it's a nice guy who may, in fact, be the one that is having a great idea, or who gets enough cooperators around him or her to form a coalition, starts a political movement, or is, knows how to run a company at a time when goodwill and partnership among the key employees is all important. nice guy. a new trend in business management is nice guys. >> all right. well, why don't you join me in thanking -- [applause] >> thank you all for coming. good night.

[inaudible conversations] >> you're watching the tv on c-span2. 48 hours of nonfiction authors and books every weekend. >> james wright talks about the experiences of u.s. military veterans going back to the revolutionary war. it's up next on book tv, although less than an hour. >> good evening. and on behalf of the marines memorial association, i would like to welcome you to tonight's program. on the book, "those who have borne the battle." the author is doctor jim wright, and doctor wright is an american historian, president emeritus of

dartmouth college and a marine. my name is bucky peterson and i'm a director emeritus in the marines memorial association board of directors. before we begin, a few quick words about the marines memorial. the marines memorial association is a nonprofit veterans organization chartered to honor the memory of and commemorate the valor of members of the united states armed forces who were killed, lost, or who died in military service. among its list of duties, amongst the list of duties for the marines memorial association is we are responsible for maintaining this extraordinary club, the marines memorial club, as a living memorial to those who have gone before and to pay

tribute to those who carry on. to learn more about our organization visit our website at www.marineclub.com. and before we begin, please take a moment to turn off your cell phones, as i just did, and any other noise makers at you may have. and while you're doing that i would like to take this opportunity to announce that on the ninth of may, this wednesday, ms. paula broadwell will speak on her book, all in, the education of joe david petraeus. she is a west point graduate who was embedded in general petraeus his staff in afghanistan. she draws on hundreds of hours of exclusive interviews with

general petraeus and his top officers and soldiers to tell the inside story of his commanders development and leadership in war from every vantage point. the event starts this evening at 6 p.m., so that's 6 p.m. this coming wednesday. lastly, you have got question cards on each of your, and i would encourage you to make use of these blue question cards early on as questions pop up in your mind. that's how we will handle the q&a tonight. and please hand them in to the staff once you've noted your question, and the staff will be mingling amongst you. ideas questions will then be posed to dr. wright bide me

during the second half of the program based on your questions. it's now my great pleasure to introduce this evenings distinguished guests, doctor jim wright. dr. wright is the son of a world war ii veteran, and dr. wright himself joined the marine corps at the age of 17. he's from galena, illinois, originally, a small town near dubuque, iowa, where i went to school. and if the college president, my college president, doctor couchman, who is now deceased, knew i was with dr. wright, because i graduated with only the slimmest of margins from the university of dubuque, he would be rolling over in his grave about 5000 rpms. so dr. wright, please allow me

to continue. after his tour in the marine corps he went to college, university college, university of wisconsin and eventually became a history professor at dartmouth in 1969. he served as the president of dartmouth from 1998-2009, and since 2005 he has visited most of our military hospitals, and has encouraged support for the wounded veterans in those hospitals. he is a director on the board of the injured marines semper fi fund, one of the 10 top charities recently rated by charity navigator. his writings have been featured in "the new york times," "boston globe," "christian science monitor," npr, just to name a few. and he is recognized by the

education field, the veteran field and other service organizations as one of the foremost spokespeople for our young veterans today. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming dr. jim wright. [applause] >> thank you, bucky. it's an honor for me to be introduced by you. i have admired so much your work on behalf of veterans at the california state university system, particularly as i told you, you and chancellor rhee are really models for individuals were pushing hard to make available opportunities for veterans. and i was down at the marine corps recruit depot last friday, and -- [inaudible] the first time i have been back on that day since i finished boot camp in 1957, and like

bucky, i have a drill instructor who surely would roll over in his grave if he knew that i was a reviewing officer on the grinder down there, and i would be very happy to see him roll over in his grave, as a matter of fact,. [laughter] i'm very grateful to general mike myatt for inviting me to speak year. i admire general myatt very much. i served with him on the board of the simple life fund -- semper fi fund. i admire him for service to this country or those who have served the country, and his service did not end when he retired. he's really just a remarkably energetic figure who tries to make a difference and does make a difference. and, of course, i'm grateful to my dartmouth friends in the bay area for acknowledging my visit, for publicizing it, for joining us here tonight. san francisco is a special place for me, in all sorts of ways.

