we thank you all, michele flournoy, colonel andrew bacevich, richard haass, stephen hadley.thank you. >> thank you. >> ifill: the n.f.l. is under new pressure over its handling of the ray rice domestic violence scandal, including calls for the ouster of commissioner roger goodell. but the people who own and run the teams are so far taking a different tack. hari sreenivasan has more from our new york studios. >> sreenivasan: as the ray rice case cast a growing shadow, the n.f.l. last night called in former f.b.i. director robert mueller to investigate its handling of the situation. the announcement came amid new questions about when league officials first saw images made public this week by tmz sports of rice knocking out his then- fiance, last february. the associated press reported an unnamed law enforcement officer sent the video to the n.f.l. in april. in a voicemail at the time, a woman at a league office confirmed the video arrived and then said: "you're right. it's terrible." earlier wednesday, on cbs news, commissioner roger goodell had again maintained the n.f.l. nev

richard haass, what do you make of the strategy?> well, degrading ought to be possible, destroying is hard with a terrorist organization because there will always been individuals that old out. if we degrade, we cannot just degrade in iraq. they ignore the border and we have to as well. we have to go after them in syria, and you can only do so much degrading from the air. air power that the united states can provide can do some of the work, but ultimately we need a partner on the ground. now, in iraq, we have three partners. we have the iraqi government, kurdish forces and sunni tribes. the problem in syria is we couldn't have a ground partner, the president is now calling for an international coalition if that were to happen, fantastic. it would have to be a sunni arabs as well as outsiders and we would have to decide where do we leave in place the syrian government and where do we try to replace it, and simply go after isis, the problem is, if you can't get some type of an international coalition, then what? but we are right to tr

richard haass and also easy field manual -- and also ezekiel manual.his is "bloomberg surveillance ." ♪ >> good morning, everyone. "bloomberg surveillance." i'm tom keene. overme, scarlet getting george clooney. he is no longer available. it is worse than derek jeter. >> this comes to us from the "india andter of -- the u.s. have a fundamental stake in each other's success. i am confident that the destiny in a are -- in our two nations, the marker see is the greatest source of renewable and offers the best opportunity for the human soul to flourish." front on theut capital. nigel hart is with us. i think most of our viewers are unaware of the mega bull market that india has been. can it continue? >> it can in the long run. elected one of the most capitalistic prime minister's globally. >> a complete repudiation of gandhi. with a that many people poor infrastructure, there is a huge scope for investment now. he should be welcomed with two hands and say let's do business. >> there is mr. modi speaking at madison square garden. >> a real rock star in new

role in both conflicts is richard haass, president of the council on foreign relations. steve coll is the dean of columbia university journalism school and writer on the "new yorker" magazine. welcome. >> thank you. >> charlie: you wrote a piece, the assad government may be evil but a lesser evil. therefore -- >> it is a lesser evil. it doesn't have a global reach like i.s.i.s. doesn't have a global ideology. you can't simply fight i.s.i.s. in iraq. you have to fight them in syria as well otherwise they have a sanctuary. we need a ground partner. we can provide the air force. we need somebody to hold the ground and take the ground from i.s.i.s. we only have a couple of choices. ideally the syrian opposition. problem is they're weak, divided. you're talking years before they would be strong enough. another would be a pan-arab force, the jourdainians and others. again, history shows very hard to organize these. arabs often aren't willing to provide the foot soldiers. what are you left with? we won't do it ourselves. >> charlie: no boots on the ground. >> then you're left w

we begin this evening this new season with a focus on foreign policy and talk to richard haass and steveesque organization and it's a very serious problem in and of itself. it's also a symptom of a deeper instability and a deeper failure of international policy in iraq and sir. i can't i.s.i.s. feasts off the suffering of sunnis in syria primarily as well as the grievances of sunnis in iraq. >> countries such as iran and the united states or possibly syria, iran, united states, russia, saudi arabia may have to coordinate their policies. we have been on opposite sides of proxy wars but now when an enemy emerges that's an enemy to one and all you may have to put aside preferences and work together in a limited fashion. >> and look

