>> i las vegas smort sports. we need to reclaim them and take sports back. what we need is we need to know our history. that's our greatest ammunition in this fight. we need to know our history of the athletes, the sports writers and the fans who have stood up to the machine. if for no other reason than knowing this history i think allows us to look at the world and see that struggle can affect every aspect of life in the system even the swoosh-adorned ivory tower known as sports. >> join our live three-hour show with dave zir; in with your tweets and facebook questions, live at noon eastern on c pan -- c-span 2. roll call, he cq's is here to talk about the recent announcement of missile defense review. good morning. what is it and what is its purpose? guest: the missile defense

review is an analysis and assessment of the threat to the united states and its allies that come from foreign countries by a missile. host: when it comes to the review process, why does it need regular reviews and what things going to consideration for that? really sets pentagon policy for how it wants to go about defending against missile strikes. this is the first new review since 2010. that was the last time the president, the administration did a missile-defense review. back then, it was called ballistics missile defense review. this review takes away the ballistic, meaning, it is embracing a wider array of threats. host: when it comes to the actual threats that leads up to the review, there is a line that i want you to bounce off. based on thers recognition that the environment is more dangerous for both

homeland and regional defense. tell us why. the mainaditionally, concern has been a ballistic missile coming from a rogue state. someone like north korea or iran, out of the blue, sort of striking without notice. we have geared our defenses toward that type of threat. but recently a technologies have advanced, there are more regional weapons that can hit quickly add a closer range and russia and china which the pentagon has identified are are near peer competitors in the great power competition, have developed more advanced weapons including hypersonic weapons which move fast, and unlike a ballistic missile, they can maneuver so you cannot just plot it's course and figure out where it is coming down. you have to track in real-time. host: missile defense is our

topic for the last half hour. if you want to ask our guest questions, we have divided a line for central time zone, (202) 748-8000, for the mountain pacific time zones (202) and perhaps you are military and have special interest on this, it is (202) 748-8002. let's hear for the president -- from the president. [video clip] review callsour for 20 new ground-based interceptors at fort briley, alaska. immediately detect foreign missiles launched against our great nation. are committed to establishing a missile-defense program that can shield every city in the united states and we will never negotiate a way our right to do this. host: certainly not exhaustive,

but what is the rationale? guest: the 20 ground-based have already been off the rise and a down payment has been paid by congress. those are going to go to fort greely, alaska. the u.s. already has 40 ground-based interceptors there. it is an ambitious commitment to defend against any missile strike anywhere. i do not think the pentagon is quite prepared to do that. there are other ways to defend against missile strikes. host: if you go to the website for the missile defense, the gives you three examples of how the defend against missiles. there is a midcourse of the terminal, walk us through the capabilities we have. section is when an

enemy missile has just been fired and is just coming up, probably out of the ground, and is gaining altitude and speed. the advantage of hitting it turf,is it's on their you are less worried about a hitting its target, and it is not going quite as fast. then a ballistic missile will take a long mid course flight as it travels across the globe. theill probably leave atmosphere and then have to navigate reentry. that gives a fairly lengthy window to try and hit it. of course, it is going quite quickly at this point. and it is far away. that's posing its challenges. really highense is stakes because if you miss, it is right on top of your target and you might not get another shot. host: that is what you don't want? guest: that is what you don't

want. host: when it comes the capabilities? guest: was a ground-based interceptors are designed to be midcourse. it takes that long period where it is arcing over the globe. the pentagon would like to get at the boost phase. there is the missile-defense review that authorizes study to look at arming and f-35, so our latest fighter jet, with a missile that is capable of downing an enemy missile and boost phase. that is technically very tricky to do. but the pentagon thinks it can be done. host: how advanced and the technology side are we at stopping missiles and how has that progress over the last decades? guest: we are pretty advanced. alwaystagon would like to have greater capabilities and the pentagon recognizes that our peers are not standing still and they are

advancing their own capabilities. a hypersonic missile poses a serious challenge. to get at that, the missile defense review wants to put a sensor in space so you can have birth to death tracking. with a hypersonic, it is not like a ballistic missile where you can calculate its course and figure out where it is coming down for you have to track it added is in moving -- you have to track it as it is moving. host: before we get to the calls, a price tag for all of these? guest: is going to be very expensive. the 20 ground-based interceptors i mentioned before that congress already put a down payment on at a bulk of $5 billion emergency funding for the pentagon a little more than a year ago. we have not seen a price tag for a lot of the things the missile-defense review proposes. we are hoping to see in the pentagon's budget submission

which we hope to see in february but that might be delayed. host: for central time zones, it is (202) 748-8000, mountain pacific time zones (202) 748-8001, and active or retired military and you want to give your thoughts (202) 748-8002. ,ur guest andrew clevenger defense policy reporter for cq roll call. we will start with michael, you are on. caller: hi, mr. clevenger. i just came in on the show, and you were talking about how they deviate course and all. i was wondering if there was some type of electromagnetic disorient anyould possible electronics on such a missile. that is not a concept i