i spoke at this club a number of times representing dartmouth a couple events year. but more importantly, i shipped after treasure island here in 1958. of course, we were really shipped out of oakland but we were on treasure island preparing to ship out. i was on the cheap carrier and then i came back here, troop carrier in the spring of 1960 and is discharged at treasure island just 52 years ago, late april of 1960. my store tonight and the story of this book is not a personal one, but it's surely informed by my background experience. i think most of us who write books write things that are informed by our own background experience, and this one explicitly is for me. i grew up in galena, illinois, as bucky said. general grant's hometown, when

the civil war began. i was a world war ii baby. i was born in 1939, and i remember my father going off to war, and our remover at the end of the war, it seems like everyone's father, so many people came home, and this town of roughly 4100 people at that time, 18, did not come home from the war. it was a town where people did serve and deserved in some very difficult places. and i grew up playing among the cannons in grant park, and the talk about that in the introduction of the book. i joined the marines at the age of 17, and it was a time, those of my generation, my age know going into the service was simply something that was expected of us. you could be wait to be drafted in the army, or as we did, we joined a marines. there were 25 boys in my high school graduating class. five of us joined the marines, another half-dozen went into the army or the navy or the air

force, and i think three or four went to college, and that was basically the breakdown at that time in the community where i grew up. but after i got out of the marines i decided to go to school. once i started i never stopped, and i haven't stopped yet going to school because they're so much to learn and there's so much to do. while at the university of wisconsin, 1960s, clearly i want to reduce engagement from the military. the vietnam war was something that increasingly troubled me, not the kids were fighting there. i worried about them a lot, wondered if i knew them. and i'm sure i did know some, but it was a difficult time. and then i came to dartmouth, the campus closed down in my first spring because of protests over the war expansion and due to cambodia. then there was a major fight over rotc. but i really engaged with the marine corps and the military

beginning in 2005. i m. really affected by the accounts of the battle of falluja in november 2004. and i spoke to a friend, and he encouraged me to go down to the hospital, and it did, beginning in the summer of 2005. went down to bethesda and talk to some marines there, and i continued that. i was just down the week, we can have to go to bethesda. i've been down the tween 25 and 30 tons against over the last several years. i generally walk the floor and talk to people bed to bed and chat with them about their own experiences. i ask them how they were injured, and it's really quite a tale, i guess i could reflect on all of the 300 plus kids that i probably spoken to and what happened to them and how did it happen to them. this led me to other veterans. i worked with a couple old

marines when they are promoting the post 9/11 g.i. bill. i had a meeting with two of them in february 2008, urging them to include opportunities for veterans to go to private colleges. and we developed in senator warner's office the basic principle which begin the yellow riband program which was a cheerleader important part of the g.i. bill. i thought i would just pick up what we do and sort of hummers myself in america as veterans and i realized it wasn't a book there. and i started complaining about this, and a friend sent quit complaining and write it yourself. that's basically how this book started. for me it has been a week emerging into american history. i loved american history. i loved teaching american history but i've been away from

it, away from a feel for some 20 years while serving in administration but this provided in a fraternity for me to become we emerged into. the book is an overview of the subject of america's wars and those who fought them. it's a narrative but it's also a meditation on my part. a reflection. i have some observations on the current state of affairs. i have a number of observations on the current state of affairs, and what we think about war and what we think about those who fight our wars. some major themes that i pulled out as a thought about american history was the idea of the citizen soldier getting back to the american revolution. the concept that americans would leave their farms and their factories and shops when the republic is threatened. and they would go off to war. as soon as the war was over they would hurry home because they were not professional soldiers. i have come to realize it's a

declining value as a description of those who serve, particularly since world war ii as the military forces have become less and less representative of the population as a whole. world war ii was the most representative of any of our wars, beginning with korea. the military was less and less representative, and part of that because of exemptions that were offered for college students, beginning in korea and certainly vietnam and then today with the all volunteer army. george washington believed that all americans have an obligation as citizens of this republic to serve when the republic is threatened, to be in the militia, to be available to be called the. he also believe we all have to contribute our treasure to support those who serve. but he also recognized that his own experience was fairly

