been prepared for a very long time. but that doesn't make it easier, and it's not something they want

on their territory. >> admiral kirby, you used to work at the state department. when you heard what the president said, did you get any sense whether those were prepared remarks or not? pause o because one of the phrases he uses, like the world has never seen, is actually a phrase he has used repeatedly throughout his life. i've been seeing just on twitter various times he used it. he talked about it in 2012, talking about rising food prices, beyond what we have ever seen. he said, running for president, he talked about china building a military fortress, perhaps the likes the world has never seen. i wonder if the fire and fury was something he worked on and he just added in that phrase. because that phrase does sort of take it to a different level, saying it's beyond anything the world has ever seen, takes it to

obviously -- what sounds like a nuclear level. >> very shrill and hyperbolic. i don't know whether it was prepared or not. i have to think it wasn't. this was a camera spray for an opioid conference. i know tefhe was following curr events, but it didn't strike me as prepared and thought through. definitely took the rhetoric to an amped level. i would be very surprised if this was fully supported. i would imagine, anderson, that this came as a surprise to pretty much everybody in his national security establishment when he said this. i can't imagine any of them were very pleased when they heard it. >> this has been pointed out by others, he actually in that discussion about the opioid crisis today, which is what this meeting was about, he used that phrase earlier talking about opioids. he said, we're very strong in our southern border and i would say the likes of which this

country has certainly never seen. he used that phrase just shortly before and used it perhaps in an ad lib about north korea. >> that's called a parachute. everybody has their ticks and phrases to fall back on when you don't know what next to say. >> colonel, can you walk us through what sort of visual the u.s. military has on north korea's nuclear capabilities? public understanding is what we know is from satellites. could the u.s. air force fly over to get a better look? is that a non-starter? >> we don't need to. we've got satellites that do much better coverage than manned platformed. if you're looking at signals intelligence, the entire country of north korea is within push to talk range. but we've never had good human assets and we don't have a

presence on the ground in north korea. we don't have an embassy. we don't have an intersection. so it's very difficult for us to accurately gauge what's going on there. as far as the intelligence on the missile program, it's probably fairly accurate, because we can watch that and see it. what we can't see is the inner workings of working on the warhead. that's all done in underground bunkers and in smaller workshops. so we don't know exactly how far along they've come on the development of the warhead. we can look at the missiles, we can't see the warhead. a lot of this is assessment. but the assessments on north korea have been pretty good over the years. and i think we predicted that this was going to snowball. we can see how much faster the pace is going right now. i think we've got a fair handle on what's going on. coming up, more on what the possibility of military action against north korea might look like, and what americans think about using military action,

according to a cnn poll. pain when...shouldr hey joanne, want to trade the all day relief of 2 aleve with 6 tylenol? give up my 2 aleve for 6 tylenol? no thanks. for me... it's aleve. forhas adapted to my weightic and shape... so i sleep deeply... and wake up ready to perform. only exclusive retailers carry tempur-pedic. find yours at tempurpedic.com. you each drive a ford pickuyes.ght? i'm going to show you a next generation pickup. awesome. let's do this. the bed is made of high-strength steel, which is less susceptible to punctures than aluminum. stronger the better. and best of all, this new truck is actually- oh my... the current chevy silverado. it's the chevy summer drive. get a total value of $9,600 or, get 0% financing for 60 months on this silverado all star. find new roads at your local chevy dealer.

with some sharp rhetoric from the president of the united states and north korea, we have new cnn polling on the subject. half the country favors the united states taking military action in response to north korea's weapons testing. 43% oppose military action. this poll was taken before today. with me now is former ambassador to china max baucus and jim

dement. ambassador, what do you make of president trump's comments today? >> during my several years of experience as ambassador to china, the chinese are very respective of strength. and they probably respect -- [ audio breaking up ] when president trump vacillates and issues contradictory statements, that's not strong. the chinese see that as weakness. and that emboldens them -- second, they definite hi want some stability in the peninsula at all costs. i think that's partly why they have lots of troops massed in the region. it is entirely possible, i'm not say thing is going to happen, but it's entirely possible that

we, the united states, if we attempt a preemptive strike, and all you know what breaks loose in korea, china may enter. that's a very real possibility. we don't spend enough time thinking about china's reactions. >> oh you're thinking that china would militarily enter north korea? obviously china doesn't want a militarily unified korea angling towards the u.s., which is on their border with u.s. troops. but also the fear of instability is something that many people said china doesn't want. but you think there's a chance china would enter north korea? >> i'm saying china would not stand idly by. they would not just sit this and watch what may or may not unfold. china has been thinking about this for a long time. they're a very proud country.

they want to maintain as much control as possible. i'm just suggesting we have to spend more time analyzing china's actions should the u.s. attempt a preemptive strike. >> senator, what do you think about that? >> hello, anderson. max, good to see you. anderson, this issue is much bigger for north korea. we're now living in a world where we have to understand, north korea is going to have nuclear weapons. we've seen rogue states, probably terrorist groups over the next decade. we have to determine what we're going to do about it. a missile defense is going to be key. we had some missile base in california and alaska, some deployed in japan. but they could not take down a salvo, numerous missiles fired at one time. we have the technology, if we develop it, to create a basic umbrella that we could use around the world for ourselves and our allies, render nuclear

weapons useless. it's going to take a while and a big investment. but we can no longer pretend that north korea is not going to have a nuclear weapon that can reach us. we can argue whether it's this month or next month, but we know they, as well as iran and a number of other nations will be there. so we need to get busy and get prepared. >> ambassador, just from a diplomatic perspective, is it wise for the president of the united states -- i mean, in past years the united states has basically tried to ignore the rhetoric coming out of north korea, the bellicose rhetoric as a way of ratcheting down things. for the president to respond by saying any more threats and those threats are not defined, against the united states by north korea will have these very powerful and repercussions, fire and fury is what he said. did that just ratchet up the situation or does north korea

cower in front of strength of the u.s.? >> i think it's very unwise. to up the rhetoric to a point we're getting too close to the tripping point where something disastrous might happen. there's too much diplomacy conducted, in my judgment, too much by twitter. these serious issues have to be addressed privately, talking with china privately, and south korea privately, japan and our allies. we need a lot more third party intervention, we've talked a lot about secretary tillerson has in talking with north korea. i think that's wise. we're going to need some exploratory conversations first potentially from sweden or other countries before we can sit down and talk. but cheerillearly we have to woe carefully and wisely in how we deal diplomatically with this very precarious situation.

