>> it's not the issue of the size. it's the issue of the pivotal

role that they will play. >> the rest, we look at the middle east and we think of religion. but in your book you talk a lot about capitalism and business.ç can you discuss the dichotomy between religion and capitalism in the middle east?ok >> well, religionç and capitalm can coexist the way they do in america. you know, you have businessmen in america who are evangelical and fundamentalists or church-going. it's the same in the muslim world as well. what makes a difference is that capitalist muslims who are integrated into global economy tend to favor interpretations of religion that supports their economic activities and serves their interest. in other words, they don't favor extremism because extremism is not good for business. because extremism does not -- interferes into global economic trends. when we lookq at countries like turkey, dubai, indonesia, we see middle classes that are getting rich by global economy that see their future and interests in global economy are religious.

but the kind of religion they follow is in some ways globalization-friendly. so it's conservative. it's pious. but it's supports capitalist activity and living harmoniously with others in a global economy. >> what ramifications did the business class have in american foreign policy? >> well, we don't pay as much attention to them as we ought to. we don't think of the fact that what transformed china, transformed india, transformed latin america, eastern europe and asia that created stable, prosperous democracies was the middle class in those countries that were dependent on private sectors and integrated into the global economy. and we don't think in the muslim world you're not going to get them to where brazil, argentina, taiwan or korea are unless the same class that got those countries where they are also

becomes empowered in the muslim world. so we're looking for a solution in the muslim world without having at what is the force that's supposed to produce a solution.ç i think the change agent in the muslim world ultimately will have to come from the middle class and from the capitalist business sector associat with it. >> vali nasr, author of "forces of fortune". thank you very much. >> thank you. >> up next, retired army lieutenant colonel and military historian, carlo d'este receives the andrew j. goodpaster prize due to contributions of scholarship. the army-navy club in washington, d.c. hosts the hour-long event. >> good evening. it's a great honor to be here tonight to follow two such distinguished award recipients.

it's really a great honor and a privilege. in addition to writing, one of my other duties for the past 15 years is to cohost and now direct the william e. kobe military symposium at norwich university.ç it's a program that's designed to expose students to great authors and scholars. and so it should serve as no surprise to you that two of our participants have been the first two recipients of the andrew j. goodpaster award. [laughter] >> it's fitting that i have had a chance to meet general goodpaster in two different settings. in 1994 i was honored to be a member of a group of historians that were invited to the white house to brief president clinton before his trip to europe to commemorate the 50th anniversary of d-day.

at his side that evening at both the briefings that were given to the president and later at a dinner was general goodpaster. although the audience included key white house staffers, the secretary of state, the secretary of the xdtreasury, th one individual that night that the president consistently turned to whenever he had a question you was general goodpaster. it was perfectly fitting that a president of the united states would turn to general goodpaster for advice. by my reckoning, president clinton was the seventh president that he either snefshd so -- that he recognized or has been an advise or president.ç

his list of accomplishments is truly awesome for a soldier/scholar to have achieved during his lifetime. when lbj became president, he used general goodpaster as a liaison to dwight eisenhower. and he once described general goodpaster as one of the ablist officers that he knew. nor should it serve as any surprise at all that during the darkest days of west point's cheating scandal in 1977, that general goodpaster was called out of retirement; asked to take a demotion to lieutenant generaç in order to become the 51st superintendent of west point. both the cheating scandal and the admission of women to west point were huge challenges for any superintendent to have to overcome. and during the next four years,

overcome them he did. the admission of women was a divisive issue that general goodpaster addressed by informing the staff and faculty at the military economy that he would escort them to the door with a handshake if they failed to make them welcomed at west point. when the eisenhower memorial commission was formed in 2003, general goodpaster was called upon once again to play a key role in formulating dwight eisenhower's legacy. i had the honor to serve under him on a subcommittee that formulated ike's legacy in the military -- the area of military and security affairs. and it was during those occasions that i had a chance to see general goodpaster at firsthand.ç and i can tell you that it was an unforgettable experience.

