>> announcer: ton on "the axe files" former secretary of defense and former cia director robert gates weighs in on trump, tariffs and dploebl tensions. >> i think it's strategically unwise to antagonize every country in the world simultaneously. >> his experience with 2020 hopeful joe biden. >> one of the guys in the room was vice president biden. would you be comfortable with him as commander in chief. >> and the biggest moments of his career serving under eight u.s. presidents. >> you knew every day you went into the who was history was being made.

>> welcome to "the axe files." >> secretary gates, great to see you again here in "wealthtrack," not that washington. >> the real washington. >> as far away from washlgtd as you can possibly get at the skagett the historical museum but even in these surrounding you thing about the world. i wanted to ask you we just celebrated the anniversary of d-day. that really was a harbinger of a new era, superpower era, and the construction of these global institutions. those institutions feel like they are fraying a little bit right now. why? >> well, i think that first of all those institutions were developed in the context of the cold war. but they were very much in the context of the united states being really the one power that came out of world war ii stronger than when it went in.

>> and we were the guarantor really. >> and the guarantor. but for example when those institutions were created in the late 40s, china was irrelevant in terms of the global economy. china was pretty much irrelevant in terms of -- of the global scene. it was just a different world. and the other -- the other part of the problem i think is that with the end of the cold war the united states really began uni laterally to disarm when it came to alm of the non-military instruments of power. >> the chinese have really filled that void. i mean, they're all over the world now, providing infrastructure and other kinds of aid. >> and my view and see we should have been more proactive after the end of the cold war, but

more particularly as the chinese economy began to take off. maybe we ought to look at how we restructure these institutions to take into account china's global economic power, and the shift in power in europe and elsewhere, and modernize these institutions. >> the other thing that's evolved is a reaction to these institutions, a populist, nationalist institution because they represent globalization as not working in their benefit. it feels like now the president is very much on the other side of the debate relative to some of the institutions. he is suspicious of them, feels like america has been taken advantage of, was just in britain urging brexit. what role is the president maying here? >> what we are seeing in terms

of backlash against globalization is not limited to the united states. >> right. >> i mean it's really what's behind brexit. it's what behind elements in italy. >> sweeping europe, yes. >> and i think in part it's because there are a lot of people in these countries that believe globalization has been a project of the political elites. and they have neglected the consequences of globalization, not to mention technology in terms of the lives of these people. i mean, you look at macron's gas tax. >> yes. >> and if you live in paris and can get on the metro, that's great. but if you're a farm ner france and need diesel to run your tractor or take your truck into town, a big increase in the tax is a big deal. and that's why you've had the demonstrations in france for weeks on end. so i think the president is out in the forefront on all of this. but i think it's part of a much

broader resentment. >> no question. >> -- resentment about the fact that the elites across the entire political spectrum really didn't pay attention to the consequences for a lot of average working people. >> his america first philosophy -- it stresses national sovereignty. it's rooted in a kind of anti-trade, anti-immigrant view, which is common to these other movements as well. are we in a new historical epoch here. >> i think there is a lot of anxiety, and i would say exhaustion on the part of the american people with the global role that the united states has played over the last 20 years. i think a huge impact, david, is 17 years of war. >> yeah. >> and people are seeing this as

a manifestation of the u.s. taking on global responsibilities. and spending several trillion dollars that could have been more effectively spent in their view here at home. a president always has the first responsibility to look out for the united states of america. the worry that i have is how do you do that while still appreciating the fact that the -- one of the unique strengths we have in the world is our alliances? and how do you press for others to carry their own weight and actually have impact while at the same time trying to keep these alliances intact and healthy? and you know, my last speech as secretary of defense if europe -- i told -- it was in brussels before a nato audience. i basically said i am the last senior american official --

national security official you will ever encounter who has an emotional tie to nato. because i was there for the last half of the cold war and saw the role nato played >> i think the kind of emotional and historical attachment that american leaders have had to this alliance for nearly 65 years is aging out. >> but this is in 2011. i said a new generation of politicians is coming to power in the united states, in the congress, and inevitably in the presidency. they're going to have a very different view. and your failure to carry your own weight, to bear the burden that the united states bears, or to share that burden is going to weigh very negatively. >> i remember. >> that was eight years ago. >> and i remember that. and, you know, the one thing one must say is that trump has jaw boned nato. and you have seen more of an investment by the countries. but he has been pretty tough on

