injured welcome back to "face the nation." for more on terror attack in paris we go to devin nunes in california and senate intelligence chairman, richard burr who is in greensboro, north carolina. chairman burr start with you, what is this attack tell you about the shape of the isis organization now? >> well, john, just confirmed what we have said the last year that there are more threats across not only this country but globally. that we always saw europe as probably the most advantageous target and in the last 48 hours we've seen that become reality in paris in a huge, horrific way. >> dickerson: what do you make -- france since the charlie

hebdo attacks increased its intelligence has been on the watch, yet this was able to be a sophisticated coordination under french authorities' noses, what does that make you think about the u.s. intelligence and ability to stop these attacks in the u.s.? >> you have a couple of things. first off you have strategic failure on not having real plan to fight isis. secondly, i think we should take to heart what fbi director has been saying over and over again and that is, that we are losing the capability to track these terrorists around the globe. >> dickerson: what about that capability, how can you improve it what would you do to try to fix this question of encryption and ability of these terrorists to communicate with each other without being watched? >> well, john, technology is going to be a tough thing to deal with. we've got to redouble our efforts to make sure that we're able to get the communications we need to give us lead time to give us better understanding. but i think devin hit on the

key, we've got to have a strategy. we don't have a strategy in syria as it relates to isil the president talked the other morning about isil was contained. american learned within 24 hours it's not contained it's rampant, everywhere in the world that they intend to carry out these horrific acts. just so happens the united states is a target. pair riffs was easier if we don't get a strategy, tactics don't make a strategy these pin rick, is that we've had as far as tactical is not a strategy we have to have strategy hopefully president hollande will call article 5 of nato in and maybe we'll put together a coalition that can for once attack this horrific terrorist element before they have ability to carry out another coordinated attack like. this. >> dickerson: chairman nunes let's talk about that strategy if you were to create one, it would have piece that deals with

syria and iraq. but then also intelligence piece for protecting america. what would that strategy look like for you? >> i think more than that, john, the point that i made all along about isis is that the president has tried to talk about and development containment strategy for iraq and syria. when isis is stretched from mother rocco is the afghanistan-pakistan arena. we just saw couple weeks ago what appears to be isis attack on a russian jetliner coming out of egypt. we continue -- lot of people talk about the migration of fighters flowing out of iraq and syria into europe, what they forget there's many people, migrants come out of the north africa. you can't fight isis unless you are willing to put a strategy together that deals with mortara the failure of libya, the problems in the sinai, iraq and syria and afghanistan-pakistan region. then i think more complicateds what are the europeans going to

do now that it appears like isis has rooted themselves into europe with a command and control structure. >> dickerson: chairman burr you mentioned article 5, what should the united tights be prepared to do to join with france or take up this -- what should americans be ready for if this is a new phase in an attempt to defeat isis? >> well, john, i would tell you today the american people want to eliminate this threat. so we should be prepared to bring whatever to the table that coalition of nato partners and hopefully that would be joined with gulf state partners, it may be joined with russia. individuals that see isis as a real threat not just in the region but globally. i would hope that like we've sent investigators from the fbi and we will send others to paris

to help out, i will make a commitment to president hollande that we're 100% beside them, not behind them, beside them. we're willing to lead. >> dickerson: americans may want to eliminate the threat, be willing to lead chairman burr is important, what does that really mean in practical terms? are we talking about more special operations, are we talking about operating in lots of different theaters. give us some concrete examples that people can balance their desire to get rid of isis with their we're reness about extended engagements in the u.s. military. >> i'm not business of military strategy i leave that up to dod we have to have individuals on the ground that are collective intelligence, better intelligence of our targets. we've got to make sure that we carry the fight to is,l which means probably more special operations efforts in that region. you can't do this with 3500

