demonstrate a track record of compliance with its obligations and begin to restore confidence in its peaceful intent. i don't know if any of the others want >> i think the centrifuge rnd is a separate issue. with -off ot a posed sic -- the problem by centrifuge r&d is that they have brake for thursday, then have much more capable machines. with maybe ld get by fewer machines if they did decide to build a covert plant. [inaudible] yes, but that does not mean anything. but the iranians try to play, you know, it offers a very productive way. like lifting e bit

off your foot off the accelerator. so the number that they have discussed does not really mean anything. you are for specter, okay, here's the number of machines. -- you are mount of producing; therefore, we can make a conversion based on a number. but fundamentally, it is based on existing machine with existing capabilities. they will not reveal very much about what those machines can do. they do not reveal it to the iaea. speak to david afterwards on this. yes, greg. >> i wanted to follow up a bit, bob, on the russian iran deal that you mentioned. clearly, by iran's signaling a

to not ness for russia only build additional reactors, but also for russia to supply fuel for those reactors, as well as remove the spent fuel, are weakening the argument for the practical need to support large number centrifuges in the future. is, given the way the supreme leader has been characterized, and his really limiting iranian capabilities, why would the supreme leader approve this deal with russia? >> well, i think that the in iran that they nneed to have an independent capacity to produce fuel for the power reactors because they cannot rely on the russians or any other outside supplier, that is a really appealing narrative. so i do not see this deal with

as undercutting iran's argument that it needs to an industrial e scale enrichment to provide fuel. of course, such a capacity would also give them a very star nuclear weapons option -- either corporate or overt. >> and they want their cake and eat it, too. they want to agree that russia can provide fuel for new reactors, but they also want at capability in place about to operate -- in case, you know, the russians renege. want the capability anyway, as well as the russian commitment to provide fuel. >> yes, in the back. >> thank you. i'm a visiting fellow here. question concerning

the potential numbers he presented in his initial presentation. i was wondering if you could tell you more about what these pmd's really are. report from the iaea was pretty much details concerning the pre-2003 material. the us intelligence completely sharing the activity of overseas. going back to fundamental issue is a ing that fundamental idea for solving the argument. willing to e undermine iranians measures --

clarify an issue which was carefully substantiated before 2003, but perhaps is no longer? resolution of the pmd is fundamental to an agreement. it is core. i think there are ways to do with it. i have written things where we have suggested capitalizes on core to t i think it is an agreement. if you do not sell it, you will an agreement that risks being unverifiable, and hurts the credibility of this very valuable international institution -- the iaea. they have learned in other cases that if you turn your back in history, they will fail. all you have to do is look at iraq in 1991. and the south africa early 1990's, when south africa would not talk about the history.

that learn the hard way history does matter, if you're going to build a credible verification machine. on the pmd's, what we -- what my organization has seen his issues about calculations related to nuclear weapons. there's a recent sanctioning of by the us entity government -- they said it was and it involves work related to nuclear weapons. so i think it was fairly there was that ongoing concerns about what some of the people are doing that were in this pre-2004 program. >> i think that pmd is largely for its impact on verification in the future. when he spoke your a few

weeks ago, he made clear what he wanted to see in a deal. facilities, ess to access to personal, and access to information. access to facilities is have been that we kind of in the verification provisions that people have talked about what essentially guarantee that kind of access. about access to personal, then the question is, who are you talking about? well, that is where it gets to be important to know what was done in the past because you your future ude in personnel list, all of the people who were involved with the program in the past. so that you know who to talk to on a regular basis.

good watch closely -- who to watch closely. and when you talk about information, you're really talking about, all right, what was the structure of your program? how were ngs done -- things done? what organizations were there that we want to follow through time and understand? what new ones are you creating with the same old personnel to causes further worries? my view iis that much of that could be done -- could be set an agreement, even satisfying the pmd issues before an agreement is signed. certainly want to future, mmajor sanction relief contingent upon the iaea

saying we have solved three of six of these issues, whatever. you would want, perhaps, to secret e solution because iranian personnel have an understandable fear of being assassinated. want to you would clean with to come the iaea, and maybe with us and our p5 +1 colleagues, but not necessarily with "the associated press". >> okay, we have only a few more minutes ago. make your questions very concise and we will -- the give some will concluding remarks. this gentleman here, first.