negative. washington, for all of the talk about the importance of citizen soldiers and the militia, did not fight in the militia. he wanted a regular army. he wanted people, when he said lets go down to virginia, they would go down to virginia with him rather than say -- sorry, we have to go home. so we wanted full-time soldiers, and he got them finally in the continental army. i've also looked at the way america is viewed its veterans, and the obligations we have to them historically. and from the very beginning there was a sense that because it was an obligation, a contract almost, of those who are part of this republic to serve, there should be nothing given to those who are healthy, and begin with the revolution healthy men if you had all your limbs you are healthy and you should not expect any support from the government. has continued to be the principal, although obviously in various wars, and all of our

wars, we started giving pensions to elderly veterans. but this changed dramatically beginning with world war ii with the g.i. bill provided opportunities for all veterans to go to school, to take out loans, to start businesses, and this has been the pattern ever since then. interestingly during the 1920s and '30s, not just presidents hoover and coolidge insisted that they should be no payment to healthy veterans, but even franklin roosevelt insisted the same thing. healthy veterans are not entitled to anything from the republic for simply doing their duty. he changed his mind during the second world war, fortunately. i've also reflected on the composition of the military today. when the all-volunteer force was approved in 1973, there was really a great fear on the part of many that the military would become a force composed of the poor and minorities.

visually has not happened today, but it's not a representative for speedy. it's more world than urban. it's a more southern and western, small town west and it is northern and eastern. there are very few college educated people serving in the military. and it's my strong impression, although there's no evidence i can give on this, but it's more generational. many of the people serving today our sons or daughters of people who served in the military, and that sort continues the demographic pattern that we have seen. it is more black and white than population as a whole reflecting perhaps the southern influence, but it is not representative in terms of hispanic or asian american population. we give our veterans today great rhetorical, even emotional support. i'm struck by the comparison

with the war in vietnam. the war in vietnam was obviously as unpopular as the wars are today, as the wars have been looking at public opinion polls. and yet we are not blaming those who are fighting today. we are crediting them, there is tremendous applause for them. but i worry a bit about this applause because the applause goes off and i think there's very little understanding who these young men and young women are. there's little understanding of what it is they have been doing on our behalf. these wars are mysterious. they are impersonal. we really don't know what's going there. there's very few news media that is covering the worst and it still and, frankly, there's not a lot to cover most of the time. there's not major battles, there's not been major battles for several years, few in iraq but not major battles that can

grab for front-page headlines our lead story in the evening news. there's and human interest stories. there's some story of tragedy, of heroism, but there's no real understanding of what it is day by day that these young men and young women do. i think that we are fighting defensive wars against unclear enemies. and this is not what the american military is best trained to do. in the play that was on broadway last year called three jacks in iraq, there was a line one soldier so frustrated said we're the only ones in uniform, you know? how do we know who it is to fight? we are the only ones in uniform. last summer when i was visiting the bethesda hospital, it was following this spring and summer battles and marines were involved with over in

afghanistan, and in late july 1 day when i was there, there were 45 in the ward that were suffering from combat related injuries. one of them had been injured by a mortar round. three of them had been injured by gunshot wounds. in each case from sniper file -- sniper fire someplace. and 41 had been injured by explosives. none of these people saw the person who detonated the explosive, that injured them. it's a different sort of war. it's a defensive sort of war. last 10 days ago as down at bethesda there were few people in the ward that i actually met a young marine who had a gunshot wound from a firefight. that's the first time i talk to anyone living in a firefight in a couple of years, and it's really just quite different. we are saving more casualties on the battlefield. about 10% of the combat

casualties in afghanistan and iraq have died. in vietnam it was more than a third combat battle casualties at the time but it is a number to do with a number of factors. it has to do with the armor they where today that protects our lord and. it has to do with the helmets that they where that protects them. it has to do with battlefield medicines, sophisticated with medevac with you get most of these kids out within 30 minutes to a field hospital. and it also has to do quite frankly with explosives which remain these young servicemen and women terribly. but gunshot wounds are more lethal. gunshot wounds are more carefully placed, and more people die. there's a higher death rate from gunshot wounds. the same was true in vietnam as it is of the wars today. so we have new types of

