it's a secret, it's national security, trust us, we get to say it, too, and we're going to do a whole lot of things you're going to hate under those rubrics, and many of us said for years, watch out these, precedents will come back to bite us and they are coming back to bite us. think if nothing else -- one of two things will happen.ne either we'll end up in a much worse world in which the precedents we have set aboutrs unilateral action, about the -- using force without having in buy insure from the u.n. security council, the precedents we have set about detaining people or killing people, based on secret classified evidence we won't reveal and won't reveal that we killed them. either that becomes the norm and lots of international actor does the same thing and that's a scarry world whether everybody is acting that way or is a

wakeup call for us and we say, whoa, you're right. we want to be the country that we have long been with want to be the country that sets the right international norms elm want to be the country setting the example that other people should follow that will make the world better. we need to get out there. we need to be saying to other states, yeah, we are going to be in this in between war and peace land forever where threats won't look like uniformed military personnel. so how do we collectively come up with some kind of international rules and institutions that both recognize that those threats are real but don't throw human rights and the rule of law out the window in order to respond? let figure this out. it's going to be hard. let figure it out. i don't know which path we'll go down. w hope it's the latter path. >> host: so, rosa, you are writing this book at a time when we're about to transition administrations. people will be coming to you've,

if they vest already, some shy go into government and take my great principles principles andy background and try to make change? what do you tell people? what are the great things about going to work in the government and trying to make change and what are the hard parts? >> guest: the great thing is you learn how the sausage factory operates, and if you care about making change, whether you think to yourself i want to spend the rest of my career in government or you want to be a journalist or academic or work in the private sector, you have to know how it works.e you have to know enough about -- nobody ever really know how it works. it's much too complex for anybody of us. when i left the defense depth of 26 months i felt like i was finally beginning to understand some things about how it work, and i suspect people retire after 40 years and still feel that way. f but it was fascinating. i met wonderful people. i met awful people. and i left with a much clearer

understanding of how change sometimes can happen and why change often doesn't happen, that i think has been really useful to me in how i talk to people and how i write, and so forth. and would be really useful to me again if i ever went back in in a different administration and a different place. so when people come to me and say, should i go do this and i usually say, absolutely. that doesn't mean you should stay forever but if you care about any public policy issue, whether it's on the foreigns policy, national security sidede or domestic policy side, if you care about being an advocate, care about being an activist or reformer, you will learn so much that is valuable and your credibility will be forever higher if you good and learn a little bit more how it works and how it doesn't work. so i think it's a great thing to do.ea the one danger is people can get corrupted very easily. it's easy to go in saying i'm

going to be part of the solution and end up becoming part of the problem. but that something that is always true for everybody.ev >> host: well, it's a fascinating read and your experiences from the pentagon give great story-telling. people can read the stories in here, and hopefully you'll be back again with another back telling us how to solve these problems. >> guest: i'll leave that for other people to do but thank you so much. >> great.books [inaudible conversations]

>> good evening. i'm bradley graham, the own over politics and prose, on behalf of the entire staff, welcome. a few quick administrative notes. please turn off your cell phones if you have not already. when we get to the q & a part of the sessions because c-span booktv is here filming and we're filming also for our own youtube channel, we'd appreciate it if you have a question, if you'd find your way to that microphone there so that not only everybody watching on the film could hear you and everybody in the store. jean, who is 83, would very much appreciate being able to hear you. so, please be considerate of him and everybody else if you have a question.

finally, at the end, before you come up to get your books signed, our staff would ask that you fold up the chairs that b you're seated in and lean them against something that looks like it won't topple over. so, this must be a crowd of truly hard core presidential history enthusiasts. either that or at least some off you are just looking for a distraction from the presidential history happening before us on a daily basis. in any case it's really a pleasure to introduce jean edward smith who has, of course, proven himself to be a very distinguished biographer of presidents, and other notable american figures help has written about eisenhower, fdr and grant, also profiled the lives of john marshal and lucious clay, all this while

dolding down a day job as aa professor at several universities. longest with the university of toronto for 35 years, and then a does years at marshall university. also princeton and columbia and university of virginia and several other schools, which i'm probably leaving out. now he is zeroed in on the presidency of george w. bush, jean is very critical off our 43rd president and no question, whether it's misguided invasion of iraq, embrace of torture tactics, the fumbled response to katrina. there's much to be criticalta about. and jean places responsibilityty for the administration's resonating failures firmly on the former president. notwithstanding the influence that also was wielded by such major figures as cheney and rumsfeld.

