iraq ends here but only on maps. theria, drawn arbitrarily by the french and british after world war i, has become meaningless. disaffected sunnis in habit most of this area and the islamic state controls large swaths of it as well. so any boots on the ground fight against isis would likely have to be in both iraq and syria. a chaotic picture. all of which leads back to one question. can we fight isis in iraq? when there really is no iraq left. >> at the end of the day we can't put that country together. >> as iraq falls apart, the blame game escalates. president bush or president obama. >> the person i blame is barack obama, not george w. bush. >> when we return, the finger pointing versus the facts. most of the show. (woman) and there's no way to restart it. (jon bon jovi) with directv there is. ♪ you see, we've got the power to turn back time ♪ ♪ so let's restart the show that started at nine ♪ ♪ and while we're at it, let's give you back your 'do ♪ ♪ and give her back the guy she liked before you ♪ ♪ hey, that's the

iraq. two sides of the same coin. al qaeda in iraq was born an direct result of the u.s.-led invasion and occupation of iraq. you ask me, of all the reasons you have mentioned, what is the most significant variable in the rise of al qaeda and iraq, would say the u.s.-led invasion. why? destroyed state institutions, it disbanned the army and the security forces. it was seen by sunni arabs in the iraq were a minority, as the invasion and occupation as political emass cue layings of the sunni community because saddam was a sunni arab. the adopt national narrative that iraq was off erred on a silver platter to iran and the new ruling elite they were brought by the americans. so all these factors contributed to -- the u.s. invasion of iraq open the gates of hell. if you ask me -- i know you are a second tear yapous -- it basically opened the gates of hell in terms of deepening and widen the rivet between sunniesi shia. here comes sarcar we with fewer than 100 isis in 2003, he was in iraq almost before the u.s. invasion, between 2003 and 2006, when he was killed, by the america

iraq. two sides of the same coin. al-qaeda in iraq was born as a direct result of the u.s.-led invasion and occupation of iraq. if you ask me of all the reasons you have mentioned what is the most significant variable in the rise of al-qaeda in iraq, i would say the u.s.-led invasion. why? it destroyed state institutions, it dispended the army and the security forces, it was seen by sunni arabs in iraq who were the minority as the innovativasion occupation of the political escollation of the sunni community because hussein was a sunni. it was offered on a silver platter to iran and the new ruling elite brought by the americans. the u.s. invasion of iraq opened the gates of hell. if you ask me, and i know you are working on sectarianism yourself, it opened the gates of hell in terms of deepening and widening the sectarian breadth between sunni and shiite people. here comes a man from afghanistan, a lieutenant, with fewer than hundred fighters in 2003 even though he was in iraq almost before the u.s. invasion. between 2003-2006 when he was killed by the americans, he was able

addressing the situation in iraq. fewer casualties across the board. it is not beneficial for us in iraq that the united states feels that the investment do not have any reward. united states has significant power. whether wants to use it or not it has significant political and economic and cultural power. we do need a healthy u.s. engaged in the region. what we see here in the election , aates and everything else country in transition. without clarity of how long a transitional take. moving forward. focused notice states. for our sake. >> ambassador there has been talk of a safe haven being placed in iraq for muslims and christians and other groups displaced by isis. using kurdistan as a model. you supported? ambassador: we need to look at the big picture. some a reversible damage has taken place. people need to recognize that. whether it has to do with heritage or with some people who left iraq are ready. the communities across the area. to that effect unfortunately and identity issue has to be resolved. none of the provinces of iraq can be fewer 100%

the u.s. invasion of iraq and it opened the gates of hell. it kind of, if you asked me, and i know you have a book coming out, it basically open the books gates of hell in terms of deepening the unrest. there were fewer than 100 isis in 2003 even though three even though it was in iraq before the u.s. invasion. between 2003 and 2006 when 2006 when he was killed by the americans he was able to establish an arabic social basis for thousands of fighters because many sunnis welcomed him not because he believed in al qaeda he ideology but they believed al qaeda and iraq were there allies against the americans and the shiites. this is really the rise. the question becomes, that al qaeda and iraq was defeated between 2006 and 2008 by sunni iraqis who turned against them because the strategy was to plunge iraq into all-out war between the sunnis and the shiites. as most of the attacks were not against the american forces, the coalition against the shiites. if they were defeated by the sons of iraq, all the awakening council between 2006 and 2008, wha