injuries. a lot of amputations. when i go to the hospital ward, it's commonplace to see someone missing one or more limbs due to an explosion. there are a lot more face and head injuries due to the explosions. i mentioned in the book one of the most poignant and memorable things i saw was when they were showing me a new ward in the hospital, bethesda, for people who are suffering from head injuries. and all of the bathrooms there were no mirrors guess they didn't want these young people to see their reflection in the mirror without somebody being with them to be able to help them through this experience. it's just a different sort of war. we know that there's a greater incidence of ptsd. we can't really compare with previous wars because we are far better now that diagnosed and

identifying this than we were in vietnam. we only started identifying this basically eight or nine years after the troops pulled out of vietnam, and the other wars it wasn't identified at all. but clearly there is more of it, and we are also understanding that while traumatic brain injury can cause ptsd, the military and the national football league are discovering this at about the same time. there's no getting your bell rung is no longer something to shrug off and dismissed. imperative i guess, my take away from this is that we need to remember the human face of war. in some profound ways i don't know there's anything more human and engaging is war as ironic and even reverse as that may seem. there's nothing more fundamental human and to estimate to do this.

and i think we have to reflect on what it is that we ask these young men and young women to do. all of us bring up our children with a set of principles that we ask them to learn, and among these principles, certainly in each case would be too, one would be to avoid situations that are dangerous, don't put yourself at risk. and the other is don't harm other people. there are personal, moral, spiritual and religious, there are legal strictures against harming other people, the 18 and 19-year-olds that would put in armed forces. we say we have to forget these rules. you have to be prepared to put yourself at risk, and put yourself at risk quite regularly. and you have to be prepared to harm other people. and then they come home and i forget, go back to the old lessons and forgetting these things is very, very difficult.

one does not forget easily. i followed the account of the young man who had been killed in korea, and i think it summarizes the human face of war as well as, and this can be repeated in any number of wars. late in the afternoon of july 1950, a young soldier huddled in a foxhole in south korea. his unit, the first time 21st infantry regiment of the 24th division had just arrived your reassigned from the occupation duty in japan. a north korean tank approached and when the bazooka team fired, the tank opened up with its machine guns, and the young man, private, was shot dead. his team withdrew taking his body with them. he was the first announced american serviceman killed in the korean war. the journalists was present when team brought his body to a cut. she had been a frontline

correspondent world war ii when she left a tokyo office of "the new york herald tribune" to go into troops to korea. she wrote this dead young soldier had a look of surprise on his face. well, the prospect of death had probably seen as unreal to private as the entire war still seemed to me. he was very young indeed. his fair hair and frail build made him look far less than his 19 years. the medic standing there said simply, what a place to die. and the new times noted he died as though bush usually die and they pelting rain and a fox will. back in west virginia, his parents learned of their son's death that morning at breakfast when a neighbor rushed and telling them that he had heard it on the radio. this is shadrach was deficit with the death of one her 10 children, and she could not

discuss it. mr. shadrach what worked in the coal mines for 37 years later talk to reporters who described him as sad but resigned. his son, he said, was the best there was. never cost us a mite of worry. mr. shadegg had accepted his sons interest in joining the army at 17 and signed the permission for it. when he was asked by a reporter what he thought about his young soldiers assigned to the conflict he said simply, he was fighting against some kind of government. when a reporter asked him if he knew where korea was, he said yes, korea was the place where his boy was killed. that sort of story would be repeated many times, 37,000 in that war, and in the wars that would follow. we ask our youngsters to go out

and do some things that none of us, many of us don't understand, some of you in this room do. i was struck by one young marine that i spoke to the talked about being on a patrol in iraq, and their vehicle took some fire from a farmhouse, and they started a firefight with those who were inside the farmhouse, and he noticed that a young boy who is frightened ran out of the farmhouse and got caught in the crossfire and fell down in the farmyard. the people were in the farmhouse either retreated out the back or were killed, and this young marine jumped out of the vehicle, ran over to the boy lying there in the dust, and he realized quickly that this boy was dying, but he was still alive. he held them come at a sergeant in the vehicles had come on, it's time for us to go, we've got to get out of here, they are coming back. he said to me, i was just so 20

i that because i knew that my unit, my guys, people i cared about a lot were in the vehicle and i did need to get out of there and i needed to be there for them to go. buddies that i also thought i don't want this young boy to die without another human being holding him. and so i knelt there in the dust and avoid finally made a sound and rattled and died, and i put them down resting his body in the dust and iran back to the vehicle and cutting. and my sergeant said i'm going to court marshal you. you put us all to risk. fortunately, nobody court-martialed him. he said they were right. i shouldn't have done it as a marine it was my obligation to get back with my unit. and my view on this is that this is, as i said, the most human of things we can do. and what a choice to young 19 year old to make, to make this sort of decision, but they do it, they do it often.

