continues. host: joining is now is trita >> thank you so much. >> a little bit about institute andhe positions it takes with conflicts world wide. >> >> we do not believe that america is safer by dominating the world militarily, we believe we're in a better position to find peaceful solutions, we

should not get embroiled in all of the different conflicts in the world. >> there israel how would you gauge u.s. response to date. >> i am concerned about there is a significant risk of this conflict escalating and dragging u.s. into it. if there iss a ground invasion by the israelis there is as, risk. that there will be a response from hezbollah in lebanon and indirectly iran. that would likely drag the united states into the war, they will likely be attacked against u.s. troops throughout the region by various militia, it should be priority of the president to prevent that scenario, the last thing we need is another war in the middle

east for the u.s. to be involved with. we're not doing anything to put pressure on the israelis, we're giving them a green light. >> to that point, military hardware withst troops, how much more could take place if it does escalate with the u.s.'s contribution there one thing that u.s. officials have been telling israelis and others and part of the the reason there is a delay in the land. >> invasion that u.s. wants to put more assets for

its troops. on one hand, makes sent to make sure that those troops are safe by adding more protection to them, what doesn't makee sense, why not also try to avoid the act that would trigger the attack on u.s. troops find another solution than a land invasion, it is important to recognize there is no confidence in the u.s. government that such a land invasion would be successful. president biden who pull the out of afghanistan. two years ago, we invaded it, occupied it for 20 years and the taliban are still in power, idea these military actions are some form of a solution needs to be more scrutinized.

is it in u.s. interest to assist in dismantling of hamas. >> ask why hamas exists in the firstne place. we have gone through various cycles. they popea up because of the occupation, we have moved beyond two state solution, we have on u.s. side trump administration we moved for normalizing relationships between israel and the arab states according to jared kushner said we're moving beyond the palestinian issue, saying we don't care about two-state solution,

they have 11 to live under occupation, it has proven to be a mistake. it did lead to violence, many of us predicted it would, you cannot put millions people under occupation and expect something good will come out of that, if we want to get rid of radical organization we have to change the radical -- situation that giving birth to their existent. we have people on our end saying we support two state solution but doing nothing diplomatic like to mutual fund itte forward -- move it forward and people have lost hope in thepl idea that it can deliver, this is what president obama said yesterday in his note that will make people move forward violent and more radical pathways that is what we saw with that horrific attack by hamas again israeli civilians. >> you said there has to be

-- work toward another way to prevent escalation, what are some avenues that you think that work. >> we need to have a cease-fire. it is isolated position internationally for the united states p to stand in the way of any effort to bring about a cease-fire. that is making sure we are paving the way for this war to continue. i think president should really put top of his agenda making sure that this dud not escalate into a war that drags the united states to another war in the middle east. not stand in way of a -- not

pushing for ceasefire, standing in way of efforts to bring about an end to bloodshed. that increasing risk of u.s. getting dragged into the war. >> sunday the defense secretary was on sunday shows talking about what military aspect of -- united states contribution. >> we have seen rocket attacks again bases housing our troops in iraq and syria, we're concerned about potential escalation. in fact we're seeing is a prospect of a significant escalation of attacks on our troops and our people throughout the region. and because of that, we'll do what is necessary to make sure thate our troops are in the good t position, and protected and we have the

ability to respond. this additional deployment sends another message to those who would seek to widen this conflict, president biden said earlier and youou heard me say, if any group or any country is looking to widen this conflict, and take advantage of this very unfortunate situation, our advice is don't. >> mr. parsey. >> ies think you know secretary austin is correct, this is a very significant risk for escalation. go back to what i said, it is quite logical and it makes sense to do everything we can to protect the troops and other u.s. interests the region. however, a strategy that is only based on deterring one side but not doing anything

to restrain the other is not likely to succeed. as a result will lead us tonight mayor that secretary austin is warning about. it does not make sense to only rely on that deterrent, while not doing something to restrain the israelis. >> taking some calls, rudy in chicago, democrat on with our guest. >> good morning thank you. two issues that are think are overlooked. most of the quote, unquote -- palestinians are under the age of 16, theyns are not trained in the way that israeli army trains its troops and u.s. trains

its troop. people are hungry. they need water. if we tell israelis to not bombre hospitals and find a way to ship people out, getek americans out, then we could sit down with the united nations and talk heabout some long-term issues. these palestinian people they are kids, they are under the age of 16, they are being manipulated in so many different ways. >> i think the caller is right with the dire situation in gaza. more than 5 thousand people have been killed, more than 2000 of those are children. there is that dire situation. israelis cuts off water, electricity and fuel, that is collective punishment in

