>> adam. >> ezu, i love europe, neil. these are big european multi-national companies inexpensive right now. >> thank youuch. and i loved david asman and i love all of you. "forbes on fox." the battle over the battle. as the president asks congress for a three-year military authority to beef up our fight against isis more than seven out of ten americans say the president does not have a real strategy to defeat isis. that's why some here say it is time to declare a full blown war to destroy their slam i can extremists and protect our way of life. i'm david asman, welcome to "forbes on fox." let's go in focus with steve forbes rich mike, saab if a, john and rick younger. rich, 73% of americans say they do not think the president has a strategy for defeating isis. should we just declare war on

the guys? >> number one the american people are right and number two, yeah, we should declare war because there has never been a better time. the burning of this jordanian pilot has galvanized the world including many people in the middle east. we've never had more economic bench to work behind the scenes to pressure saudi arabia and qatar to stop funding groups like this we now have the upper hand on oil and gas. if we don't do it and god forbid these guys get their hand on a weapon of mass destruction we'll reget if. >> john even some lib tear yans are saying a clear declaration of war would cut through all of the uncertaintiy. >> i guess i've got rick's slot for a second straight week. i'm going to give a rick kind of answer. i think this is a really bad idea once again. we to some degree have isis because we saw fit together rid of sad dam hue sign why do we think the third time is going to

be a charm? we've spent years on this show knocking the obama administration's con seat that it can create a healthcare market out of thin air but when it comes to making the middle east a it tranquil place we get that american troops can do it. i think this is wholly naive and we should stay out of it. >> sabrina, in fairness to the president he says and his people say he is stepping up his air strikes against isis. why isn't that enough? >> look, i mean i understand what john is saying sometimes we're in the position of choosing between bad and worse and that's a dangerous position to be in but i'm disagreeing in the sense that i think we do need to do more, but part of doing more is to be very clear about what it is we're fighting and how we're going to target it. i agree, we don't want to have sort of this open-ended effort where it's not delineated in had any way, but the president needs to -- most of this has to do with had his attitude and his positioning. what are we do? are we upping our jint gent or working more with our allies or do we know who we're fighting

and in which countries? this is a lot of what the american people are waiting to hear. >> rick, the president says he is out to destroy isis but is he doing enough to destroy isis? >> here is the problem again, like every other argument in our country this day it degrades into he's horrible or good or whatever. the president had a strategy at the outset it hasn't worked. the idea was to degrade isis, they had about 20,000 troops at that point conservative estimates now say maybe 200,000 troops, the degrading part didn't work out. so we have to move to a new strategy of destroying. all out war, problematic because we can't declare war within syria. >> going back to that poll, 60% of americans say it's going to take ground troops to defeat isis. only 23% say air strikes alone will do it and even chuck hagel the outgoing secretary is of defense has publicly said that air strikes alone are not going to do it. take a listen. >> no one is under any illusions

under any illusions that air strikes alone will destroy isil. >> how bhou a declaration of war snooths not soomp a declaration of war the president has the authority to take action he doesn't really want to take a lot of action. he should realize and have a strategy we're going to have to use ground troops going to have to more coordination with countries like jordan and saudi arabia and this resolution is pro post house rouse, has a three-year time limit, takes away the authority to go after non isis terrorist groups and so you look at that and then no enduring ground offensive. you mow, do that to d day we'd still be on the beaches. this guy doesn't get it. >> mike why not, then, as the constitution says put it in the hands of congress sm have congress come out with a clear declaration of war? >> because unless the president is on board with everything, david, it doesn't matter what you say as steve just says it matters what you're doing. >> let me just stop you there.

is the military on board with what our commander in chief is saying? i say a lot of military guys even still in their positions disagree with the president on this. >> you're right and the reason is because you need a clear consistent and coherent strategy that involves economics, that involves politics and involves the military. our president has been gutting the military with his budget. so the fact that he declares war isn't going to help us if he's gutting the military. >> rich it is true that a declaration of war putting the u.s. on a war footing would extract costs from an american public that already have not seen much happen with their income over the past ten years. >> yeah, that's true the economy is beginning to recover, we're talking about a relatively small amount of money, though, to do everything we can to save western civilization. and by the way, you know my good friend john tamny put out the false argument here, this is not about being democracy in the

middle east that was the big flaw of george w. bush, this is about getting rid of people who put the world in danger. >> be ware of when somebody parts a sentence saying my good friend. respond to that. >> the insults are usually about to start flowing. again, the talk was years ago that we had all these dangerous people in the middle east, we've got saddam out and can a daef out and it's still very dangerous. i think to presume that this time it's going to get much better is naive. after that all this talk about the incompetence of obama and the incompetence of the obama administration i'll match you on that on any given day you then want this incompetent administration to make big foreign policy decisions that could involve american lives i think the arguments are inn inconsistent inconsistent. >> as the parent of somebody in the military i'm a little reluctant when i've seen all of the mistakes even rick runninger admitted this commander in chief has made serious blunders as commander in chief i'm not sure i want to give him all that much

more power over what happens to my son. >> and actually that's why i think that this has less to do with declaring his war powers and having a conversation with congress and sort of delineating what is the obama doctrine because up until now it has been these half measures and ultimately mass what is going to put people in harm's way whether our military or civilians at home. if we don't make choices about what it is that we're doing and trying to accomplish we're going to be leaving ourselves in much more danger. >> rick, i know you're upset because john is stealing all of your thunder but go ahead. >> look, i have to agree with my good friend rich. look, you can't first of all you don't get to decide when you have to do something when the situation requires it. you guys may not like obama, he's your president, he's the one who has to do it, that's physical one, number two, i agree with what rich said earlier, we are not going to have the better opportunity to take this fight to the bad guys.