admiral, i'd love to capitalize on richard haass' point about air strikes only at this point, with no're being called very successful. but what are the limitation, to air strikes only? >> well, think richard categorizes it correctly. without the spotters on the ground. without that real time laser dot. to put it precisely where you want. you are handicapped. now, you can do a fair amount using strategic intelligence, overhead sensors, that type of thing. there are some indications that some of the leadership of this khorasan group may have been hit. over time, if we're going to be very effective in this air campaign, we're going to have to put some people on the ground. >> richard -- >> yeah, and of course, really, that's the big question. we don't have any arab troops ready. united states aren't putting people on the ground. the pentagon's not even -- doesn't even seem to be confident. a lot doubting this is even going to work. >> david ignatius writes in "the washington post" this is a wake-up call. they're setting up these camps in saudi arabia. where we're going to train people to

i think the president laid that out clearly. >> richard haass, we were talking about a lot countriesat's not with us, turkey. why? >> i think the most important reason is something like 49 turk irk diplomats and their wives and children at their consulate in mosul inside iraq were taken prisoner by isis. and the turks, quite honestly, are worried that 49 people have their lives on the line, could be beheaded. that is really freezing them and making it extremely difficult to do what we want them to do to cut the flow of recruits going through turkey into syria and iraq. >> chris matthews, you have a question for congressman smith? >> what do you expect to be the action on the hill? will there be a vote? will there be anything in term, of forcing members to be up and down, whether we go into this war? >> there's two pieces to it. one is the train and equip in syria. the president needs authorization for that. the department of defense cannot engage in that without it. they are trying to keep the government open past september. that will be the first test. do we add that to the cr. for

role in both conflicts is richard haass, president of the council of foreign relations. steve coll of the new yorker magazine joins us later. you wrote a piece in the headline was the assad government might be evil but it is a lesser evil. >> it is a lesser evil. it does not have a global reach unlike isis does not have a global ideology. when you look at isis, you simply cannot fight them and iraq. you have to find them in syria. otherwise they have sanctuary. we need a ground partner. we need someone there to hold the ground, take the ground from isis. ideally, it would be the syrian opposition. the problem is they are weak and divided. we are talking years before they would ever be strong enough in part because we wasted time by not doing more. jordanians and others but again, history shows it's very hard to organize because arabs are not willing to often provide the foot soldiers. what are you left with? we will not have an american intervention force. no boots on the ground. then you are left with, by process of elimination, a process of working with the syrian gove

this, and a couple of people have reached a different conclusion about president assad, one being richard haass, the other ron crocker a former ambassador to iraq. here's what they said this week on this program. >> it's the least bad, potentially the options that are feasible. is it desirable? no. but when you look at the range of options from doing it ourselves to organizing a force to building up a viable resistance anytime soon you may say too hard, and some time of tacit division of syria where we leave assad alone in some areas and work in others with sunnis may be the least bad options available. things deteriorated in the last three years as you know better than anybody. >> i said from the beginning that simply saying that assad must go isn't a policy. the fact of the matter is assad wasn't going three years ago and he's not going to today. that said, it is a pre pretty horrible regime. that said, i think if we are able to degrade i.s.i.s. in syria to some significant degree, the primary beneficiary would likely be the more moderate elements of the sunni opposition. i.s.i.s. has done mo

with him included prominent republicans, steve hadley, the form he national security adviser, richard haasscouncil on foreign relations and others and i was pleased to see that it was a bipartisan discussion and that the president was reaching out to people in both parties to talk about some of the tough issues. yes, syria i think is on the agenda tomorrow. i don't know precisely what he will announce but he made clear he has the legal authority to do it and he is building a broader coalition to be supportive. and i was very pleased to see the fact that people in the region including the arab league are joining this coalition. >> did you get the sense he would start trying to target the isis leadership for assassination? >> i don't recall that being specifically discussed, but we have in the past, we the united states, targeted terrorist organizations. this is a faux terrorist state so i think this is an even more dangerous group than some of those where we have successfully targeted and taken out leadership. for example, recently in somalia with al shabad. i would assume that's under consi