but as a review in the new yorker -- the "the new yorker" says jean's book doesn't feel s like a hatchet job. in it a in the words of the "new york times," quote, comprehensive and compelling narrative, and "usa today" said jean, quote, writes off a death sweet and sense of history. speaking off how jean writes, one of the most interesting tidbit is learn about him from the acknowledgments in the book is that he still composes in long hand on yellow legal pads and then has someone type up what he has written and when you consider that this book totals 800 pages in print, that's a lot of legal pads.in please join me in welcoming jean david smith. [applause] >> thank you very much. this is my introduction of the

third biography here at politics and prose. earlier i did fdr and eisenhower. and it's always a pleasure for me to return to washington where i was born 83 years ago, and went to elementary school and junior high school and high school. i was not permitted to interview george bush for the biographyy. dick cheney, whom i interviewedd a number of times, set up an interview for me with the president at the bush library in dallas. and just before i was to fly out i got a call from one of bush's aides who said the president doesn't want to see you. you have written a book critical of his father, and for that reason he does not wish to see you. which was true in 1992 i wrote

george bush's war dealing with the first iraq war, and it was critical of bush's decision in iraq. and before i begin, let me make two remarks to put the biography in context. first, when it came to national security policy, george w. bush was absolutely in charge. all the decisions were his. he was indeed the decider, as he called himself. after 9/11, he relished his role as commander in chief and everything became chain of command. bush was not a tool of cheney or condoleezza rice or of the neocons or anyone else. he was the driving force,se whether it was cia renditions or nsa snooping or the war in iraq, these were all personal decisions made by the president. and everyone in the administration fell into line.

let me say a word bet nationalon security council. the nsc was establishedded by the republican 80th congress in 1947. and the idea behind it was to prevent the concentration of power in white house that happened under fdr in world war ii. it was modeled after the british war cabinet and was designed to bring the secretary of state and the secretary of defense, military leadership, in a conference with the president on national security issues. o truman used the nsc that way. eisenhower used the nsc that way. eisenhower met with the nsc every week on thursday at 10:00. and in his eight years in the white house, he presides over 314 meeting of the nsc. the change came with john kennedy. kennedy appointed mcgeorge

kendy as hismanal security adviser. neither truman nor icessen hour had a national security adviser and the size of the staff mushroomed. under truman and eisenhower the staff of the nsc were note tablingers and minute keepers and numbered three or four. under ken the size of the staff increased to 20 and began to handle policy issues. it doubled again when kissinger became the national security adviser to nixon and by the time george bush took office, numbered well over 100. these were professional experts in specific areas. in many respects the national security act of 1947 had been turn on its head. instead of a body that coordinated government policy, as was intended, the national security council staff became a policymaking tool of the president. bush ran policy from the white

house and the national security staff allowed him to do so. the second point i would like to make is that bush is a born-again christian who saw the world in biblical terms. that was especially true after 9/11. bush defined the battle against terrorism as a struggle between good and evil. he saw himself as god's agent, placed on earth to defeat the forces of satan. that religious fixation is the common denominator behind both the domestic excesses of the bush administration and the foreign policy decisions he made. in many respects the contrast to abraham lincoln is interesting. lincoln in 1861, after the battle of bull run, was visited

by a delegation of pros stand ministers -- protestant ministers and the spokesman for the group told lincoln he had vision from heaven the night before and the president had said that he was on lincoln's side. lincoln replied, hope the lord is on my side, but what i really need is kentucky. [laughter] today is george bush's 70th 70th birthday. he was born in new haven, connecticut, july 6, 1846, and upon his father's graduation from yale, the family moved to texas, where the senior bush went into the oil business. george w. grew up in midland. when it came time for high school he went to andsover where he finished near the bottom of his class. the dean of students at andover