this is the work of al-qaeda in iraq. we know they were defeated by sunni iraqi's that turned against them because the strategy was to plunge iraq into all out war. secretarian fight between the sunni and the shiite. the american forces and coalitions willing were against the shiite. if al-qaeda in iraq was defeated all of the awakening council between 2006-2008 so what does that explain? the rise of isis. why did iraq and al-qaeda mutate into isis? we have to take other factors into the equation. other variables. here is the deepening sectari sectarianism, the arab spring uprising, the civil war in syria, and you have al-qaeda in iraq and they were able to embed and blend itself within the sunni communities in iraq and in syria to have a security vacuum, you have sunni rebellion against the shiite and the arab dominated parts of iraq and syria, so the surge of isis was a direct result of the creeping sectarianism, the civil wars n arab east, the security vacuum that exists in iraq and syria and other states, and the perce

and iraq's people. the ambassador actively opposed saddam hussein's dictatorship and advocated for democracy in iraq. he was an active leader in the iraqi exile diaspera, serving as a trustee for non-iraqi governmental organization, helping those who fled their homes from persecution. he continues to be a vocal and articulate advocate about his vision for iraq's future. he promotes the need for development that not only focuses on physical infrastructure or an oil-based economy but focuses on the balance of cultural and 21st century needs. as a young country with 65% of its population under the age of 35, the ambassador focused the need for jobs and an economic environment that will allowed for expanded trade and opportunity, particularly for young entrepreneurs. he advocates for greater public engagement and communication in people, not just poll takes or diplomats across cultural and political borders. he's active on twitter which he uses to directly engage with followers and expand the global conversatio

the war zone. my question is, it appeared as soon as we got into iraq that no one in government had the idea what wasn iraq or who was in iraq or what their history was. similarly with afghanistan. you in the state department, your whole function is supposed to come get people who know what's going on. the lesson from vietnam is it's not a good idea to support an unpopular government. you can't at the end of the day. that's why we're taking fallujah for the third time. and ramani the third time. you in those meetings, you said you were things that the people carrying the weight didn't hear. so what did you hear and did they really, did they just know what they were doing but not communicate it to the people who make the decisions? >> read my next book because i'm going to tackle some of those. it's a very important question. my dad and uncles were in vietnam. my dad again was there when neil armstrong landed on the moon. added to make connections between my boat in vietnam. i think when richard holbrooke was criticized for bringing up his vietnam experience in this debate i think that was unfortunate

, and actually before the iraq war he said we should invade? >> no, actually, that has been completely misinterpreted and mice-represented in the media. donald trump from the very beginning was against the iraq war. two months before the iraq war, in january 2003, he gave an interview with neil kabuto on fox news where he expressed heavy skepticism, saying we should focus on the economy and not go to war -- >> i want to read something from 2002 -- >> you just said that he lied about opposing it and he didn't, he's been against the iraq war >> i want to put this on the record, a.j. 2002, before the invasion. he was on the howard stern show. here's the direct quote. howard stern -- >> i know exactly what you're talking about. >> hang on. howard stern says, are you for invading iraq in the answer is, yeah, i guess so. that doesn't sound like somebody who's against this. >> a rousing endorsement? yeah, i guess so? >> i didn't say rousing, i said endorsement. he didn't say no, he said yeah. >> that was 2002. and sofy may respond now in 2003, march is

the truth. that they are sincere in supporting iraq. at the same time if people do not have the understanding of what is happening they will have misinformation. their decisions will not be rich enough. for me, that is an obligation i will hope to stick to. once you look at the global challenge one is amazed by the complexity of it. also amazed by the interdependency of that. managing complexity is one of the key challenges any world leader faces today. even any congressman or senators. to understand the depths and the ability of the united states to influence politics across the board. whatever the u.s. influence can projected. managing the complexity is an issue. let me give you the elements of that. when you look at the global challenges, you can find refugees, human rights, nuclear weapons, terrorism and so on. when you look at the middle east as a region you find that the majority of global challenges to do fit the middle east phenomenon. nuclear, we have an issue. displaced people. terrorism. yber, less. we has a region have had is

