suggest is best spent with adam smith. thank you very much. [applause] ... >>

>> i was being polite to say he might be the greatest ballplayer of all time. [laughter] and the 1967 world series at fenway park in the bleachers we won that one we lost the next one. >> justice was done. [laughter] from 1946? i was there. saying something about politics at the end talking about the book things that matter charles and the introduction of talks about

the importance of do we get. in the world were it is less important. i industry and the appeal as

a sports fan it is okay to root for your home team but here's the truth actually realize the boston red sox are really not any better emotionally and psychologically morally than the other teams in baseball. [applause] but i don't always act that way. in england in the premier league every team is the new york yankees. i will lead to a game and i told the doctor that was visiting a very dignified he said would rather have my eye is a thrash out.

he said i like newcastle. to the key wanted to give me a bad directions to get to the game. everybody hates every other team like the yankees. i have two sons all my children were born in st. louis . correct. you cannot argue with that. >> to have the ridiculous emotional connection and we do that with politics to see

this fabulous internet to say how we see our politicians ha -- always a their politicians with the picture of cars fader in what they're both like added is the picture of jar jar binks. we create a partisan love for the good guys are the bad guys. but that can corrode the the so will if you are not careful. while politics matters and it is importance i want to keep that arm's length. and my attitude i never disappointed.

but republicans and democrats are constantly disappointed they think their guys are better than never betty else. another question? >> with this book to the lady you conduct your life? >> i write that i had to interview a call they get the time in to be six hours of conversation on the theory of moral sentiments.

i thought i have no idea what he is talking about but once i got into what i got very excited and it did help me the way people see me and how i see them. when you write a book about loveliness there is pressure to be lovely. it is an interesting experience. people have written me about things they have done now that i realize it is a lovely but that is gratifying. 1% change their behavior of the with the wonderful. so far as for me if i'd be better maybe i could really tell you with my close personal friends i will tell you things that maybe you're not so honest but i will say

with that wisdom this millennial i am jewish there is parallels between tolstoy and a lot of great ethical thinkers in history there is nothing new under the sun. ice save money doesn't make you happy it isn't a new idea. the hard part is to turn down the consulting opportunity that is lucrative because it realizes integrate the argument to forgive for word. that is the challenge when your friend says i fell down and ivan the hospital you actually do it. that's lovely. if you do once it is great

all the time you are a st.. , edits the idea. >> we want some time for him to use sign books. >> we're also being taped by c-span. or you can watch on the web site and watch yourself all over again. [applause] >> on behalf of the economics department, thank you.

[applause] >> in 2004 i came back to notice immediately getting off the plane in california just feeling different than my best friend took me to a bar it was a club i remember looking at the people i could tell everyone was drinking and talking in socializing like nothing had changed and there was no reason to feel angry or upset but it has struck me i

had changed for pro and remember being very bored and i laughed. and one interesting saying in stick diego they're all run by iraqis. the order was from baghdad so i was just off the plane and i walk right next door to talk to the iraqi. so it was a very strange feeling that i felt from early days in bin the tail end of the battle of fallujah to a explain what

they saw was gross mismanagement and poor leadership with irrational policy making its and then no w mgn then i was returning in 2004 just a few months later george w. bush was reelected sill that was a difficult process that in light of everything that happened was difficult for a free tour except -- for every word except they would elect the person that put them there in the first place. there is the movie theater

in 2009 with the explosion that resembled but i wasn't -- was in and the cinematic experience was very overwhelming and i actually blocked out and regained full consciousness is a the hallway at the cineplex. nobody else have this difficulty. i asked my girlfriend and she said there was an explosion and you ran out. i began to sense not all was right of sears on a personal level and i did not have full control of my memories. one person interviewed saying having ptsd was memories gone wild bird grows so that was the beginning of examining ptsd

as a historical entity because i was curious zero lot of marines and veterans i saw that as a cop as a shortcut to not having the emotional engagement with the post war services the way to die each -- dodgers on its ability. what i discovered is the original people that fought for the diagnosis was how i felt the non veterans against the of for the group that advocated for the ptsd diagnosis in his view there was no distinction between the politics in their own struggle of vietnam's and

added that k and the ptsd diagnosis we have today. >> before we get started a few housekeeping points. please silence your cellphone do not turn it off but you can follow on facebook than a twitter and instagram and if you hadn't already looked at the emails newsletter to see what else we have going on because i

hope you support our wonderful author tonight you can grab one of the event calendars to see what else is coming. they give her coming of the event's director here at provokes and we're so pleased to welcome you and also pleased to welcome benjamin schwartz for his noone -- a new book "right of boom". and is a wonderful thing. he started the events program just over the summer summit has been great building that program from scratch and getting to highlight interesting books with new genres and authors it is a great opportunity for us and we're so pleased to welcome benjamin schwartz. taking a look at what would happen if a nuclear explosion took place in the