they are remarkably professional what they do. we talk now about everyone being a hero, and i think of the people who are serving as being so courageous and so remarkable, brave. but there's no longer much use of the word heroism in the contemporary sense, but this goes back to abraham lincoln at gettysburg in his wonderful poetic remarks in a battlefield that will still stand by the blood of 70,000 when he spoke in the fall, there were no names, no exploits, no battle accounts. rather it was a poignant eulogy for all who sacrifice, and he said they were heroes, all, and they continue to talk about heroes, all. certainly in our wars today, there's a focus on our patriotic sacrifice, but there's little room to understand the horror and the cost of war. most people simply do not understand that.

yet we have to recognize that there is a whore and there is a cost of war. it may be different from vietnam or korea or world war ii, but there surely is a horror and there is a cost, and all of us need to step up to that. some of the political protests, about the 1% and the 99%, the fact that 1% are privileged and entitled, and 99% of us pay the bills for them. and we will hear more of that coming forward. i think that there's also a 99 and a 1% ratio that we don't talk about so much, about 1%, even less than 1% of our population serves in the military today. about 1% of our families have sons or daughters who are serving in the military today, and 99% of us simply are not sacrificing.

we're basically unaware of what they do. this is the first sustained war in american history where that not even been a tax to pay for the war. vietnam, a came late but there was a surtax in the vietnam war to help pay for the cost of the war. we that tax cuts at the end of this war and nobody dared talk about taxation today. i wrote several senators in congress, men and women, last year, all of whom i have a first name relationship and said you know, if you're talking about this, maybe it's time to have a surtax on individual income and corporate income to help pay for this war rather than let these kids come back from the war they're fighting and say now you have to pay for it. and many of these people -- and none of these people whom i hae a first in bases even answered these letters but it's the third rail of her politics. ironically, as much as americans

think they are taxed enough and don't want anymore, i'm not sure that such attacks couldn't be approved. but it couldn't be and it won't be. and that's the nature of war today. i have been immersed for the last several years trying to understand this, and i'm an old history teacher, and my interest is having the biggest lecterns i could possibly have to talk about some of these issues that i think are terribly important. is a history lesson here, but it goes beyond a history lesson. there's a civics lesson, a lesson in the way that a democracy organizes itself. a lesson in the sacrifices that we asked our citizens to take on. and i'm just delighted to be here tonight. i'll go anyplace to talk on this subject and bucky, i will be happy to answer the questions

you have now. [applause] >> well, i think i speak for all of us, dr. wright, but thank you for your tremendous capturing of the essence of what the y3 the essence of what the young military man and woman faces today. and the world that they come back to. and the first question, you talk about in your book that veterans are portrayed as victims. and what can we do as a society to take that off the description of veterans? >> yeah, i think that the vietnam veterans are often considered veterans, one of your

wars, colonel, people were considered a victims, and i think that's a condescending term to use. and i don't think, and i think in this case when we talk about them as victims, it's also condescending. look, these young men and women signed up. they enlisted, and i think we need to be proud of them rather than thinking of them as some sort poll -- some poor soul who did want to be someplace. some of them did find themselves in places they didn't want to be but that's true in every war, i suspect. they are not victims. they are quite remarkable young people who are trying to serve their country. >> here's a question back on your discussion with your first name friends in washington. there seems to be a sort of duplicity in d.c. these days.

national leaders want to reserve the right to engage our military forces and multiple assignments, yet they do not want to fully fund our active duty forces. the result is repeated deployments of the active, reserve and guard units, and they are not really designed for continuous or repeated tours. >> i think, i think, you know, i will get into the duplicity in washington, but the thing is true, that we have not, we did not mobilize the force sufficient for the wars that we have been fighting over the last decade. and part of that is because a decade or so ago, beginning in 2001 in afghanistan, nobody predicted, nobody seemed to think that much about how long these wars would take. they didn't think about the cost of these wars, and we should have mobilized a larger military.