am familiar with or i have heard talked about a lot in the pentagon. one thing to remember with a law of the hypersonic weapons is some of them fire initially and then are actually gliding. it needs very little maneuvering of fins to change its course. i am not sure that an electromagnetic weapon would be able to disrupt that, but that is probably something the pentagon is looking into. host: of you were off of twitter asking to about inf, please explain where they are and where we are walking away from the treaty. guest: it looks like we are walking away from the treaty. host: what is an inf? guest: that would be a nuclear treaty designed to reduce the wheres of nuclear weapons and that case, the u.s. and

russia have aimed at each other. both those countries have somebody nuclear weapons that the opponent could not hope to shoot them all down. mutually assured the structure and is really the key deterrent to that. the treaty looks like we are walking away from them. the u.s. feels that russia is not in compliance, and it does not see the point in remaining in a treaty when your partner is not playing by the same rules. host: you mentioned that china and russia are the obvious. what about threats from the other places such as the middle east? where are we as far capabilities for that? east, theree middle is sophisticated regional network of smaller defenses that to geted around the area at some of the shorter range threats that might come out of iran. iran has quite a striking

distance. it can reach parts of europe with the capabilities we believe they have. thet bulk sped up at all, concern is that it can eventually reach the continental u.s.. host: james is next. good morning. there is a really good website, i wonder if andrus familiar with -- andrew is familiar with public integrity.org. here we are $23 trillion in debt. vetad was a world war ii and he only said that war should never be wall street traded for profit. what he thinks about the biblical passage james 4:2. the cause of war is greed.

guest: the development of a massive industry in terms of -- theng this country missile-defense portion of the think is theot part that is going to necessarily break the bank. the causes of war are very tough to get at and above my pay grade, so i will leave that to the planners. host: from california, george is next. caller: hi, good morning. richard, ingo to ohio, go ahead. caller: good morning. i followed his industry to a irtain extent and anyway, read about what china is developing as far as different kinds of missiles. we got maybe 44 defense muscles to stop icbms, but what if they

launch 2000? and frankly, how many cities in the united states have to be nuked to destroy this country? i think what we are doing is crazy. we are trying to pick a fight with china over trade for crying out loud. this is going to get freaking out of hand because we are going around trying to intimidate them militarily and they are going to do the same thing to us. economically speaking, they can produce missiles a lot cheaper than we can. what do you think about that? guest: you raise a great point. having 44 ground-based interceptors is not a blanket deterrent against any missile lost our way from that side of the pacific. i think they are designed to more towards a rogue strike perhaps towards north korea where you do not anticipate a massive wave of missiles you are describing.

so far, the best deterrent against that strike has been the fact that we can hit them back. if you launch missiles at us, you will be staring at 2000 missiles coming back to you, and that is the end of the ballgame. host: because missile-defense depends on alliances with countries and we have a president who sometimes is very critical of allies, how does that rhetoric factor into these longer-term negotiations with nuclear accords and treaties? does it have an impact? guest: it does. some of our allies are very nervous because the rhetoric he uses and the questioning nato's defense spending, suggesting that our allies are getting a the allies rely on u.s. commitments to keep them safe. if the u.s. were to draw back

,ignificantly from south korea japan would be very nervous. koreare very close north and north korea certainly has the capability of hitting them quickly and easily. so it is important to reaffirm these commitments to keep our allies confident. host: gerard from georgia. caller: hey, how you doing. there was some, news about a month or two ago about russia having a way to scramble the gps system. we had some exercises and they had a way to scramble them. our gps would not be used. thethe other thing, tommy moore, everybody would die , nobody would survive. that is tommy moore. guest: thanks.

a nuclear exchange would be devastating and frankly, a nuclear weapon across the globe would be a devastating loss of life, and that is the incentive to not let that happen. capabilities, they are very good at electronic warfare is as you mentioned. gps and able to disrupt that would be challenging to the pentagon. but of course, the pentagon has more than one type of sensor to rely on, so that is not the whole ballgame if the gps is knocked out. to thef you go missile-defense agency, there are pictures of the various items that are used in this idea of missile-defense. how does the defense contractor comment all of that? guest: well -- come in to all of that? a, missile-defense is a hugely challenging enterprise and there is a lot to coordinate. if you are talking about

striking an incoming icbm, first you have to be aware of its launch, the second you have to have sensors that are able to tell you where it is going, and then you have to have the capability to get your interceptor in front of it so that they can collide. it has been described as shooting a bullet with a bullet. contractor, ite really requires a martian of resources and often they have to work together because one company will do a sensor that works and feeds information to the missile that another company will develop. top defensee the contractors and how much are they getting paid to develop and keep this technology going? the maineing is contractor on the ground-based interceptors. raytheon has an extensive business. askheed martin