the university of maryland. recall, back in wrote in "time" magazine that they're asking us to take concrete steps, in return for promises in which we do not have much confidence. today, the critics in iran are same kind voicing the of concerns. united states ink should do, or not do, to the iranians njure that it does have the will and live up to its part? thank you. >> yes, sir, right here. talked about the would like to get opinion or the view of the

other panelists because i am than dr. levine is about the role of the new congress. i want to know how, possibly, if this decision does not work the end of june, and there's the w congress on environment in d.c., how they can really convince both that licans and democrats we have to come up with the decision. or, as you said, break down the talks. >> yes. the woman in the back. who was waving her hand. >> hi, i'm at the center for national policy. members of the panel's support additional functions? why or why not? >> thank you for being so

concise. >> yes, one right there. about the talking need for more concessions from iranians. the question is, do think there room for more flexibility on negotiations from p5 +1, taking into account that the of each country -- the overall political situation -- you view us politics and so forth. thank you. last one over here. mark from the national college. iran got, by think 2003, to proving the technology

needed to produce a nuclear weapon? is it possible that they prove to their own satisfaction? go okay, why don't we just down the row and deal with his remaining questions and any concluding remarks. >> several people asked the question about sanction release. i think one of the big problems an agreement is exactly as professor said, iran's concern that the us will not be able to deliver on sanctions relief. clearly, the president is not convince be able to congress to repeal all of the sanctions against iran that are in place. does have the ent authority to waive the sanctions -- most of the ones that really count -- every six months. the protection iran has is that obama agreement, if

cannot deliver -- for example, if congress overrides the president when he waives the sanctions -- then the deal is off. and iran is free to resume its nuclear activities. iran is at a point in its nuclear program where it is not be able to -- they up its permanently give weapon program. questions of the sanctions relief is one that can be addressed in a deal. the more difficult problem, as to our, is that iran is not willing to come even close to meeting the p5 +1 demands. now the gentleman asked about further extensions. i mean, my guess -- my guess is that congress is unlikely to overturn the current extension -- the current seven month extension. iran y because as long as continues to comply with the joint plan of action, we have frozen the program.

so we lose their little by see whether or not it is possible to come to an agreement. i think is going to be very difficult to get any additional extensions, unless there is on these rogress critical issues that we have talked about. if there is progress, then i it will be possible to justify an additional extension. under the current circumstances, i think it is probably not possible, politically. >> yes, let me just say on the question of technology. there's an internal report -- i know some of the people involved in it -- they that iran had the capability to build a weapon at the end of this 2003 period. about .55 m to be across, but it had a long ways to go to finish that.

if it picked up that work again, they would succeed. so i think they have made substantial progress on this of being up to produce a bomb, and that is part of what causes a concern. just as a final comment, i in the technical community, i think the hope is there for deal. of parts to a lot it, and that can be a curse and a blessing. there is a lot of places iran has to make concessions. the us has to consider its possibilities. but there are also trade-offs among these parts. collectively ere at all this -- in all this, i i remain hopeful that -- creative, s can be along with iran, to be able to construct a deal that both can live with. the question of whether we are for more sanctions.

speaking for myself, i could for more eing sanctions authority, but not se at re sanctions per i am wary of us, sanctions with triggers. i would much rather discuss with the administration what need in the future, and give them the authority to take steps if they decide they need it. but congress is not a very effective institution for running foreign-policy. there i betray my past. i used to work for old-style republicans. on the question of whether have any more give. have n't know because we

not been told how much give we have already offered in the negotiations. and so, it is very difficult to figure that out. might interest the iranians is the extent to under a situation of major sanctions relief, they benefits from foreign commerce and from greater international acceptability. and being welcomed back into the international community. not a t extent, that is matter of giving them something in a negotiation. it is a matter of making sure they are aware of how much have to gain if a deal is reached. and, therefore, how much they

lose by refusing to make are romises that we think reasonably within their overall objectives. final notes by me. i do not know whether we will achieve a deal. i think it is going to be very difficult. is a reasonable prospect that we will not be able to come to terms. if we do, it is not going to be a perfect deal. we will not have achieved we wanted to at achieve, but that is the nature of negotiations. think it is important -- one, look at the deal as a -- as david said -- not to focus on any one particular element of it -- the number of centrifuges and so forth. look at the overall deal. second point to make, what to be realistic -- we need to be realistic about the alternatives to the deal.

