i'm candy crowley in washington. head to cnn gaum.com/sotu for analysis and extras. stay with cnn throughout the day for updates on the rescue of hannah anderson. "fareed zakaria gps" starts next. this is "gps," the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. on today's show, first up is al qaeda back? or were the embassy closures and the terror alert misguided? we'll take a look at those questions and examine al qaeda's new stronghold. and we'll ask the last man to try to achieve peace in the middle east whether the current attempt is worth it. ehud barak, the former prime minister of israel, weighs in. also president obama cancels a summit with russia's president putin. what is up with the russians? finally, before and after. a stark reminder of the ravages

of war. but first, here's my take. the obama administration's warning about a possible al qaeda plot against american interests in the middle east has triggered a volley of attacks back home. for those who always suspected president obama was somehow soft in fighting the war on terror, this was vindication. the weekly standard, fox news, the wall street journal editorialists all piled on saying that the president had claimed al qaeda had been decimated -- >> al qaeda is on the run and we got bin laden. >> but this terror warning proved him wrong. now, in part the administration has only itself to blame. the state department issued a global travel alert for the entire month of august and explained that the attack could come anywhere. congressmen who were briefed by administration officials explained while al qaeda targets were in the arab world and in africa, there could also be attacks in europe or north america. now, if it is a global travel alert, then it isn't really a

travel, but rather an existence alert. the public announcement had all the hallmarks of the old color-coded alerts of the bush era. threatening enough to make people anxious and vague enough to give them little to do about it. but what about al qaeda? well, al qaeda central, the organization centered in afghanistan and pakistan, is in fact battered and broke. but the idea of al qaeda remains vibrant in some other places. not, as it turns out, in the great hot beds of islamic radicalism such as saudi arabia, but rather in places where the government is so weak it simply cannot control its own territory. yemen, somalia, mali, northern nigeria. so what kind of strategy should the united states pursue against these very small groups in very weak states? there are three possible paths. the first would be a more full bore counterinsurgency strategy, the kind that general david petraeus executed in iraq and to

a lesser degree in afghanistan to bring stability to those areas. but does anyone think that sending tens of thousands of american troops into these countries is a smart idea? and does anyone think keeping more troops in afghanistan would make terrorists in mali tremble? as michael hayden, cia director under george w. bush pointed out, many of these groups are really gangs of local thugs using the al qaeda name to build their brand. for washington to announce a grand campaign against them might exaggerate their importance, americanize local grievances and create a global threat that didn't really exist. the terror alerts have probably delighted these small groups for just that reason. the second strategy would be counterterrorism using drones, missiles, special forces and other kinetic tools to disrupt al qaeda-affiliated groups. by anyone's measure, the obama administration has been aggressive on this front. president obama has used more

drones each year of his presidency than president bush did in his entire presidency. data gathering, as mr. snowden reminded us. the third possible approach to the threat of terrorism is to try to get local governments to fight the terrorists, but the places that these al qaeda affiliates have sprung up like somalia and yemen are ungovernable. only the u.s. has the technology, missiles and soldiers to disrupt terror plots being hatched in these countries. so you throw the posturing and the politics aside, and you can see that the u.s. is following a reasonable path among the options. if anything, the best policy in the long run would be to shift the struggle over to locals, who can most effectively win a long war against militants on territory that they know much better than outsiders. it would also shift the ideological struggle over to muslims, who can most effectively battle al qaeda in

the realm of ideas. the u.s. can help by building up the legitimacy and capacity of these governments in various ways by encouraging reform, providing aid, technical know-how. of course this would be the softest of the three strategies and would probably draw the most fire from obama's critics before they actually pursue it more fully. go to cnn.com/fareed for a link to my "time" column this week, and let's get started. you've heard my take. let's dig deeper now. i have two great scholars on al qaeda and terrorism. peter bergen is of course cnn's national security analyst, the author of many books on al qaeda. he produced the first tv interview of osama bin laden back in 1997. gregory johnsen is the author of the last refuge, yemen, al qaeda and america's war in arabia. welcome.

