retaliated by attacking the iraqi embassy in paris and targeting iraqi diplomats in london paris and karachi. abu nidal struck yet again on june 1st 1981 killing the p.l.o. brussels represented but abu nidal is most significant operation was to come pick a year later. 13982 and other nidal gunmen opened fire on israel's ambassador to london critically wounded. israel responded by launching the military operation more massive than its 1973 war effort against the combined forces of egypt and syria. and 982 israeli invasion of lebanon had been an open secret for some time the lebanon israel border had been a constant point of tension as palestinians and israelis dreda drugget and artillery fire and a fact had realized that it was only a matter of time before israel launched an all out attack go ahead. oh i thought our arafat's was the only one who believe that an israeli invasion which would reach beirut was in a vital light of how much you can build the pillows military council and appoint a committee headed by the p.l.o. is chief of staff start to plan the defense of beirut. many pale

we made a lot of progress on the political process, we transitioned a we've set up a an embassy, an iraqi government. the politics were kind of working, but the violence was not getting any better. there was a debate as well a monk officials in baghdad, i witnessed as a young person, that was 32 years old at the time, about the debate that doug talked about. and the idea that politics would drive security gains, and those of us working the politics, were saying that no based on security, there is no politics. security problem is a security problem. in any event, meghan became a senior director at the nsc, asked me to join her staff, i joined the white house in 2005. and i think it's safe to say, in our office we all spent a lot of time in iraq, that and we believe that there was this disconnect between security and politics. but they're always always is a hope, that there's going to be a constitutional referendum, that this will turn the corner, so there was enough to not really force a fundamental reassessment. i was also as a young guy as a director at the time, and i was always wonderi

embassy in the world. and we had worked harder with the iraqis i will not call it nationbuilding but they are proud to vote. would we be in a very different place? to broker and to put more effort to institutions of democracy. >> and people like john mccain if you think after 9/11 and it happened again when we left prematurely in iraq. and then very much as we did in 2011. certainly not in the form that we found those that are about to make that identical mistake is the obama administration made in iraq. >> before we come back go to the options you sketch out very quickly. that i like to be able to say them on the air. [laughter] so just embrace the stock one - - it just means something unpleasant will happen and trying to make the most of it. so embracing the suck strategy that us global strategy is the example of an empire like any other empire and then to have a soft landing with a successor. >> and by the way when president obama favored such manage decline paradoxically and then to execute the obama strategy president trump and president obama but the problem here is for the strategy that has to be ve

lot of progression, we did an interim constitution which was successful and we set up an embassy and an in the iraqi government. the politics were kind of working but violence was not getting any better. and there was a debate among very senior officials in baghdad which i witnessed as a very young person, 32 years old at the time b this debate doug talked about, is it security or politics? and the idea that politics would drive security gains and those frankly of those working the politics were saying no without security it will is no politics. security problem is a security problem. in any event, meghan became a senior director at the nsc and asked me to join her staff and i joined the white house in 2005. and i think it is safe to say in our office we all spent a lot of time in iraq and we believed there was this disconnect between security and politics, but there's always a hope there's going to be an election, there's going to be a constitutional referendum that this will turn the corner. so there was enough to not really force a fundamental reassessment. i was also as a young guy, a director a

the current administration, even though we all know in the iraqi government admitted he was the mastermind behind the attack of the us embassyin iraq a few days later when the demonstration came. his killing gave a boost for the reformist in the iranian government. of course it gives a boost for the syrian people who have thousands of freedom fighters at the hands of the militia of qasem soleimani. his last trip was meeting in lebanon before he moved to damascus to take the plane to iraq so getting rid of the man is symbolism to a lot of people in the middle east who somehow, it's very ironic that you're talking about the arab dictators are better benefiting from the period that arab spring that started from tunisia through egypt through libya to syria to lebanon are orchestrated and planned by the foreign powers and cia puppets in the usa and all of that and you know very well it's a genuine uprising so i would like, my question to you, how do you think the popular unrest uprising in syria, how will it affect the syrian issues. we've seen how economic the syrian powers, do you think the lebanese, the demonstration will some

current administration even though we all know that the iraqi government actually admitted that he was the mastermind behind the attack of the u.s. embassyin iraq, few days when the demonstration came. his killing actually gave a boost to the iranian reformists, the reformists in the iranian government, give a boost for the syrian people who lost thousands of freedom fighters on the hands of the militia of qassem soleimani. we know his last trip was meeting in lebanon before he moved to damascus. probably getting rid of the man, it is the symbolism. a lot of people as you say in the middle east who somehow it is very ironic that those dictators that you're talking about, the arab dictators are benefitting actually from the arab spring that started from tunisia to egypt, to libya, to syria, to lebanon are orchestrated and planned by the so called foreign powers and cia puppets and usa and all of that, and you know very well it is a genuous uprising. >> sure. >> my question to you, how do you think the popular uprising, syrian and lebanese at the same time, how would it affect the syrian issues? we have seen how economically the syrian pou