for sure there should've been more marines, more army infantry and paratroopers mobilized rather than ask some of these people have deployments five or six times. i don't think anyone can go through this, can go through combat zones as many times as we've asked these young people to do without suffering significant consequences. 56% of the military today are married. these people are leaving families behind when they go back often for the third or the fourth deployment. i just think it's a tremendous burden they have taken on. >> several questions have come in on the increasing role of contract employees. and your opinion, your thoughts on how this impacts the military. >> yeah, it's interesting. i was down in san diego at camp pendleton and i asked somebody,

i said what about the mess hall, that's all civilian contract, and i said what's happened to my marine corps? i was on mess duty all the time. [laughter] and doing things. but i think that's good that marines are not as the eye peeled potatoes in japan. i worked in the scullery on an lsd. i worked in a pod shack. i have done it all. i think it's good that they are not asked to do that now. but more solution of course is the people who were on guard duty, or serving other roles on the basis in afghanistan and iraq, and i do know if i want to say there's too much of it. that's a harder question to do with. if they can really the military of certain obligations, that's good, but what does happen is we don't have to account for this. they are not military so there's a different accounting system, and the numbers of people who have been over there have really been quite significant, and only when there's a significant

incident like some of the killing of, the hanging of those bodies in falluja in the spring of '04, do we realize just how may of them are over there. i think there's needs to be a fuller accounting and understanding of this. >> several questions have come in regarding post-traumatic stress and psychological support. so first, how are we doing in the area of post-traumatic stress? and secondly, is there enough psychological support outside of the post-traumatic stress? are the young veterans open to counseling, or do they consider it to be weak and stigmatization of themselves? >> yeah, i think the answer to the first part of the question depends on the observation of the second part. i'm not sure they are open to

counseling. it's hard for them to come forward. as i said to a group of the first marines that came to dartmouth to go to school, i said there's nothing harder for 22 or a 23 year-old guy, particularly one who is a marine who served in iraq or afghanistan to come forward and say, i'm scared, i'm nervous, i'm angry. i can't sleep, i'm apprehensive. i said you have to be willing to do that, and i don't think we do that very well. there needs to be i think more and openness of encouraging them to do that. finallythat. finally, the va just recently expanded significantly the number of mental health counselors, trying to understand that it's time to step up and to be able to provide support more quickly. there were more suicide in a military in 2009 than they were people killed in combat zones in iraq and afghanistan. we need to do a better job. i've been struck by the way that they come in and of the marine corps, general chiarelli was very active as the chief of

staff of the army, and trying to break through this, and to get people to understand that if somebody says i'm apprehensive, i'm concerned, that you don't say in language that i will use in this company, come on, you know, don't be, don't be a sissy, or don't be afraid, you've got to big for. we are working to that, but i just talked to a young guy recently who was supposed to go back to iraq with his unit, and he had been identified with ptsd, and the sword you really him out. he said you did this just to avoid serving with this. this guy had been over three times. he was set to go again. you've got to get down to the nco ranks, as we all know, to really make a difference. it comes from the top, the military, really is hierarchical. people do try to follow orders, but this is a cultural thing, a

god-given, it's just harder to break through. >> there's a couple questions on the all-volunteer force, your views on the all-volunteer force, as it strengthened the country? or has a cost weakness to pop-up? >> i think the all-volunteer force as i suggested is not representative, and i think that's unfortunate. so people often say well, let's have a draft, and there are often people urging a draft. and i'm not one of those people who would urge a draft. i think that the military does have a very professional force today, and certainly if you talk to many of the major branches of the service ever that people people who have enlisted, who want to be there. but more profound i think in 2010 their work 4.418 million-year-olds in the united states, and that you're the military forces ascension as they put about 165,000, that's

less than 4% of the 18-year-olds who were asked, to circumvent signed up, they are all volunteering that year. we could move away from volunteer and have a draft, and you could have a lottery i guess, but what 4% would it be? would be the question. i think most people would say well, midas will be those those who prefer to be there. rather than some is dragged into the military's service and who does not want to be there, and certainly those in his command which just as soon he wasn't there. is a difficult thing to do that. i don't know. it's not representative. we have to make, we have to represent the military better. we have to understand better who they are. we have to understand better what it is where asking them to do. many people say we need the draft because people in washington, people make decisions on war will be far

more cautious about making those decisions if their own son or daughter were likely to be called up to go to this war. and i believe that such a cynical review of democracy. i refuse to accept that. if we have people in washington who will be sensitive and sending young americans off to war only if their own children are involved, but they would be indifferent or not care as much if somebody else's children are involved, they should not be in washington. we should never have people in public office who functioned this way. >> a great question. would you make comments regarding a recent dartmouth grad, nathaniel, and his book one bullet away? >> he is somebody who i'm very proud of, and i become a good friend of in recent years. i was with him and talking about this book in washington a couple weeks ago as a matter of fact. he's a great example i think of a liberal arts graduate going in the marine corps.