allies. at times tougher on aur allies than our adversaries. >> i think some of the language, some of the personal attacks have made this worse than it needed to be. i will give him credit. i mean, he has produced results in most of the european countries in terms of increases in their -- in their security. and the question i've always had is is there a middle road between the rhetoric that i and others like me used against the allies and their failure to carry their fair share of the burden -- which frankly had no results -- produced nothing. >> right. >> and the president's over the top pressure. >> yeah. >> and personal attacks. >> the nuances. >> that have produced results but at a considerable cost. and you'd hope that there was some middle ground. but i'm not sure what it is. >> so one of my big concerns, technology is churning faster and faster, and liberal

democracies are moving slower because they're designed to move slow when countries are divided. and i think it creates this tension and sense of doubt that drives people in the direction of authoritiarian. this is the argument that the chinese make that they're better suited to deal with the challenges and the opportunities of this century because authoritiarian regime case move more quickly, can plan for the future. >> i think our economic crisis in 2008-2009 was a turning point, and not just for us in many ways but for countries like china, and especially china, because all of a sudden it was obvious that our political system wasn't producing whag it needed to produce. but what that economic crisis showed was that our economic system wasn't working either. frankly, xi jinping is not shy about positing china as an alternate of model of governance

and development. you know, do it our way, and -- and people- dsh i mean they brought hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in a very short period of time. they have all this extraordinary fraz. and say basically we can get stuff done and bring prosperity to people. >> so give me a little hope here. >> well, i think people often ask me what's the greatest national security danger to the united states? and i've been saying for quite sometime that i think the biggest national security threat lies within the two square miles that encompass the white house and the capitol building. because in all honesty if we can't figure out a way to get stuff done and address some big problems here at home we're at much bigger risk than from any foreign threat. we've always had political polarization in the united states. but what's new really in the last 25 years or so is paralysis, the inability to get

anything of any real consequence done. every now and then you get a bill. but it's pretty -- they're pretty few and far between and not tackling any of the really big issues whether infrastructure or immigration or public education and so on. >> let me ask you about a few quick tariffs. the president has used them -- i don't know if the word liberally is the right way to say it. but we're in a trade war with china. he's now brandishing them to mexico, not as a matter of trade but to try and influence policies on immigration. is this a winning strategy? >> first of all, on china, i think that i give the administration credit for challenging the chinese. and being tough on those issues and hanging tough i think makes a lot of sense. the united states has not, for 30 years, for all practical purposes, used economic leverage for geopolitical or geostrategic

reasons. i mean, my view is -- well for openers, i think it's strategically unwise to antagonize every country in the world simultaneously. i think we ought to establish some priorities. we ought to understand the critical nature of the trading relationship with both canada and mexico. >> our trading partners, yeah. >> and realize the disruption that that will cause. i just think we're applying them too broadly to too many countries, all at the same time. and it's not clear what the priorities are or what the long term strategy is. >> announcer: come up on "the axe files." >> you're also a former director of the cia. what impact does it have on the intelligence community to have in open rift? fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely.

but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?

and is the fastest growing place to buy a car in the nation. carvana is six years old this year it's because we have thousands of people working hard to make our customers' experiences the best. it's because we have tens of thousands of cars ready to be delivered to your doorstep. and it's why hundreds of thousands of happy customers have ditched the dealership and bought their car online, earning us an average 4.7 stars in the process. so if you didn't know about us before, you do now. we're carvana, and we want to give you the car buying experience you deserve. ♪

applebee's new loaded chicken fajitas. now only $10.99. it's been a long time since andrew dusted off his dancing shoes. luckily denture breath will be the least of his worries. because he uses polident 4 in 1 cleaning system to kill 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. polident. clean. fresh. and confident. of odor causing bacteria. so recently my son's band was signed by a record label. while we're on the road, i can keep my parents in the loop with the whole facetime thing. i created a rockstar. (vo) the network more people rely on, gives you more. like iphone xr on us when you buy the latest iphone. that's verizon. welcome to seattle. where people are into coffee, tech, and retirement planning. the perfect retirement for me is doing the things that i want to do, not the things i have to do.