international law considered a war crime. under those circumstances i agree we need a ceasefire to find a pathway to diplomacy. just simply not allowing that ceasefire to take place will increase suffering on bothea sides and make it more difficult to find a lasting solution down the road. >> from scott, in arkansas republican line. >> yes, mr. parsey, i got two scenarios not answer to problem. but two, you if hamas unilaterally lead down their weapons what would happen in and other, if israel laid down their weapons, what would happen. >> please tell the audience. >> thank you. >> i don't think that any of those are likely. inio sense that laying down

their weapons is not happening, however. ceasefire is a different story. it is giving humanitarian pause to be able to give time to find another solution. if hamas were to lay down its weapon, i find it more likely israelis would move in further and try to eliminate the organization, if israelis did the same, the reverse is likely, this is not about giving one's defenses this is about making sure that a war right now is killing more civilians than hamas terrorists, and only making more difficult to find a solution and on top of that riches regional war that will -- risks a regional war that will suck in the united states into it, we need's pause to avoidwe this nightmare scenario. >> pictures this morning of two hostages released

yesterday. questionon of remaining hostages and americans that are still there in gaza, how does that complicate future of u.s. involvement. >> it is important. many of them are americans. hamas originally said they wanted to use the hostages to exchange them for about 7 thousand prisoners in israeli jails, many children. taking hostages is unacceptable. much of what hamas did in its attack is also a war crime.e. light later on, a changed their position and said they were willing to give up all hostages in return for a ceasefire, not clear what u.s. calculation is, some israelis i spoke to are surprised usely israel adamant about making sure they get their hostages out

alive. almost they cannot save the hostages, they are moving forward with bombardment campaign. >> sam, in dc, independent line. >> good morning mr. parsey, i have a question regarding role of media in united states and abdecation of responsibility and propagating information and disinformation to be precise, the way it is portrayed in united states, is this happened on october 7, would you be kind enough to explain this goes back to 7 years.

dehumanization, and the rape and killing of palestinians to shed light in this that how -- media like nbc, cbs and some of the foreign like british newspaper, instigator of primary are advocating for more violence and more crime against palestinians rather than bring it to more meaningful resolution so they can live side by side. >> this is a very old conflict, true to say that much of the world including

western media stopped paying attention to what was going on in palestine and gaza, as a result when attacked by hamas took place it looked like beginninghi of a new war thatat came out of nowhere. but. the occupation had continued and been tire. this iss not a justification for that type of attack, the narrativeon in media has some parts as it came out of nowhere. part of the challenge has been biden administration followed up on what trump administration did that, is push aside palestinian issue. biden administration put in political capital. normal rising relationships between israel and saudi arabia, even considering offering a defense pac with

saudi arabia, the biden administration would send u.s. servicemen and women to die for the kingdom of saudi arabia, that is based on idea it wouldl bring about peace, with assumption you could just simply ignore the flight of the palestinian people. >> part of the reason why this belief came about is because after the arab spring, true that arab world stopped focusing as much on palestinian issue because of civil war in syria and a lot of eyes were turning inwards but assumption that was permanent is questionable which was a temporary shift because of temporary developments, idea that arab world as a whole forgot about the palestinian was never true and never true that palestinians forgot about them. some of these assumption

lead l us down the path of bad policy. >> karl in florida, democrat. >> good morning. mr. parsey, i am interested in what you have to say today, is there a chance there is a small group of palestinians within gaza be willing to ally themselves with the israelis after this terror attack by hamas in order to throw hamas or eliminate hamas from gaza so that palestinians may have a better chance of getting two state solution, i'll hang up and listen to youran answer. >> thank you, so much hamas has had a very brutal reign in gaza, opportunity for

opization groups opposed to hamas have not existed. and there has been some attempt and brutal oppression by hamas, it likely that they would besidesly with israel against hamas, that is presuming it just the existence of hamas which has been the problem. right now the israelis are bombing the west bank, hamas does not exist and previous months, most of the violence wast in west bank, where israeli settlers killing different palestinians. hamas was not creationed until 1980s, decades after the occupation started and the israelis supported hamas early on, they wanted to see

them emerge as a competitor to the plo . this is a complex history, there are no easy answers or solutions. >> a thing in background some u.s. officials talked about iran, what degree do you believe they were involved. >> i don't think there is operational involvement by the iranians. but there is no doubt they have supported hamas and continue to support them militarily, i am sure there is funding. but theyt have been training, many of the different, there is reason that hezbollah has become a potent foe of israel. because of the training, and houthis and hamas in gaza, israelis were shocked to see

efficiency of that horrible attack that hamas engaged in. their operational involvement is different, however, if this war continues if hezbollah steps in from u.s. perspective, it will be seen as a direct involvement by iranians, in iraqi militia start attacking u.s. bases and troops in iraq it would be seen as iranians are behind it, that lead it trek military confrontation between the united states and iran, iraq was a horrible war. it cost united states strem tremendous amount and iraqis more, iran is a much more potent military enemy in that regard. under these circumstances when u.s. has a crisis in ukraine, april crises in taiwanal and philippines with china rightht now, idea to

walk into a war in middle east is horrible and must be avoided. >> there was a freezing of 6 billion from u.s., what do you think of that move? is there more involvement. >> i think that was a political issue, the mechanism put in place to make sure that money could not be used for going else was very solid. bottom line, that money, would never go to iran, it sits at a qatari bank. u.s. instructs qataris to pay the vendors, iran never touches that money.

