dov zakheim: please identify yourself richard solomon.hard: as jacob, you just said, the subject is iran and the american politics. the terrible message that i am hearing in this discussion is very fundamental to american politics. the question is, are we capable as a country, a country with presumably the most resources economic, military of any country, are we capable of conducting a meaningful foreign policy. and, david, you began with pointing out the various ways that iran has been the beneficiary -- you have to take that back to bush. when we eliminated the iraq saddam hussein challenge we basically destabilized the balance. was anyone thinking about that issue when we went into iraq? i see a fundamental, structural question, it is partially related to a generational change occurring in our politics. the last american president who served in war was george herbert walker bush. since then, we have had a new generation with a different view of the world and how we should deal with it. we have been cranking through the lack of strategi

dov zakheim: most of these questions were directed to me so i'll start. let me first say that i have written and i have spoken over and over again that i think not only would an israeli attack on iran be useless, but i think our attack on iran would be useless. there are too many targets, it will take far too long. it's not a one shot deal. we don't have as great battle damage assessment as we say we do. the u.n. will tell us to stop in a few days. the job will not be done within a few days. let's assume that we or the israelis or some combination could take every iranian target out. fine, the iranians now say we're on our own and they get the bomb within a couple years anyway. so i don't think a military strike is the answer. what i do think is the answer is essentially to turn around to the iranians and say, look, this isn't good enough, we have to keep talking. netanyahu said a year ago that the interim deal was a disaster. it's turned out not to be a disaster. in that respect, the administration, it worked. the iranians haven't moved anywhere as far a

that is does like him -- dov zakheim. and david rothkopf. thank you very much. [applause] >> [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations] >> all this week on c-span2, we are showing you readers of our q&a programs. later today a recent conversation with dr. anthony fauci, head of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases. watch that at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> tonight on "the communicators," more from the international consumer electronics show as with the new technology products. >> it is something want to catch them you just take it off your wrist and it will be very simple to take off your wrist and it will expand and it would be as easy as gesturing. you will just toss it and it is completely autonomous. there is no remote. you don't need to be wearing something. it's smart enough to know the direction you toss it from the pressure of your tossed the if it is a gentle toss it will stay pretty close. if you throw at it will go farther away. it will compose a photo, take a photo and come back completely autonomously. >> tonight a

dov zakheim: one area they haven't focused on is missiles. can't destroy too many countries unless the bombs are carried in a suitcase, which no one has really tried yet. what you have to do is mate them to missiles. the iranians are moving right ahead and not saying anything about it. we have a problem that you can't resolve even with a halfway decent agreement and that is that nobody trusts us. if you're the saudis, for example, and your ambassador who was beloved by the previous king and highly trusted of the current king was the subject of an assassination attempt in washington by the iranians, you have a lot of trouble accepting that the iranians are good guys. it's just not going to happen. the problem is we haven't been trusted for years. yes, it's true this administration accepted and i use the word accepted advisedly sanctions. those sanctionses were pushed by the hill and every single time the administration tried to fight them until they couldn't fight them anymore and everybody knows that. what is most important is that the people

and editor of the fp group that publishes foreign policy magazine also dov zakheim.90-minute forum was hosted by the center for the national interest in washington d.c. >> hello? >> yes. >> hi. i am jacob heilbrunn, the editor of the national interest magazine. and i'm moderating today on behalf of the center for the national interest, which has invited two distinguished guests to speak today about iran in american politics. on my right is david rothkopf who is the c.e.o. and editor of the f.p. group which includes "national interest" magazine. he's also been magazine director of kissinger associates and held several high-level positions in the clinton administration. also the author of several books on international relations. and to my left is dov zakheim, a longtime friend and also the vice president of the center for the national interest -- >> vice chairman. >> vice chairman. dov has also been the comptroller at the pentagon during the george w. bush administration. and he is the author of a quite provocative memoir published by the brookings institution called

dov zakheim: i am afraid i will disappoint people here and the viewers and i will not defend the obamadministration, i will take a perspective that is pretty much the same as david's but expand on it in a variety of ways. first, this guy used to sit at the far corner of this room, named arnold deborgraff, and he was a leading journalist analyst, a brilliant thinker quite a character and we will miss him. i wanted to mention that because he really was a regular here. and he contributed tremendously to the conversations that we had. i wanted to give you some context that goes beyond in some ways what david talked about. you have to begin not just with the debate with hillary, you have to begin with the fact that the president as a candidate and pretty consistently since then wanted to focus on nation building at home. that was his priority. do stuff at home and try to keep the world at a distance if at all possible. so what are his big legacy items? obamacare is one he hopes to preserve, he is still trying to do something on immigration, he clearly has a predelection for wishing thepushi

dov zakheim: my bottom line up front is the same. i don't think we can hope to have influence unless we have some boots on the ground. i think that the the president's reluctance manifest reluctance to keep troops in afghanistan now sesaying up to 2015 thank god for that for the end of this year, is simply not the way to go. and i think the best example the best reason for saying it is not the way to go is if you look at the timelines in iraq, mr. malaki becomes a real dictator after december 2010 when we pull out and it is arguable that had he not behaved the way he a had the sunnies would not be behave the way they are. and so, having that presence there and it is not a massive presence i totally agree it is very important. we are not in 1914. we are in probably 1912 to 1913 the balkan wars, these kinds of wars that sort of preceded the big one. or you might say it is the spanish civil war where you is a proxy war between nazis and stallin and not going to be award war but it will be a middle east-wide war and some where like the 3