we got to get behind our president whoever our president, who ever she maybe in the future. in order to ensure the united states is speaking with a single voice on these issues. and then i think the final reason why there is a divide on this issue goes to the hard of what raj and wendy are talking about and that's diplomacy and the civilian use of power is inherently i am paternit-- impe. okay, people will come along and saying why would you get a better deal in oh, a better deal. >> i only thought that we could have only this deal but it never occur to me that you can get a better deal. at the end o f the day, the negotiators have to use near judgments and have to make a

call of the best alternatives. this deal is not perfect. i think we can all acknowledge that including those who worked on it. it is a heck a lot better than going to war with iran or trying to pursue an end less path of sanctions and their program races ahead towards them having the capability of having multiple bonds of weapons grave uranium or plutonium. that means whether cuba or paris, they're always going to be subjected to scrutiny and debate. i think what we have to do is have the courage of our convictions that when we send our diplomats out and they do their job and the president makes a call that we have confidence that our professional men and women of our united states and diplomatic cores and our leaders are looking out for our interest. i have full confidence that history will record this deal to

stop iran getting nuclear weapons and stop them from firing a shot. [ applause ] >> i very much want to invite this audience into this well-lit situation room. i understand three of our pan panelists have some where to be. do you have a few minutes? >> a few minutes. >> right there in the blue shirt, please wait until you have a microphone in our hand and ask a quick question. >> thank you, student of the university of pennsylvania. i am polish and i am very grateful to the united states for their success of bringing my country to the nato alliance. given the recent crisis in

poland, as well as the rise of national -- i am wondering what advise would madame secretary give to the future president on how to keep -- [ inaudible ] >> one more from that side of the room. wait until you have a microphone. gentleman, right there, yes. >> thank you, i represent georgia, i am a former defense minister, my question would be of course, related to nato and defense capabilities. georgia had been a tremendous part of afghanistan and iraq. do you think that the next four years that administration will be going. it is time to really push for a large part of nato. the only way we can detour them is to ex pend nato to georgia

and the second question is the united states thinks about providing the cape a loabilitie our country. >> well, thank you, let me just say in both regards, something that i have spent a lot of time on and thought about. the issue on what was happening in poll lapoland at the time is important. one o f the questions we have to ask ourselves is why are these things are happening whether it is hungary or poland. one of the things that happened was, when getting ready for president obama to arrive, they met all during the night in

order to theoretically improve it, in fact, they made it worst. with worth noting of the statement that the president made and about nato. let me give a background on that. what happens was when after the fall of berlin wall, there was no question that it will be changed or desin gratedegrated. >> it was kind of a way to get ready and be apart of anywnato. >> nato is not a charitable. you have to read carefully of what president obama said of the over night activities trying to do something about the constitution and i do think that

we have to keep stressing, it is an alliance of democracy and that requires there to be a rule of law and a number. that has to be apart of it. on the georgia issue, i having spent quite a lot o f time on that. i think there are a variety of steps and that, i personally believe in nato enlargement. i was there as it enallerlarged. it has to be making nato stronger and a variety of arrangements allowing to countries to be able to defend themselves that's out there. a lot of georgians are around and making their points. i think these are live issues. it has to be not only military but alliance of common values. >> i want to pick up on something embedded in your

question about why poland has changed. there is been a lot of pulling data of whether it is called natoism. we have to understand that what is about. in my own view and coming out of research polling data and it goes all the way back in 2002. it is about liking what you get in terms of better food and better form s better pharmaceutical and blue jeans, that has come home. we saw that in the economy and coming home to roots to the west and in our country where people are seeing staggering wages and the 55-year-old guy who does not

have a manufacturing job and it takes two years training program. he still has to put his kids to college. there is a lot of anxiety that's real and our social moral has changed. i am someone who believes that people should be able to marry who they love. it is complicated for people. is this about, has been said here, love or hate? in my view, love does trump hate. it is the kind of thing that we have been talking about here at this convention which is whether that -- we did the platform whether it is a minimum wage that goes up and helping insurance people that we can pay for college debt. these things are inside our own country and how our own domestic economy connects to the world economy so that young people have a future past and don't have to be recruited boo i by