peter, what triggered all of this as far as we understand it is the head of al qaeda sent a message to al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, in yemen, asking them, you know, do some terrorism, please. >> yeah, do something. >> now, is that a sign of weakness or strength? >> it's a sign of just sending a message. i mean it's do something is pretty -- it's not like, you know, the end of the world is coming. and so far whatever that something is hasn't transpired. and i think that al qaeda central is aware of its own problems and even al qaeda in the arabian peninsula is not doing particularly well, despite all of the flurry of things we've seen over the past week. about 30 of their leaders and south operatives have been killed in cia drone strikes, so their bench is thinning. >> why has yemen become the next

place, after afghanistan, pakistan? >> right. well, i think in yemen you have a very weak central government so this is a government that doesn't have a lot of control over a lot of the territories. which means when this group, al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, really have their genesis moment in a prison break in february of 2006. at that point the u.s. was really focused on iraq and the yemeni government was really focused on an insurgency it was fighting up in the north, which meant when the group tunneled out of the prison, they had about two and a half years in which to build up an infrastructure and really establish deep roots. and that head start that they have had is one that the u.s. and yemeni governments really haven't been able to catch them. >> are they ideologically motivated global jihadists? are they really after something, do they want to rule yemen? how would you describe these people? >> i think the problem that we in the west often have is we think about al qaeda in the arabian peninsula only as a terrorist group and they're certainly that. but they see themselves as something more.

they see themselves as a group that can be a governing force, a group that can take over territory, a group that can staff schools, build water wells, string electrical lines. this is something that they did in 2011 and in 2012 in the wake of the arab spring. but doing that opened them up to air strikes from the u.s. and they were eventually forced out. i think what the group is doing now is having a debate over how do we get to where we want to be, ruling a country without being so vulnerable to strikes above. >> how should we think about drones? i know you've been very critical about the drone program and the excessive use of drones in pakistan. >> if the price of a successful price in pakistan is angering 200 million pakistanis, the fifth largest country in the world with nuclear weapons, that's a large price to pay. there are certainly moments to use drones and the president in the speech in may gestured at the idea that they're going to be more careful about the use of drones. in pakistan we've seen some of that but in yemen we've seen a lot of strikes.

so as a practical matter, the administration is still using the drone program. but -- you know, in pakistan it's unbelievably unpopular. in yemen, as greg knows better than i, you know, there have been protests. but it's not -- i don't think the whole country is up in arms in yemen as it is in pakistan on this issue. >> when i look at these groups, the thing that i think sometimes we forget in the united states is these are very small groups often and with very little public support. there's a reason these guys don't field candidates for elections, they're not going to win anywhere. there's a reason they don't try to get a million people out on the streets as in egypt because they can't. so how do you think about the strength of something like this? of all of them, the one in yemen probably has the most intrinsic strength. how strong is it really? >> that's a great point because this group is deeply unpopular in yemen. the problem is, is that the u.s. is even more unpopular. so this is a group that has

really internalized a very important lesson and that is that the side that kills the most civilians in a war like this loses. and that's something that al qaeda in the arabian peninsula is very, very careful about. they justify their attacks, they make mistakes, but they really attempt to limit their attacks to military forces or to western interests. >> peter, i have to ask you before we go about syria. is it your sense that there is not jihadis but actual al qaeda presence growing in syria? >> without a doubt. the most effective fighting force fighting the assad regime is the victory front, basically an al qaeda front organization. it's zawahiri is the boss. it's next door to israel. you've got thousands of foreign fighter coming in, including people from the west. just do the math. it could get pretty ugly. iraq didn't turn out to be a net exporter of terrorism in the end.

many of the foreign fighters who came actually ended up as suicide attackers who died on the battlefield. but certainly syria is something where al qaeda could establish a safe haven. >> peter bergen, greg johnsen, thanks for joining us. wonderful book, by the way. lots more ahead. two big conflicts. the first is india and pakistan. i'll explain why we might actually be optimistic that these two sworn enemies might become friends. but up next, the chances for middle east peace. i have a great guest, a former prime minister of israel, ehud barak, who tried this the last time around. lecoca-cola is partneringg. with nashville parent and charlotte parent magazines, along with the mayors of those cities, in the fit family challenge. a community wide program that offers free classes that inspire families to get out, enjoy moving together, and even track their activity online. it's part of our goal to inspire more than three million people to rediscover the joy of being active this summer.