united states. he maps out the likely revocation and imagining if it had been in washington d.c. what the commander-in-chief could do and as someone who has worked at the department of defense you can take a few -- a full view of what might happen. we're so glad to welcome him [applause] >> fate you for coming in just went to graduate school a few blocks from here and i came here once to twice a week but i never imagined one that would be here speaking about a book that they are selling so it is a pleasure to be here. i will spend 15 or 20 minutes talking about my book i am happy to open it up to questions. as the current employee as

department of defense i have to disclaimer's the first is i speak in my day capacity that does not reflect the defense department or any other agencies. and not meant to be a criticism of the above mentioned illustration but as the civil servant the radically any criticisms that all it would only occur to me in the future at the bar. that is a forum for a critical political discussion. so that we start with the title the most deadly cause of the tax against u.s. soldiers were roadside bombs and brenda defense community talked about that there would say get left of boom.

so "right of boom" is what happens after the bomb goes off. is about a question what if a nuclear attack occurred and could not be traced back to a foreign government? digest is impossible to prove who is responsible. 10 years ago at the kennedy school of government senior official with the reagan administration wrote a book on nuclear terrorism and in that book to put forward a doctor in and he said if the deadlines were breached that it is the significant possibility. edits snowden new nuclear

weapon states thinking of north korea. second was no new national capabilities to produce plutonium and the third is no conditions for nuclear weapons and. with the arsenal of the soviet union, where ted years has passed since the publication and north korea is undisputed the part of the nuclear weapons club passing the test in 2006, 2009, 2013 and everyone has a large program with multiple complex dispersed throughout the country many are buried deeply in there ground. although this is the positive development to to the efforts of the threat reduction program that paid for the destruction these

positive developments are from the trended pakistan. according to the veteran of the pakistan the military pakistan is in the mitt said a massive expansion to deploy a tactical systems this is understandable from that perspective but it is troubling with the inherent risk of nuclear weapons. >> so we went to a world of three nose to the three yeses. keep in mind the atomic bomb this 1940's technology so

that a secret knowledge hasn't been a secret for quite some time. classification may delay but not present the acquisition and the ingredients are dispersed through 25 countries and by some estimates there are metric tons of this out there. and to say it doesn't take much more than a fraction to create a weapon. so it is increasingly plausible that the government cannot control and is not responsible for this scenario it plays out of nuclear terrorism. it is a problem because the most powerful force since

world war ii is the incredible belief of retaliation the government's the citizenry and people will be held accountable if the territory or resources to our fellow citizens are used in such an attack. in 2007 the israeli air force struck that was intended to produce plutonium and what would have happened if that did not take place? if the bombs were created in and on stage actors? would risk a real be held accountable to build that plant and wonder if the individual's insurance korea if they believed at that time if they would be held accountable to the non stage

actor per barrasso plunder about less direct forms in a friendly country like france or japan in a facility with special nuclear materials. what are the standards for culpability or the of mechanisms to hold people accountable? i will be clear to say i am not suggesting that nuclear terrorism is likely to happen tomorrow or it is inevitable but unfortunately it is increasingly plausible scenario and it is worth taking about seriously after such an event as wet cold war strategy thought about the hot war between india and its states and soviet union. that is what the book attempts to do. "right of boom" is a noble but it is not inconceivable

with those approaches it would be unprecedented but the event would combine their different types of threats to be managed in the past summer to do highlight case studies and to give assistance realistically also that are considered in isolation. so the first general topic is the history of non-proliferation and counter proliferation. dealing with cooperative efforts beginning with treaties and regimes like the role of the

non-proliferation treaty. metaxas of nuclear terrorism without physical protection of nuclear materials. counter proliferation tends to be more coercive to cite that allies of a triage action to interdictions and the high-speed to carry those debut md materials into more allegations in the attempt of sabotage the second is the lessons of the escalation is it new end there are those of the last 70 years going into the massive retaliation and

mutually assured destruction of flexible response considering the capabilities of the reputation in so to fail to create commencements and another topic considers the lessons of counterterrorism id with bad not so much focusing against violence against civilians to believe in radical ideologies but the fact what makes it somewhat difficult dealing with violent groups that could be pacified so they don't respond to those same incentives but fortunately the violent non state actors have efforts by governments that manage those threats so too

underscore effective tools that include barriers for movement from the great wall of china to the checkpoint the importance to promote governmental institutions the development a pair of militarized forces that have lower intensity scale but of greater capability of tools of diplomacy and also the role of the engagement that don't aim to destroy the enemy because destroying a threat is the assumption those that manage the threat

with that strategic environment. finally it deals with the of question of morality and the legitimacy because it would directly impact the political feasibility. american history and american people have a history to use extraordinary violence of adversaries as well as exercising restraint a lot of love u.s. officials have made public threats about what would have been if individuals assisted in the acquisition. in 2001 and the director george tenet basic the threatened president drew sharp of -- the sharra if if