isis to get a salary >> that's a challenge to us. those of us considering ourselves as people who can see beyond their own lives and other lives which is all the people here have done and public service. we lift people up as the entire night last night at the convention. how do we lift people up and out and in my view, i know hillary clinton knows how to do it. >> they both said it all. there is not much to add to it. the important thing coming on our friend from georgia is that, i do think it is very important that we support our friends that we give them both the military and economic support that they need in order to be apart of that defense system. i do think that it is important to continue to work to expand

nato because of the challenges we are facing and not only around the world but russia and obviously, is displaying a whole new chapter in the cold war. and aggressiveness. the main message of russia is nato is going to be strong and we are going to be there and the president is taking the right steps, we are doing exercises with nato countries and we are helping them to support them. i do think and madame madalyn mentions this. it is important to take these countries to be able to provide the economic support for their defense. because that becomes an argument that then issues to beat up nato and that's what trump is using. the fact that we are all partners and all in this together and support each other at one of these country's

attac attacks, we'll be there to support our countries. the least we are trying to get back is these countries providing enough support in order to make sure we are in full partners. >> just quickly on the question of pulling. the european union is grappling of two types of exits right now and only one that's getting the exit. the soft exit where we are seeing countries officially still members of the european union but distancing themselves from the values that the du represents. wendy was rooted in all different types of rationals and causes. we'll have to restore some sort of faith and intuition going forward and i got to run. >> all right. >> some of our guests leave. they have additional speaking engagement. they have been going on.

[ applause ] >> we'll take a couple more questions. i will take the lady standing in the middle in the black dress. would you get a microphone, please. >> thank you, my name is nguyen. i want to ask the panelists. it has to do with asia out with the rebalance to asia and the relationships between the u.s. and china in particular on the south china sea and the ccp. between the two candidates, mr. trump and secretary clinton, what are the differences that

you see and the ttp has not been discussed. is there a reason why? would the ttp be the answer for our u.s. leadership in the global arena and supposed to bring us more jobs for americans and supposed to level the plainfields for workers. it does not seem to be we are given accurate information to our democrats. i have talked to many delegates and i don't think they are adequate of understanding. thank you. >> another question. >> right here in the blue dress in the front. >> down here. >> thanks very much for coming. as someone that's not apart of

this world. this is really exciting to see everyone in real live instead of "meet the press." trying to spread the good word of secretary clinton. i am from arizona so i have met people who are trump voters, is trying to convince them of this threat that poses. lets pretend in november that he's elected, what can we expect and what will be our strategy moving forward after that. how do you recover? >> that's a tough one. >> okay, i will give tom either vote. >> on the rebound to asia. i spent a lot of time on that of the last half decade or so. secretary clinton has been the leader of rebound to asia. >> she took her first trip in

february of 2009. she has been in the very pivotal time of all her efforts and security and diplomatic and military and economic and the substantial change in organization and a lot is driven by the man of u.s. leadership of the nation of asia and a key part is our engagement with china and we talked about the revamp and that in clucludes engagement with secretary clinton. i would expect secretary clinton to work very hard on our rebalance to asia and our futures are intertwine. we'll really are -- it does not mean the united states' global

power gets to pull away from all their obligations around the world but as significantly as i think if this certainly continues, i will spend ten seconds on this, i have other questions here. >> it would be a dramati dramatic -- again, it is very difficult with mr. trump to engage exact of the impact of policies for a number of reasons. one, he does not speak a lot of issues and two, there is some kind of vagueness and contradictions around it. three, he does not have any advisors. it is really an interesting thing. candidates in the history, we have had a sense of where they are coming from. and they are advised to say something. some people compared mr. trump to ronald reagan. i lost my first job to reagan. i was in the convention for

president carter and lost my job at age 25, in january of 1991 of reagan who became the president of the state. it was very different. he was a leader of ideology policy movemenovement. he had a mass array of policy advisors. one of the most amazing things of 1991 of january is nobody had to tell them what to do. it was part of a movement of what's going to happen. you don't have that kind of certainty here. >> you have a number of statements that would be a dramatic departure. he would be opened to negotiating u.s. debts which is the most important debt and

