some time to come is likely to be centered preeminently and the fiery descent to some extent in southwest asia. >> let's talk about that in a moment. i'd like to hone in more on this question of the west and marching with ideas. during the cold war. , the west was more or less a concrete thing. you have nato, formal alliances, defense treaties. do you mean that the west should be enlarged in this sense has some sort of an alliance heckscher or a power block? raises some of the conceptual expansion of value systems which are referring? >> now, it's something else altogether. in a sense, it's all the things you mention the beginning. it doesn't have to be just one. in other words, i don't envision that must necessarily be composed of everybody in nato. but i do think nato is needed. one part of the west can be united in an organization that enhances security and gives recognition to the importance of security. you wouldn't have a wife, with simultaneous based on enlargement of financial and economic arrangements. but again, not necessarily to all parts of the west. think of the other members of

for some time to come is likely to be centered preeminently in the far east and some extent in southwest asia. >> host: let's talk about that in a moment that i would like to hone in a little bit more on this question of the west and large in and what that is. during the cold war period the west was more or less a concrete thing. you had nato, u.n. form alliances, defense treaties. do you mean that the west should be enlarged and a sense as some sort of an alliance structure or a power block or is it much more of a conceptual expansion of value systems you are referring to? >> guest: no, it's something else altogether. in a sense it's all of the things that you mentioned but it doesn't have to be just one of them. in other words i don't think the west as opposed to everyone being in nato but i do think they need it so some parts of the west can be united in an organization that enhances security and gives recognition to the importance of security. you would have the west which is based on enlargement of financial and economic arrangements but again, not necessarily to the same degree to all p

i don't want to be nation building in southwest asia when this nation is in such need of repair.e do have a counterterror mission in southwest asia, and that would suppose leaving behind maybe 10,000 troops. for intelligence gathering, for special forces rapid response capability and training. >> governor romney, time to come home? >> well, we want to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can. and governor huntsman says the end of 2013, the present and the president and the commanders are saying they think 2014 is a better date. we'll get a chance to see what happens over the coming year. we want to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can. and i will -- if i'm president, i will inform myself based upon the experience of the people on the ground, i want to make sure we hand off the responsibility to an afghan security force that is capable of maintaining the sovereignty of their nation from the taliban. but i can tell you this, i don't want to do something that would put in jeopardy much of the hard-earned success which we've had there, and i would bring our troops

yeah and here's the conundrum i mean we're actually making an argument for withdrawing from southwest asia not being so involved in the middle east the out of the is that the bulk of the persian gulf oil goes east not west so china is already the primary beneficiary of that flow and most interested in securing it we keep talking about china becoming a responsible stakeholder in terms of international affairs and yet if they make any moves along that line trying to create deano basing rights or a replenishing of rights for their ships between china and the middle east we find that suspicious by and large you know and we come out with this strategic guidance that basically says in fairly uncertain terms that we're going to try to pend them in as much as possible militarily in east asia and that we find their lack of strategic clarity you know rather odd i don't think there's anything too odd about their military build up i think they have a long history of being dominated by former or by foreign colonial militaries i think they're very nervous but having the us so close to their shores i thi

we are going to focus our attention on more or less some southwest asia and the far east. to the extent that we are going to support nato. we intend to support them the same way that we supported them in libya. this is the first time this has been articulate and it means that we are going to drop the size of our conventional units and spend more on forces like special forces and special operations. >> let me bring you in and let me welcome you home from iraq. i am happy to see your face on the soil of this country. let me talk to you about this. we know that the u.s. will not be able to fight two ground wars at once. the detail that i got is more reaction from vets that can be possible military benefits cut as a result of this. what are you hearing from vets? >> first i think it's bolt what the president did. i agree. i love seeing him stand up and be the commander in chief. i think it's a threat to the way we have been operating which is great. she done with this stuff and trimg down the forces. i am in agreeance with that. how is that going to affect military retirees an

i don't want to be nation building in southwest asia when this nation is in such need of repair.ut we do have a counterterror mission in southwest asia, and that would suppose leaving behind maybe 10,000 troops. for intelligence gathering. for special forces rapid response capability and training. >> governor romney, time to come home? >> well, we want to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can. and governor huntsman says the end of 2013, the present and the commanders are saying they think 2014 is a better date. we'll get a chance to see what happens over the coming year. we want to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can. i will, if i'm president, will inform myself based upon the experience of the people on the ground, i want to make sure we hand off the responsibility to an afghan security force that is capable of maintaining the sovereignty of their nation from the taliban. but i can tell you this, i don't want to do something that would put in jeopardy much of the hard-earned success which we've had there, and i would bring our troops home as soon as we po

to relate its greater sycophant for us to the deepening military role of the united states and southwest asia specifically afghanistan and iraq, and i don't think it is particularly effective or persuasive to even illustrate that by announcing we are going to deploy 500 marines and australia. i find that to be on the verge of the absurdity. what would imply in a larger sense i also disagree with because it would imply if we are really serious about it that we are going to do what we did in europe and in our earlier discussion there is a difference between what we have to do in europe with what is today needed in the far east because we are not going to dominate the far east. we don't need to engage some sort of a cold war with china if we are smart. and china needs us just as we need china we will do better meeting with britain did in europe during the 19th century which strike a balance between the powers hopefully thereby maintaining the situation which no one sees itself so powerful to the force and the same time we do what we can to promote what we have to promote in europe. we have to pr