he was, his unit was involved. he was in afghanistan for and was involved in the invasion of iraq in march 2003. the book and film dealt with that. once they got to baghdad he wanted to take his platoon down to see babylon and see some of the ancient ruins of iraq. and i like that, although he said that a few years later, a few months later arrived, he could have taken his passion he couldn't have taken his platoon down there unless he had a bigger escort. there's a brief time you go to the. is just coming on the dartmouth board of trustees. he's a remarkable young man. >> this question speaks to the transition program in the military. the questioner says, we go

through boot camp where 10-12 weeks are taken to transform a young man or woman to become a military person. and there's literally no process to help them when they exit the service. your comments in this area and the importance of a transition program, solid transition program. >> i think that's a very good observation. i think there needs to be a solid transition program for those who are leaving the service. leaving the service, i know they're trying to do more at some of the major military installations were many other people reserve the discharge and go back to civilian life. but i think, i think what's required is just really sort of good personal counseling. we can do that in this country far more effectively we can

today. young veterans have a higher unemployment rate than the population as a whole. there is more homelessness on the part of veterans than there is the population as a whole. we just need to do better than that. and the way to get at that is fine individual support and counseling is not massive across the board programs. you got to understand what it is, where the problems are and what it is you can do to deal with them. i really worry about counseling for our veterans. we have, as i said, just horrible injuries today, and you know, if you bring a young soldier in a wheelchair over football game at at&t park, there'll be a a standing ovation. everyone chewed them, teary-ey teary-eyed. that's a good thing, but my concern is that the music is going to stop. these guys are rock stars right now but the musical stuck to the last world war i veteran just

died of the last year. sometime -- given the nature of the centuries, these guys deserve to be better than wards of the state. we need to find ways to look after them. we need to find ways to encourage them to enlarge their own dreams and the we need to find ways to help them meet their dreams. this can be done, but it's just going to take time and effort. i think the personal touch is very hard to find today in discharge centers or in in the veterans administration. they are just so overwhelmed by the numbers. >> in the past we had john wayne, audie murphy and others, who made major impacts on the military through the movie industry. now we've got the act of valor and hurt locker.

your views on the impact of these movies on young men and women today. >> yeah, i don't know what impact is on young men and women. i think that they showed some of the experiences that the actual people who are serving in the field have. you know, there are just fewer euros quote, in these wars today. the medal of honor, i think there are 10 or 11 of in these wars. but audie murphy could actually assault a machine gun nest and take 50 or 60 prisoners. john wayne could potential assault the beach at iwo jima and be a hero. there are no opportunities in these wars for that sort of traditional concept of heroes. you know, we tried to make jessica lynch who endured tremendous pain and discomfort as a prisoner, or pat tillman,

remarkably courageous young american, and we try to make traditional heroes out of them, and it doesn't work the if you look at the medals of honor in the current wars, i think only a couple of them have gone to people who survive. most of wanted people for, not for assaulting an enemy force, but primarily for saving someone's life, for jumping on a hand grenade to save others. just remarkably heroic and courageous actions. it's just overwhelming. but we don't know how to handle these wars. we don't know how to define heroes of these wars. but everyone who steps out of a gate is a hero over there as far as i'm concerned. >> last question. in past conflicts, the civilian leadership has had military leadership. today, the civilian leadership

is shrinking to almost a microscopic level of those who have served. how does that impact on the civilian decisions made for the military forces? >> is an interesting question. the congress today, for example, as a far lower percentage of veterans that it is at any time since maybe 1940 i guess, and its decline significantly just in the last 20 years. and i think this is not a good thing, but maybe in some ways it may seem a little ironic. i think that there is an inclination on the part of many people in congress. summary said this is where the military or this is for the veteran to say i'll vote for, i'm for the military and, therefore, the veterans. and you know, i think you need to get a few more old lance corporal severe. we be more than happy to ask tough questions of people, but somebody was never in the