number three let's stop with the religion stuff, these guys are evil i don't care who they are or what they are, they kill little children, somebody has got to kill them. >> they care about their religion and their religion plays a part in tear war strategy, it should play a part in our war strategy but that's another argument steve what about the economic costs of this? if we go all out, really do what the president says we're going to do which is destroy isis there is going to be a cost are americans ready for that? >> i think the americans are. they don't like t but they're ready to do it because they know they have to do and because we made mistakes in the past there's no excuse not to do something now. they said in the '30s appeasement, we made mistakes after world war one world war one was a mistake they ignored hitler, ignored imperial japan and we nearly lost western civilization. enough of it. >> it's enough to say the eventual costs will be greater, but the costs now, i don't know if americans are ready for that. >> they've had a real president yes they would who could make

the case for it. >> this is why boehner was right in inviting netanyahu to come speak because net wru is really the one person actually in the free world right now showing leadership. >> there's so many kettles of fish we had open up. coming up next a word of caution to budget cutting lawmakers be careful saying we need to tighten our nation's belt because there's one union who is bost who says he's going to take off his belt and whip you with it. you've got to hear this.

aft 2:30 p.m. now back to "forbes on fox." government workers not just protesting calls for government cuts even though they make a lot more than folks in the private sector, now the president of the largest federal employee union reportedly saying this, quote, if i meet one more politician who tells me we need to tighten our belts i'm going to take my belt off and i'm going to whoop

his blank. steve. >> first of all, let's just point out the differential between what federal workers make and private sector workers make. this is huge. 115,000 versus 66. >> re already see the corrupt influence of "fifty shades of grey" that he's talking with b. whipping people but the fact of the matter is the government is way overbloated today, you see it playing out in the twens defendant as they're can you get back uniformed personnel they're increasing one for one the bureaucrat tick personnel as if a bureaucrat tick army could keep us safe. you could put the employees by 20 to 20% and the rest of the american people would not notice the difference. we inefficient organization. >> rick this is not just republicans saying this, a lot of democrats are in the battle against public sector unions too, chicago mayor rahm emanuel against the teachers union. in missouri they have a right to work measure that was introduced by a democrat. >> look, i mean, first of all,

points to you steve forbes for finding a way to work "fifty shades" of gray into this. you mow, i think we're all coming to the point in time where democrats, republicans we have problems with public unions. the problem is if you are somebody who is a unionist as i do tend to be you realize that the private unions are all but banished. i want the private unions back and i'll do would you tell the public unions because then we can start solving income inequality. >> ee hack, the problem is that management for public sector unions is us, the taxpayers, we are the management. they're supposed to serve us, they're called public servants for a reason and yet it's all about the cash. 86% of all the state politicians in illinois are paid by unions so they're just giving pay back. >> it happens in the federal level, you have the national treasury employees union rooting for president obama and those are the people who work at the irs and the treasury.

the problem is you can't vote out the bureaucrats. we've got -- this is the true entitlement state, these are the guys a lot of these workers watching porn at work or doing full time union work and we're also seeing, watch had this, the geo has recommended 9,000 different ways that these guys can cut waste, fraud and abuse they've ignored it through the decades and now the gao has raised a number of federal programs to 32 including tax enforcement. >> and, mike the reason we're not making any progress in can you get our debt our national debt from what is it now 18.1 trillion dollars is because of this, because politicians in the past have made unrealistic promises to public sector unions. >> the public sector government unions, david have become sort of this form of welfare. i mean, you know, they only have to contribute, for instance 6% of their paycheck towards their social security where if you're in the private sector and you start a business you have to contribute 12%. they get a whole bunch of perks

that people if the private sector don't get. so it's de facto welfare system. they talk about belt tight if i think. in the 2016 budget president obama ask adding to these workers by 30,000. >> but, john, he says he's can you get back. >> yeah, their version of can you get back is a big different from ours. the original idea of the federal government was at that it was going to do very few things very well. nowadays the federal government does very many things very very badly and that's the government. it's not just about spending cuts it's got to be about a bowl sling programs and departments a together. you've got to get rid of them because otherwise we're going to see more of it. >> to highlight rick's point about how many government workers are part of a union 35.7% of government workers are part of a public sector union that is five times more than the private sector, that's just huge, it's unacceptable, isn't