not 100, 90,000, but maybe something that represented the real challenge in southwest asia, which isr challenge and that would be 10,000, maybe 15,000. >> do you think governor romney would be a credible, strong candidate? >> we'll let the people decide. >> taking lots of questions. >> who those ultimate successful candidates are to take on obama. >> when you saw the scrum today after huntsman's talk, was that totally atypical for what it's been like with huntsman thus far? this is new for huntsman? >> i used to be the only reporter following him around, rachel. i'm not kidding. it's change a lot in the last month. more and more people are coming. you see the national reporters from washington. today as i told you earlier it was completely unprecedented. i've never seen him mobbed and walking and told not to do an avail. usually huntsman is the kind of guy after an event, he wanders up to reporters, hey, guys, what you got for me? we fire away and he's so nice and takes every question. i think now everyone is sort of paying attention and maybe their strategy is changing. >> do you th

troops to come home from afghanistan [applause] because i don't want to be nation-building in southwest asia the typically at a time when this nation so desperately needs to be built. [applause] if our nation is weak, if our core is weak and crumbling as it is today, you cannot protect the values that make this nation so you need. -- unique. i have lived overseas several times. i have seen this nation when the projects of values of goodness and it moves people. it changes history. it changes the event. those values of liberty and democracy and human rights and free markets -- nobody doesn't -- does it like the united states and today we are weak and not protecting those values and i say you cannot have a foreign policy or national security strategy when you are crumbling at home. i want to square with the american people on this, too -- afghanistan is not our nation's future. it is not your future. iraq is not your future. our future is how prepared we are as people, all of us, to rise up and meet head-on the competitive challenges of the 21st century. that is your century and that is about

japan, china, south korea and india in southwest asia, but china is the biggest customer.e iranians were dumb enough to do something, the united states would not simply respond in kind just sweep the gulf and leave it alone. what the iranians would hand western world is the perfect excuse to destroy their navy, flatten their command and control facilities and start work on the nuclear facilities. the persians are the ones who invented the game of chess. they are not going to hand us absolutely an excuse we have been looking for. martha: all of these things, the missile tests they have been ratcheting up the tengss and the stakes on all of this. is it all to push the price of oil higher? >> this may be their chess game of pushing the price higher. but i don't know. the e.u. is suffering. that accounts for 16% of their output. they will have to send it to china most likely at a lower price. we have seen the currency of iran drop in one month. the iranian people are concerned bombs may start flowing. if that happens that affects our economy, you and i, greatly. martha: always

because -- [applause] because i don't want to be nation building in southwest asia, particularly at a time when this nation's so desperate needs to be built, do you know i mean? if our nation is weak, it's our court this week and crumbling as it is today, you can't project the values that make this nation so unique. i have lived overseas several times. i have seen this nation when it projects the values of goodness. and it moves people. it changes history. it changes events. those values of liberty and democracy and human rights, and free markets. nobody doesn't like the united states. today we're week. we are not projecting those guys and i say you can't have a foreign policy. you can have a national security strategy when you are crumbling at home. i want to square with the american people on this, too. afghanistan is not our nation's future. it's not your future. iraq is not your future. our future is how prepared we are as a people, all of us, to rise up and to meet head-on the competitive challenges of the 21st century. that's your century. that's about economics, and that's abou

troops to come home from afghanistan [applause] because i don't want to be nation-building in southwest asiaypically at a time when this nation so desperately needs to be built. [applause] if our nation is weak, if our core is weak and crumbling as it is today, you cannot protect the values that make this nation so you need. i have lived overseas several times. i have seen this nation when the projects of values of goodness and it moves people. it changes history. it changes the event. those values of liberty and democracy and human rights and free markets -- nobody doesn't like the united states and today we are weak and not protecting those values and i say you cannot have a foreign policy or national security strategy when you are crumbling at home. i want to square with the american people on this, too -- afghanistan is not our nation's future. it is not your future. iraq is not your future. our future is how prepared we are as people, all of us, to rise up and meet head-on the competitive challenges of the 21st century. that is your century and that is about economics and that is about

troops to come home from afghanistan [applause] because i don't want to be nation-building in southwest asialy at a time when this nation so desperately needs to be built. [applause] if our nation is weak, if our core is weak and crumbling as it is today, you cannot protect the values that make this nation so you need. -- so unique. i have lived overseas several times. i have seen this nation when the projects of values of goodness and it moves people. it changes history. it changes the event. those values of liberty and democracy and human rights and free markets -- nobody doesn't like the united states and today we are weak and not protecting those values and i say you cannot have a foreign policy or national security strategy when you are crumbling at home. i want to square with the american people on this, too -- afghanistan is not our nation's future. it is not your future. iraq is not your future. our future is how prepared we are as people, all of us, to rise up and meet head-on the competitive challenges of the 21st century. that is your century and that is about economics and that i

asia. things looking dry and fine across the continent. we run into showers in the southwest of china. to the north, the system is going to be snow. and in the upper elevations, some of it will be heavy. in the lower-lying regions we're looking at some less-heavy preparation and that's going to be turning to rain as we hit the south. as for japan, if we step this way, you can see the system that's just departing here, is a very windy low pressure system. that's going to be heading out into tuesday, so things will be settling down. at the moment it's still windy on both sides of northern japan. as the system leaves into tuesday, we'll just see the wintry pattern continuing and that's going to be heavy snow for the northwest. now, also impacted by some strong northwesterly winds, will be the eastern half of the korean peninsula, you might see some snow coming down here as well. heading further to the south, you can maybe just see on your screen, low pressure here to the east of mindanao, that's bringing some heavy rain, about 100 millimeters in the last 24 hours. as it heads towards the