so the politics in iraq are very, very difficult. and the president's exactly right to be seeking as much coalition support for the prime minister who is endeavoring to be inclusive, which is what is required again to bring iraq back together. >> rose: how many american forces, special forces are there? >> i don't know the exact number now. >> rose: around 2,000, 4,000. >> i think the numbers have been quoted as high as five. but it depends on your counting rules and how you count the counterterrorism forces and those that come in and go out. >> rose: and what are they doing? >> well, there is a trained equip mission that is sort of behind all of this, that is regenerating the iraqi security forces to go into these fights. there is an advise and assist con exent that is creeping ever closer to the front lines. and we have had a couple of individuals tragically killed, of course, in recent months. that were nearer to the front lines than in the past. and i think this is right. we are-- we have tried how we can do this. and we're advisi

forces are increasing daily. >> this is at the apex of iraq going to hell. the surge has just started. and the war went from incredibly violent to over the top violent, especially in baghdad. >> we would get blown up regularly. snipers shooting at us. never really tell who the enemy was. >> soldiers from the u.s. army's bravo company 216, including specialist ethan mccord, are on patrol in a rundown neighborhood called new baghdad. early that morning the battalion comes under mortar fire as it leaves the base. while the soldiers patrol, they hear sporadic gunfire. >> this area had been a troublesome area so bravo company was tasked out to go in and kind of flush people out. >> two apache helicopters are providing air support and cameras mounted on their gun sights are recording the mission. wikileaks added the subtitles on the video, but the audio you hear is the pilot's actual radio chatter. >> we got a target coming at you. >> the pilots spot a group of men they suspect are insurgents carrying weapons. >> have individuals with weapons. >> he's got a weapon,

the first section is "the wrong war," iraq. the second section is the right war, afghanistan, and the third section is home. but probably my favorite section as the author is the the additional part which is after war. and i was interviewed this week on radio and fresh air, and terry gross -- who's an incredible interviewer -- asked me with why i ended the book with not my words, basically. the walt whitman quote, the real war will never get in the books. and i'll come back to that at the end of the 20 minutes or so that i've got. and i think the last 30 or 40 minutes i would rather have a q&a, and i'm going to ask some veterans to come up and share their satisfactories with me. quick -- their stories with me. quick question though. when i say united states of america today, what words do you associate with our nation? my mother was a fifth grade schoolteacher. she taught me the value of a pop quiz, so i'm giving you a pop quiz. don't have to write it down, but i hope you'll think about some words that come to mind. nouns, adjec

it is the area of the sunnis in iraq and the shiite of iraq. the shia want three things.want autonomy. the kurds want the same thing. they want an end to demarcation. sunnis can work in the iraqi government, be in the iraqi military. if they are a member of the baath party. that would include pensions, those who worked in the government and the military under assad. those are the three main things they want. we have gotten absolutely nowhere in negotiations between the a body government and the sunnis away forward on that relationship. that will only happen if we and the iranians put intense pressure on abadi, and we and the sunni gulf partners, the uae, put pressure on the sunnis. but we have not made progress on the political side. james: so, if you are a sunni in iraq, you are more afraid of a shia militia than you are of isis today. today. james: when you see photos of -- that does not do nothing to help us. charlie: so what about the iranians? what role would they play in iraq and in syria? i mean, they have -- they have vladimir putin acting on their behalf. mike: t

go to the invasion of iraq. what the president said were the reasons for going into iraq were not true. now, people can argue, well, did he know it was not true or not, but whether he did or didn't know whether it is true or not, he had plenty of reasons to question it. so we've had this fraction between the leadership and i think in the foreseeable future this is going to cause us continuing problems. sometimes war is imperative. america is entering world war ii was not a choice. it was imperative. but one, having the public recognize, and my concern of what television coverage of war, it tends to flatten war out. it lacks -- the advantages of television coverage. but in general television coverage lacks perspective and context and any historical context. and the very fact that you have a flat screen is kind of hard to describe it, i think the late eric receiver said with the television camera, the viewer has to understand when he is looking at, say, war coverage, that the camera is like a flashlight. the camera