told george not to bother tostut apply to yale because his grades were so low he could not get in but george did so and was admitted. george was a fourth generation legacy at yale.. his grandfather, his father, his great-grandfather, all had gone to yale and at the time george applied yale was admitting 52% of the legacy applicants. princeton and harvard were admitting 14%.ere kingman brewster became president of yale during george's freshman year and changed the rules.id from that point on, yale would only -- would take the samee amount of students that princeton and harvard took, 14%. bush's three brothers and his sister had the same legacy credentials he did. none of. the got in because brewster

change the rules. bush did no better at yale than he did at andover. returned to texass' spent the next five years in the wilderness. his father inning arranged for him to be commissioned in the texas air national guard which testified him from service in vietnam, and his career in the guard has matter of controversy. it was during these five years that bush drank heavily and used drugs. he was admitted to he harvard business school in september of 1973, and as one of the few graduates of harvard been school, if not the only one, not to have a job offer when he graduated. [laughter] >> bush had 53 interviews with fortune 500 companies. and did not receive a job offer. one of his clause mate ted harvard been school told me his

classmates considered him -- include dynamically ignorant. with no job offer bush returned to texas and like this father went into the oil business. buying leases on property hoping to strike oil. in 1977 he married laura welch, the following year ran as the republican nominee to take over from retiring democratic congressman george mahan. he was chairman of the appropriations committee for 12 years and was the senior member of the house. bush lost the election, return to the oil business. prospered for several years through family connections. but the downturn in oil prices hit hard. bush profited from several for few to us mergers and eventually sold out. it was during this time that bush became a born-again christian. in his memoirs bush credits billy graham with his-a rediscovery of god. m

but the fact it the conversion came a year earlier by a lesser known evangelist named arthur listen. also true at this time that that bush gave up drinking. the occasion was his 40th 40th birthday celebration. at the broad more hotel in colorado springs. bush became -- operating hi birth day, bush became i hopelessly intoxicated and woke up the next morning with an incredible hangover and resolved to quit drinking. laura said it was because he got the bill for the previous night's celebration. actually it was because george recognized hi father was running for president and he didn't want to embarrass him in any way so he stopped drinking. it was 1986, and no longer in the oil business, george and his family moved to washington to assist in his father's presidential campaign in the '88

election. george was given an office, campaign headquarters, and the woodward building down on 15th 15th street near the white house.ic his office was between lee atwater who was managing the campaign and roger ailes who was handling the publicity. now head of fox news. for to next two years george learned about electoral politics from who gifted practitioners. pop pa ran against michael dukakis and george saw first hand how to run a presidential campaign. when the election was over into november, of 88 george declined an offer to work in his father's administration and returned to texas. he started an informal campaign to run for governor but at the same time held organize a cindy cat to buy the texas rangers baseball team. the rangers, you may recall, are the old washington senators

expansion team, an expansion team formed here in 1961.at moved to texas in 1972. they were scarce scarcely pennant contenders and the deal to buy the team came through. bush stepped back from running for governor and for the next four years was the public head of the texas rangers. he owns only two percent of the stock. built a new stadium and really basked in the blow of an improving baseball -- the glow of an improving baseball franchise. bush assist northwest his father's reflex 1992 and -- but from a distance he stayed in texas, and when clinton won the election he set his sights on running for governor of texas. jeb decided to run for governor of florida.. bush was running against incumbent ann richards in texas. richards was heavily favored. in florida, jeb was favored to

defeat the democratic incumbent, law ton chiles. but the elect was an upset. george won in texas, jeb lost in florida, and from that point on, george became the likely successor to his father. texas is really the largest -- second largest state in the union in terms of area and the second largest in terms of population, but the governor of texas has no executive authority. that reflects the post reconstruction constitution. 1876, which stripped power from the governor. the governor of texas is essentially a symbolic figure, a little like the queen of ligland. most political science school ares of state government consider the texas governorship the weak nest the united states. the governor of texas cannot even issue pardons.