unlike seattle, less than half of americans participate in their employer retirement plans. so what keeps people more engaged in their retirement? i want to have the ability to easily transact online, great selection of funds, great advice, everything in one place. helping people in their working years and beyond. that's financial wellness. talk to your employer or start a plan at prudential. who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go.

i have to talk to you about russia. you were a russia expert before you entered public life half a century ago. that's how you started out. today russia seems like a degraded power but a first rate provoker. >> how should we deal with russia right now. >> putin's initial obltives were to establish russia as a friendly power and establish a buffer of states. but after the color ruffles in the kirkants and georgia in 2003 and 2004. i think putin concluded that he was next, that the west was trying to overthrow him. and then in the election of 2011 parliamentary election in late 2011 and secretary clinton's speeches criticizing the lack of free elections. >> and we do have serious concerns about the conduct of the elections.

>> he saw as outright interference in the russian election. he had never seen anti-putin demonstrations in moscow before so this really antagonized him. i think putin is now in the position where one of his primary object he was is the wherever in the world ke create problems for the united states he will do that. and he is also determined to accent divisions between ourselves and allies and also exploit differences within each of our countries, whether the united states, france, the uk. we know about the russians and us in 2016. but they were very much involved in the brexit election. >> other elections. >> they loaned millions of dollars to massry le pen's republican party in france. he is determined to create as many problems for the west and as many places ke.

he is a provoker and spoiler. he has been pretty successful. put isn't a classic bully. the only way you deal with putin in my view is from a position of strength. >> let me ask you a question. when you saw the president in helsinki stand on the same platform and say putin assures me that they had nothing to do with meddling in our elections, and i see no reason not to believe him when american intelligence was very, very clear on this, and now we have the mueller report as well, what message does that send to putin? >> well, i think he -- i think he thinks he has a friend in the white house. you know, it would have been nice to see the president do a few winks, even if he was saying that for diplomacy sake. the administration is correct when they say they've imposed some of toughest sanctions on russia ever. and yet you have the president's rhetoric that's in a very different place in terms of russia. and so you have the actions of the administration which are

what they ought to be doing, and then you have some of the president's rhetoric which convey that is he is thinks putin is a really great guy. >> and what about the intelligence community generally among your many hats over many years, you're also a former of the director of the cia where you worked for decades. what impact does it have on the intelligence community to have the open rift between the president and the intelligence agency and people like clapper who are very well respected, john brennan very well respected. >> in the past it hasn't been as personal. i will tell you from personal experience that most presidents don't much like cia. and have been critical. richard nixon was once quoted as saying what the hell do those clowns do out there in langley? after the fall of the shaw jim judge carter sent a hand wrien note saying i'm not satisfied with the quality of our

intelligence. and most presidents have had issues with the intelligence community. and one of the reasons is because whenever the intelligence analysts write a piece assessing what's going on in a foreign country, the president and the secretary of state often look at it as a grade card and how they are doing. but the other part of it that gets under the skin of presidents and see all the analysis the cia does goes to the congress. i used to tell our analysts i said just always remember, the members of congress aren't looking for enlightenment. they're looking for ammunition. and that's how the president sees it. >> well, imhe has basically accused the intelligence community and fbi of being involved in an operation against him. >> i would say that, first of all, that those differences are much more public than they have been under previous presidents. and more personal. there is no doubt about it.

>> now, we know, mueller laid it out in detail what the russians were up to. wouldn't it -- wasn't it the responsibility of the fbi with the assistance when they needed it of the cia overseas to run these rumors to ground that turned out to be absolutely true? >> well, you know, i wasn't there at the time. >> of course. >> i don't know what they did or what they didn't do. but i would say as a matter of general principle, any evidence that a foreign power was trying to interfere in an american election should have elicited a strong reaction from the intelligence community, the fbi and frankly our political leaders. >> do you think the obama administration was strong enough in response? >> based on what i know just reading the newspapers and so on probably not. >> and what should we do now headed into 2020 because they are clearly as you say putin has made his choice, involved in a full scale subversion campaign