and the power in iraq, the power in iraq that is doing the most damage to isis is assad's military. a little bit of the courage in the north but most of the territory, most of the territory that has been taken back from isis in syria has been taken back by assad's military. and my concern, my concern is and sandy might have a different view. but my concern is that if you significantly weaken a sad, not knowing what comes next, back to the same question, not knowing what comes next, you may actually create more instability. you may actually reduce the effectiveness of the fight against isis. you may actually give isis more running room in syria. >> rose: let me just make sure i understand you. one of the arguments made after iraq was that the army was gone. and they had fled because they had been dismantled by the forces. and almost in a wide giant swath. and secondly, political people who only joined the bawt party because they wanted a job and had no ideology about it and were not sort of best friends of saddam hussein were also taken out. and therefore you were left when he fell,

as the situation worsened, in april of 2014, i said it's reality check time in iraq where the syria-iraq border has turned into a major highway and safe haven for transnational terrorist groups. the black flags of al qaeda fly over the city of fallujah where hundreds of u.s. troops were killed and injured. violence across the country has reached the same levels at the height of the iraqi insurgency in 2008 and the country is creeping dangerously close to a reignition of civil conflict. president obama, september, 2014. we will degrade and ultimately destroy isil. john mccain, september, 2014. the president's plan will likely be insufficient to destroy isis, which is the world's largest, richest terrorist army. to destroy isis, create conditions for enduring security in the middle east and protect the american people. additional steps are necessary. half-measures against isis only make it stronger and will not lead to its destruction. that was almost two years ago. senator graham and mccain, october, 2014. we continue to urge the administration to quickly adopt a comprehensive strategy ag

i think our training is highly valueed by the iraq and kurdish forces there. i think it is concentrated with selected ied training. i think we have the right pieces of training simply because there is so much ied by daish in the terms in which they have been driven. but general mark what do you add on training. >> the training issue is clearly progressi progressing. the question is the degree to which the soldiers are coordinated with water capabilities that is logistically sustainable and has the right communication systems, sufficient combat engineering support. the bulk of their activity is actually static defense along the pesmmerga. we would expect to sustain the effort we are doing at the moment. coalition commanders are not yet refrequenting with the deficit in -- reflecting -- the capac to push through so there is cleary a minimal critical pass to the recruiting pool and reservoir of available manpower. at the momentx it seems to be in balance. people are not waiting to be trained. we are able to train all of those who present themselves. with respect t

there's the core in iraq and syria. self-proclaimed caliphate.ony i've traveled around the world and the common denominator when i ask leaders what is it that's young people to this movement? the common denominator is this of a common on caliphate so we have to shrink the core and i'll talk about that in some detail. that's the core and then there are the global networks, the fighter networks that feed the iraq and syria, the financial networks and the propaganda networks, and we are ly through a global coalition every single day thoseing and constricting networks. i just came from a state department where i addressed 66 ambassadors and representatives coalition to talk about how we're doing, particularly in that global network piece. seven n they have affiliates around the world, self-proclaimed affiliates. get too rtant we don't distracted about these. many are preexisting terrorist as bocaho ran and nigeria. focused on them even after they're flying the black flag of isil. like libya where we see isil sending some of

the iraq is not in a war that obama started. i highly doubt the american public wants to see ground troops in iraq, syria and afghanistan. but if that's what mccain is suggesting, then i think he should propose sending -- he should propose an an al alternative instead of blaming obama for national security failures. does he want to see american troops in syria. does he want to see american planes in syria. congress has full ability to be able to send troops or air planes over there and that is not something that they have done yet. >> let me do this before i throw it to you, adam. clarify a couple things. first of all, ms. haq, thank you for starting with is he a terrorist. i'm not sure what you said the other thing. you called the ar 15 an assault weapon which is not. john mccain was taking a direct shot at president obama. there are a lot who think he was right in that and then there are those who say wait a minute. we're not sure about syrian policy what we should be doing. maybe mccain's idea of what to do in the middle east