financial to the world. and it would be massively disrupted. the most important thing, i will finish on and ask wendy to comment is they're really not an alternative to global prosperity other than u.s. engage. ment. you have to go through the thought experience of region to region and globally. >> what does europe after u.s. engagement and what does latin america look like after u.s. ed engagement. these are deadly serious issues. i feel it is difficult to manage and if in fact, he acted in a way he's going act. the last thing i will say is this. people also talk about checks and balances in the system. this goes to your question as well. >> so you are in the campaign, there are checks and balances in

the american system and for major initiatives, you have to deal with the congress and the court. having worked closely with the three presidents of the last 35 years, there are dozens of decisions that get reached every single day by the president. >> and the kind of questions that the president have and the kind of con strastraints that a president brought. that interrogation of what does this look like? how well plan is it? these kinds of key questionings and consistency. you cannot really rely o should not rely on some sort of generalization of checks and

balances. >> when a person who was his ghost writer on his book did a new yorker article and said he had the attention span of 10 or 15 minutes on any given subject. when he tells us he likes to be unpredictable because people don't know where he's going. a president has to have an intention span more than 10 minutes. the decisions thof tom is disgusting. it is consequen >> they are everything from should we take this person out because they are terrorists and killing our people. >> that takes more than five or ten minutes of thoughts.

you have to understand our intelligence and capability and you have to make a judgment that's well informed because there is a hell of lot at stake including how we are seeing by our region and allies and the people we hope is working with us to deal with issues. secondly, un-predictability. >> you don't know what you are going get. you don't tell your adversaries everything. that's a strategic set of decisions. that is not sort of i am un-predictable because i don't have any idea of what i am going to do. it is totally two different things. >> secretary tom and the three

people that's at the top of our government say they are terrified of what this man would do or what this approach to national security would do? >> quite frankly negotiating the kind of things we need to negotiate as diplomats are not the same as negotiating a contract on a building och. it is just not. >> thanks everybody. >> thank you toll our panel lists and those who were able to stay for the last few questions. we are limited in the amount of time but i engage you to join us and a smaller somerset of a group on stage. a few notes, the video of today's event will be pushed out to you by e-mail on the e-mail you register on so you will have access to it. you may see it on cspan and

tomorrow morning, we invite you back to perry's world house with discussions of the washington bureau chief here. it is my pleasure to welcome you or reception lab and our student lounge. if you want to walk outside, there is beers and wines, enjoy the rest of your day and thank you very much for coming and thanks again for extraordinary families. [ applause ]

each night there is the democratic convention, cspan 3 is showing american history programming. tonight's program is about president ronald reagan as we talk about his life and personality and after that, we look at eisenhower. all of this is coming up tonight on american history tv on cspan

3. coming up this weekend on cspan 3. saturday night 8:00 southeastern on lectures of history. and sunday morning at 10:00 on "road to the white house rewind" of the national on vengs aconve. and in 1948, the first televised conventions where president harry truman accepted his party nomination. >> my dear residecitizens, i wi

whatever i can. >> at 6:00, "american artifacts." well take a look at african-american history culture museum. it opens its doors to the public september of this year >> we'll get amazing movie posters such as the ones behind you. this is part of our job is to tell people we learn history that they think they know. that movie poster is from spencer williams. he's the most important black film directors in the late '30s and '40s. sunday night at 8:00, historians talk about the process of writing a presidential biography. for our complete schedule, go to cspan.org. thursday night, hillary clinton becomes the first woman to accept a major political party

for president of the united states and with cspan, you have many convenient options for watching the entire speech without any interruptions. watch her acceptance speech live on cspan. listen to it on our cspan app, watch it live or on demand on our smart phones or tablets. her speech is on thursday night on cspan, on the app and on csp cspan.org. >> up next is cap text messaan talks about our president ronald reagan reagan. it is an hour and 40 minutes.

let me introduce ben griffin who graduated in 2006 and was commission in the intelligence officer. he served while deployed in iraq since 2007 and 2008 and as an assistant bergade officer in 2011 in iraq. he's currently ashisigned as a history instructor. his service medal and his unit combination. >> he's working on a dissertation of tom grant and ronald reagan.