and in that setting bush thrived. [laughter] as the symbolic leader of texas he was overwhelmingly re-elected in 1998. and he also built a very effective political machine there, held by karl rove and karen hughes, and was quietly exploring the possibility of running for president in 2000. bush announced his candidacy on june -- in june of 1999, defeat john mccain in the primaries, was nominatedded almost unanimously at the republican, o convention. al gore was the democratic nominee and was heavily favored to win the election. gore fumbled almost meetly when he chose joseph lieberman, thet most conservative democrat in the senate, as running mate. snubbed bill clinton throughout

the entire campaign. and did poorly in the three television debates with bush. the choice of lieberman and the snubbing of clinton gave third-party candidate ralph nader an opening on the left. it would ultimately -- nader would ultimately poll three million votes and the election came down to florida. gore failed to carry 10 states that clinton carried in the 1996 election. any one of which would have put him over the top. the supreme court, as you know, ultimately decided the election. bush became president. and bush was superb as a politician seeking votes. but he had no executive experience. little knowledge of international affairs, had really not traveled abroad. a short attention span, and genuinely believed he was god's agent put here on earth.

with the exception of appointing colin powell as secretary ofn op state, don rumsfeld as secretary of defense and his friend, don evans, as secretary of commerce, a he delegated the selection of his cabinet and other top federal officials to dick cheney and closeted himself kneeholes with his staff from texas, plus condoleezza rice as his national secure adviser, and andy card as chief of staff. now, if you think about it, it is inconceivable that franklin roosevelt would have turned the selection of his hiss cabinet over to john garner or that dwight eisenhower would have allowed nixon to do that, especially after the scandal. as a result off cheny's input bush took service office with subcabinet appointees who were powerfully motivated and already equipped to arrived theer intellectual justification for the pret's policies.

conservative in outlook and articulate, these like-minded ideaogies and long can time friend, scooter liby, paul wolfowitz, elliott abrahams. cheney played an important role during bush's first two years. he had an office in the white house, his staff became part of the white house staff. they were all white house staff. the administration's position on energy, the revision of the tack code in 2001, and after 9/11 their presidential direct tonight too try al qaeda members by military commissions all reflected chen cheney's input. over the years his influence faded. initially bush devoted himself to the domestic issues. the united states had run a budgetary surplus under christianphone for the last three and a half years.ev clinton had applied the surplus to reducing the national debt. bush insisted the surplus money

should be returned to the taxpayers, it's your money, he said frequently on the election trail. and at his urging congress elected one of the largest tax cuts in american history. he also pressed education reform that first year, and in thisishr case "no child left behind" which congress enacted. bush rarely touched foreign policy issues in his first amongst in office when when he did so it was with a depression -- aassert american supremacy. the clinton administration worked to bring north korea back into the family of nations. the united states and south korea would provide economic assistance for north korea, in return for which north korea would abandon its nuclearr program. madeline albright visited pyongyang in dem of 2000. got korea's president, kim day

jung, came to washington inn march of 2001. really to put the final seal 0 on the deal with north korea. north korea was on the verge of renouncing nuclear weapons and signing a peace treaty with the south. burk rejected the idea. this wasn't something that bubbled up from anyone on the white house staff.ty the north koreans were evil, he believed, and the government must be replaced. this was bush's personal decision. the attacks of 9/11 were a surprise. but merely reinforced bush's view of good versus evil. in many respects the attacks of 9/11 have been a defining moment in american history by conflating the attacks with saddam hussein, bush led the united states into a $3 trillion war in iraq, promulgated doctrine ofn preventive war, alienated most

of american allies, weakened its alliances and inspired young muslims throughout the world to join the jihad. domestically the hysteria up leashed be in bush administration undermined civil liberties, eroded the rule of law, and tarnished the respect traditional american values of tolerance and moderation. i am the war president, bush once boasted. and on september 12th he assumed total responsibility and total authority as the nation's commander-in-chief. that morning, cheney offered to lead a group of cabinet officers to device policy. bush rejected the offer. this is a job for the commander in chief, and cannot be delegated, said bush. rather than treat the events of 9/11 as isolated incidents, rather than handle them through the political process, bush