americans in an advisory role. 50 special forces which we've just upped in the last two weeks. that's not enough to make a big impact. but mirror that with global effort and we can take this fight to a very difficult and barbaric terrorist organization. >> dickerson: chairman nunes in the last 45 seconds like your assessment of what the united states should do about syrian refugees coming into the united states, how to screen them, what your view is about that. >> there's no possible way to screen them. it should be stopped immediately. what we -- bottom line if you don't refugees you have to go into iraq and syria and defeat isis. the challenge is, people talk lot about boots on the ground, we've had boots on the ground there for over a year. the problem is, as chairman burr said, trying to use pin ricks for airstrikes and having the

first rule of war for obama administration not to take collateral damage that's not war. if that is what you're going -- if you're going to strap down united states air force and our allies with these types of rules of engagement, we are never going to win you're going to see more and more refugees flood into europe. >> dickerson: all right. thank guess man, senator, thank you. we'll be right back. can a business have a mind? a subconscious. a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive?

oh no... (under his breath) hey man! hey peter. (unenthusiastic) oh... ha ha ha! joanne? is that you? it's me... you don't look a day over 70. am i right? jingle jingle. if you're peter pan, you stay young forever. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. ♪ you make me feel so young... it's what you do. ♪ you make me feel ♪ so spring has sprung.

>> dickerson: we're back again. senior security analyst michael morell plus former special representative to muslim communities at the state department she's now the counsel on foreign relations and american enterprise institute's danielle. thank you for being here. i'll start with you. the response to the attacks in paris should be what for the united states? >> i think we need to look at the hall thanks we face on the ground, recognize if we don't do something we will see what happened in paris in new york, l.a., washington, some where in the united states. we need to have a clear strategy that addresses the challenge in both syria and iraq but also yemen, north africa, serbia, we can keep going here. we need serious partners on the ground. more troops on the ground. we need a concerted effort. >> dickerson: what is your assessment of what we should do? >> certainly that is important, we can't do without it.

but the other half of the strategy is the nonmilitary. that includes briefings. one is, when we think about the money, when we think about momentum and ideas. one is, stopping ability for money to flow to these terrorist organizations, that's only primarily government can do. something to build public awareness about, the sale of antiquities. in terms of the emotional and psychological momentum that is taking place with this group moving into the minds of all of us, whether it's here, whether it's emotions, but most critical component is the idea space. that is what we call the war of ideas. how do we engage in bringing down the number of recruits so that isis doesn't have armies. because isis is using digital space we need to build digital army. we need to do it proportionally and at scale. >> dickerson: when you're trying to win the war of ideas also using drones to kill, lots of

anti-american fervor no number of tweets and facebook could overcome what has to be done militarily. >> let's be clear, what is happening in the ecosystem makes a difference. there are almost a billion young muslims under the age of 0 across the world. that is the pool from which the extremists are recruiting. because they're millennials using the digital tools that we all have to move forward. we have yet to go at this at scale. we have yet to go all in and really create the kind of momentum in the digital space that we need. in order to do that we need credible voices scaled up. there's no scarcity of credible voices. what we are missing is the scale up, the proportional response in the online space and i'm not just talking about tweets that are going back and forth. i'm talking about ideological influence for these young people who are being lured in by predators online. need to think about it like that. >> dickerson: michael, let me

ask about momentum as it been explained, isis benefits from these successes. so does what the coalition or united states has to do retaliation has to have a big showy aspect to it, on the military side? >> i think if you look at the strength and weaknesses of isis, they're greatest strength is the sense that they're winning. and the momentum that that creates and the followers that it brings and the foreign fighters that it brings. and the radicalization of young people around the world that it brings. that is one of their great strengths. they benefited significantly from that with the downing of the airliner and with the attack in paris. so, pushing back on that momentum is really important. >> dickerson: danielle, secretary clinton said in the debate last night, this cannot be an american fight alone, there's some -- sometimes semantic but debate about where america's role is in this fight. martin o'malley run topping her