worldwide to try and weaken the western alliance and certainly the united states, what should we be doing now? >> well, again, there is a difference in my view between the actions of the administration and the rhetoric. and -- and my impression is that the fbi and department of homeland security and the intelligence community are working very hard to try and identify what the russians are doing? and try to block it. and the congress i think has been -- has been concerned. i think the problem is that endeavor really needs leadership from the top. it needs the president to say, we're not going to allow any foreign country to interfere with our elections. and we will take whatever steps are necessary. >> why doesn't he? why don't you think he -- >> i don't know. >> announcer: up next on "the axe files." >> the president has just lost

control of both house of congress and losing two wars. what could possibly go wrong? ret are planked-to-perfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank... ...but not for long- so hurry in! ...to give you the alrprotein you needin ensure max protein... with less of the sugar you don't (grunti)g i'll take that. (cheering) 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar ensure. for strength and energy.

you ever wish you weren't a motaur? sure. sometimes i wish i had legs like you. yeah, like a regular person. no. still half bike/half man, just the opposite. oh, so the legs on the bottom and motorcycle on the top? yeah. yeah, i could see that. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive.

woman: (on phone) discover. hi. do you have a travel card? yep. our miles card. earn unlimited 1.5 miles and we'll match it at the end of your first year. nice! i'm thinking about a scuba diving trip. woman: ooh! (gasp) or not. you okay? yeah, no, i'm good. earn miles. we'll match 'em at the end of your first year. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist.

you can barely feel. mno kidding.rd. but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome.

go to xfinity.com/moving to get started. >> i want to talk a little bit about you. i know that is not necessarily your favorite topic. but just a little bit of history. you were born in kansas. so far as i know you grew up in a norman rockwell painting. your parents you wrote were of mixed marriage, a republican and democrat. but did you have a thought then about politics? could you see yourself in government, really. >> when i went to college, i enrolled in pre-med. i wanted to be a surgeon. and as i've often told people since then, god only knows how many lives have been saved by my becoming head of cia and secretary of defense instead of a doctor.

i went to the college of william and mary, in williamsburg, where really the first steps toward independence were taken in many respects. walking those streets, and just, you know, being in those buildings, had a big impact on me. then i wanted to teach. i had to intention. >> you went to indiana university and got a masters degree. >> when i got my masters i had two job offers one was to teach seventh grade history. one to work for cia. >> i said i'll go to cia or a while and then teach. >> you were in the air force. you were at a missile defense. >> no an icbm base. >> you went back in the cia you spent time in national security councils. in the 80s you had a kind of meteoric rise in the cia and appointed by president reagan, i guess to be cia director. and you ht to withdraw. you had to withdraw because of

the fallout from the iran contra scandal. for a guy who had the meteoric rise how was it to have the setback. >> i tell young people if you never had a failure, you're -- your education is incomplete. you know, i never -- i never got into any real trouble because of it. and david borne the chairman of the senate intelligence committee said if you are willing to wait six months we'll get you confirmed. he was a democrat i went to president reagan and said i don't think cia can be without a permanent leader for six months. and i think -- i'll stay on as deputy if you want me to. and frankly one of the reasons why i still had a future in front of me was because the congress still trusted me. and because of the way i conducted myself.

and i think -- i think the key is you just have to keep a sense of perspective. and i actually -- the whole thing ironically ended up creating tupts for pay i probably wouldn't have had otherwise. >> you went back to the national security councils under president bush, the first, 41. ultimately you did get the cia job. but you were there during the -- obviously the fall of the -- >> it was the most amazing closure you could possibly get. i joined cia to do my bit in the cold war against the soviet union. the soviet union collapsed six weeks after i became director of central intelligence. to be with bush two or three or four hours a day while he was managing this liberation of eastern europe, the end of the cold war, the collapse of the soviet union, the gulf war, you knew every day you went into the office history was being made.

>> you also mention his stewardship of the gulf war. years later when the u.s. went into iraq, there wasn't it that kind of global coalition. was that a mistake to move forward without building the kind of architecture the first president bush built? >> well i think ultimately there were at least nominally a couple of dozen different countries. >> coalition of the willing, some of them quite small. >> that cooperated, yeah. i gave a speech six weeks after the invasion. and i said that the concern that i have is that we're a little bit like the dog that caught the car. what do you do with it now? i said in the speech that i thought the post-military, post-invasion problems were going to be much harder than the military piece of it. and the challenges inside iraq were just enormous.