she's the one that stupidly raises her hand to go into iraq and destabilize the entire middle east. >inton versus trump heating up. let's bring in se breena sidiqi and hailey brooks. brian fallon said this is a template. are they on to something here? >> i think it's effective. on one hand it rallies democrats, making this a referendum on donald trump and on the other hand it says to moderate leaning republicans, raises the question about donald trump's temperament and raises the question of you may not like me but do you really want this person with his finger on the nuclear code so i think that's effective. there are several months to go in this election, of course, and the question is whether she can keep up this kind of argument and momentum behind it. >> and also, sebrina, the interesting thing was it was very much an attack against donald trump from hillary clinton. she was not talking about her own record. libya did not come up. she didn't want to talk about iraq. she does have some vulnerabilities on these issues. there is a question can donald trump capitalize on them. >> i t

it was the first city that fell that fell to iraq forces. rst meaningful city that fell when they swept back into iran. charlie: a lot of isis people came from al qaeda and iraq. mr. petraeus: -- and it is in the heart of the sunni province of an bar, one of the few centers controlled by the islamic state. this is a big deal. it is a short drive from western baghdad. so, very important battle. what you have is a combination of all of the different elements of iraq. you have iraqi army elements. you have iraqi special operations forces, special operations forces, police. federal police. keep in mind it is a sunni arab city. we have some sunni tribal fighters as well. all of this. the city has been and circled for some time. circled -- encircled for some time. it is cut off. by the way you have perhaps as many as 45,000 iraqi civilians still in the city. in some cases being used as shields. this is already taking on barbaric aspects if you will. the use of civilian shields, executing civilians -- what is remarkable so far i think is the resilie

his formative form policy events of his lifetime was the iraq war. he won the presidency in part because of his rejection of that and he came into office with a strong conviction that he wanted to not just wind down the worse of the bush year but actually bring america to terms with a new view of america's role in the world that is somewhat different than what we have had for most of the post-world war ii era, one in which we are not the undisputed hegemon. one in which we recognize limitations. so as you saw these two titanic figures go through these debates you got an interesting lens into a broader debate which i think is one that is very relevant as we look toward 2016. that debate is, we have now been through the maximal is some of the bush years. you could perhaps say the minimalism of the obama years. so what is it that we really want america's role in the world to be. do we want to somehow split the difference and go for a goldilocks scenario where we are more engaged but not as engaged as we were. or does the minimalism that obama set out for

the iraq is not in a war that obama started. i highly doubt the american public wants to see ground troops in iraq, syria and afghanistan. but if that's what mccain is suggesting, then i think he should propose sending -- he should propose an an al alternative instead of blaming obama for national security failures. does he want to see american troops in syria. does he want to see american planes in syria. congress has full ability to be able to send troops or air planes over there and that is not something that they have done yet. >> let me do this before i throw it to you, adam. clarify a couple things. first of all, ms. haq, thank you for starting with is he a terrorist. i'm not sure what you said the other thing. you called the ar 15 an assault weapon which is not. john mccain was taking a direct shot at president obama. there are a lot who think he was right in that and then there are those who say wait a minute. we're not sure about syrian policy what we should be doing. maybe mccain's idea of what to do in the middle east

these are iraqi fighting force to free the city of iraq. is a sunni city kind of but the shia are fighting to free it. for who? for their own people of mosul. the same thing with fallujaha. we salute the armies who are fighting today and making great progress in the city of fallujaha. we just liberated a couple important bridges and a couple of other bridges coming from the main street and hopefully the next couple days or maybe three or four days hopefully we'll have the news that fallujaha will be free of isis. a lot of people asked me just last night when we get some report the battlefield has been slowed down just a little bit because we let the civilians get out. we've been making an announcements left and right with the helicopters telling the civilians to get out and there's protection next door in tikrit to have protection for the families and children. a lot of people wish to stay just to help isis to be honest. hopefully these folks will get out and the battle will slow for the last 24 hours or so just because that way it will give