depicted them as acts of war by the forces of evil. i won't really tonight 0 go into bush's assault on american civil liberties. in the poock i devote kuo two chapters to nsa spying and the torture trail and the record is clear. bush believed he was fighting the forces of satan. and as a result, if you're doing that no holds were barred, whether it is enhanced interrogation techniques, extraordinary rendition, or the intercept of private communications here in the united states, bush thought he was god's agent and the final fight to rid the world of evil. let me say a few words bottomsms the war in iraq. from the beginning, bush was determined to remove saddam hussein. the intervention in afghanistan was simply a warmup. bush instructed the department

of defense to prepare to invade iraq and ignored the findings of u.n. weapons inspectors that saddam hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. the planning for the invasionor began early in 2002. and the military assumed that the purpose was to remove saddam hussein destroy whatever weapons of mass destruct mights be founm and leave iraq as soon as possible.leave ir rumsfeld and general franks believed 90 days should be sufficient. and that's what the military planned for. the invasion took place, saddam was toppled. the search for military weapons began, and the military began too withdraw. ... weapons began and the military began to withdraw leaving it to the military to work things out. as the state department and the defense department thought, iraq

had been liberated and it was up to the iraqis to do it on their own. the ba'ath party remained >> the iraqi army remained in place. under the senior leadership council established by general jay garner. they were developing plans for new government anorak most and partly it was a secular state. but on may 1, 2003 lincoln, under a banner that read mission accomplished first said that the purpose of the invasion was to bring democracy to iraq. the united states forces would remain there until that was accomplished. bush change the mission without consulting anyone. the decision was unilateral. instead of liberators, the army would not become occupiers and would bring democracy to iraq. rumsfeld -- were called

dumbfounded by this change but acquiesced. in retrospect they probably should not have done so. let me digress a moment to explain the difference between being liberators and being occupiers. liberators set a country free, occupiers impose their will. in world war ii, as the day approached franklin roosevelt to not want to be bothered governing occupied france. and so instead, over roosevelt's vigorous objections, he came from north africa and six days after d-day the gault landed and the free french took over the government of liberated france. united states, british and canadian troops moved ahead without regard to what was happening in france. that was the goal's responsibility. with a cross into germany, germany became occupied and thea

allies to control.an france is liberated, germany was occupied. it is really a an important distinction. and for iraq the defense department, state department and all of the military assumed they were liberating iraq from saddam. and that the iraqis would work things out for themselves. then on may 1, on the flight deck of the abraham lincoln, busch unilaterally changed direction. instead. instead of liberators, coalitioc forces would become occupiers. oc was downhill from there. brimmer was appointed to head the occupation. the iraq he army was disbanded, most government offices were close. remer reported directly to the white house not the defense department or the state department. coalition forces in many respects became the enemy. bush bared so responsibility of that decision.

if i may, let me say word or two about the situation of the abu ghraib prison. and the atrocities that were committed. what we did not know at the time and maybe was that the military police on duty in the prison were not acting on their own, they were not simply hillbillies who -- they have been urged by the cia and military intelligence to abuse the prisoners before they were be an integral gated to set them up to confess in the interrogation that would follow. for subsequent military investigations, the first by major general antonio -- said

clearly the outrages we saw were deliberate effort to break the will of prisoners before they were interrogated. by 2006, bush became deeply distressed about the situation in iraq. he authorized a surge of u.s. troops to regain the initiative. they found general betray us to command it. betray us is an interesting figure, the army passed him over for promotion for major general to lieutenant general in 2003 among other things because they thought he was too ambitious. he was promoted to three-star rank by rumsfeld's recommendation to george w. bush who promoted him. his career his career took off. he was indeed ambitious. i should not say this was so many of my classmates here, but when he was head of cia, a group of princeton alumni wanted him to become president of princeton.