>> when you were called back in 2006, the war was being lost. and public opinion was dramatically negative. >> we were losing two wars. >> in afghanistan and iraq. you were down at texas a&m happily esconced leading that institution. why did you come back? and did you know what you were walking into. >> a year and a half earlier i'd been asked to become the first director of national intelligence by bush. and after really wrestling with it for a couple of weeks i told him no. i wanted to stay at a and m. but when the national security adviser steve hadley called me in october of 2006 and said if the president asked you to become secretary of defense, would you agree? and i said, steve, there are thousands of kids out there putting their lives on the line every day doing their duty, how could i not do mine?

i said of course i'll do it. and i remember happening up and saying my god what am i going to tell my wife? one of the things i told her, i said you know the president just lost control of both house of congress and we're losing two wars, what could possibly go wrong. >> and you managed the surge. and the surge was successful. i'm sure you know the leader of the democratic -- democrats in the senate, harry reid called barack obama in the summer of 2008 and said, you ought to ask bob gates to be your running mate for vice president. you knew that? >> i did not know actually he had called obama. i did get a call from harry reid. i remember the first question he asked me was, what's your position on abortion? and i'm the secretary of defense. i said no position. and he said well i think you

ought to -- you ought to be the vice president. and i -- i told my secretary when i hung up wsh i think he is smoking something. but i had no idea he had actually called. >> yeah, he called. and it was taken seriously. the president did come back -- president obama -- abasked you to stay on, which was unusual. >> unprecedented. >> request. were you reluctant? no we were still engaged in the two wars. and i felt like, you know, if i can help, how can i not agree to stay on? >> announcer: ahead on "the axe files." >> we didn't have a shred of solid evidence. i think there was really a big political risk for the president. uh-oh, looks like someone's still nervous about buying a new house. is it that obvious? yes it is. you know, maybe you'd worry less if you got geico to help with your homeowners insurance.

i didn't know geico could helps with homeowners insurance. yep, they've been doing it for years. what are you doing? big steve? thanks, man. there he is. get to know geico and see how much you could save on homeowners and renters insurance. they're america's bpursuing life-changing cures. in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that. ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design.

award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. the volvo xc90. get 2 medium, every day at marco's, 1-topping pizzas for just $6.99 each. because it takes two... to make a great everyday value. every store. every day. the italian way. hello primo. plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants.

♪ ♪ want to freshen your home without using heavy, overwhelming scents? introducing febreze one. it eliminates odors with no heavy perfumes, so you can feel good about using it in your home. for a light, natural-smelling freshness, try new febreze one.

today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest.

i have to ask you about the bin laden raid. partly because there is an iconic photo that goes along with that i think will be one of the most famous photos of our -- of our time. you were opposed to the raid initially. and really until your staff persuaded you at the end that it was -- it was something that should go forward. and you said you were sort of the prisoner of your own

experience. >> i had been in that same room, that situation room almost exactly 30 years earlier when we tried the hostage rescue mission in iran, which was a complete disaster, which by the way also the disaster started with the helicopter crash. >> yes. >> my opposition to the raid, i wanted to attack the compound. i wanted to kill bin laden. there was no question about that. the sque whether to do it with a drone or do it some other way than going in. my concern about a ground operation or about the seals going in was tied solely to the future of the war in afghanistan. my concern was that the pakistanis would be so antagonized by a raid into their territory that they would shut down or lines of communication from karachi to afghanistan. and we would lose the war in afghanistan overnight. that was my biggest concern about the raid. i had no doubts about the capabilities of the team or the

military plan or anything else. i have to say about the photograph, i got a photo shopped copy of that picture with all the key players in superhero costumes. so obama is superman, bide isn't sprrmd. hillary naturally is wonder woman. and for some reason i'm the green lantern. >> i saw that. >> and we all had a good laugh i held it up and said mr. president these pictures are why you must never release the photographs of the dead bin laden because somebody will photo shop them and anger a billion muches putting our troops and americans at risk. to the best of my knowledge the photographs are the only thing about the raid that never leased >> you talked about president bush's decision to go forward with the surge which was quite unpopular. what about the president obama's decision to -- on not 100%