see the difference all of us can make... together. they're the days to take care of business.. when possibilities become reality. with centurylink as your trusted partner, our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and responsive, dedicated support, we constantly evolve to meet your needs.

every day of the week. centurylink® your link to what's next.

hd "vo:remember to changew that oil is the it on schedule toy car. keep your car healthy. show your car a little love with an oil change starting at $19.95. if all goes as planned, in the coming days the next round of the middle east peace talks will take place in israel. this comes on the heels of the negotiators meetings with president obama and secretary of state kerry in washington last week. so we have actually made it past the first round. but what are the real prospects for middle east peace? joining me now is ehud barak, the former israeli prime minister whose 2000 summit with yasser arafat remains the most ambitious attempt to achieve peace between the israelis and the palestinians.

so when you look at the situation, a lot of people say this is a waste of time, it's a sideshow. secretary of state kerry should not have invested political capital in this. what is your sense? >> i'm basically an optimist. i have been all along my life and i believe it's a real need for both sides. both sides, the leadership on one hand, the mainstream understand that the alternatives are much worse. and i think that secretary kerry deserves a lot of compliment for his tenacity in bringing both sides to the table. >> but is there -- has something changed now that makes it likely to happen? >> i think that there are more chances. the reason is that both sides understand it. i personally believe that the palestinians are much more responsible for where we stuck the israeli government, but it

doesn't matter because without tough decisions from both sides, nothing will move. >> you were in these talks. what is your sense, what is the single issue that is likely to be the deadlock? is it jerusalem? how would you describe it? >> i say it's all -- the four or five core issues. security of israel is extremely important. some formula with the refugees and ultimately the need to recognize israel as what it is, a jewish state, and putting an end to all mutual claims. end of conflict and end of mutual claims is the essence of a permanent peace. i personally believe that even if it will end up that a full permanent peace cannot be achieved, it was the effort to

strike even an interim agreement where voters and security is made and once and for all a line will be delineated on the ground within which there will be a solid jewish majority for generations. we include the major settlement blocs and israeli presence and jewish presence belong the old line of jerusalem and on the other hand a place for a viable palestinian state. that's the least strategic. if this can be achieved, it will provide a better launching pad. >> let me ask you about israel's security. ariel sharon when he was prime minister said we were rapidly approaching the moment when iran's nuclear program reaches a point of no return. shaul mofaz when he was defense minister said something similar. you talked about iran entering a zone of immunity at which point there was no turning back.

hasn't israel cried wolf too often on iran? it seems as though you have set up these red lines and iran seems to move past them, but nothing happens. >> we all use the same rhetoric. we all say there are options on the table. with the new president, everyone mentions that he was the one responsible for slowing the -- moving toward the nuclear military weapons in 2003-2005. we have to remember why he did it. he did it the only time he did it and that was the essential condition where he felt with the americans already hit afghanistan, they already hit iraq and their center might be the next target. that's the only thing that convinced them. when we say that we are determined to prevent iran, we

literally mean it. and we expect others who say to mean it. the real way to act, according to my judgment, is to -- if you decide to give some time for negotiation, do it. but put it within a tight timeline. the iranians should know, not the public but the iranians should know that they are expected to put an end to their nuclear military program or else. behind closed doors they have to know it. but there is no need to humiliate them, there is no need to embarrass them, but they should know what will follow if they will not take decision quite urgently to stop it. >> does that mean that if things continue as they are and the iranians are careful not to enrich beyond a certain level, but if they continue as they are, at some point israel will strike in your opinion?

>> i don't want to announce in front of cameras what they'll do but i'll repeat many times what i've said when i was in power and repeat it now. when we say that we are determined to prevent iran from turning nuclear, we mean what we say. >> but a lot of people look at what israel has been saying, from ariel sharon to shaul mofaz to you and not acting and come to the election that maybe israel has decided it can live with the situation as it is. >> no, no, we didn't. we didn't decide. and i don't believe that we can decide that we can live with it. we cannot control whole events. i don't want to go into speculation what might happen if pakistan is politically there's a meltdown, what will happen to nuclear proliferation, but we feel a heavy responsibility to do what should be done if the future of israel is going to change in front of our eyes, we cannot afford to sit idle.