anybody assisted in the effort but what would musharaff with the full fury of the american people? it builds into the question of what it does it mean and what is credible? but the pundits and politicians used the phrase unprecedented but that scenario is out of the sun so there are the limits to history so i try to do to transcend this problem is a narrative speaking with the foreign counterpart another conferring with commanders with talking heads and

intellectuals debating what would occur and of course, the president speaks before the american people to confer with his advisers. the point is not to be dramatic but to underscore challenges and complexities decision makers would phase "right of boom" also to reject that time so with an immediate aftermath it would be different than the months or years later. just to give one example to focus on demonstrating a the capabilities for citizenry to project power to building a diplomatic coalition in to

support united states aggressive law enforcement that is very visible but it is unlikely to the changes to prevent the attack with the structure this required in a post nuclear terrorism scenario what we need to do to secure and maintain strategic priorities. these are a few of the questions the book tries to delve into. i will conclude by saying where the book came from. it came from one judgment and to questions. of the judgment is my personal view freer getting close to a tipping point if we haven't already crossed

it to be plausible deniable warfare so what would have been realistically if a tragedy were to occur? and but historical lessons in such an event? so it is part of a satisfying leone curiosity to think about this scenario. it deals with more questions and answers and i hope readers will find it is troubling but all too real question so i think there will conclude with saddam briefly open to questions. [applause]

>> [inaudible] >> is about the applicable of said wm the attack it designated to chemical weapons but the question is that are raised applicable. it is a different problem to make nuclear weapons as distinct. >>. >> the other day there was an issue at the white house with a drawn and everybody

said this a secret service prepared to deal with drones even though we have known about radio control the aircraft for decades that should not be reducing. 70 years in the making the house prepared it is our country to deal with "right of boom" offers is what you can pull from existing documents to show if something did happen tomorrow here or somewhere else the government is prepared to deal with all these scenarios that would arise from there? >> i'll add a good answer for that. with the issue of

credibility there is a gap between the history buffs with the monroe doctrine that committed to expel european powers from the western hemisphere at a time when it was a fraction of the british navy. there has always been of a gap with that capability and i think there is a concern with the gap goes so wide adversary start to probe at the red line because of the unintended escalation. dealing with flexible response options tuesday we will respond with a nuclear attack the al think that is a good response this is my personal judgment obviously a and i look for it is a

broader range of capabilities i hope they consider how to expand those capabilities. >> these are strategic so if a terrorist uses them the response is and be a strategic sense that there really is not a response. >> wide of the inherent challenge with a spread of nuclear weapons coming from the state to airforce or the navy you knew that was coming from you concede that and in this situation you don't you cannot respond in the same way.

is not a linear response. you have to be more creative and that is what i tried to integrate those use violence for those that would be applicable to deal with a nuclear terrorist attack. >> what i thought was have you get to boom in the first place with said territories they you can combine them to make a lot bin. said is a more viable threat right now? >> [inaudible] for weapons that were already prepared?

>> that is the very good question but there is no answer just speculation. the scenario i laid out his low probability hopefully provide purposely don't think there is a way to quantify with constructed weapons is a greater risk it depends on the situation with the bins and factors. >> i guess i will take one more question. >> talk about the dirty bomb for what doesn't have the immediate effect of the quarantine? >> i'm sure there is disaster response that is

where a taxpayer dollars go to. but it deals with the hypothetical in terms of a defense policy response of you get that problem from the statecraft? and it is theoretical you can only go so far to write that plan down to make an official but to have that play-by-play it gets more abstract analysis that addresses the question. thanks for coming i hope you enjoyed the book. [applause]

>> please just pulled up your chairs please come to your book signed. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> how is this country? [laughter] that things and the 100 year terms? real lucky people can have that span with a person gets elected for the first time it is assumed he will be reelected.

>> i have tried to put the issue of 20 - - china and then narrative on the presidential election debate agenda for 2016. it was a much of the issue in 2012. mitt romney has said chapter on china and brings up about being more competitive but it isn't the unprecedented debate began one of a bite to see is our media who dominates the issue. people those that fox news and they would raise the topic in the presidential debate team and you'd better be right purpose of the media says what is this all about? is china really doing these are we gullible?

so far only to have talked about it. elisabeth warring has a comment talking about losing jobs to give a percentage of gdp to a flier that chinese model. the title is roughly pre-used to be like that. there is a similar book called foreign policy begins at home so the idea is there but not yet a presidential issue because the narrative to day it will collapse they are stupid and we opened up china.

