started this mess in the first place go ahead yeah i think michael o'hanlon predictive not too long ago that we would see devolution in the shia stand sunni stan and kurdistan entirely predictable when you go into a contrary with strong central authority remove it remove the army let all hell break loose basically over a period of years of various ethnic cleansing in the population of areas of refugees of course i mean entirely predictable and what neither of them have mentioned is there's absolutely no sign that this is going to stop anytime soon so i think we're really reaping the whirlwind of what was essentially a huge scam perpetrated on the american people to get them to go into this country and we haven't learned anything from it at all kelly would you like to pick up on that scam and we haven't learned anything. well i think i think ryan crocker recently former ambassador to iraq said it best when he described our our ethos and the american ethos we we go in there we knock things about we break things and we pledge to rebuild and when we find that it's a little more difficult th

uk and all of the people that unit war on the war path for going into iraq and so a person like o'hanlon who's been flip flopping about was that good was it bad he no longer has much of a track record to even talk about the current problems because he was part of creating this current problem so i'm really not surprised that he bailed out it took a lot of manipulation to get the united states into what i call iraq scam and the brookings institution o'hanlon or part of that so no longer he doesn't want to defend it kelly you know. one of the i wish michael had stayed because i want to talk a little bit about syria right now and we're repeating the same mistakes i think it's pretty obvious yes. do you mean like in terms of what the u.s. policy is moving forward yeah i really like interrogating possible intervention or are mean looking for governments after the fact you know all of these things. well you know i'm going to you know i might differ from what that what you're thinking i think that the obama administration seems to be a little bit more skittish about intervention i don't know ho

the and all of the people that unit war on the war path for going into iraq and so a person like o'hanlon who's been flip flopping about was that god was the best he no longer has much of a track record to even talk about the current problems because he was part of creating this current problem so i'm really not surprised that he bailed out it took a lot of manipulation to get the united states into what i call iraq scam and the brookings institution and o'hanlon were part of that so no longer he doesn't want to defend it kelly you know. one of the we i wish michael had stayed because i want to talk a little bit about syria right now and we're repeating the same mistakes i think it's pretty obvious yes. do you mean like in terms of what the u.s. policy is moving forward yeah i mean like to turn against possible intervention or are mean looking for governments after the fact you know all of these things. well you know i'm going to you know i might differ from what that what you're thinking i think that the obama administration seems to be a little bit more skittish about intervention i don

started this mess in the first place go ahead yeah i think michael o'hanlon predictive not too long ago that we'd see devolution in the shia stand sunni stan and kurdistan entirely predictable when you go into a contrary with strong central authority remove it remove the army and let all hell break loose basically over a period of years of various ethnic cleansing in the population of areas of refugees of course i mean entirely predictable and what neither of them have mentioned is there's absolutely no sign that this is going to stop anytime soon so i think we're really reaping the whirlwind of what was essentially a huge scam perpetrated on the american people to get them to go into this country and we haven't learned anything from it at all kelly would you like to pick up on that scam and we haven't learned anything. well i think i think ryan crocker recently former ambassador to iraq said it best when he described our our ethos and the american ethos we we go in there we knock things about we break things and we pledge to rebuild and when we find that it's a little more difficult th

michael o'hanlon will help us to understand it. it's the city so nice they named it twice and elected this guy thrice. who will be the next your honor when bloomy is a goner. there is a growing sense that michael zukerburg is biting the hand that feeds him. looking for likes in the world of politics. particular around. >> democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. >> if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that there is any chance we'll see this president even say the words "carbon tax"? >> with an open mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned "great leadership" so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter). >> watch the show. >> only on c

michael o'hanlon with some context. what do you make of this?ere's a legal threshold that has been perhaps violated now with the chemical weapons and that may make the obama administration feel like it can now do things that maybe i wanted to do before but didn't feel like could fully justify. that's one possible interpretation. in other words, if syria violates the general have no cocoon venges, even though it dunce change the basic picture of the war and doesn't represent the cause of most of the deaths it crosses a legal threshold and that may help explain it, or may have been the straw that broke the camel's back for this president, who has wanted to stay out of the conflict and feels that we americans are tired of war and don't g do well in the middle east when we get involved. but you can't watch this go on indefinitely and hold your breath that the insurgents will overthrow assad. so it makes the last straw. even though in and of itself it's not a huge change in the way the war has been going. >> shepard: you've seen the reports there's i

o'hanlon raised earlier and how it such plans be affected by sequestration? >> thank you. when secretary panetta called me about six months, a year before he gave up his job, we started looking -- this is in the budget control act was signed in sequestration is now out there a year later. he said the, as we begin to reshape the fours, several things have got to keep in mind. we have to build a natural for us come a flexible force. we have to build a force that takes care of business that we typically find ourselves involved in today, which is that not the party stuff i talked about at the beginning. and i could take it in 1990. we don't have to go back too far, but he said reversibility is a key fact here. what does that mean? after admiral premier, my shipmates, john premier is worried about the industrial base. he tell you precisely how may she appears we have, but we don't have a lot anymore. we don't have a lot of aircraft manufacturers. so those are pretty important to our nation. regardless, as he tried to force down and reshape the fours, this matter of reversibilit