>> ehud barak, always a pleasure to have you on. thank you. >> next, what in the world. this time both sides are armed with nuclear weapons, but despite that there are reasons to be optimistic about india and pakistan. i will explain when we come back. >> announcer: introducing the redesigned jitterbug plus, our smartest, easiest cell phone yet. >> when i heard about the jitterbug, i went online and ordered one for my mom. she loves it. she takes it everywhere. thanks to greatcall, now my mom has a cell phone she actually enjoys using.

>> hi, grandma! >> hi, sweetie! >> announcer: the jitterbug plus-- the large numbers and the yes/no buttons make it easy to use, the bright screen is easy to see, while the improved speaker makes conversations loud and clear, and with the longest-lasting battery on the market, you won't have to worry about running out of power. coverage is powered by one of the nation's largest, most dependable wireless networks, and phone plans start at just $14.99 per month. for a limited time, get a free car charger with purchase. the jitterbug plus is available nationwide. to locate a store near you, visit greatcall.com. greatcall-- people you can count on.

is. for the first time there is reasons to be optimistic about its prospects. india and pakistan. the two countries have fought three full scale wars and are locked in a nuclear arms race.

if you take a step back, independent i canindiana there are reasons for cautious optimism. pakistan could be the game changer. while sharif is back as prime minister, the last time he was in power in 199, he brokered a new peace government. it could set the stage for a break through owing. instead it deposeded sharif as prime minister. especially in his years in exile and opposition, sharif continued to stress the importance of peace, he has pointed out pakistan will progress only when it stops treating i said i can't as its biggest enemy. he's also called for cutting the army's funding.i can't as its biggest enemy. he's also called for cutting the army's funding. and he's right.

trade amounts to only $2.6 billion a year. about one fifth the value of trade between pakistan and china and about one 125th the value of trade between india and china. this despite the fact that end i can't and pakistan share not only a border, but a common history, culture, language. they are natural trading partners. pakistan's army could prove to be the biggest optical again. a climate of peace would threaten its vast budgets. pakistan is the 44th largest economy in the world and yet it maintains the 7th largest army in the world. about a fifth of its annual budget is spent on defense. meanwhile most of the country suffers from a lack of electricity and basic resources. but sharif now has a mandate to tame the military. what about new delhi? there is a small window for talks ahead of national elections next year. the fact is india knows that a reach presents their best chance

for peace deal or at least for the laying of a ground work for friendship. and eindia also knows factions could try to derail peace. new delhi needs to hold firm. the solution is to redouble efforts. if they're looking for a legacy, foreign affairs does seem a possible way to be remembered. all of this matters for the united states. as washington pulls out of afghanistan, india and pakistan would compete for power there. that will influence whether afghanistan moves forward to its stability or become as failed state. if they can move toward better tees, the whole region becomes less of a cesspool of radicalism and terror. up next, resetting the reset.

what is going on with russia and the united states? we'll figure it out. we have two top experts. yeah excuse me, the equinox in atlantis blue is mine! i was here first, it's mine. i called about that one, it's mine. mine! mine. it's mine. it's mine. mine. mine. mine. mine. it's mine! no it's not, it's mine! better get going, it's chevy model year-end event. [ male announcer ] the chevy model year-end event. the 13s are going fast, time to get yours. current chevy truck owners can trade up to this chevy silverado all-star edition with a total value of $9,000.

humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us.

plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?

saving time by booking an appointment online, even smarter. online scheduling. available now at meineke.com.