military may not want to ask tough questions. it is interesting if you look at presidential elections, the last of her presidential elections, clinton, the second war hero and dole in 96, george bush the second president bush had been in the national guard, but he beat al gore who had served in vietnam, and john kerry was defeated by bush the second time. mccain was defeated by obama. i don't think being a war veteran or a war hero is not helpful, but it obvious doesn't put people to the top anymore. it's an interesting situation. but with fewer people serving in the military with less than 1% serving, we just have to recognize will have a smaller and smaller proportion of veterans in almost every area of american life, including our politics. we have to find ways to deal

with that. >> on behalf of the marines and for your guest here tonight, thank you spent thank you, bucky. [applause] >> thank you. >> is there a nonfiction author or book you would like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail at booktv@c-span.org. or tweet us at twitter.com/booktv. >> and welcome to boston where "the communicators" is on location for the 2012 cable show. for the next three weeks will be bringing you some of the interviews that we conducted on telecommunications policies and issues. this week, michael powell, as president and ceo of the national cable and telecommunications association.

we talked to him as well as the chairman of time warner cable. here are those interviews. michael powell, president and ceo of the national cable and telecommunications association, yet this week at the cable show you had a sit down interview with fcc chairman genachowski, and chairman genachowski talked about the fact that shared services agreements needed closer attention. what is your view? >> he didn't expand on on detail but it is a subject that is come up somewhat consistently in the courts, concerns about reagan's addition to the senate. and i think it was meant to signal that that is one area that the commission may have some concern when people are bundling, we transfer and legitimate -- leverage. there may be something in there from a public policy perspective that concerns them. i assume that's what he was focused on. but to be candid i haven't heard much more about that beyond

that. it's interesting, interesting they are focused on it and we will see what comes of that. >> are the concerns? >> certainly for some of our members it is. it's been a touchy issue both in association because we represent both programmers and operators, but there are certainly operators that are strenuously continue to be concerned about rising programming costs, and particularly and the broadcast stage with retransmission consent. it isn't just what you pay. there are a whole lot of people come some which are part of the government policy and regulation, that they have had a proceeding at the commission for a long time. right or wrong the commission should resolve elements. it's not going to do those things it does not have jurisdiction. to those things it thinks they should make, a should act on the. >> were some of the other policy issues that came up during this

year's cable show? >> very interesting enough, i love when they show really seems to be focused on the business, the consumer and the technology, and the policy isn't the biggest part of it. you do start to hear the rumblings about our refund of the place where we'll start talk about -- once we get to the election? i think there's a universal view that certainly the old statute is definitely old now. it's not slowly being in need of bearing pics i don't know that everybody is about what exactly should replace about this but healthy conversation. isn't a healthy conversation? it's not unique to cable. is not unique even traditional telecommunications but it's very critical to facebook stock price. once he gets over the mess it is in. it's critical to sort of where the country is going to draw the balance. that would be a big subject and discussion. mentions really important conference in december with the ipu. that's a global into a policy

which i think is a sleeper area of great worry to the industry and to broadband generally. but otherwise with those issues on the margin, a little bit of cybersecurity, i think it's come up. a little bit of piracy has come up. but i would say a little bit many the overwhelming field of the show is wow, a lot of things we been debating are coming to fruition. broadband is turning into successor for america. >> what are some of the new technologies that have been introduced? >> let me just think of two real quick. one involving comcast, something call the excellent platform. boston will be the first city be deployed this technology and so think about it. we sort of hate our set-top box but that box for anti-who should cable is required by the architecture our network and limits what you do with the guy.

it limits what you can do with software and it limits what you can do with security. it is the gatekeeping device that the networks, and we could deliver more services on a cloud of platform. the guy doesn't need to sit on your box. it could serve -- live on a server in denver. so good applications and other kinds of services. we can innovate because we can fix one and distribute one. so they can literally change the guide overnight. they could change the guide in an hour. they can build an application and work with another company, a google or someone, and build the navigation and posted on the server and the cloud and that platform would be able to allow you to assess. we would have to switch out your gear every time we get and innovation. i think ultimately they want to deploy that platform to all the homes in the footprint so we start having that stopping the limitation. and all cable companies are heading to that so that's really