>> his work includes grand strategy and american foreign relations and the cold war and held a bachelor science from the united states of academy and a master of arts and international security of the university of arizona. a master of history from the university of texas. in addition, he has a national security fellow at the clemens. he resigned in new york. welcome, ben griffin. [ applause ] >> thank you very much to kind introduction and the opportunity to speak here. i am thrilled to have this chance. thank you all for coming. i know it is friday and in new york city, i know there are plenty of things you can do. you chose to come here and listen to me, it means a lot to me personally. >> before i begin, everything i say is my own opinion. it is not reflected of the

opinion of the military academy. you mention the military, really, that's what tom blanchey does. we'll get into that tonight as well. the speech of the good guys, while ron reagan and tom blanchey. october of '86, reagan decided to take a break from the cabin and moved back to talk with and socialized with the staffs. rather than focusing on preparations and talking about things like missile numbers or throw away nuclear yield, instead, he talked with his staff about the new released world war thriller. he termed it research for the upcoming summit. >> many who heard that took it

as a joke. >> i mean, how could the president be using this against thrillers and this work of depictions have research. but, what many of reagan's joke contains a little bit of the truth >> the front line is in capsulated. it provides realistic and allowing them to visualize in the near future. it is kind of a personal war game and the conclusion directly impact the negotiations with gorbacho. that look was officially largely

irrelevant. >> he understood that fictional narratives have power. in his address to the graduating cadets at west point, we'll start with this one. >> but, as he's giving his speech at graduation, he talks to to the black respects for r the uniforms that many in the country are exhibiting towards the united states of military. >> he returned to his team in the 1980s, talking about the need and how the nation i iis is -- continuing to maintain low pay levels and resentments of those in uniforms from the public. >> and then younger administration and marked with pride and that they decided of rides and quality of those coming into the military. >> this is an important part to

do policy changes and a large pay raise and certainly -- we always like to get paid a little bit more. it is not the entire solution. >> instead, reagan argued there was a new spirit that broadened the land which more than changed the benefit and led to a discove discovery. the unequivocal language of his first major policy speech demonstrated that it was critical for policy success. >> his secretary defense shows how conscious the choice of words in his work. the matter that secretary defense and secretary reagan had discussed before. >> a telling paragraph terms of lack of respect. the nation shows the military as

a national disgrace. >> knowing the film in this country pandering to anti-americans, was rep prehenceable. >> there is a list of movies, "coming home," "dear hunter" and "apocalypse." >> we have received a lot of movies about the vietnam war. about this now is not necessarily of a pay on issue. >> now, this past did not make the final draft o f the speech. >> reagan had alienated his friend in hollywood. when he comes in the community -- however, even in draft form, shows how closely length policy culture works in re begreagan's mind? this is a theme that he will always touch on his farewell

address. >> people could get a sense of patriotism. and implicitly republicenforced idea that america is special. >> this is no longer true. it was no longer in style. the american spirit was back. they have to do a lot of work to reinstitutionalize it. >> it seems a little odd when you look at the cultures in the '80s and the things that come outs which is like "rambo" and "top gun." those dominated the box office, at the same time you saw other popular like' 87, there were a lot a lot of work to do. the comic show -- he would use

stories as a shorthand to describe a sort of policies he would want to reenact. tom reid who served as a primary national security for ray began. >> they discussed this cold war strategies. they would do the right thing without seeking credit. the president wanted the u.s. to be a global, marshal cane. someone that's going to fight for a virtual cause. >> once that cause is won, we'll walk away. you use fiction and more direct way as well. >> the book commences reagan that the u.s. and the soviet union -- reagan expressed this

connection to thatcher. thatcher is understandably surprised and upset and reagan's willingness to lose these weapons. >> they cannot eliminate those weapons. >> reagan is dismissive of his friends and the prime minister's claims. instead, he recommends that she go ahead and read so she can better understand this new strategic situation, what it looks like. >> the first one is communicative of his policy to a broader audience and providing in a matter of space for the

president and others in administration to war games and set of principles. >> we are working on the novel. it is some where between merely exponential and incredible. >> something that i think a lot has settled for, including myself. upon his death, he would leave his state's value of $82 million. >> he graduated in baltimore after majoring in english but denied the opportunity to his vision. he was nearly blind without his thick glasses. >> instead, he opted to work with his wife in owens, maryland. >> he voted for ray began, four out of five times as he could.