and then came the day that my telephone range. -- rang. and on the other end was general goodpaster. now, he was calling to discuss some of the issues that we were working through. the first thing he said to me was, please call me andy. [laughter] >> but old habits diehard. [laughter] >> and i think it wasç the onl time that i have ever disobeyed a four-star general. and i replied, yes, sir. [laughter] >> bless him, he tried again. and once again i could not bring myself to call him andy.ç at that point i think he gave up. and i heaved a sigh of relief. while i very much appreciated the gesture that i should call

the officer who during world war ii commanded an engineer battalion, led his unit across a german minefield against enemy fire, received the distinguished service cross and call him andy was quite simply to me incomprehensible. but serving on this committee gave me a unique opportunity to honor one great american while learning from another. and it was an experience that i will always treasure. which brings me to the heart of my talk this evening. when i began to think about what subject i should talk about, i asked myself the very simple question, what would general goodpaster have suggested and of course the answer was obvious. of the many people that he served during his many, many years of public service, the person that he was closest to was, of course, dwight

eisenhower. in 1954, president eisenhower summoned him to serve as a staff officer in the white house. their relationship dated to ike's tenure as nato supreme commander. where general goodpaster served as the assistant to ike's chief of staff general alfred grunther. he formulated policy in the political and military aims of the alliance. ike had long since come to trust the soldier/scholar who had graduated second in his class at west point in his class of 1939. and it's so important that he become to the president as an advisor and as a policymaker that he was soon known as ike's alter ego.

general goodpaster was successful precisely because he never let his ego get in the way of his duty. and whent he preferred to stayn the background to entering the limelight, he was not afraid to challenge his boss when he believed it was the right thing to do. and during discussions over troopq reductions in europe whih eisenhower adamantly wanted, general goodpaster made the point that it was not possible until the europeans possessed the ability to fill a gap that we ourselves had created. and at that point ike's legendary temper got the better of him. )55uáti out secretary of state n foster dullesç who attested to his judgment.

their disagreement led eisenhower to bemoan, foster, i lost my last friend. not so. but it did lead to this observation by general goodpaster that we both knew that it was our duty. and the president knew it perfectly well. he was just sounding off. and that was part of our role. to let him relieve some of the pressure but to make sure that he didn't make that kind of mistake. one of the great advantages that i have as a writer is the freedom to choose my subject. and during the writing and research of five previous books, eisenhowerç had been a key plar in each of them. and i believed strongly that the time had come to take on the challenge of writing a new biography of his military life.

and so in 2002 a journey into exploring his military life ended with the publication of my book of "eisenhower: a + soldier's life." in the years that followed, i have moved on to tackle winston churchill's extraordinary military life. but that book includes a great deal about eisenhower but from churchill's and the british perspective. last year the eisenhower preside#!1 library did a lengthy retrospective of ike's youth in abilene. and they very kindly asked me to deliver a speechñr that sort of summed up his first 20 years in abilene. and that led me to take a retrospective look at eisenhower from the point of view of seven years since i published that book. and what i came away with was a really -- a fresh appreciation

for the man and for his great accomplishments. i felt really a great affinity for what he did and what he accomplished during his extraordinary life. "time" magazine said of him in 1952çç -- they saw ike, and t liked what they saw. they liked him in a way they could scarcely explain. they liked ike because when they saw him and heard him talk he made them proud of themselves and all of the half-forgotten best that was in them and in the nation. i'm often asked to describe eisenhower. and here's what i replied. he was ambitious. calculating, a britain organizer who could take virtually any problem and figure out a logical solution. a man possessed of a volatile

andç terrible temper that made george patton looks like a boy scout. [laughter] >> a powerful and retentative mind. a man who loved and studied history voraciously throughout his entire life. and whose high school yearbook proclaimed that he would one day teach history instead of making it. [laughter] >> young ike was something of an enigma. desperately poorer and passionate about achieving a higher education.ç in order to escape the poverty of his youth. his appointment to west point in 1911 ought to have resulted in a very serious young cadead. -- cadet. a cadet who would do everything in his power to achieve success. and as many of you probably know, he did no such thing. while at west point he was a