and then seek the republican nomination in 2016. now, maybe they were right. the [laughter] such as eisenhower had done when he was president of columbia in 1952. p that effort of course it failed when petronius betray -- the surge in iraq help but it was not a decisive factor. it ended a number of factors that were more important. the and borrow awakening in which the sunni leadership wanted no part of the isisnted leadership. the decision of shiite cleric tn disband his army which iran told him to do. in any event, by the end of 2007, similar order had been achieved. in late 22008 just before he

left office bush went to baghdad to sign an agreement providing the withdrawal of american forces from iraq. and that was by the end of 2011. you will rick call that is when a disgruntled iraq he took office. and that may suggest that bush's decision to invade iraq was the worst form policy decision ever made by an american president. if anyone can think of anythingi that is worse, please let me know. that doesn't necessarily mean that bush was america's worst president. herbert hoover probably had that. bush did well domestically as president. no child left behind has been a valuable contribution to the haucational program. particularly to children from the dvantaged families. the amendment of medicare to

provide prescription drugs to seniors is a remarkable achievement. bush also took the lead in the global fight against aids. particularly in africa. under his leadership the aids that disease has some degree been brought under control. bush remains active in the fight. he also expanded american free trade and bush took office the america ahead free trade agreements with israel, canada and mexico. he now has now has free-trade agreements with 16 countries. bush also concluded an agreement with putin in his early term to reduce the nuclear arsenal that each country maintain. improved relations with china. i think bush is most important achievement was to contain the economic meltdown in 2002. against all of his instincts an

deeply held beliefs, he bailed out wall street and the american auto industry. he avoided another great topression. unlike the war in iraq, or the fight against terrorists at home, this this time bush listen to his advisors. paulson, who is secretary of the treasury and bembenek at thend federal reserve carved out a strategy strategy of support and bush adopted it. from bailing out subprime mortgage lenders and conglomerates to rescuing the market itself was a massive troubled asset relief program.pr bush deserves credit for taking necessary action. it was a he was a remarkable achievement and it probably saved thee world's economy. when they failed to rescue namey and brothers, that was paulson more than bush. i really have not said anything about bush's personal life, let me be very brief. he was always an early

riser, he got up at 545 in the morning. he still does, he goes to bed shortly before 10:00 p.m. a 1 physical fitness buff, exercise two, exercise two hours a day in the white house gym. he was not a details man. he wanted short descriptions, i ief memos. he and laura were close, the white house kept entertaining to a minimum. i've not said anything about laura. she was a major source of support for the president. she took a responsibilityly seriously and did not seek the limelight. she she usually accompanied bush on his trips abroad. she provided great comfort for him. paul, long long serving united states senator from maryland as you know and a staunch democrat told me that he thought the war was the best first lady he hadad ever met -- laura was the best first lady had ever met. paul became a member of congress when pat nixon was first lady. .

as ex-president, bush has been exemplary. unlike most unlike most of his predecessor he does not miss the office. he does not try to second-guess obama. curious if you can believe it, but after the election, after obama was sworn in, bush told, bush told friends in dallas, free at last. in many respects he was a model to what an ex-president should be. as i said i do not think george bush is america's worst president. i do believe his decision to attack iraq is the worst form policy decision ever made by an president. it getse worse as time goes on. thank you very much.y much [applause]. >> thank you very much for your time. i think your presentation a book is a quite timely with the

inquiry report in the u.k. today. the question i have is that you seem to present an inter- visual who may be unqualified to assume the position of president. yet, i noticed two pivotal historical points that may have changed the course of history. the first was how george w. bush was selected as republican nominee in the primaries over john mccain. if things were not differentha otherwise, that would have significantly changed the course of history. secondly, al gore's brushoff of aistory ase bill clinton in thec race as well. so, i guess the question i have is as a historian looking back, what lessons in your work do you find that we can learn as well as picking qualified leaders in the 2016 election?

[laughter] >> i am not sure. i don't think that is a questiot i can easily answer. i think i will let it sit at that if you don't mind. >> i just have one question. morris berman and one of his books mentioned george w bush's drinking drinking and mentioned that he stopped drinking but did not take the steps necessary to grow up. seriously, i look around and i think untreated alcoholics can sometimes be very dangerous because they're running around impaired and still thinking with impulse and doing all sorts of stuff. like the thing you mentioned on the abraham lincoln. sort of like getting up in front of them i can you go, i know it's neat. let's do this. and then go on from there. i was just asking if you have any reflections on that. >> that is very interesting. i did not know that.