missile-defense systems, that is part of the regional that the u.s. and allies the -- allies deploy. it is a billion dollar industry. host: we will hear from mark. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. i am wondering why we spend seminars $70 billion on defense, the russians only spend $60 billion, the chinese only spent approximately the same. you mean to tell me that we cannot control the world like we are now and to mr. kim was to lay off one nuke, they have 200 coming back at him -- i do not believe it is going to do that. it is a false claim and a waste of money. guest: you raise a good point, top defenses spending globally, but the pentagon is very clear. our adversaries and potential adversaries are catching up. they have not been sleeping

while the u.s. has been busy in conflicts in the middle east. in fact, they have been going to school on american capabilities and working very hard. they have good scientists and engineers. they have working very hard to develop capabilities that can not just counter ours but surpass ours. i think the pentagon is playing a little bit of catch-up in these missile-defense regions and that is going to be expensive. --t: letter from angelo, let's hear from angelo, massachusetts. caller: how far away come from knocking down missiles with lasers? guest: that is a great issue and something that is contemplated in the missile-defense review. they are calling for a study of six months to produce a report on the feasibility of that. it sounds like something out of science fiction, but lasers in space is not that far-fetched.

having a laser that can disrupt while it icbm section isidcourse not so far-fetched. host: a couple of topics to talk about, space force. we heard a lot about this last year. where are we as far as the development of this? guest: the pentagon is doing the organizational steps that it is capable of doing without congress. acting secretary patrick shanahan recently by memo designated under secretary of defense michael griffin to oversee the space development agency. that is sort of the hub of acquiring assets for space, overseeing the parts you need to assemble a space force. whatremains to be seen is

the pentagon's budget request looks like in terms of specific money for the space force, and whether congress buys in. a lot of the changes necessary are going to have to be authorized by congress. host: and the purpose of space force, what is it? u.s. has a law of assets that are in space already. a lot of gps satellites are up in space, and if we are going to space, we aree in going to need to defend those amongst thesly capabilities that china and russia are developing -- the ability to get at our assets. this riseometimes as juicy targets by the pentagon and they need to be defended. host: washington states, maria, hello. caller: hello, how are you

doing? host: fine, go ahead. caller: ok. my question is the waterways of the philippines, when macarthur toe back from world war ii help us in the philippines, the waterways are very important to the navy. abade navy system themselves? guest: i'm not quite sure where you are going with that and the waterways of the philippines. host: if you go to the mba website, the naval aspect of it? just: the navy does not have radar, but it has defensive

missiles that are on board ships. it is a key element of our theonal defenses to have system on board of the missile destroyers. the navy has a key role to play in regional missile-defense. host: what do you mean by that? is -- i'm going to mess of the acronym here but act ive -- i will not even try. it is a radar sensor system. host: lorenzo joins us from louisiana. he is also calling on our line for those who are active or retired military. hello, go ahead. caller: yes. i was calling on a couple of things. states, they are talking about the wall. we have only been attacked twice and that was once by the airplanes from the saudi's and

the other time was the russians in the election. the wall is not going to be up to stop that. when ier thing is that iraq, i there in wanted to give a shout out to those guys. they knocked down everything saddam tried to throw. don't fear russia and to do not fear china. they have no way to deal with america. i do not appreciate getting on the republican and all this information out to the public. stuff, evenret though it has been unclassified, i do not think we should be putting fear and americans talking about what china can do and what russia can do. host: thank you. good point,aise a one that the patriot system was very successful during the gulf

war invasion. that remains a key system for regional missile-defense. success is something our competitors to close note of and started working very hard to counter out that -- counteract that. i take your point about not wanting to talk to carefully about our capabilities, but you lose some of the deterrent effect of our capabilities if you do not let your adversary no that you can stop of what they are contemplating. -- some of what they are contemplating. it is good for china and russia to know that a volley of nuclear weapons is going to meet with a volley of nuclear weapons coming back at them. that is a very effective the -- deterrent. theyorth korea, thinking might be able to slip one

missile through, it is good to telegraph that we are able to knock that. host: andrew clevenger >> with the help of our comcast cable partners. nation forest in the agriculture. nationgest county in the for dairy products. as a result of that, we have a lot of industry here that is based on agricultural needs. >> saturday on book tv. author asth a local he shares stories of their notable western criminals.

>> the county was remote. it had the mountains right next door which made great hideouts for people on the run. this wants east of visalia were also great hideouts for people on the run. if you're going to practice criminal activity, you want to be able to do that without getting caught. the county made it pretty convenient for outlaws to hideout. 2:00, we'll at explore the city and history of the region's agriculture. --ch these man city terror c-span's cities tour on c-span's book tv. working with our cable

affiliates as we explore the american story. coming up next on c-span, a look at global security threats to the u.s. that's followed by discussion on the political situation in venezuela after the national assembly recently declared nicolas maduro's presidency illegitimate. on capitol hill today, national intelligence director told lawmakers it was unlikely that north korea would give up its nuclear weapons and production capabilities while testifying before the senate intelligence committee. he was joined by several officials to testify about potential threats to the u.s., including the cia director and fbi director. other topics included a ron, cyber threats and foreign efforts to influence u.s. elections in 2020. th