happy-go-lucky, irresponsible cut-up who never attempted to excel at his studies. violated a great many academy regulations. some of them expulsion offenses. accumulated more than 100 demerits in his senior year alone. and was a frequent guest of the commandants punishment tour squad. pouring buckets of water on unsuspecting cadets in the barracks and leaving the academy grounds without permission were hardly proscriptions for a cadet's experience. his famous exploit and i think some of you probably know this was probably on the occasion during his plead year when he was ordered to report to an upper classman's room in full dress coat. eisenhower duly reported clad

only in his coat under which he was stark naked.ç he did, however, take football very seriously. in a severe injury to his knee, very nearly cost him his commission and in that regard, ike and i share a common experience. eisenhower's commission was saved by the intervention of the academy surgeon who persuaded washington to grant him his commission. my own commission was saved at the ft. knox rotc summer camp in 1956 by our deputy professor of military science who had a quiet word with a young optometrist after i flunked the eye exam and both of those changed the course of our respective lives i can tell you. ike entered the army with few career aspirations and a happy-go-lucky attitude.

that changed into professional seriousness very quickly. so what i'd like to spend the rest of the evening talking with you a little bit about some of the examples of eisenhower's character and leadership that i think will illustrate why i regard his legacy so highly. i'll do this by examples of leadership, humility, responsibility and his remarkable insight. in 1967, a former army chiefsof staff visited eisenhower at his gettysburg farm.ñr during the course of their conversation, the general said, there was something writtent( about the pel pakneesian war that someone can't be a armchair general at once. afterwards one of the white house speechwriters who had been

present during this conversation asked eisenhower if he knew the precise wording of the quote. eisenhower replied, first, it wasn't him but emilious. it was not the war but the puniç war with carthage and third he misquoted. [laughter] >> but then asked why he hadn't correctedñr the general, eisenhower replied, i got where i did by knowing how to hide my ego and hide my intelligence. i knew the actual quote but why should i embarrass him? a classic example of leadership is one that you're all familiar with. one that i think cemented ike's place in history above all the rest. and that was his great d-day decision. i'm sure you're familiar with the fact that bad weather was

the one criteria that the allies could not control in june of 1944ç and bad weather came as tends to do. and ike was forced to postpone d-day by at least 24 hours. the weather was of a huge factor and 24 hours laterç it appeare that there was a narrow window of possibility for d-day on june 6th, 1944. but there were no guarantees. the weather was marginal. and ike was called upon to make one of the great decisions of military history. whether or not to launch d-day. the lives of 156,000 men were at stake along with really the outcome of the war. as things turn out. and &aq unhesitatanting made the decision.ç he made the best decision he

could based on what information that he had. it was decision that took as much guts by a military commander as anything that i have ever read. and what made that decisionq so remarkable was also the note, the famousúovte that was found some weeks later in his shirt pocket by his naval aide, harry butcher. and in that note, eisenhower took sole responsibility if d-day had failed. and i find that rather remarkable particularly in the climate we live in today where no one really wants to seem to take responsibility for anything these days that eisenhower would step forward and accept total responsibility for anything and everything that could or might have gone wrong with d-day.

another area that was very close to ike's heart was the cause of peace and the death of soldiers in combat. he was really a professional soldier who hated war. but few hated war with greater passion than did eisenhower.ç he regarded his adversaries with nothing short of local on the 8s. -- loathing. men who started wars earned his utter contempt. an example of eisenhower at his best occurred at 2:41 am may 7th, 1945. when germany surrendered unconditionally. at the headquarters in northern france, colonel general alfred yodel signed the documents of surrender for germany. the only sounds in a densely crowded room came from a hoard