it. >> it's not the unions that bother my it's the government and the government size that bother me. i have been engaging in some fantasy thinking we eliminate the department of education we eliminate the department of energy, we repeal dod frank's and we are no longer by 100,000 regulators and compliance officers. but that's pure fantasy. >> steve, what about that, cut back on the institutions that create all this government excess. >> hearth, david. that would be a good start. also getting ready of the income tax code, which always leads to more government programs and higher taxes, more complexity. so yes but we talked about 20 years ago, david getting rid of the department of education and what happens in washington? it gets bigger. >> 2 does seem to do that. the "cashin' in" gang getting ready to roll at the bottom of the hour. >> slam mcterrorist targeting a kosher deli in paris is a random act, president obama thinks so. is that type of thinking putting

america in more danger? plus no backlash over bond analogy, tinsel town liberals celebrating "fifty shades of grey" while slamming american sniper, can you say hollywood hip krits? >> up here first innocent until proven guilty, it's a pillar of our justice system. try telling that to innocent americans watching the irs seize their bank accounts and close down their businesses. how to stop it next.

make sure kids learn how to swim. always watch them in and around water and properly fence all pools. simple steps saves lives. to learn some new ones visit poolsafely.gov

♪ ♪ i'm almost done. [ male announcer ] now you can pay your bill... ♪ ♪ ...manage your appointments... [ dog barks ] ...and check your connection status... ♪ ♪ ...anytime, anywhere. ♪ ♪ [ dog growls ] ♪ ♪ oh. so you're protesting? ♪ ♪ okay. [ male announcer ] introducing xfinity my account. available on any device.

i did not serve three combat tours in iraq only to come home and be extorted by my government's use of civil forfeiture laws but what is that i feel they have done to me and i need you to stop it from happening to anyone else. >> imagine happening to a veteran. imagine having your bank account seized by the irs with no proof that you've duchb anything illegal. that is what the irs has been doing for years to innocent business owners just making large cash deposits. now, the tax agency's chief says he's sorry but lawmakers want to pass a bill to make their power to seize property illegal. steve, i think it's time to clip their wings. do you is this. >> it's not time to clip their wings it's time to shoot the whole bird and replace it with a flat tax. what they're doing is engaging in criminal activity. they seizure assets and then negotiate when they don't have a case to make on getting your assets backel mowing that small businesspeople don't have the

resources to fight them. so this is illegal seizure this is criminal activity just like targeting conservative groups which they did three years ago. >> bill it runs totally counter to our system of justice. isn't until proven guilty. >> i'm going to make myself a lot of friends by putting in a good word for the irs. the irs needs snatching power watch snatching power in order to deal with dead beats some of whom are quite prominent. so what i would do is control it by saying that if they take too much, if they take more than -- and are proven to be entitled to they have to give back double the difference and then they won't terrorize small business owners who have done nothing wrong. >> i can think of some tax dead beats like al sharpton who still has his job and property. it seems like the innocent people, the people who least deserve it is getting tarringed. >> it's so wrong treating regular taxpayers like drug traffickers or terrorists. the problem is that the median amount seized is 34 grand and

the amount amount for the legal cost to get it back is 20 k. law enforcement agencies are allowed to keep a portion of what they seize. so does the irs have a stake in the game, they've seizing this money and get to keep it for themselves at the agency. that's the question. >> is it not time to end this forfeiture law? >> you know, i sadly and reluctantly have to agree with bill until such time that we do have a radically simplified tax problem as steve add dates, the irs needs this power. there just should be a much higher barrier of probable cause. it's harder for police in the city to get a subpoena than for irs to seize property. >> but sabrina, look whose getting caught in the squeeze innocent businesspeople. in this case of this one guy, a veteran, the people who least deserve it. >> right. and actually i thought it was sort of kudos to the republicans for actually bringing this down to the personal level which they often fail to do. the problem of course is that it's much more pervasive than this one veteran it's over the

course of the past seven years or from 2005 to 2012 the first has seized more than 240 million dollars in this same it -- same approach. so i think that people need to realize how pervasive the problem is. >> the people with power and influenza void the problem it's the at any time people that get caught. >> and the arrogance of the irs is demonstrated by the fact they've rehired hundreds if not thousands of people who have committed illegal activities it didn't file their tax returns, the irs hires them back. what kind of -- that's unbelievable. >> time for a big change. coming up. apple keeps making history now the first company with a market value of over 700 billion bucks @?

stocks ready to pop like apple. emac. >> biotech specializes in cancer treatment, big break through with pancreatic cancer treatments. >> at wood ocean knicks. >> a rising oil price will lift

all the rib operators. >> that's if for "forbes on fox." have a great valentine's day. thanks for watching. keep it right here on the number one business block continues with eric bolling and "cashin' in." first the president won't call them islamic terrorists and now he seems to be denying their motives. this is what he says about the recent terror attack at the kosher deli in paris. >> it is entirely legitimate for the american people to be deeply concerned when you've got a bunch of violent, vicious, zel lots who bee head people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in paris. >> you're right, mr. president americans are concerned because it's -- you think this was a random act. inl eric bolg welcome to "cashin' in." wayne,