>> he later explains this vote by asking for dpgod's forgivene and nobody is perfect. >> in march of '81, congressman, william broomfield to rekwooes a cop p copy of the president. >> the white house responded positively and july of that year, a science photograp photograph -- clancy maintained a deep interests in the military. he used this opportunity to build knowledge and capabilities and in particular commandeering of gregory young and providing much of the systems with details

that clancy are now fay more for. >> which is designed by formal naval officers. after digesting the game, it would be easier to explain the concept in this book to anyone. he didn't begin to work on it until 1982. he had a grand vision for his projects, though. >> he actually start working on the draft games in late '82. non-traditionally he plans three other novels. these other novel concepts within a nine month period speaks to its future's out put. >> 86 and 89 is the best seller

every year. >> as far as his first book, a rather unusual one. this was the first book ever released. >> and prior to hunt, the best known book is a blue jacket manuel. >> he first came to our attention by handling the letter to our editor. >> this was the first time that he received any confirmation for anything he had written. >> he approached them with the draft of unsome liunsolitd. in order, to offset the bumper

to bumper -- something that clinton's editor, defense but not great for a first time author. >> in july 84, career change for the 78-year-old but not exception nam reviews. >> throughout that time, it took more am beilament track. >> reviews like this for common sense place. huntsville did exceed our public. >> as a half of a second run of 10,000 books. >> the book is particularly in washington dc. >> it is still seemed on track

to me that you have a neat audience and on the path of national or national super star. >> this is going to change. the president wants told that nancy reynolds, that he uses books as france. he reads a third of it on christmas day and finishes the rest of it very soon after that. >> and identification with his novel costed him to depart against his conceit. thesis book were personal treasures. he really talks about books that he read. he talks so much for hunt of october. >> he appraise the book as unput downable and it is a perfect yard. >> by march, they 75,000 hard copies. >> first paper back run is 850,000 copies.

>>. >> the sense of real life century. there were enough buds around the book on "good morning america." >> with this, they are now ariefiarie aarriving. >> march 13th of' 85. >> he's describing it stoping over a threshold as contador think taking on the white house in to munhkin lanes. >> the president could charm the things off of a cobra.

>> of course, sharing it was about world war ii. inquiring about who was going to win. >> of the president. all this took place in about five minutes. as reaganing had to then go out for lunch with henry kissinger where the two the would discuss the death of constantine sher neck co. clancy rawles if reagan could not charm gorbachev, then ronny could probably drive him into the pavement. clancy had a mixture of administration officials and white house journalists in the roosevelt room. he discussed the book with the secretary of the navy who confided his response reading the novel was to ask, who the hell cleared this. robert marry, a white house reporter rawles lunch turned into a lively discussion between

clancy and the naval secretary. clasp the discussion also covered sdi and the prospect of nuclear weapons over which he and angeneral brent scowcroft disagreed about the general advocated you could win a nuclear war, something clancy didn't buy into. other attendees at the lunch were senator hatfield from oregon who asked cleansecy to si sign his book. as well as long time friend of reagan charles wick who would later wuuse a letter to try to t more in understanding out of reagan knowing reagan's love for the author. the audience of the lunch and the serious with which the participants recall it is an indication of chance sits stake himself as expert on national

security. clancy's only other visit to the white house came on march 19th marking the arrival of the president of argentina. while awaiting the arrival of the president, he mingled with arnold schwarzenegger and after a an ceremony, the clancys left the white house to prepare for dinner in the evening. following dinner, he and his wife spoke briefly with nancy reagan hon took her charms from her husband and robert mcfarland took the opportunity to profess his love for "october" and felt to tell cleanse he was nothing like jeffrey pelt in the book. clancy floated an idea on c power to national security advisor which he liked but clancy did not further elaborate on this. watching the president and first lady dance, he and his wife made their exits. of he clearly arnold schwarzenegger would be a very