of photographers jockeying for a position. but conspicuously missing from this incredible occasion was te man who had orchestrated the events leading up to this historic moment. eisenhower at that moment expressed his disdain for his enemy by declining to even be present at the surrender ceremony.w3 he designated his chief of staff the task of signing the surrender documents for the allied expeditionary force. under its terms, the german surrender was to take effect at 1 minute before midnight may 8th, 1945. the strange thing, wrote general smith, was the lack of emotion that was shown when the surrender was signed.t the germans were military-correct and their

stone-like expressions but i do not remember that the allied officers around the table displayed any emotion or elation. it was a moment simply of solemn gratitude. and while this surrender ceremony was taking place, eisenhower was pacing back and forth in his office like a caged lion. his driver and confident kay summersby described the atmosphere as electric with impatience. afterwards, the german delegation was summob to the supreme commandersç office whe his chief intelligence officer general kenneth strong acting as his escort and his interpreter for eisenhower who stood rigidly behind his desk looking more military than i think anyone had ever seen him before. and this was a different eisenhower. it was cold. he was brittle.

he said very curtly to the two germans, do you understandç th terms of the document of surrender that you have just signed? and they replied, ya, ya, they did. and ike declared that they would be personally held responsible for any violation of those terms. and then he said quite simply, signaling that the interview was at an end. and the german yodel made a slight bow, saluted and turned to go. then i think the real supreme moment occurred. and as yodel turned to leave the room and eventually a date with the hangman after being convicted of military crimes at nuremberg -- from his nearby place under eisenhower's desk, his scotty dog growled his

displeasure at the back of the retreating german. and it was only after the germans departed that eisenhower finally unbended and began to relax. as a hoard of photographers were admitted to his office and scrambled to record the scene, ike gathered his key staff around him. although exhausted, ike's famous grin reappeared at a historic moment. and he signaled a v for victory by holding aloft the two gold pens that were used to sign the surrender documents. he proclaimed that it was a special occasion that merited champagne. and everyone decamped to his quarters where for the next two hours there really wasn't much of a party.ç in fact, quite the opposite. there was surprisingly little gaiety or joking or even really a sense of pride. instead, there was a rather

somber realization of the significance of this historic day. few words were said. everyone seemed incredibly weary. kay remember. -- kay remembered. everyone was very, very tired. no surprise really.t( after four years of war. but before he fell into bed, exhausted at 5:00 am that this morning, eisenhower performed one final duty as supreme commander. during their many nights together, ike and butcher had joked about what language the supreme commander would use to inform the combined chiefs of staff that the germans had finally surrendered. such phrases as we have met the enemy. as a soldier, though, eisenhower understood that it was not his place to announce the end of the war in europe but a function of

the heads of state. who would make the formal announcement the following day. beetle smith recounts that in the afterglow of victory and the after glow of that ceremony the staff had several drafts that were suitable for a historic event of that nature. i tried one myself smith said. and like all my associates, groped for resounding phrases as fitting accolades to the great crusade. general eisenhower rejected all of them with thanks and without comment and wrote his own. now, ike was known very often for writing çlong-winded missis but on this occasion he dispatched the briefest cable as supreme commander. it was typical of dwight eisenhower that he would not take credit for the allied victory.ko

instead, his message to his bosses, the combined chiefs of staff was utterly devoid of self-pretension. it was only a single sentence long. and it read,i] thus, the missio ofç this allied force was fulfilled at 0241 hours local time, may 7th 1945 signed eisenhower. i would submit that only dwight eisenhower would have taken such a humble approach to one of history's greatest of moments.ç and indeed world war ii took its toll on eisenhower, a soldier who was as hard-boiled in his own way as george s. patton. for all of his military

experience, ike detested war and everything that it stood for. he once said, i hate war as only a soldier who is lived it can. only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. that ike well understood that sometimes war is inevitable is beyond question. yet, so profound was his experience that as president of the united states, he was moved to state in 1953 the following. every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. whether in war or in peace,

eisenhower always insisted there was no such thing as indispensable men. 20 years after world war ii, he was aboard the liner queen elizabeth on a nostalgic return on the scene of his greatest triumph. and one night over dinner he said he read a poem that summed up his attitude about indispensablity and he reached into his wallet for the clipping and he read it allowed. -- a loud. the moral of this quaint example is to do just the best that you can. be proudu! of yourself but remember there is no indispensable man. i take issue with that last remark. if there was ever an indispensable man it was dwight eisenhower.