right said america has to lead, they will bring other people along. give me your assessment of that. >> those are words that i've ever uttered before i agree fully with martin o'malley. i thought that was rather strange she as bulls been proponent of american leadership when she was secretary of state she recommended that the president be -- we are the only ones with the capacity to actually lead on this fight. now, should we be alone, absolutely not. we should be working with parties on the ground, we should be working with allies. but we haven't shown leadership up to now we really haven't not on refugees, not on fighting al qaeda not on helping good guys. >> dickerson: news that countries in the region should do their share you hear a lot from the administration, the free rider problem. are they going to be -- can you wait it ought long enough to do their share or again is the night states have to move then perhaps bring them along? >> this is sort of, football

fantasy camp. foreign policy, when you're talking about the saudis or the turks whoever it is doing their share what we end up with is one priority that belongs to the saudi or turks, that is the challenge for us. we have desired outcome here that is actually not the same as desired outcome of parties in the region. that's why when you subcontract to saudi arabia or you subcontract, god forbid as john kerry wants to do to iran or to russia, you end up with outcomes that are ultimately dangerous for the united states. >> dickerson: let me ask you a question here. in response to these kinds of attacks you talk about that space, the battle for ideas. is the government doing it wrong? is there an over reaction that sends different kind of message? >> i think that there are things that the government has done, those in the bush administration and obama administration to take hold of the ideological space. there's only i have to say only so much you can do in the

government space. the way we have to go at it is to look at the armies that we can build professionally outside of government. those are the credible voices, the former extremists and others who can make a difference. their money can go to some of the core funding for some of these organizations that are doing it, not in terms of how they message or what they message but in terms of setting up these organizations to do something. these organizations are working at a pace that is really quite excellent but they don't have enough money to be able to scale the way they need to do. this the second piece the government can make a difference, is to ask the private sector to go all in with us. that is to say, not partner with government but partner with the actors on the ground who can actually make a difference. and the third by the way is to say that we can actually go at the ideological war with the kind of will and determination that isis has. they aren't sophisticated they were determined we need to be determined, too. >> quickly at the end here, mike. the administration, says this is a long war.

so, what do you hear when you hear that from the administration when they're criticized about the pace on isis, administration officials sets president said this would be a long war. >> there's a difference the ups and downs in a long war, victories for us, victories for them. difference between that and what is clearly momentum in their favor, what is clearly them advancing their capabilities. >> dickerson: thanks so much all of you. we will be back in a moment with

>> dickerson: we're back with peggy noonan. you've seen chief political correspondent foreslate magazine here before but first appearance at the cbs news political analyst. congratulations and welcome to cbs jamelle. nancy cordes our cbs news congressional correspondent who sat in seat next to me flying overnight from des moines, iowa. she has gotten as little sleep as i have but nevertheless welcome. thanks for being here. >> good to be back with you,

john. >> dickerson: peggy the debate last night afterwards we did a poll. those -- hillary clinton won in that debate how did you see it? >> i didn't see it as such a clear win actually on her part. i suppose she had her moments, so did mr. sanders so did mr. o'malley. it seemed to me that they all struggled pretty much with the issue of what to do after paris. with isis. i think mrs. clinton had been awkward moments with regard to wall street. >> dickerson: in our poll overnight hillary clinton on question of handling the foreign policy. hillary clinton came in at 67% said that she handled it the best. sanders and o'malley were far behind sanders at% then 11% for o'malley. how much did that matter, how much does that matter, what did you make of the debate? >> i think as far as democrat can primary goes, it's sort of

given that democratic voters trust hillary clinton, she was secretary of state, long been her wheel house. i think per the general election it matters quite a bit. as peggy sai secretary clip ton had hard time answering on the question of what we do after paris. i think part of the problem is that she was secretary of state during the rise of isis, so closely to president obama's administration. no room to break out. real evidence that clinton has a differing view on these questions than obama does. >> dickerson: or distance with him. let's talk about wall street here for a moment. i want to play her response when she was asked about the wall street contributions that she gets and she was hit on -- bernie sanders hit her saying those contributions make her compromised let's listen to her response here. >> i represented new york, i represented new york on 9/11. when we were attacked, where were we attacked? we were attacked in down ton