different captain ramious than sean connery. so clancy was clearly a hit in the washington. newspaper articles listed the senior administration officials who read and enjoyed hunt for october. the photographer enthused to clancy everyone in the white house had read the book. caspar weinberger was among the last to read it but quickly became its biggest public supporter. in august of 19 5, the editor was times literary supplement approached weinberger take part in a series to talk about a book they felt deserved more attention. the secretary passed had him a copy of hunt and included a photo she had it on good authority that the big boss across the river loved it. weinberger read the book and recognized its potential for shaping it cultural american opinion on the policy. he reviewed the book explaining it offered many lessons for

those who wanted to keep the peace. he would later go on to review patriot games for the paper. saying it gave considerable insights into the minds and motivations of terrorists and how quietly upholders of peace and order insure the freedom of all. putnam books use his reviewses as blurbs on the back. so it's fairly remarkable that you have a sitting is secretary of defense taking time out to review works of fiction as opposed to doing things like working on budgets or handling the many, many issues that come with running an organization as large as the claens so a reason for the novel's media appeal to reagan is jack ryan bears a strong resemblance to marshall will kane, ryan becomes the protagonist reluctantly and

serves as a moral center for the norvel. 'apologizes for every deception such as when he's forced to wear a naval uniform and states he does not like pretending to be what he's not. even that rankles ryan so much establishes him as a character who puts what's right over what's necessary. in true marshall kane fashion, ryan does not seek accolades for his work. instead he declines an opportunity to go to the white house to receive official praise from the president. and instead immediately boards a plane to head home with a gift for his daughter in hand to mark the completion of his original mission. so ryan asleep on an eastbound concord is the clancy equivalent of marshall cane and amy walking away from town with a discarded marshall star in the dust. hunt's unnamed president likely increased reagan's affection for the novel because clancy clearly based his character on reagan. he was a press of the dramatic society capable of earning quikdss through the force of

shear rhetoric. he is blinded by a dazzling charm that the president could turn on and off like a spotlight. these serve as a predictor of the same force clancy would experience meeting reagan for the first time. even the soviets respect the president in hunt for october. the soviet ambassador serves as his prime foil and used the president as a bastard. he further describes the president as a strange man, open yet full of guiel who was friendly but always ready to seize the advantage. the description echoes future leaders statements about reagan. gorbachev frequent dmaents reagan kept pocketing concessions without giving much back. clancy's president is an intelligent negotiator who exercises strategic visionings to outmaneuver his opponents. this matches clancy's image of reagan. for reagan, the familiarity of the story and the positive portrayal of himself in hunt for

october likely made the book the type he would view as a friend as a close secret personal treasures as journalist lou cannon describes him. it does not describe why reagan chose to support book so publicly. hunt's portrayal of the competence and honor of those who bes their country and the distinction clancy makes between the u.s. and the soviet union drove this. ef captured two of the most important policy abbottatives of reagan's first administration with the book. given account potential to reach such a broad audience. hunt for october afforded the opportunity for the administration to build upon the favorable trends. popular culture that are reagan and those closed to him used to feed further efforts as the reforming american national security posture. in his commencement address at west point, he talked about the widespread lack of respect for the uniform and the u.s.

military and returned to those themes from his campaign. in his second term in may of 1985, he gives a commencement address at the united states naval academy. i'm loath to acknowledge but forced to by the subject of my dissertation. the president noted that this new spirit had he previously described was still animating the land and that we had gotten to where there was a new appreciation for our men and women in military service. in contrast the immediate post vietnam era, the americans had faith in the military to face decisions in a difficult environment. because not only was the military meeting recruiting goals, but bringing higher quality recruits into service. reagan believed the men entering the military embody the nation's values and the character was superior. the navy now possessed the most hi-tech weaponry needed in the modern fleet. new and powerful weapons required technical skill to use and an stronger moral compass to employ given the destructive