and so tonight it has been my great privilege to pay tribute to two great americans. general andrew goodpaster and dwight eisenhower.ç through the more than 30 years that i've toiled in the fields of military history and biography, i'veç been sustaine by the honor of not only writing about gmeat men but also of ordinary soldiers, sailors and airmen. the men and women who stepped forward to their nation and did their duty. those at the american veterans center so ably represents. my late father, likewise, understood the essence of what duty and leadership were all about.ñr although he like so many other italians who lived in the austria-controlled city wanted no part of world war i, he was conscripted into the austrian army and given a commission.

when the unit he commanded was left to fend for itself in russia after russia capitulated in 1917, he brought them all home safely. and his later decision to live in freedom in the united states rather than under fascism is the reason that i am here tonight. thank you so much for inviting me here to receive this wonderful honor. and enabling me to help celebrate the memory of two great americans. i close with this simple observation. that america can ill-afford to stop producing men like andrew goodpaster and dwight eisenhower. thank you so much. [applause]

so do i have any questions that i can answer? yes, sir. >> speak loudly. >> i just wondered -- it's a little bit off-topic but if you would address the effect of eisenhower which was his remarkable brothers. there was something about that family. >> well, it was. it was a remarkable family. they were all -- they were all successful in their own professions. and milton eisenhower, as i'm sure you're all aware, you know, had an incredible career.

not only as the president of johns hopkins but in various fields of government. another brother was a simple pharmacist and he was successful at what he did. so each of them in their own way rose from poverty. if you ever had a chance -- if you have read about eisenhower, you're probably familiar with the fact that that family grew up in abject poverty, you know, wearing shoes was a luxury. and everything that they had was a hand me down. one of the first things, for example, eisenhower learned as a young boy was how to sew because nothing was wasted. nothing was ever thrown away. and so this was really a remarkable family that -- there was no money to educate them. there was no money to send them to college. that's why ike, you know, was desperate to get a higher

education. to find his way out of -- out of abilene and out of the poverty that he grew up in. and they had a lot of fun. i mean, you read about the lives of these young men. and there's a lot to be said for it. they had a good time. but it was hard scrabble. it really was. they were from the wrong side of the railroad tracks. if you've ever been in abilene, there are two sets of railroad tracks, actually. and i think there must have been two in ike's day. but if you were south of those railroad tracks, you essentially came from the wrong side. and you generally grew up -- you know, you were poor. and so it's hard for me to explain but there was something in what those young men were taught that allowed them to grow up and to be successful human beings. and that's all -- that's all any parent can ever do. and if you have your children grow up to be successful the way the eisenhower boys were, that

says, i think, everything that needs to be said about the parents of dwight eisenhower. >> in reading your magnificent biography, i'm struck by the tension between the man you described as humble and modest and also the perception of one of the most supremely self-confident men that i think i'm beginning to learn something about. how would you explain those two polar opposites. >> we're talking about ike and general goodpaster here? >> between ike's sense of modesty and humility and at the same time this enormous confidence. and i don't know where the verb is in that. >> that's probably the hardest thing for any biographer or any historian to try to get to the bottom of. i mean, all i could do, you

know, when i wrote about him was to try to give you a sense of what made this man tick. but there was something about him -- and one of the reasons that he was so remarkable and why i wanted to talk about his legacy tonight was that you had a man who became so successful, who became a supreme commander, who became the president of the united states in the powerful -- in the most powerful position in the world and yet who could still retain that humility. and i don't know that anybody can actually explain that. but it goes to the heart of what made ike what he was. that he had those qualities. because so often what we see in men who achieve powerful positions is that they forget where they came from. and i suspect it's probably fairly easy to do. you know, all of a sudden, you know, you're powerful.