verifiable intelligence to go forward with this in his first term when he was going to have to run for re-election. >> i thought -- and i wrote that i thought it was one of the most courageous acts that i had seen a president carry out. we didn't have a shred of solid evidence. the entire case was circumstantial put together by a group of analysts out of cia. there was no solid evidence at all. and i think that the -- the iranian hostage crisis and the failure of the rescue mission credibilitied to president carter's defeat in 1980. the economy didn't help. >> right. >> but this was also a big issue. and so i think there was really a big political risk for the president. >> one of the guys in the room was vice president biden, who is now running for president. he clashed with the pentagon and with the leadership over

afghanistan. and you've been fairly critical of him at one point, saying he was wrong, on every foreign policy issue for 40 years. would you be comfortable with him as commander in chief. >> i think we'd have to wait and see. i don't want to go down that road with anybody, frankly. i think the vice president did have some issues with the military. and i did say that recently that i stand by the statement that i thought he had been wrong about those foreign policy issues for 40 years, especially during the cold war. but in truth, apart from afghanistan, there were a number of issues he and i agreed on. he obviously has a lot of experience, chairman of the foreign relations committee for a long time. and we just have to see how these things play out. >> you can't say whether you'd be kmfbl with him as commander in chief. are you comfortable with the currently commander in chief.

>> i'm just not going to go down that road. >> i i wanted to note i gave you the invitation to go down that road. you also mention the issue of age. i sat next to the presidents. i know how taxing that job is. you've raised questions about whether anybody should be in that job. i mean should there be an age limit for the president? you were there when president reagan at the end of his term. do you have concerns about anybody? >> it's not the level of energy for certain periods of time. it's the level of energy that i think is required over a pro tracted period of time. and it's the fact that you're dealing with 20 different complex issues simultaneously. it's three dimensional chess every day. i know how exhausted i was when i left as secretary of defense after four and a half years. i worry -- i'm just talking about myself -- there is a certain pnt at which you have to recognize you don't have the same energy level that you did when your 60s.

i mean things have changed. sort of 75 is the new 60 or whatever, i hope. but i do think that there is a question there. and -- and there is also a question about intellectual curiousty and intellectual flexibility, how willing are you to change your views, adjust your views in light of changed circumstances? and the truth is the older most of us get the more set in our ways we get. >> there was definitely some tension over how many troops to send to afghanistan. and now we're almost 18 years into the war there. we have a fraction of the troops we had at the peak of the surge. but still we are there. how does this end? or does it? is this just a never-ending commitment? >> i think we have had troops in south korea since 1950. we've had troops in germany

since the 1945. they're there for different reasons and so on. if the taliban take over just willy nily and there is no political agreement, for all the trouble we have had in afghanistan, for all the lives we lost, all the treasure that's been spent, the fact remains there are 5 million girls in school in afghanistan, women are in the parliament. women are a part of the society in way -- there is a relatively free press. do we just chuck it all? i mean it's a very -- it's a very tough problem. >> you have written about -- and i know -- and i know from working for the president -- and i had the chance to go to iraq and afghanistan with him and see the plen did young people. some of them had to do on your orders, on his orders, president bush's orders, four, five tours of duty. many lost their lives. many limbs. and many came back with

psychological scars of -- that repeated horror of war. we have 20 suicides a day among veterans. it's a national crisis. have we met our obligations to these -- to these young people who served? >> no, i don't think so. but i must say it's not -- it's not for a lack of people trying. the challenge is how do you make them feel part of a community again that people actually recognize? you know, it's not enough just to say thanks for your service. i mean these guys go -- men and women go from being part of a closely knit unit where they've got mutual support. and then they come disproportionately from rural areas and small towns and all of a sudden they're back home alone. how do you take those people and create an environment in which they can reintegrate and be great citizens? and the truth is the vast

majority already do that. the vast majority come back, they adjust, deal with the problems. and they move on with their lives. and they're mentally healthy and contributing and everything else. the problem is that subset that have had those difficulties. and find it difficult to overcome them. to tell you the truth, injury a big part of the solution is not the government. but society itself. and whether it's businesses, churches, or other organizations. >> providing support. >> in the small towns that create a sense of bonding. >> announcer: up next. >> i thought that was a very poor shot. i thought that was outrageous. >> should the -- should there have been resistance to that? guys, get in here!