we vow to the people of iraq. we vow to the victim, the family, we will not let them go and keep continue fighting and get to isis as we reach to victory. hopefully, we'll never be victorious unless we be united, thank you. [ applause ] plap. >> thank you so much. it's a pleasure and thank you all of you to be here today, actually. . everyone knows how things are complicated. when it comes to the battle of iraq to fight isis, it's clear cut. it's clear, clear cut. thank you mr. obama, i do say on the behalf, thank you america for standing with the iraqi people, with the kurdish people. >> united we stand to terminate isis. i see the american soldier with the american soldier turning them, we love it. that's what we're heading for. thank you mr. president. i love president obama as republican, by the way. i'm republican. i love george bush went to iraq and i wanted to vote for him but also i voted twice for president obama. he's a character. i know how it goes in this country. i wish he would go for the third terms

keep in mind for 3.5 years after the surge iraq did very well. was only when the prime minister started pursuing highly sectarian actions against the senior -- who was our partner when we did reconciliation. and undid a very historic achievement to bring his country back together and once again tore fabric of society and led to what we have. charlie: but one of the takeaways from our conversation. it is possible, possible that before this president leaves office a good retake fallujah, mosul and rocca? charlie: mr. petraeus: i don't know if i'd bet on that. three is not inconceivable. i would not rule out rocca, because you could seek some kind of collapse at some point. when they are caught up from their turkish supply lines where they are in circle the bit more. you never rule that out, but certainly would not want to see. fallujah is going to go down on this president's watch. can mosul be taken down as well, and what kind of pressure can you bring on rocca? cannot focus on this. you have to keep the focus on islamic state elements in libya th

the iraq is not in a war that obama started. i highly doubt the american public wants to see ground troops in iraq, syria and afghanistan. but if that's what mccain is suggesting, then i think he should propose sending -- he should propose an an al alternative instead of blaming obama for national security failures. does he want to see american troops in syria. does he want to see american planes in syria. congress has full ability to be able to send troops or air planes over there and that is not something that they have done yet. >> let me do this before i throw it to you, adam. clarify a couple things. first of all, ms. haq, thank you for starting with is he a terrorist. i'm not sure what you said the other thing. you called the ar 15 an assault weapon which is not. john mccain was taking a direct shot at president obama. there are a lot who think he was right in that and then there are those who say wait a minute. we're not sure about syrian policy what we should be doing. maybe mccain's idea of what to do in the middle east

and, believe it or not, the iraq war was won by the time president bush left office.o the sales job, in effect, was done largely in this room by general petraeus, who was going to be the person to execute the strategy if he could get the funds for the troops. host: one of those if the walls could talk sort of rooms. isn't it? senator mcconnell: yes. host: next is your own personal office. correct? senator mcconnell: yes. host: how long are your days? senator mcconnell: i usually have something to do in the evening. we're either in session or i have some event i need to attend for my colleagues. so i usually get home around , 8:30 or 9:00. host: and when do start? senator mcconnell: sort of normal time like most people, 8:30 or 9:00. host: so regularly 12-hour days. will how much of that time is spent in here? senator mcconnell: most of my time in here. like all senators, i have another office in the russell building. we have three senate offices but i have, as a result of being leader, i have two offices and two sets of staff. the staff here deals with all of the sena

because the plan is to and iraq because the plan is to tackle daesh across its length tackle daesh across its length and breadth and it's clearly and breadth and it's clearly important to pressure it in its important to pressure it in its rear areas, which is a job rear areas, which is a job associated with syria. associated with syria. and so while the geography and so while the geography battle might suggest that it's battle might suggest that it's in support of iraqi kurdish in support of iraqi kurdish forces, we're not doing forces, we're not doing necessarily as much as we like necessarily as much as we like in syria. in syria. in fact, we're pressuring the in fact, we're pressuring the entire daesh network in the entire daesh network in the areas where it's most areas where it's most vulnerable. vulnerable. >> the reason behind this >> the reason behind this questioning, and i would like to questioning, and i would like to know if the secretary of state know if the is able to tell us that which forces other th