you have a lot of -- you have people doing your bidding and everything. and, you know, ike never seemed to lose that human touch. he always had it. i don't know if this really plays into your question, but there were such things as when the day he was -- one of the days when he was president that the superintendent of west point was in the oval office. and i don't remember exactly who it was. but they had a meeting about something. as the meeting broke up and the superintendent was ready to leave the oval office, ike called him back and whispered in his ear, he said, general, you need to do something about that damn football team. [laughter] >> was it westmoreland? okay. there you go. he had that quality that he

never seemed to lose that and that's what, i think, attracted me to him. and why last year after seven years and sort of away from ike. he's never out of my picture, but, you know, i had moved on to other things. and going back and looking at what he did made it all the more remarkable, you know, why i felt he was so special. there's something else that i'd like to share with you. that i think goes to the heart of why men like ike fight. and why they do what they do. i spent today -- a good part of today at the holocaust museum working on something. and i came across a story that i think goes a little bit toward explaining why -- why people like ike do what they do.

and it has to do with a story that takes place in budapest in 1944. and budapest is being bombed. and this is the memoir of a young woman who helped to save many of the jews in budapest and let me read to you what he read and see if we make the connection here. she talks about how the street cars were still running. but then the bombing started. and we had nowhere to go. there were really no shelters and it was hard to run into houses where the basements were already overcrowded. so bravely the tram went on hoping that we would not be hit. in the midst of the welter of noisy heard some birds singing. i thought i was in heaven and i looked up and saw a cage with a canary to it next to the conductor. at my questioning glance, the conductor explained.

i love her and if i have to die we will do it together. the tram went on. the bird kept singing. the bombing stopped. we had survived. and, you know, i thought to myself, when i read that, that, you know, when you get right down to it that's one of the reasons why men like ike did what they did. to save people like that. oops. that's good. i got it. >> could you talk a little bit about the way eisenhower treated his army group commanders differently? the generals? >> well, he had his hands full. i think, you know, he had a very difficult task balancing a number of rather large egos. and one of the challenges that he faced as supreme commander, you know, was balancing all that.

and at the same time, you know, trying to stick to a strategy that he believed was the right one. you know, we're still refighting the broad front, narrow front strategy of 1944 and i don't really expect that it's going to get reresolved.wxp you know, i laid out the case for eisenhower and why i thought he did what he did. and i think again that goes a long way to explaining how he worked with allies and with his subordinates. and if you want it sum up the broad front narrow front strategy, it really comes down to something very simple. and that's this. there were american generals, bradley and patton who thought we can win the war by doing it our way. you had a british general, montgomery, who thought my way will probably win the war. and eisenhower's view was, we are allies.

and we're going to win this war as allies. we began as allies. and we're going to finish it as allies. now, you can poke a lot of holes in that argument if you wish. but what it came down to goes a long way, i think, it off explaining eisenhower. and the way that he dealt really with people and in this case how he dealt with a strategy, you know, for ending the war in europe. i don't want to get too far, you know, in the monty thing between ike and monty and some of the other problems that ike had with others. some of eisenhower's biggest problems were not with montgomery. they were with bradley. i mean, he had his hands full. these were all generals with ideas of their own about how the war should be won. and so one of his challenges as supreme commander was to try to juggle those things and still

follow what he believed was the strategy that he felt had to be laid out to do this. and he made a lot of gusty decisions. i talk about one of them very briefly. another gusty decision that ike made was in december of 1944 when he realized how desperate the situation in the battle of the bulge was and he decided to split the front and give the northern half of the bulge to montgomery. and there was howling. oh, my god, you can't do that. you can't give it to so-and-so. and so there's been -- there's been a lot of written about it. but if you go -- if you go to the generals that fought that battle on the northern half of the bulge, every one of them will tell you that that was the right decision. and having montgomery there probably saved their lives.