-- girl abducted after her brother and mother were killed has been found safe in the woods in idaho. fbi agents found hannah anderson yesterday after a week long search. they shot and killed her captor, james dimaggio was a family friend. her dad says it's now healing time. good news on the wildfire front. the silver fire burning through the mountains east of los angeles is now 75% contained. it has blackened more than 30 square miles, some people can't return to their homes still. the fire is blamed for injuries to 10 firefighters and one homeowner. and in iraq, 64 are dead a and 190 wounded after a series of bombings this weekend. the attacks came after celebrations marking the end of ramadan. that's cnn newsroom. hannah anderson now physically

safe, but mentally and emotionally her recovery is just beginning. and the next hour, we'll take a look at what type of psychological damage this kind of ordeal can do to victims and what treatments can help them recover. stay with us. this was president obama and president putin in june. sullen and silent. now it's even gotten worse with the white house pulling out of a planned one-on-one meeting in moscow next month. so what to make of it? who is to blame? i have two great experts. julia ioffe is a former moscow correspondent for "the new yorker" she is now with "the new republic." and chrystia freeland wrote her book about russia's transition from communism to capitalism. she's now running for parliament in canada. welcome to both of you. julia, let me start with you.

do we know how much of what is going on is about more than snowden? i mean by which there did seem to be a more promising prospect between u.s./russian relations, the reset, but then you've had syria on which the putin administration has been a big disappointment to the obama administration. you've had even arms control where they have not been particularly forthcoming. and then this. so is this part of a larger trend? >> i think snowden was just the catalyst. he was the straw that broke the camel's back. i think you would have to rewind past syria and go back to libya. the russians felt very much duped by the americans. they had abstained from vetoing the resolution to allow the use of force in libya, and then what ended up happening was not, you

know, the use of force was much more than they had anticipated and then gadhafi ended up getting killed. this really, really rattled putin. then you had the protests, the kind of anti-kremlin protests that broke out around the time of putin's return to power. and the kremlin chose to take an anti-american line in not accusing then secretary of state secretary clinton of almost orchestrating the protests. things just kind of snowballed from there. things haven't been going well for about two years, a year and a half, and the snowden thing i think was really just the last straw. >> and chrystia, isn't the awkward reality here that this anti-americanism actually plays well in russia? is that fair? >> well, i agree with you, fareed, and i would double down on that argument. you know, i've seen some people talk about the cancellation of this summit as a blow for putin, and i think that nothing could be further from the truth. i think that what we're seeing

in russia is putin playing the classic authoritarian leader's playbook. and what he is doing is not only playing to a nationalist xenophobic anti-western constituency, he is building that constituency. he is doing everything he can to create a power base in russia and a sense among ordinary russians that everybody else is against us, everybody else is hypocritical. we are strong. i am the person who supports you. and all of this is at a peace. the very strong and to my mind really dreadful, terrible, anti-gay legislation, sort of anti-gay push that we're seeing from the russian government is another part of this that's saying we're different from the west, we oppose them, we openly oppose them, we can stand up to them. and ultimately what this is about for putin is consolidating his hold on power in an authoritarian regime and i think it speaks actually -- julia mentioned the democratic protests. this is something he's actually really worried about.

and so what he's trying to do is build up an alternative really quite frightening, nationalistic, hostile power base in his own country. >> julia, was it always like this? it felt like when he came to power, he was seen as a man who seemed to like the west, the west seemed to like him. bush famously looked into his eyes. but he also asked repeatedly for membership in nato. he thought that russia's rightful place was as part of western europe really. and he's moved from that a long way. part of that, i think, is that the price of oil as quadrupled and all of a sudden the russians don't need foreign aid and things like that. but there seems to be something else happening as well, where the putin of today is not the man who took office. >> well, in some ways he is and in some ways he isn't. i think this is his relationship with the west is part of a long tradition of cognitive dissidence inside russia that goes back hundreds of years. on one hand russia wants to be part of the west, it wants to be seen as an equal partner at the

table. on the other hand it wants to be seen as different and unique and wants to be immune from what it sees as the west superimposing its values that are foreign to russia on russia. >> chrystia, when president obama says, you know, i'm trying to look forward and i sometimes feel like they slip back into the cold war, i do think there's something to this in the sense that this is not the most sensible strategy for russia. if you look at russia's national interests, what are their big problems? islamic radicalism to their south. the other problems are the long border with china that they always had. they need the west in way that say would serve russia's national interests, but as you say don't serve putin's particular power interests. >> putin is not chiefly concerned about what's good for russia. he is chiefly concerned with what is good for putin. and that's where i think