but i think you are absolutelyk right. [inaudible] >> professor smith, i'm a college college student in the washington d.c. area and several years ago i read your biography of president -- are you able to hear me questioning. >> asset. >> several years ago i read your biography of president eisenhower which is one of the most interesting and meaningful books which is one of the most interesting and meaningful books i have read. my question is as follows, i know for example that you served, i read for example that you served in berlin during in the u.s. military. would you say that you had any life experiences which were particularly helpful for you in

the context of right in the biography and if you did have any such experience, what were they? how are they particularly helpful? >> you mean my military? >> your military experts or other. >> i can only say about my experience in berlin. it really goes back to my childhood here in washington dc. my my grandmother lived with us and before i started school my grandmother always read biographies to me.interehe so i've always been interested in biographies. when i was a graduate student at columbia,um before i took my orals, thethe a chairman of the department wanted me to bring him a list of all of the books i had read. which i did and he said there are a lot of biographies here. so yes, i followed it for years. thank you. >> just to pick up a little on the last question. how do you see bush in the light

of eisenhower's legacy? how would eisenhower have assessed bush's record, and in the light of what is going on in the republican party, how do you see eisenhower dealing with that? >> on the first question, don't a pret eisenhower was elected by his promised to win the war in korea. he went to korea and saw it was unwinnable the key back and immediately made peace. the united states stayed at peace for the remaining eight years of eisenhower's term. so eisenhower, haven't seen war first-hand to not want to get back into one. don't forget, when eisenhower won the nomination against taft in 1952, eisenhower 52, eisenhower represented the liberal wing of the republican party. for the next eight years, maybe longer it was a liberal wing wing of the republican party that dominated.

taft was the candidate of the conservative and he lost. eisenhower really, really had n use for them. i don't think it is generally well known but it was eisenhowe behind the scenes who conducted the operation against mccarthy. it was was eisenhower who picked david welsh to be the council in those hearings. so, thank you. >> rather than restoring the civil liberties under bush, what you think it is that democrats and other politicians that have followed in his footsteps have continued in the similarities and people like jimmy carter collett. [inaudible] >> i don't know. the republican party leadership in the republican party

generally have moved much further to the right than it was 40 or 50 years ago. i think this view comesgo, and naturally. >> i'm not sure of that, but i think that is possible. >> the democrats are acting mor like republicans except for social issues. the money in politics as well. >> you can say the whole spectrum has changed and moved to the right. >> thank you. >> i have read your biographies of fdr. i thought it was first-rate. and i would would like to say that we americans are fortunate that a canadian scholar would tackle so many of the questions in american history. i look forward to reading the book. >> i have to confess, when the university of toronto hired me s in 1965, for the department of

political economy was very large department. one hundred and some faculty acmbers. i was the first american on board. i went there, they want to be there because they wanted to teach american government. so in my entire exposure at the university of toronto i taughtsi american government.oreign p >> your statement that this was the worst form policy decision beer made, i cannot believee anyone here would not concur with that. it has unleashed the sunni shia war, invited iran into the scene, and my question is do you think it is fair, you will argue that we can really blame the iraq war largely for the arrival of isis? >> absolutely.

just as long as saddam remained in power iraq was a secular state at that time. and he needed if you wanted tof say, his military to keep a lit on it. so i think that's absently correct. i might say, i've been thinking a great deal about is there another form t policy decision that you can one might outrank bush's decision decision to go to war in iraq? feeling when i could possibly come up with is harry truman's decision to drop the atomic weapon on hiroshima and nagasaki. thus only thing i could think of. >> what about lbj's decision on vietnam, i don't put at the same level. >> but the point you made earlier, in vietnam there's noer carryover. there is no isis, there's no war on terrorism and

so forth that came out of the vietnam war. as there was here. i think that is the principal distinction between the two. >> thank you. >> another question about : paul. another >> i just wanted to ask, whatwe are are your thoughts about : powell. to me he seems like a tragic hero and he may have a lot of remorse. let his story nobody has really shown the light on. >> there's a very good biography about : powell.t written by the reporter of the washington post. he was a tragic figure. he was bush's first cabinet appointing. bush - make use quickly shut by the white house and -- [inaudible] this may be in your book, will