you talk to the people who defended the area, the u.s. seventh armored decision they said the rope they survived that battle was because of that decision. it was one ike made and it was a very unpopular decision but, you know, he was willing to do that. i mean, he had a reputation of not doing that type of thing but that's not true. myths grow about people. and there certainly have been, you know, myths about ike. and i think one of the jobs of us who are in the historical profession is to, you know, try to tell you what we think really happened. and if it means busting a myth, then so be it. but he was willing to take the unpopular -- a very, very unpopular choice because he felt militarily it was the right thing. >> our country have a lot of war heroes and generals who attempted to become president and have tried to do it.

of course, george washington and eisenhower being two that got us through the war. and this beautiful peace that you just read is from the museum today. the bird still singing and got us through. do you think it was much that got us through the war that he was able to be successful where so many other war generals were not able to become president or other attributes do you think that got him to be elected? >> well, you know, it's certainly his war record. one of the pictures i was going to show you tonight, you know, is ike as "time" man of the year. think easily after world war ii, certainly the most respected and indeed probably popular man in america. people trusted him. as that little piece i read you from "time" magazine, they liked ike and they liked what they saw. and you can't fake that stuff.

you know, when you present a persona to the public, you know, trying to fool the public is something that you cannot do that. and if you're a fake or a phony, you're going to show up. and there was something -- those qualities, there was something about eisenhower, i think, that struck a chord with the american public. i don't recall the exact size of his majority when he won the presidency, but it was huge. and so he was enormously popular, you know, because people trusted him and maybe that's the operative word that i want to leave you with. he was someone people trusted. and if you were -- if you earned someone's trust you've really gone a long way toward being a successful human being, whether it's politics or whether it's a general or a business person, that's pretty darn important. and so i would rate trust right up there as one of his great qualities.

and i think that's something that i saw in general goodpaster as well. i wish i'd known him better. but i just feel very fortunate that i had those few opportunities that i had working with the eisenhower memorial commission to see the same sort of thing as general goodpaster. and obviously and presidents in thews united states would not b consistently calling on him to be their advisor. it was amazing that night that i spent at the white house before the 50th anniversary of d-day. every single occasion -- when something would come up, you know, there was a lot of big wheels in that room. you name it. if they were in the white house or in government, they were at that dinner. and there's only one person that president clinton would consistently turn to, the man sitting -- the man sitting on his right, which was andrew goodpaster.

and i was struck by that, that evening, about how much trust there was. and i don't believe those two knew each other before that night. if they did, it was a very brief acquaintance. so it goes a lot to saying about both these men about how deeply they were trusted. to earn the trust of a president is something really special as well. so i just thought i'd mention that. yes, sir. >> you mentioned the quality that general eisenhower had. early on he was a happy-go-lucky fellow. and then you mentioned the quality that he exhibited late in life. an enormous temper. >> the temper he had forever. he had the temper as a young man. he used to beat up trees. of all of the eisenhower brothers, he was the toughest one for his mother to handle.

so the temper -- i need to qualify that immediately. the temper was always there. that was something that he had to learn to rein in. there was more than occasion where he would actually bloody his hands trying beat up a tree in a front yard because he was so angry about something. he did have one heck of a temper. he did manage to learn how to control it. it's interesting i don't think the american public really knew that. because that was something that he was very good at concealing. certainly those around him, you know, at least during world war ii and i'm sure in the white house, you know, probably got to feel it once in a while. but he never held a grudge. i mean, that was the big difference. i mean, he would get angry. but it was over. >> well, did you ever make any connections between his temper and the certainty that he was right? >> i'm not sure that i did, no.

it's difficult to try to sometimes to make linkage. and, you know, it's possible. but i'm not sure i could answer that. >> last question. >> it's clear that we finished the war as allies but what did our allies really think of eisenhower as a leader? you've gone on and worked with your book on churchill. i just wonder given the diaries of ward allen brook and field marshall montgomery that have come out -- what ex post -- was there a real judgment of eisenhower? >> well, there were obviously differences of opinion. you know, everybody thinks their way is probably the right way. there were a lot of stresses and strains on these men during world war ii. when you stop to think about the