that narrative is all wrong. i tried to show the new evidence in the book that with a different narrative is the tills barry dream to say what about the both the 100 year marathon? the candidates say no. so we have discussed the chided dream now we discussed the other is. [laughter]

and now he

says brian super thrilled to lou host for the first time and. this blew my mind. des is terribly exciting and something about the drug war. if you're living in baltimore you know that the drug war is bad panel full but those who is writing journalism who comes along to look to that history to talk to people there go to places figure out a way to tell the story to give a different lens and a different optic and gives us a way to deal with that with a better future.

i'm glad you all came out. [applause] as the liquid the war on drugs was launched there was one place in the world that it would work that if you crack down hard enough then there would disappear. how is that working out for you? if you like i should apologize i should say i am not from nearby have never felt so colleges about it i went to the only hit man of

the drug cartel i went to french in the jack in the box. do you have that? is a fast food chain that is responsible for at least one of my chins. could i have a quarter pounder with cheese? can she said what? i apologize taking into the accident -- accent she said you speak english i said my people invented it. [laughter] but she did not laugh. now is 100 years in strokes were paralyzed for personal reasons with the drug addiction in my family where this memory was trying to wake up in not being able to

and i realized going on for 100 years there were questions i did not know the answer to that nobody has ever told me why were drugs being and in the first place? what really causes drug use lower drug addiction and? talking about in such the abstract way talking about how all the world should be talking about how it affects real people. but it the 8,000 miles talking to load the different people from brooklyn to a scientist to spins to enter into the mongoose.

to the only country in the of world abuzz decriminalized all drugs with great results. almost everything we think we knew about the subject is wrong. drug addiction is not what we think it is. in those alternatives i tell the story in the book of real people whose lives were changed one way or another. with just 56 people i talk about in the book and in 1939 billie holiday's saying a song is a song against lynching. to say you have to understand how shocking this was the african-american

woman standing in front of a wide audience she was not allowed to walk to the front door seeking a song against lynching. that night according to her biographer billie holiday receive death threats over wording from the federal bureau of narcotics that said don't sing this song. the man who ran the bureau was the most influential person and nobody has ever heard of. he created the department of prohibition in just as it is sending then he has to find a new purpose for the department he had to hatred one was african-american is the other was attics he was the crazy racist. he used the edward -- the edward and he was assessed billie holiday was

everything they hated african-american woman standing up to white supremacy as a heroin addict. and then as a sign of a of chaos was sitting to those lyrics and then he says that is what they do. billie holiday grew up in baltimore the last city in the estate's without sewage system. she grew up in big talent. and she learned something she was not allowed aha in the stores as an african-american in she vowed she would never bowed her head associates says krio american citizen i can do what i want and that is

the point when this talking began. he had a role that there could be no black guy in head is the organization but jerry it -- don as a job was to watch everything she did. but he loved her because she was so amazing that he was ashamed she was put on trial and was sent to prison in and she gets out she can sing. you need today cabaret performers license anywhere that alcohol was served in there would not give it to her. what is the cruelest thing you can do to a person is take away what they love. i went out with the female

chain gang to say i was said drug addict i will never work again with a record but billie holiday with all the suffering in her early '40's she collapses in new york and is taken to hospital and though hospital refuses to have her and she says to one of her friends they will kill me in there. don't let them. on her hospital bed she is diagnosed with liver cancer they handcuff her to the hospital bed. the take away the candies and the tories issue goes into withdrawal because she doesn't have heroin. the doctors give her methadone into stores to recover 10 days later they cut that and she dies.

but she insisted on singing and her songs she would go anywhere there would have heard she always would sing in a whole we to think of the addicts in my life there is the drug courier in all of us that feels really increase of a the time and helped me to know that the addicts can be heroes. her friend said to me she wasn't week she was as strong as she could be. i want to understand how those dynamics continue into today. the root of the best people i know does of former transsexual church crack to her when the crack addict was

raised by the n.y.p.d. police officer nothing was done to prevent the transmission of aids in fact, the one thing that did help was said distribution of clean needles was the crime. so his mother dies and he becomes a crack dealer of a corner and she helped me to understand the dynamics and run happens. if we go into the liquor store and retry to steal the deere they will call the cops they will take us away the lot -- a lot -- the liquor store does not need to be violent they cannot

call the police for the half to either fight you were established a reputation that he will not dare take them on. and it you have to be learned to be terrified. end to shoot and be aggressive and violent this has nothing to do with drugs it people still wanted to buy milk this isn't about drugs is about prohibition. and vendor alcohol prohibition so what happens is he started to rise through the crips and in

force to let a gang members then it cost $1 million per year. and his whole life is pour is service to use crack now want to know what my mother chose over every. he gets out of prison in his early 20s to redevelop the drug war in discovers something that blows his mind. this is is something that just happens is not like a tsunami or hurricane. what happened but the first campaign but also to be very

articulate it to explain what it was about but and he thought judy garland was a hero when addict. 78% of the people that sell drug czar african-american. . .