potential. linking the quality of personnel with the idea of equipment on the cutting edge of technology reflected the core how the reagan administration sought to revitalize u.s. military strength and conveniently little the center of what most of clancy's novels are about. the military was not the only organization for which reagan saw the tost build morale. it the federal bureau of investigation and the national security agency and uncovered significant abuses of the law by these agencies that led to undermining of public opinion. the excesses of these institutions and their less than stellar record of accomplishment left many in doubt as to their ability to perform their prescribed functions. the intelligence community was suffering from negative portrayals in popular culture. movies like "all the president's men. >> and the bourn identity" pilloried the community and depicted as willing to do anything it, even assassinating americans. it's worth noting that weinberg reviewed a third fiction book

and that was the bourn supremacy, the follow-up to the bourn identity. unlike the glowing praise he heaps on clancy in patriot games and hunt for rocket october, is he negative towards the bourn supremacy talking about how it's a shame the authors is trying to follow these common themes of disgracing the military and portraying the government as doing things it's not supposed to be doing because this would never think of breaking the law and it's a shame ludlum feels he has to go down the path to sell a couple books. but it's a remarkable negative review in large part because of the negative portrayal of intelligence services something countering what the administration is attempting to do with popular culture. and so reagan sought to reverse this trend. he spoke outside of headquarters at langley, virginia, in 1982 and assured the days of such abuses were past and he had the full confidence of the agency to perform functions in a way that is lawful, constitutional and in

keeping with the traditions of our way of life. he told the cia employees it was their intellect and integrity and their wit and intuition upon which the fate of free rested for millions. the members of the cia were heros of a grim struggle. he expressed similar sentiments to members of the cia covert action arm and expressed the country's gratitude for their service praising them for skill and character as they upheld the country's freedom. clancy's characters can fit perfectly into the narrative of self-describes reagan was attempting to establish. the americans in hunt for october share above average intelligence and review. jack ryan's service is cut short by a helicopter crash. after four years as a an stockbroker, ryan became bored with making money and began his career at the cia.

ryan was a successful historian with books on british naval history. in additionings to incredible professional success, clancy's hero is a strong family man enjoying a strong nigerian a surgeon, an adoring daughter and aed to lerl jack ryan junior. the perfect image of family life and tranquility that reagan wanted to point to for americans to follow. ryan's virtue goes without question and he rarely confesses his cia affiliation to anyone be is a u.s. admiral rather than to risk deception. is he harbors few career ambitions and seeks nothing recognition for his work. only his physical appearance is unremarkable. though at 6'1" he is taller than average though out of shape due to the miserable english weather, she's knighted by the queen of england and ryan is at ease spiking his mind to u.s. admirals and senior policymakers. only the president is able to

overwhelm him. so in short, jack ryan is an impossible amalgamation of all the ideal traits that reagan believes someone serving his country should embody. his integrity would likely be enough by itself to draw reagan's interest. as the president showed an interest for heroes that resembled westerns. so the louis l'amour novels, high noon and marshall cane. all these things influence the way reagan is viewing the world. but ryan is not the only character to though these traits. the u.s. naval officers are his equal in status of paragons. he describes admiral painter, the commander of the "uss kennedy as a gifted tactician and a man of puritan cal integrity. you're seeing the blending of both remarkable professional competence with high moral character. the cia director james greer who may have been modeled off admiral inman is able to remain in the navy past his retirement

age through confidence. clancy compares his intellect to rickover who is the father of nuclear submarine fleet but notes greer was a far easier man to work for. skipper of the submarine that successfully finds october is one of the youngest submarine commanders in the navy and shows the ability to the trust instincts and trust subordinates. the portrayal is the portrayal of ronald jones. the only service member to receive attention in the book. he reflects the high quality recruit that reagan referred to in his addresses at west point and the naval academy. and weinberger identifies in his memoirs. jones dropped out of the california institute of technology and joined the fave to rehabilitate his name and foster a return to the school. he has as iq of 158. listens to classical music in his spare time and turn the sonar into a giant speaker in the ocean floor.