>> this is from indiana. walt republican line. >> thank you, mr. i marci and the quincy institute for bringing this fresh air in terms of what is going on in middle east, i am a veteran of indo-china war. they would ignore lesson of history, romans -- involvement in the middle east, they took their eye off the ball in terms of dealing with tribes on northern border, i pray to god we don't get involved with another war in middle east, the eye on the ball for us is mainland china, communist china, that is the real game.

>> do you think that biden administration has an overall strategy for middle east. >> they did have, was what i said early year, they set aside almost all other issues and focused on the idea of securing normalization agreement, politically iee can see why that was attractive, strategyicallyy did not see a basis for it working. idea in addition to that, we would be offering saudis a defense package and a nuclear technology, raised questions marks about what ises big gain in this to offerha something as drastic aso that, united states does

not have any agreement with any other state in middle east except for turkey who is a member of nato. that is nowhere near type of agreement that of discussed by united states and saudis. >> from laurie in ohio, independent line. >> good morning, i am just sickened by everything. my question is, why does the united states not cut off aid to israel. until the apartheid ends in gaza and west bank and they come to a solution. i feel only way that israelis will stop this apartheid and now genocide.

of the palestinian people, the funding has to stop until a solution is met. from that is it. >> i think that the likelihood of u.s. cutting funding is not particularly significant. right now administration is considering a proposing to congress increase of funding. i do agree we need to have a reorientation with this issue to be able to spring it to a solution. the peace process in two-state solution has been dead for more a decade. we're pretending it is alive. the situation on the ground has gotten worse. now we're seeing the consequences in a very horrible way. both for israeli civilians and palestinian civilians. we need a new rethink that

goes back to fundamentals of international law. today united states, biden administration is encouraging israelis to make sure their attacks are in line with international law, but much of what happening rightna now is in violation of international law. including collective punishment. these are things that will backfire on u.s. interests. u.s. is in a isolated position internationally. veto by brazil -- everyone in council but united states united kingdom. we have to rethink our approach to this, we're

getting isolated and the rest of the world is shaking their heads. they are wondering what happened to our rules here. >> what happened after russian vetoed the resolution ofth course a new mechanism was put in place. if the council member uses a veto, the question is will this issue be moved to general assembly. if that happens, we'll see position against humanitarian, ceasefire will be difficult. it not majority position inu u.s. either. according to data for proes from, 80% of democrats believe there should be a

ceasefire, 12% support position of opposing the pause. 66% of americans believe there should be a pause. humanitarian pause. i suspect a lot of that is because of humanitarian concern. not wanting to see more civilians die on either side, there is a fear not having a ceasefire that would lead to a war to drag in united states. >> one more call, aaron in virginia. >> i was listening i heard you mention turkey. has turkey designated hamas as a terrorist organization, i believe they have not. and president trump praised the president of turkey. but, my main question to ask there is a lot of u.s. support for israel.

trying to root up hamas from the neighboring areas, a lot of support from people who are said to be pro life. we know there are a lot of children dying, what are your thoughts on support of israel even in light of so many casualty of civilians including children that are on the ground. i'll listen to your answer. >> on first question, no, turkey has not designated hamas as terrorist organization, hamas comes out of egyption muslim brotherhood, that is related to erdogan's party in turkey, turkey right now is eyeing a role to be a mediator in this

conflict. itte has taken a harder stance against hamas but not designating it as a terror organization. >> on the issue of support. first, to say that, i think mine support is not support. a lot of israelis, the idea that united states stands by israel is important. but to support a strategy that is likely going to lead to a worse situation, is not support even president said this, he pointed out. that after 9/11, we engaged in a lot of excesses that were counter productive. not one of our friends were telling us to restrain

ourselves. president has said these, he said these things, publicly. the extent to which it received by israelis and we have not yet seen any clear evidence. that in my view would be support israel to make sure it does not engage in something we know. >> i am worried about it, if there is a landin vague, and what -- landing invasion and what that would trigger. , i am worried what will happenth elsewhere in region, some militias have already started shooting at american bases. our guest.

mr. parsey. thank you for your time. >> thank you so much very having me.