>> senator, do you think it was wise of the president to make this statement today, because rex tillerson, in the statement he had made a few days ago, seemed really polar opposite in terms of kind of deescalating the situation. >> well, president trump's comments is not a real issue here. president obama tried for eight years, speaking in very conciliatory, soft tones and we see where that ended up. so north korea is so consumed with paranoia, they assume whether trump says it or not, that we're ready to attack, the south koreans are ready to attack. it is a very pretear ucarious situation. but it is amazing that people are surprised, as incredible as a country that all the generals before me tonight said we've allowed them to get so strong, we can't mess with them militarily. that's an incredible position for us to be in, and we've

obviously not prepared and dealt with korea in a way that has kept this threat to a minimum. >> ambassador, senator, i appreciate your time tonight. thank you very much. i'm going to speak with a congresswoman who represents guam, next. and clean energy resources because there are limits to the amount of fossil fuels that we can burn. since 1925, we have depended on diesel generators, burning approximately a million gallons of diesel fuel a year. we're going through an energy revolution. our mission is to make off-shore wind one of the principle new sources of energy. not every bank is willing to get involved in a "first of its kind" project. citi really stepped up when we needed them. citi saw the promise of clean energy and they worked really closely with us, financing the first off-shore wind farm in the united states. the wind farm will lower power prices. we're polluting the air less. businesses and homes can rely on a steady source of power.

block island wind farm is a catalyst this will be the first of many off-shore wind farms in the u.s. dj: siri: ok, 10 minutes andr 10 counting.es. chef ludo: je sens ce que the rock mijote. dj: man everything does sound better in french. dj: gimme some, chef. ♪ [siri ding] atmore than one flavor, oruch texture, or color.ing. a good clean salad is so much more than green. and with panera catering, more for your event. panera. food as it should be.

get your ancestrydna kit.here. spit. mail it in. learn about you and the people and places that led to you. go explore your roots. take a walk through the past. meet new relatives and see how a place and its people are all a part of you. ancestrydna. save 30% through august 15th at ancestrydna.com.

after decades of fiery rhetoric from north korea, there's a new threat to american territory in the pacific, a potential threat coming from state-run north korean media, saying pyongyang is looking at plans to strike areas around guam with medium to long range intercontinental ballistic missiles. congresswoman, i appreciate you being with us.

when you heard this verbal threat from north korea, how do you respond? >> thank you, anderson, thank you for thinking about us in guam. i've been definitely concerned about this threat because we were threatened numerous times a few years ago. and we take it all very serious, particularly the people of guam. i was getting calls a few years ago, whether people thought they should move off the island. these are 168,000 american citizens living in guam. and we've been living with this for the last few years. recently, anderson, i talked with both secretary mattis and admiral harris about these, and they always tell me, madeleine, don't worry about it, we're going to keep guam safe, we're going to take good care of guam. i've kind of felt, you know, this is a good thing, they're

going to take care of us. and at one time, a few years ago, i went to see secretary panetta when the threats were coming in quite seriously and often. and he decided to deploy the thaad missile defense on guam. then they talked about it not being permanent. again, i had to go through hearings in congress, please make this permanent. so we have the thaad missile defense out on guam, and it's currently operated by the army. so i've been told over and over, anderson, that, you know, they're looking at guam, they've got us within their vision, to take care of us. this has been very, you know, assuring to me. we have two large -- yes, go ahead. >> are people you talk to on guam, are they very concerned about this? is it a big topic of discussion today? >> they are very concerned because we've always known our

position near north korea is much closer than the united states. so lately they've been talking more, north korea, kim jong un, has been talking about the united states. but in the early days, a few years ago, it was guam. and it was japan, and other regions. so we kind of -- you know, i've always been very, very concerned about this. i've told people. >> congresswoman bordallo, i appreciate talking to you tonight and i wish you the best on a difficult day for people if guam. thank you. up next, a closer look at north korea's actual nuclear capabilities. plus reaction from capitol hill about the threats from president trump and pyongyang. i'm ryan and i quit smoking with chantix. everything i did circled around that cigarette when i started taking the chantix that urge just slowly diminished and it was a great and empowering feeling.

along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i don't even think about cigarettes anymore. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. many insurance plans cover chantix for a low or $0 copay.

no splashing! wait so you got rid of verizon, just like that? uh-huh. i switched to t-mobile, kept my phone-everything on it- -oh, they even paid it off! wow! yeah. it's nice that every bad decision doesn't have to be permenant! ditch verizon. keep your phone. we'll even pay it off when you switch to america's best unlimited network. hi..and i know that we have phonaccident forgiveness.gent, so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight- four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident.

switching to allstate is worth it. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.

breaking news tops this

hour. reaction to a threat from the president to north korea that is a world apart from anything any president has said in more than 40 years. these are words we're talking about, not a call to arms, and it's hard to understand the thinking behind them. first, here is what the president said today. >> north korea best not make any more threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. he has been very threatening beyond a normal statement. and as i said, they will be met with fire, fury, and frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before. >> that was president trump today, a day we learned that