who's a good boy? it's me. me, me, me. hey guys! you're gonna want to get in on this. i know how to those guys in here. let's pause the internet on their devices. wohhh? huhhhh? [ grumbling ] all: sausages! mmm, mmmm. bon appetite.

make time for what matters. pause your wifi with xfinity xfi and see the secret life of pets 2 in theaters. general mattis is someone you know well, served while you were secretary of defense. you probably knew general mcmaster as well. rex tillerson was someone you knew and i think recommended to the president. they're all gone now. what do their absences mean? >> every secretary brings a different set of skills to the job. i think the key is, is not necessarily the personalities but are there people who are still willing to tell the president when they disagree. and it sounds like, just from what i read in the newspapers, that there are disagreements within the white house and those are put in front of the

president. for me the key is, you can argue and debate with the president until he makes a decision. but you do need people around the president who will tell him, that's a mistake. and when the president makes a decision, you have two choices. you either say yes, sir and go implement the decisions, or you resign. the worst of all possible wor , worlds, and i've seen this before, are people who disagree and stay and then try to undercut the decisions. you saw this in the obama administration. we've seen it in every administration. that's the worst of all possible worlds. so the question is, with tillerson and kelly and mattis and mcmaster gone, are there still people around the president who disagree with him and who are willing to tell him when they think that something is not going the right way. and my sense is, just based on newspaper articles, from fights

inside the white house, there still appear to be such people. >> you knew john mccain well, probably battled with him at took place, but indisputably a person who sacrificed greatly for this country, loved the country. what was your reaction when you saw over in japan that they covered up the name on the ship, on the carrier that was named for him and his father and his grandfather, all honored servicemen? >> i thought that was a very poor show. i thought that was outrageous. >> should there have been resistance to that? >> the question is, you go back to the bush administration, are you going to fire the advance guy that put the "mission accomplished" banner up on the aircraft carrier? >> should have, honestly. but the military had to cooperate in that, right? >> i mean, those kind of things, i mean, i have seen -- look, with all these presidents, i

have seen advance people do really crazy things. and as long as it's not illegal or, you know, immoral or whatever, people try to accommodate what the president's team wants them to do. i've also seen a lot of advance guys do things the president didn't know anything about. >> iteight presidents. what are the most important things you've learned watching them, all of them very different, all of them with strengths and weaknesses, what's the most important quality a president and a leader can have? >> so in 1933, supreme court justice oliver wendell holmes jr. was asked him opinion of franklin d. roosevelt. and he said, you know, he has a second rate intellect but a first rate temperament. and i think at the end of the day, what's most important is a first rate temperament.

uf you take the greatest presidents, lincoln, washington, fdr, eisenhower, reagan, they weren't necessarily the smartest men in the room. but they had enough self-confidence, their temperament was such, they were comfortable surrounding themselves with people who were smarter than they were. and i think, i think the willingness to have people around you who disagree with you, who tell you that that's a bad idea, is absolutely critical. but that's part of the temperament. so i would say, you know, you can come up with long lists, different skill sets and everything. but at the end of the day, every one of our greatest presidents has had an extraordinary temperament. >> macarthur said old soldiers never die, they just fade away. what about old secretaries of defense? >> they do interviews.

>> thank goodness for that, i'm very prevenappreciative. what is your level of confidence about our future as a country? >> you know, david, despite all the problems, i'm actually an optimist. one of the reasons i'm an optimist, i've probably had more experience with young people in this country than almost anybody else. i led the boy scouts, i was president of texas a&m, i was secretary of defense, i led cia. and i see this rising generation of really amazing young people who are dedicated, who are determined, who want to serve, who are unhappy with where we are, who i think see the role of the united states and the world in a positive way. for me, the greatest source of optimism is our young people. >> secretary gates, it's always

good to see you. thank you very much. >> thank you, david. my pleasure. >> for more of my conversation with secretary gates, visit luminarypodcasts.com. >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. you are live in the "cnn newsroom." i'm ana cabrera in new york. we have breaking news right now, the first real meaningful test of where democratic voters are leaning as they look over and consider the more than 20 men and women who want to run to replace donald trump. the cnn/des moines poll. in the last four u.s. presidential elections, when there was no democratic incumbent running, the man or woman who won the iowa democratic caucuses went on to become the democratic