a nuclear weapons to india or pakistan. dia or pakistan. we disengaged. military terms. we did not completely disengaged diplooatically but we were no longer much of a force. what happened? that was the road to 9/11. the afghan civil war haapened. the taliban emerged on top in the early 1990's and gave sanction to al-qaida. a few years later, we got 9/11. host: why did we disengage in that region? guest: we figured that there are strategic competitor, the soviet union had been defeated in afghanistan better work there was done. we saw the world through purely bipolar terms. we knew it would be essie in Ñiafghanistan -- we do it woulde messy and afghanistan. faugwe thought we would let them fight it out any way they could. we would not be engaged. it was a failure of engagement on our part based on a failure of imagination. we will not have that excuue this next time around if we decide we want to disengage now militarily. we know how bad movie goes. i, for one, don't want to see it again. host: john, on our independent line.

weapons t india or pakistan. ndia or pakistan. we disgaged. military terms. we did not completely disengaged diplooaticallyut we were no longer much of a force. at happened? that was the road to 9/11. the afghan civil war haapened. the taliban emerged on top in the early 1990's and gave sanction to al-qaida. a w years later, we got 9/11. host: why did we disengage in th region? guest: we figured that there are strategic competitor, the soviet ion had been defeated in afghanistabetter work there was done. we saw the world through purely bipolar terms. we knew it woulde essie in Ñiafghanistan -- we do it woulde meand afghanistan. faugwe thought we would let them fight it out any wayhey could. we would not be engaged. it was a failure of engagement on our part based on failure of imagination. we will not have that excuue this next time around if we decide we wt to disengage now militarily. we know how bad movie goes. i, for one, don't want to see it again. host: john, on our independent line. caller: i am so infuriat

the way out the door in 1190, we put sanctions on pakistan because of their nuclear weapons program.3 say we supported them or give nuclear weapons to india or pakistan. we did not. we tried to prevent their acquisition of those weapons. we disengaged.+ we disengaged in military terms. we did not completely disengage diplomatically, but we were no longer much of a force. what happened? that was the road to 9/11. the afghan civil war winter dishes years in the early 1990's -- went through a vicious years in the early 1990's. the taliban was victorious. we figured since our strategic competitor, the soviet union, had been defeated in afghanistan that our work there was done.. we saw the world through purely bipolar terms. we knew it would be messy in afghanistan, but we thought we would let them sort it out, fight it out anyway wanted to. we would not be engaged. it was a, if you will, in failure of engagement on our part based on a failure of the imagination. we will not have the excuse this time around. if we decide we want to disengage now militarily, we know how that movie goes. i, for one, do not want to see that. host: a few quick cal

we do not have to apologize to pakistan or india or iran to choose our allies. the afghan government should not be apologetic to the rest of the world for being allies of the u.s. they are good allies and it is necessary and gd for both countries. has pakistan asked us who they should be allies with? has p[unintelligible] why should we apologize to the rest of the world for being allies with the west? we have experienced alliances with the soviet union, we have been neighbors with pakistan and iran and we had that experience. the united states is not going to back afghanistan and take it away. -- bag afghanistan and taken away. -- take it away. it is logical for our government to make a decision and explain it to the people of the world, we do not need to apologize for being somebo make. they should speak courageously in front of the world that this is our right. and then that right after recognition of that right, a level playing field, pakistan, iran should recognize we exist and we will build a relationship based on cooperation and mutual respect. use the oth

we do not have to apologize to pakistan or india or i ran to choose our allies the afghan government ould not be apologetic to the rest of the world for being allies of the united states. the united states and pakistan are good allies and that is good for both countries. why should we apologize? z)hañhas pakistan ast who they d the allies with? -- asked us who they should the allies with text why should we apologize to the rest of the world for being allies with the west? we have experienced alliances with the soviet union. we have been neighbors with pakistan and iran. we have that experience. the united states is not going to bag afghanistan and taken away. those countries in the region have territorial designs or territorial dispute with afghanistan. it is only natural for a logical afghan government to strategically make a decision and exploited to the people of pakistan and the world that we do not need to apologize for being somebody's allies. does a very natural decision that a nation should make. -- it is a very natural decision that a nation should make. we should speak very

pakistan and india. the core issue was kashmir. this has to change. we're not in the 50's or '60's or even the 70's. united cooperation in the region needs a fast and speedy economic growth and pakistan is falling behind rapidly. dangerous for pakistan and an enticement for pakistan to recognize and make up and take advantage of the regional economic growth. i think we have to create an opportunity where there is a level playing field. pakistan has to prove that it is a country, it is a nation, illegitimate legitimately. we have the right to be there. we do not have to apologize to pakistan or india or iran to choose our allies. the afghan government should not be apologetic to the rest of the world for being allies of the u.s. they are good allies and it is necessary and good for both countries. has pakistan asked us who they should be allies with? has p[unintelligible] why should we apologize to the rest of the world for being allies with the west? we have experienced alliances with the soviet union, we have been neighbors with pakistan and iran and we had that experience. the united states is not

unlike the way it has to regard people from pakistan or india or new populations coming in from poland or syria, the latino migration has been so much more broadbased, so much more numerous, and complicated because it puts america in the position of having to deal with the physical reality of a mixed race people. to try to tease out race and its operation from immigration and its operation is a fool's errand. our immigration system has initialize from the beginning -- rationalized from the beginning. it does not look that way when you stand in 2010 and look over your shoulder because irish, crayons, greeks, italians, jews from all across eastern europe, stand in our culture as whites, even though many did not and many were legally defined as other than whites. because we have a system where its new practice accumulates like the mountain and jurisprudence accumulates in size and haft, we actually have a mountain of court cases that are adjudicated whether people from saudi arabia or afghanistan or armenia were actually white and it was not social practice, but court cases that dictated

we do not have to apologize to pakistan or india or iran to choose our allies.the afghan government should not be apologetic to the rest of the world for being allies of the u.s. they are good allies and it is necessary and good for both countries. has pakistan asked us who they should be allies with? has p[unintelligible] why should we apologize to the rest of the world for being allies with the west? we have experienced alliances with the soviet union, we have been neighbors with pakistan and iran and we had that experience. the united states is not going to back afghanistan and take it away. -- bag afghanistan and taken away. -- take it away. it is logical for our government to make a decision and explain it to the people of the world, we do not need to apologize for being somebody's allies or choosing someone as an ally. it is a very natural decision that a nation should make. they should speak courageously in front of the world that this is our right. and then that right after recognition of that right, a level playing field, pakistan, iran should recognize

are a few places in this year's survey, for example -- china, india, pakistan, where there are parts of the country that for logistical or other reasons we just cannot get to. in the places, the samples are disproportionately urban. pakistan, for example. there are security concerns in many parts of pakistan and parts of the country we can get to, although in truth, we cover 80% of pakistan, even with the security concerns. we work very hard to get a broad sample of the population that looks like it should in terms of its demographics, etc. host: again, if you would like to see an interactive global map database of the nation's attitudes toward the u.s., you can go to their website, pewglobal.org/database. tell us about how this works. if you actually click on the countries, different information comes up about the research coming from that country. >> that is right. if you are interested in one particular country, you can go to our website and pull up a range of questions just for that country, or if you want to compare countries across a given question, you can do that as well. we have maps, charts, so we tried to make