look at what the realistic alternatives are. in my view, there are two alternatives. and ratchet up sanctions in the hope that iranians will have more flexibility of eventually. but they have been under pretty over a year ons for now, and this has not move them sufficiently. hard to do ing to be that, and the effort of trying raise that is going to some real concerns among members of the sanctions we need to hat continue to put pressure on iran. the other alternative is the use of military force. military force can succeed temporarily. set back the programs, but it cannot prevent iran from eventually succeeding in its objective. indeed, it could give iran initial incentives to move more

actually building nuclear weapons. just appeal would be not to our audience, but to members american ss and the public in general, is to look realistically at the alternatives and then make up your minds. i want to thank you. you have been a terrific audience. i especially want to thank our palace for giving us a very illuminating conversation. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] reporter and ing author james, on how the us government waste billions of taxpayer dollars on the war on terror. >> stewart owen was really the official who became --

investigate ry to what happened when the united states until that money to iraq. are over al estimates $11 billion out of the roughly in iraqi money that the united states was sent back from iraq. they found that nearly $2 in $100 in cash -- bills -- was stolen after it was flown from baghdad, and was being hidden in a bunker in rural lebanon. >> sunday night at eight eastern. join us as we get an insider's view of covering presidents, as we talk with ann compton, who more than etired as 40 years as white house

correspondent for abc news. >> yesterday, president obama a traditional n thanksgiving ritual of pardoning two turkeys. the president is joined by daughters sasha and malia in white house grand foyer. >> hello, everybody. good afternoon, everybody. please have a seat. normally, we do this outside. is not cooperating today, but i want to, first of of malia and f early wish everybody an happy thanks giving. i'm here to announce what i'm sure will be the most talked executive action this month. [laughter] am taking an action fully within my legal authority. [laughter] of action taken

republicans, and presidents before me, to spare mac lives of two turkeys -- and cheese -- from a terrible and delicious fate. [laughter] i want to thank joe, the president of the national turkey federation. chairman, and he his son, who personally raised to mac & cheese. big round of applause. he is getting pretty excited about this. thanks to all those who voted i to pick the official national thanksgiving turkey. cheese wants you to know that he won. mack, the alternate, is not so badly off, either. if you are it,

turkey, and you are named after your chances of escaping thanksgiving dinner are pretty low. these guys are well ahead of the curve. they really beat the odds. it is important to know that turkeys have always had powerful allies. many of you know, benjamin franklin once wrote, i was the bald eagle had not been chosen representative of our country. he is a bird of bad moral character. the turkey is, in comparison, a much more respectable bird. i think these two turkeys would agree with mr. franklin. and they will get to live out of their days respectively at a virginia state with 10,000 acres of roaming space. i know some college amnesty -- [laughter] but do not worry, there are plenty of turkeys to go around.

in fact, later this afternoon, michelle, malia, and sasha and i will take two turkeys that a local ake the cut to food pantry to make sure that nation's capital have food eating close to where. i want to thank the turkey farm in pennsylvania for donating, again, those birds -- it has been six years in a row that they have made its contributions -- and for making thanksgiving dinner possible of our fellow americans. finally, the wisdom of the whole turkey pardoning tradition. typically, on the day before thanksgiving, the story went, the man who makes decisions about wars, virus outbreaks, other matters of state, chooses to pardon a single turkey plus an alternate. tell me about it. it is a little puzzling that i do this every year. will say that i enjoy it

because, with all the tough stuff that's was around this once in a is nice, while, to say happy thanksgiving. excuse to s a great do it. is a special moment when we give thanks to the people we love, and we are mindful of the incredible that we have received. we remember the folks who can't spend the holidays at home. especially the brave men and women in uniform who helped keep our country secure. we celebrate the holiday that is about what makes this nation great. that is its generosity, it's openness. as franklin roosevelt once said, our commitment to make the country in which no one is left out. now, because i know everyone out of town -- mac

& cheese included -- it is time for me to engage in the official act. let's see what we can do here. >> all right. are hereby pardoned from the thanksgiving dinner table. congratulations. he looks pretty happy about it. [laughter] >> all right, if you want to take cheese down, that is okay. will tell you, though. the best o not have looking heads. [laughter] know what i'm saying?

do think they're beautiful? >> i think they're beautiful. >> and they are thinking about their red, white, and blue. patriotic, right? >> absolutely. [laughter] >> do want to take them down? >> thank you. appreciate it. okay, thank you everybody. happy thanksgiving. >> today on c-span, "washington journal" is next. live with your phone calls. then american history looks at the lives of native americans. a tour of a new mexican pueblo. and a look at 9000 pictographs in montana. in an hour, an update on the us

military operations in afghanistan. then combat operations against pentagon's he response to ebola. historian david catoosa on wartime. host: good morning everyone on this thursday, thanksgiving day 2014. president obama has plans to watch football on his favorite holiday. but before that, they plan to go to a local food bank for his d.c. neighbors in need. we plan to talk politics today, and if so, what debates will you be having? -- will you plan to talk politics today, and if so, what debates will you be having?