will find that will get to reading it, how directly involved was bush and theereadin disastrous decision to disband the army? jerry brammer gives flavor some of that, but did bush give the order? >> no, bush, bush did not give the order. brehmer gave the order. it was brammer's decision. but he was instructed to go over and bring democracy to iraq. went brehmer did make the order bush immediately approved it. there's no tension. bush did not order it.o we >> so, we have have had a few glancing mentions of the current nominee for president in the republican party.e i have noticed that this is a bipartisan thing, right among democrats and republicans there renes to be a great deal of

sympathy or renewed positive feelings towards george w bush presidency and wake the current nominee. what you think of that? >> really? [laughter] >> my dad for instance is an old-school democrat and thinks that among his group of people, he feels like i will draw a parallel as an example. trumps views on barring muslims from entering the country versus perhaps george w. bush is repeated mentioned that islam is a culture at peace and things like that. >> well, i'm surprised at the belief that bush's reputation is improving. i think if you looked at today

the english investigation of the bush and blair, it is not going to improve.o they had wanted me to write an op-ed on comparing bush and trump. and i said no. [laughter] said >> thank you for speaking. i was also intrigued to and i read in the review that he wasn't the worst president by going to iraq was the worst form policy. i got a minute what else was in the top five. you - on that was some analysis question. so what. so what are the best form policy decisions are the best, have you thought about that? >> the best form policy? i think you have to go back to the roosevelt administration and certainly eisenhower's decision

to make peace in korea. i think that was a breakthrough. eisenhower eisenhower was working very closely with -- to improve relations and then he screwed it up. but the paris summit, you can go back to the eisenhower the bush it and roosevelt administration. i think you probably have to go back there. but, may be certainly president lincoln decision to maintain the union. you have to admit.ma >> thank you. >> well i think you have a consensus of the iraq war under george bush was the worst foreign policy decision. how do you treat the war against

afghanistan which i think was weekend but it's still going on to.o. >> well the war against afghanistan you're quite right was weakened by bush's decision to go into iraq. but i'm going to take a minority position on those. i'm not sure the war in afghanistan was necessary.n 9/1 the accidents that happen on 9/11, four planes were hijacked and three crashed into buildings.crinld that is not a reason to go to war. you handle that as a legal issue. you try it in the courts. you find others who are in ball but you don't go to war for something like that. and i may be in a minority position on that but that is what i believe. >> i think that bush welcomed the possibility to be a war hero like his father.

>> i'm not sure he welcomed it. but i'm sure he responded to it. thank you. >> we have time for a couple more questions. >> richard clarke has suggested that perhaps george bush should be tried as a war criminal, any . >> yes. i don't think presidents are crisis of war crimes. >> you seem to give bush a lot of credit for handling the financial crisis. there was an hbo movie about it and the trade paulson emperor mackey making policy at the last minute i think they did make policy but i don't think they set at the last minute let's consult the white house i think and i think they

did it in extremely good job of bringing bush along which was contrary to all of bush's views. i also think that bush realized this earlier. then that he messed up the iraqr thing. i think is much more inclined to listen to paulson and bernake. >> would you like to discuss the renewal of the saudi arabia concessions during this time of both bush worse? >> i'm not sure i'm qualified to do that. but i think you raise a questiod that is important consideration. i don't know the details of sufficiently to give you anffict answer.[app [applause].

not. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> here's a look at books being published. founder of the ego form along with co-authors ed martin and brett decker lay out why they support the republican presidential nominee in, the conservative case for trumped. one of the national book center

award. nicholas baker discusses his time as a substitute teacher in maine in, "substitute". in "hidden figures" we remember in "hidden figures" we remember the lives of four african women whose aeronautical cat collations were integral in helping the united states with the space race. connie martin looks at the life of a state employment employee turn soviet spy in "true believer". alberto gonzales discusses his life and time in the bush administration. data scientist kathy o'neill's weapons of mass destruction warns against the use of big data and computer models that can be used to discriminate against people. "words on the move" by. [inaudible] looks at the continuing evolution of the english language.