actually the cold war analogy is not quite right. this is not -- we are not living in this dual-power world in which moscow is the capital of the soviet union and is seeking to control a big part of the world. we are living with a russia which is a much smaller, relatively economically and militarily much weaker country, and a country in which for all his power, vladimir putin doesn't have the communist party machine to control his country. he is much more comparable to the classic authoritarian rulers whose control is brittle. >> we'll have to leave it at that. chrystia, julia, thanks for joining us. chrystia, best of luck on your campaign. up next, a tycoon who was prosecuted and jailed by u.s. authorities explains why america is a great country nonetheless.

we've been bringing people together.

today, we'd like people to come together on something that concerns all of us. obesity. and as the nation's leading beverage company, we can play an important role. that includes continually providing more options. giving people easy ways to help make informed choices. and offering portion controlled versions of our most popular drinks. it also means working with our industry to voluntarily change what's offered in schools. but beating obesity will take continued action by all of us, based on one simple common sense fact... all calories count. and if you eat and drink more calories than you burn off, you'll gain weight. that goes for coca-cola, and everything else with calories. finding a solution will take all of us. but at coca-cola, we know when people come together, good things happen. to learn more, visit coke.com/comingtogether

a quarter million tweeters is beare tweeting. and 900 million dollars are changing hands online. that's why hp built a new kind of server. one that's 80% smaller. uses 89% less energy. and costs 77% less. it's called hp moonshot. and it's giving the internet the room it needs to grow. this&is gonna be big. hp moonshot. it's time to build a better enterprise. together.

you might remember the case of the press baron conrad black, who at one point owned one of the great newspaper empires of the world.

but then six years ago, he faced investigations into his handling of his company and was convicted in u.s. federal court on the lesser charges of obstruction of justice and fraud. some of the major charges against him were successfully overturned on appeal, but in the end black served more than three years in american prisons. black, an amateur historian with several important biographies under his belt already, has now written a book about the country that imprisoned him called "flight of the eagle, the grand strategies that brought america from colonial dependence to world leadership." he cannot enter the united states currently so he has joined me from toronto to talk about his benign view of american grand strategy but his much less flattering opinion of our legal system. listen in. >> conrad black, thank you for joining me. >> i'm grateful for the invitation, fareed. >> let me ask you first about just a general tenor of your new

book which is kind of about american leadership in the world. you've always been a great fan of america. i was just wondering have your views changed after having had what i think you would describe as a very rough encounter with this country's judicial system? do you still -- how is it that you can go through that process and still be so laudatory about the united states as a great role model for the world? >> well, that's not quite what i wrote. i was laudatory of the rise of the country. i separate that from the fact the country persecuted me half to death, and that does affect my affection for it at the moment in its present condition, but not my admiration for it historically or my fundamental liking for it. of course it has nothing to do with my relations with a great many valuable friendships and acquaintances i've built up with americans over many years.

>> but still, does it make you think that our system of law, for example, that our rule of law is not as great as it is purported to be? >> it is in a terrible condition. 99.5% of your prosecutions are successful compared to about 60% in canada and 50% in britain. it's not because your prosecutors are better, it's because the system is too one-sided. you've got 5% of the world's population, 25% of its incarcerated people and nearly 50% of its qualified lawyers. it's a terrible problem. and the plea bargain system is just an outrage. it's simply the extortion of incriminating perjury with an immunity for perjury in exchange for not being prosecuted or for a reduced sentence. it's not justice and certainly has made a shambles of america's claim to being a bastion of human and civil rights and has put the bill of rights through the shredder.

>> tell me about leadership. you wrote an exhaustive biography of franklin roosevelt. even though you are a conservative, you were quite laudatory toward him. you wrote one about nixon. what do you think distinguishes a great leader? >> well, you've had a variety of them, obviously, in the united states, but i think courage when you need it, sense of a ruse and an ingenuity within limits and getting things done when you need that, such as roosevelt's performance in helping keep the democracies in the war between 1940 and '41. and a vision of the country of what it can do, where it can go, what its moral imperatives are, a sense of grandeur.