competent on equipment. jones is capable of making important decisions and plays the decisive role in looking for red october. clancy drives home his points about the quality of enlistments in if the military by having them marvel over jones competency. every time he talks to a soviet, they're shocked an enlisted soldier can make decisions that understands specifications can supposed to highlight the american system of trusting our privates and our sergeants with the soviet system only trusting officers. the fbi also receives positive attention in hunt for october. as they expose a mole on the staff of senator donaldson hon chairs the senate select committee on intelligence. part of the apparatus in place to supervise the intelligence committee in the wake of the church committee. clancy depicts the efforts of the fbi as exceptional. the directors of the fbi and cia

negotiate with the donaldson promising mot to the embarrass the senator politically if the senator agrees to resign later on they strike a double blow, able to turn an important soviet asset and strike a blow against the unfair and perhaps overzealous monitoring and oversight that's established in the wake of the church met. the characters in lunt unan pol jet cliff arc types of service. they're largely better suited for a fable than a thriller with realism. this design does not escape the nose of book reviewers. virtually every character in the book is a caricature. another reviewer says -- americans in the booking are intelligent, manual native and disciplined. he still gebs the book positive review calling the work great fun. the los angeles times knowing despite the cardboard characters the work never quite syncs.

so can't escape the navy puns. however, reagan's love of the book rested on the simplicity of design. histori histori his t the themes were easily digestible and made a more acceptable of reagan's policy. this is similar to the role that reagan experienced with james mitchner during the 1950s. in of historian christina klein. he talks about the virtue in heroism in the service trying to bolster support for a war as it's starting to decline in america. so clancy fills the same role as paraphraser for ronald reagan. he causes millions of americans to bring reagan's cold war fable

into their homes. it helpeded riggen envision the near future state of military. reassuring that his initiatives continued to eliminate the dangerous capability gap between it and the soviet union. clancy's next novel red storm rise would go convince account president actually it was in the favor of the united states. so red the storm raise something about a third war begun by the soviets. as clancy promised during his visit to the oval office, the good guys win. that is not why the book appeals so much to reagan. it's four major plot lines matched reagan's vision both in the conduct and the results. the plot follows the war in central europe. the operations in 2349 nor.

the soviets are tremendously successful pushing into west germany and seizing iceland in a surprise assault. the narrative centers on the u.s. and nato as they try and get more resources to europe. eventually, nato is able to be establish a bit of a stalemate in west germany buying time for reinforcements to arrive from the united states. >> clancy and his co-author larry bond examined what modern warfare would look like and looked at the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. it's world ward ii scenario in which the united states wins. nuclear weaponses are not entirely absent. as it becomes clear to the soviets they can't win, hard liners in the politburo attempt to bring about the use of nuclear weapons. this leads to a coup as the

military leadership refuse and take control of the government ultimately ending the war. clancy and bond constructed the narrative in order to demonstrate only the truly mad would advocate the use of nuclear weapons. anti-nuclear sentiments are nearly universal between american and soviet leaders. earlier in the member, they lament the money spent on unproductive holes with the ability to the kill account west ten times over. the commander of receive force use views the secretary-general as crazy and mad. it's also notable u.s. planners never once discuss employing the weapons even though they were in europe to mitigate the advantage in conventional forces because the technical advantage they enjoyed allows for a noun nuclear balancing of force. reagan reacted strongly to the bombings of hiroshima and nag

gag sa can i saying the weapons would bring bandage apocalypse. and also the internationalization of atomic nerg. he planned to read anti-nuclear poem "set your clock to u 235 at a public ral-until warner brothers said if you like your contract, you're not going to read this poem. reagan opted not read the poem. but as he became more politically active he maintained criticism of the role of the weapons in policy. in 196, he compared future little destruction to two weshers standing in a saloon aiming guns to each other's heads permanently. again seeing the western metaphor make its reappearance. the situation would limit policy options and force accommodations to what reagan viewed as a toxic standoff. reagan did not moderate his views after assuming the presidency.

in december of 981 he referred to the weapons as the last epidemic of mankind. talking to u.s. troops in camp liberty in 1983, he argued that a nuclear war could not be won and must never be fought. and promised to continue to pursue one of the most arms control programs in history. his the day after made for a tv movie about the effect of nuclear war on a small kansas towning is to strengthen his resolve that there is never a nuclear war. his unwillingness to accept the only way to be safe from attack was to be vulnerable to be it led him to make the strategic defense initiative a centerpiece of his policy. the willingness to share the breakthroughs of the program with the soviets harkins back to his desire for the internationalization of atomic energy and his disdain for the weapons. for many,