that worked, but then the policy that followed in 2010 when iraq -- when the united states pulled out of iraq before iraq was able to govern itself because there was support, perceived support, between -- cooperation between the u.s. and iran to work with a sectarian prime minister and work with him despite the fact he was weakened and there's another shiite rival that was more tolerant. so the mistakes that followed that very success, that success that was between 2006 and 2010, led to circumstances that enabled isis in 2012 to tell all sunnis in these areas, look, the only way forward is for us to work together and reject this government from our area. and they were able to rally people, mobilize people against this government. that's why they were able to take mosul in 2014, in the summer of 2014. took mosul, forced the iraqi army to drop its arms and flee, and they took massive american weaponry. they marched back into syria and fortified iraq. they became a stronger organization because the political failures. and my fear is there is so much focus on the military component rather

go to the invasion in iraq, what the president said were the reasons for going into iraq were not true people can argue did he know it was not true or not, but whether he did or didn't know, he had plenty of reasons to question it. running for the foreseeable future, this is going to cause us continual problems. sometimes, war is imperative. americans say world war ii was not a choice. but having the public recognize what war is and my concern about television coverage of war is that it tends to flatten were out. it lacks perspective, context, particularly any historical context and the very fact you have a flat screen, it is hard to describe it. with the television camera, the viewer has to understand when he is looking at war coverage that the camera is like a flashlight. the camera shows you what is at the end of the beam but does not show you what is above, below, or on either side. understanding the limitations of television coverage, this business of building trust, it's going to be slow but we have to start sometime and now would be a good time to start. mr arnett: a new generat

saddam hussein is the one in iraq. the mass popular forces fighting isis and al qaeda and daily absorbing, daily they fight and they died to protect the christian the sunni conic and everyone on the behalf of the whole world. on the behalf of the global. saddam's is very well-known person. he served three prime minister as an advisor. he is the only one they captured because of his character. because of his style. doer. to her -- is a and all of the big mission, the impossible mission, mission impossible, mission husseini was in it. >> thank you. in the name of god the most compassionate. we talked today about the popular mobilization and everybody has been talking about this new phenomenon that started in iraq. after the collapse of the city of muzzle almost a couple of ,o as ago -- ,os a coupl mosul a couple of years ago. popular mobilization forces was established by a settler. it is not a proxy. the issue is for all iraqis to participate with what they call and non-mandatory, volunteer basis to be part of protecting

we're not. >> no, the big prize is in iraq and in syria. taking back their strongholds. >> david, 49 innocent people were killed last weekend. the big prize, they're winning the big prizes. we aren't. >> we can't stop every attack here, unfortunately. we wish we could. and we especially cannot stop every homegrown terrorist attack when we don't even know that they are sympathizing with isis, they have connected with isis and that they are planning to do an attack like this. we need to try and do better. let's look at the real prize which is iraq and syria and taking them out of their strongholds and making pr pro-depress. have we gotten the touchdown down there yet? no we have not. can we do a internet job? yes we have to do a internet job of arming and supporting indigenous forces on the ground in iraq and syria take back cities. >> i have got to go right now. gentlemen, thank you so much. a new poll shows republicans and democrats see things very differently when it comes to the orlando terror attack. dana perino will be right here to ana

the problem is syria and iraq, am i right? the iraqi people and the iraqi army, the peshmarga, the popular mobilization force fighting in iraq. that's why i invited somebody from iraq to represent the mobilization, the mass mobilization. he is representing and will come and talk. so we have the status quo. a lot of people said, bashar al assad is part of the problem. russia and iran, is anchored by almost a superpower like russia and iran. okay. if assad goes, who is going to take over isis and al qaeda? not the moderate opposition. the moderate opposition not even three person, four person on the ground. okay? so what we suggest, we have in gafta our vision. our vision coincides with rand paul and richard black, the senator richard black, the senator rand paul and congressman rand paul, and also we agree with chuck hagel who resigned as secretary of defense. i saw on cnn news he resigned because of the issue of syria. so another question asked, why syria? because isis came to iraq from syria. within minutes a second attack to