>> so you have a few pages on obama in the end of the book and they're quite dismissive, i think. i wonder if you were to look -- >> not dismissive. i would never -- fareed, i would never dismiss a president of the u.s. it's a great office and i always respect the holder of the office, the present holder and previous ones. i have to say, yonk the majority of americans would be quite as enthused about this administration as you are. i'm certainly not street miss siv of him. i think there have been serious problems. they don't start with him. i think there is a leadership problem in the u.s. which has been going on most of the time since reagan retired. the thing that worried me just as an example in the certainly year of 1960 with 550,000 draft yes in vietnam, 200 to 400 of them coming back dead every week, riots everywhere in the country, race riots and anti-war

riot, assassination of martin luther king and robert kennedy, in that year, lyndon johnson, hubert humphrey, robert kennedy, nelson rockefeller, robert reag reagan -- robert kennedy and richard nixon all ran for president. i don't think the best candidates in the republican party ran last year. this is duriisturbing. i don't think it has ever happened before in u.s. history. in my judgment, since you asked me, i think that there is a very large number of americans that felt instinctively that the national media and political establishment had unjustly destroyed a distinguished administration mr. nixon had in his first term and scuttled the effort in vietnam and never ceased to congratulate themselves for doing it and the country is uneasy about doing that and why rushbaugh has

30 million listeners. >> at the end of all this you have a sunny optimism about america. >> it's fundamentally a powerful country, a rich country, nothing wrong with it in my opinion leadership won't get it and in the habit of history a country that neither leadership gets it. few people expected great things of abraham lincoln or either of the roosevelts, let alone a less glamorous personality like harold truman. many people disparage d ronald reagan as a rather intellectually limited actor and were all very distinguished presidents and led effectively. we'll get back to that. all that's needed is conceptually needed the playbook is well-known for the leader of the country say we have a serious crisis and this is proportion and this is the plan of action we need and i ask for your support. as long as it is plausible, the

people will support that. it's not happening. >> a unique perspective on america. conrad black, glad to talk to you and glad to have you back. >> i always like speaking to you, fareed. nice to talk with you again. up next, what does war do to a country? i'll show you images from syria that will get you thinking. turyd it partner, you'll experience reliable uptime for the network and services you depend on. multi-layered security solutions keep your information safe, and secure. and responsive dedicated support meets your needs, and eases your mind. centurylink. your link to what's next.

folks have suffered from frequent heartburn. but getting heartburn and then treating day after day is a thing of the past. block the acid with prilosec otc, and don't get heartburn in the first place. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn.

this week marked the 68th anniversary of the atomic bombing in her roche ma in 1945. there was a somber ceremony in the city's peace memorial park to honor the dead. nuclear weapons that are currently in the u.s. arsenal have an explosive impact that is almost 15 times that of little b boy, the bomb used on her roiro ma. how many bombs does the united states have in its arsenal today? is it a, 5,700, b, 6,700, c, 7,700, or d, 8,700. go to our website for the correct answer.

if you miss a show, go to itunes.com/fareed. this book of the week is by black, on roosevelt. a surprising approach for an afternoon conservative but he make his case very well. this isn't an ominous clip of an incoming ufr. you're looking at the city of aleppo in syria. watch what happens as you drag this bar to the right. these extraordinary before and after satellite images released by amnesty international this week show changes to the city in just 12 months. 1,000 road blocks are scattered throughout and the extend of the devastation is truly vast. after 12 months of bombardment, hundreds of homes and businesses

are reduced to smoldering rubble. these pictures demonstrate not only death and destruction but lost cultural places as well. here you can see she minnibuild that was completely destroyed. the only construction that is taking place, makeshift camps for internationally displaced people along the turkish border. the correct answer to our gps challenge question was c. the united states has an estima estimated 7,700 nuclear weapons betwe . and we produced nearly 70,000 total warheads and spend at least $8 trillion in present day terms on nuclear weapons developmen development. >> fire. >> the steadration of american scntists estimates russia currently has l