manhattan where wall street is. i did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild, that was good for new york, it was good for the economy. it was a way to reduce the tear thrusts attacked our country. >> dickerson: nancy, in the debate, what do you make that have moment? >> think what she was trying to say was, of course, these people support me, i was their senator i did a good job for them, why wouldn't they give me donations. but it struck a lot of people acetone deaf. because she was essentially saying because of 9/11 that's why i get millions ever dollars. so, we were getting lot of traffic on twitter from people saying, that just doesn't sit right with me. and i think to be honest, when we asked her the question, she was a little surprised because i don't know that she actually realized the way that it came off quickly tried to self correct. >> dickerson: that's right. you brought up the tweet that had been sent in sayingy did she

use 9/11 in defending herself. how much of the wall street issue is a real problem for hillary clinton or just one where she's not trusted but it won't be real obstacle. >> i go back and forth on this one because i think it's awkward, it's real problem in terms of trying to get these liberal voters to trust her as nominee. i'm not sure how much in a general election it will matter given extent to which republicans do, sort of a watch. i think what is really challenging is that there is an answer for this, not one that democrats want to hear which is that hillary clinton and her husband were part of a movement of democrats who are pulling the party to the center. i think there's way to make a defense of that. we had 1 years of republican presence we had to do something, good thing that we did. but i don't know that anyone on clinton side wants to litigate all of this. and other than litigating,

become awkward. no way around it. >> i just thought it was one of those great moments in lame debate answers that you can put together, that would be about number four. the clintons are tight with wall street. wall street is pretty darn tight with the democratic party. that is what it is. i understand bernie sanders' critique that was not serious answer to a serious critique. >> on the other hand we gave him the opportunity to explain what it is in her record as shows that she is beholding to wall street, he couldn't -- >> part that have hillary clinton pretty much generic democrat in many ways she goes where the party was. when the party was very tight with wall street she was tight with wall street. now less tight with wall street she's rhetorically less tight with wall street. difficult position to be in versus someone like sanders who is very much ideal log, this is where i've always been this is where i'm never going to be.

>> it used to be i'm for the little dwight not for i'm for goldman sachs. you think about it, she is in a particular position that does need some answers. >> dickerson: let me ask you, nancy, about in our poll of independent for democrats who were watching bernie sanders didn't do well on foreign policy but on the economic front, sanders on the question of who can handle the economy, sanders came out of 43, clinton to the 40. comes to income and equality on that issue he got 58% and hillary clinton got 31. on issues, democrats care about it was wood night for him. >> it was a good night for him. and i think the issue of income equality was really in his wheel house you could almost see chomping at the bit to get past foreign policy get into the issues where he's the strongest. talking about single payer, for example. talking about a $15 minimum wage which was really strike can debate last night between him

saying it should be $15 no matter what, hillary clinton saying that could have unintended consequences, i'm more comfortable with $12. but you're right, clearly more democrats came down on his side. >> but, working against him was i believe the fact that last night and more strikingly today on your show, bernie sanders essentially said a major problem with all of this isis stuff and terrorism and what's going, the west a climate change and global warming which makes him to many people look likely daffy like someone who doesn't understand what the real subject is, is looming outside to left progressive, it's about terrorism. it isn't about climate change and deserts and people migrating because it's hot. >> dickerson: last word to you. thanks to all of you we'll be right back.

♪ great change comes from doing the right thing. like the radical idea that health isn't an industry. it's a cause. so we do things differently. we combine care and coverage. and believe prevention is the most powerful of cures. so forgive us for not going with the flow. we just think the flow should go with us. which makes us rebels with one cause.

>> dickerson: until next week for "face the nation" i'm john dickerson. we leave you with the voices of new york's metropolitan opera and tribute to the people of paris from around the world. captioning sponsored by cbs

panic breaks out at a memorl is -- thousands . new video tonight of gunfire outside a theater in paris during the terrorist attacks. >> panic breaks out at a memorial in paris. thousands run screaming into the main square. tonight, fnce carries out major strikes on targets in syria. >> france lost the attacks, the target, the isis strong hold of raqqa. france is describing the airstrikes as massive. this footage was released, showing fighter jets taking off from jordan and the persian gulf, a total of