responsibilities that they had and the pressures that were on them and, yes, they all kept diaries. and, you know, some of those -- some of those things that they had and wrote came back to haunt them, i think, later on. and there were mixed opinions. you know, because they really thought that their way was the right way. but i don't think that necessarily changes history's judgment. i mean, the fact that one individual has an opinion, you know, doesn't -- doesn't change the overall judgment that history -- the cumulative experience of a man is not necessarily going to be affected by the judgment of one other person. so, yes, there were great differences of opinion. and, unfortunately, i have to say that some historians have made a little too much hay over some of these differences. you know, because it sells books. and i have rejected some of

that. as being, you know, either exploitive or, you know, rather exaggerated. but i think in a case of eisenhower, you know, specifically to answer your question, yes, there were some mixed opinions. by others who were close to the thing that felt their way was the right way. but i don't think it affects history's judgment one way or the other. definitely not. [applause] >> thank you. >> carlo d'este is the author of the military biographies of george patton and dwight eisenhower. he is a retired u.s. army lieutenant colonel. for more information, visit americanveteranscenter.org. >> we're here with christina asquith author of the new book "sisters of war": a story of love and survival in the new iraq." who are these sisters?

>> they are two iraqi sisters. and they are 18 and 21 years old at the start of the war. they are filled with hope for what the americans will do for iraq because they had suffered horribly under the iraqi regime. the older sister goes to work for the americans and ends up falling in love with an american contractor and the other sister -- she's struggling to get her degree at the university, baghdad university, which becomes harder and harder as the americans really lose control of the country and the radical islamists gain control. >> now, when did you meet them? >> i met them in early 2003. just at the start of the war. >> throughout your book you look -- you talk to the sisters and you talk to two other women. who are they? >> captain coin, she's a u.s. soldier. she's a reservist. she's there at the start of the war. and she eventually becomes in charge of really the biggest initiative to bring americans' version of women's right to the middle east. the other woman is a palestinian

american, an activist and she is working for women, for women international in iraq trying to help iraqi women build a grassroots effort to strengthen their rights. >> so you followed these four women throughout your stay on the ground in iraq. and when was that from? >> i was there in may, 2003. until the beginning of 2005. >> what change did you see? >> tremendous change. i mean, we went from a country that was absolutely thrilled at the thought of the u.s. there, overthrowing saddam. the potential to rebuild the country, to give iraq a new lease, to really a realization that the u.s. didn't quite know what it was doing. it wasn't prepared for the problems that it faced. and the country was spinning slowly out of control. it became very -- it was a very safe place in the beginning for u.s. journalists in the beginning that became dangerous in the end. >> these women come from different backgrounds. how did they see a change in the way they were treated in iraq?

>> well, they had a lot of freedoms under saddam hussein. they lost those freedoms instantly with the war as often happens with war. there was no security. so they were virtually under house arrest. for a long time. that eventually got even worse, unfortunately, in that the power vacuum led to the arrival of radical islamists with a conservative version of how women should live. many of them influenced by iran. and iraqi women found themselves unable to leave the house, possibly losing their rights in the constitution, in government, in matters of divorce and inheritance, family law so they became really desperate for what the future held for them and they didn't think they would end up like that. they had a lot of rights under saddam hussein. >> you reported from the middle east for many years. have you seen a relative change in the way you've been treated as a female reporter on the

ground since 9/11? >> well, you know, i think that most arabs were welcoming to the -- to americans despite what the media portrays them as being anti-american. but i think that the u.s. aggression in iraq and afghanistan have changed minds. and led arabs all americans are against the arab world and against islam. as a religion. so i've had to really counter that and i've had to address that in meeting them. >> is it difficult to do that as a journalist? >> yeah, it is. there's a lot of suspicion about journalists in the middle east. i think a lot of them think that we work for the cia. that we're spies. they don't quite appreciate the wall that exists between the media and the government in this country. so they don't really believe that we're neutral observers. i have to counter that before i got anywhere in terms of talking to them. >> thanks so much.

>> here's a look at some upcoming book fairs and festivals over the next few months. ..