>> makes zero sense. 85% of iraq's oil is in the southern part of the country that is not under threat from isis. so in fact we won invading iraq to take its oil and we would be at war with iraq, not with isis. >> seems to me that would inflame parts of iraq not against the u.s., you steal their oil or take it, that inflames the entire country against you. >> if you like the iraq war, this would be the iraq war on steroids. >> you were publicly critical of trump in the last few months of the primary. the decision to go public supporting secretary clinton, did you come to that on your own, were you asked to do this by your campaign? >> no, i was not asked by her campaign at all, i had no contact with her campaign. this is a conclusion i came to on my own. >> scale of one to ten, how much of a bernie sanders fan are you? >> 110. all in. bernie or bust. >> scale of one to ten, how much hillary clinton fan are you? >> negative 110. i will never vote for hillary clinton. ♪ bernie, bernie, experience and wisdom not for sale. >> reporter: they're some of bernie's biggest fans, or put another

the government of iraq is a real partner in this. rocities were a tarnish on the government, the iraqi security forces, and that is something the prime minister recognizes. >> did they agree falluja was a mistake? >> certainly. in the first 24 hours of the offensive movement into the city in which we had the reports, it was top to bottom voices in iraq. people to the government, the minister of defense and announced the arrest of some of the members of the iraqi army involved in the abuse. they have to remain vigilant. when you have a lot of young people out on the streets with guns, it is impossible to mitigate the risk of anything happening. when you see something like you saw in the early days of falluja -- >> how may people of been punished for what happened in falluja? >> i think about four or five members of the iraqi army have been detained and some members of the -- has notnvestigation been concluded. we are saying repeatedly people have to be accountable when reports of found to be credible. so, what is the answer to why were

the problem is iraq. the iraqi people and the iraqi army, iraqi password via, the popular mobilization force fighting in iraq. that's why you invite somebody from iraq to present the mobilization. they're going to come and talk. so we have the status quo. a lot of people have said bashar al-assad if you believe that is anchored by russia and iran. it is anchored by russia and iran. if assad goes, who is going to take over? the moderate opposition not even three persons are four-person on the ground. we haven't got our vision. our vision inside with ron paul and richard black, senator black congressman ron paul. and also we agree with chuck hagel who resigned from security and defense. i saw on the news. so another question asked by syria? i says -- bashar isis came fromq through syria. the city of my mother, by the way. people are suffering right now and most wealthy at the city of my mother and i am in touch with them. they said they would rather die than live under isis. they need help. they need the who

we helped make the world a mess. going into iraq was a disastrous decision. maybe the worst decision ever in the history of our country. number two, getting out of iraq the way obama did it he didn't have a clue. and now you have -- and then she got into libya. and by the way, who has the libyan oil? i'll tell you who has it. isis has it. of the' great oil, by the way, the highest quality oil you can get. isis now has the oil that hillary clinton gave them by going in and doing that stupid -- you know that stupid attack on libya. just -- the world was crushing and she goes in and wants to do more. she doesn't have a clue. she doesn't know what she's doing. she doesn't have the strength the energy she cannot be president.

navy has launched air strikes from this part of the world since the iraq war in 2003. rear admiral bret bachelder told us the move shows flexibility in the fight against isis. >> we continue to strike at the financial capabilities, the revenue-generating sources that they have there, their abilities to generate forces, and at their leadership. >> reporter: that can mean striking militants or banks? >> yes, it could. >> reporter: so far, 1,800 combat missions, or airstrikes, have been flown from this carrier since it was deployed. dealing a blow to the terrorist group. >> they do not have the same real estate or freedom to maneuver that they did when we arrived in december. >> reporter: the u.s. says "harry s. truman" will be heading home soon but it's keeping up the fight for now, as this is such a crucial time in the battle against isis. >>> still ahead, remembering muhammad ali. at a new york boxing gym with ties to the champ. at a new york ties to the champ. at a new yorkg gym with ties to the champ. at a new yor boxing gym with ties to the champ. >> the greatest of