it was in the days after 9/11 that the neocons and their hawkish republican allies began beating their drums to get us into iraqnothing justified for us attacking a country that had not committed an act of war against us. before we went into iraq, we had believed sense the time since we were kids that those who started the war were the bad guys. i'll never understand how a president so limited in his ability or sense of history as george w. bush, a vice president as uncharismatic as dick cheney could so screw this country to the wall of history as the band that ran things in materially years of this century. we were united after 9/11. they were the ones who divided us, and divided iraq into the two warring factions. they went into iraq and took apart the iraqi army, iraqi government and replaced it in a sectarian bunch primarily interested in getting even with their fellow americans. just look at the spectacle of saddam being hanged in front of jeering shiites. history will make us part of this debacle, the people who took us into baghdad should cease and desist from ever again even saying the word "iraq." that

credibility when it comes to criticizing the administration when the faulty intelligence got us into the iraq war in the first place? >> well, don, i need to tell you, as the senior intel guy, when we went to war in iraq, i was the guy that was holding the wmd bag and had to try to make sense of it. to the contrary, there were elements of wmd that we did find, but that's another story. clearly, there was some intelligence that was extremely faulty. and was laid bare during the initial stages of the conflict in iraq. the issue that i have right now is that we could go back and there clearly is plenty of blame. well rolled into iraq in 2003 far too few troops on the ground to really get a sense of what was going on. and then we decimated the military, told everybody to go away. so we created a vacuum into all of which what we have seen over the past decade boiled in. >> why are we going back and fighting a war that has already been fought. >> no, no, no. >> shouldn't we be looking forward? >> yeah, yeah, of course. your question of me, what is vice president saying relative vis-a-vis what happe

the media bookers shows with the clowns who got us into the iraq mess while the people we elected to te for us are sitting on their hands and hope no one will call on them to say what they think we should do. collectively, they're like the kid in class who didn't do his homework and is hoping the teacher won't see them hiding behind the kid in front of them and ask them to stand and give the answer. is it too much to ask for a return to glory when we had people in the who believed the senate foreign relations committee is there for the most important reason in the world, to stand up to the president or stand with him, that running and hiding isn't an option? on this grotesque abdication of responsibility, i'm embarrassed by a congress i've grown up to respect almost to the point of reverence. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. >>> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. we've got a big night tonight with the debut of our latest "all in america" series coming up shortly. >>> but we begin tonight in iraq where secret

republicans point to the irs scandal, the va scandal and iraq and say president obama is not competent but how do you think he compares with other presidents? >> he didn't get us into the iraq war and he wasn't involved in watergate and he has run a pretty honest administration. so let's take first the va. one of the reasons the va is a problem is that he has got to take care of 100 million vets and he has to see to it that he not only takes care of them but that he sees to it that they get care they are supposed to. and that is against the skin fled congress that had a cut of $10 million or 10% that the republicans were prepared to give. so i don't have any real problems with that. a lot of these people are getting -- in the va, a lot of the people are getting their benefits and a fair number of these guys are waiting because they are not qualified to go in. these are non-service connecting. the service connected are for the most part not involved. >> watt what was the other one? >> i think we covered everything. >> i don't want to run out of here but i want to address what these no-good republicans say because every once in a while they say the truth and i would

the spectacle of saddam hussein being hanged to a jeerg of a mob of shiites. sadly, history will make us part of this whole debacle. the people who took us into iraqcease and desist from ever again saying the word iraq. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. stay tuned now for "weekends with alex witt." >>> a call to arms in iraq. new action today as extremists in that country march toward baghdad. now the u.s. might get involved. reaction ahead. >>> the fallout from a shocking week in washington. in the end, which party might benefit from a surprise election result? >>> new developments in the search for malaysia flight 370. one effort to find it involves reward money. >>> it is a moment that stunned movie goers. see how one company delivered a message to a crowded theater. >>> good saturday morning, everyone. welcome to

management at charles schwab. . >> i don't know if you've noticed, but some of the guys that got us into the iraqicizing president obama's policy. that takes a lot of nerve, getting criticized by those guys is like being called ugly by a toad. >> sharing his remarks on iraq. we're joined now by dan senior. early on 2003 and 2004 he was in iraq as the bush administration's efforts were just getting under way. e. he was the chief spokesman for the authority. thanks very much for coming in. >> good to be with you? is he right when he said someone like dick cheney who got the u.s. into the war with a lot of bad information back in 2003 really just shut up right now and not give advice to the president? >> i'll say a couple of things, wolf. anybody who has experience dealing with iraq should be weighing in right now. >> even someone who made many blunders making predictions that turned out to be disasters? >> wolf, if senator king is right, that anybody who was for the original policy in iraq should quote shut up, he's talking to many of his colleagues in the united states senate, whether it's senate

republicans point to the irs scandal, the va scandal, and iraq and say that president obama is incompetent. to other presidents you have served with? >> didn't get us intowar, did he? and he wasn't involved in watergate. and he did -- he has run a pretty honest administration. so let's take first the va. one of the reasons the va is -- the problem is that he's got to take care of 100 million vets and he's got to see to it that he not only takes care of them but that he sees to it that they get the care that they're supposed to, and that is against the skin flint congress that had a cut of $10 million or -- or 10% that the republicans were prepared to give. so i don't have any real problems with that. a lot of these people are getting -- in the va are getting their benefits and a fair number of these guys are waiting because they are not qualified to go in at this particular time. these are nonservice connected guys. the service-connected are for the most part not going -- are not -- what was the other one? >> i think that we have -- i think we covered everything as we're nearing the end of our hour. >> i don't want to run out of here with my tail betwee

republicans point to the irs scandal, the va scandal and iraq and say president obama is not competent but how do you think he compares with other presidents? >> he didn't get us into the iraq war and he wasn't involved in watergate and he has run a pretty honest administration. so let's take first the va. one of the reasons the va is a problem is that he has got to take care of 100 million vets and he has to see to it that he not only takes care of them but that he sees to it that they get care they are supposed to. and that is against the skin fled congress that had a cut of $10 million or 10% that the republicans were prepared to give. so i don't have any real problems with that. a lot of these people are getting -- in the va, a lot of the people are getting their benefits and a fair number of these guys are waiting because they are not qualified to go in. these are non-service connecting. the service connected are for the most part not involved. >> watt what was the other one? >> i think we covered everything. >> i don't want to run out of here but i want to address what these no-good republicans say because every once in a while they say the truth and i would

no you haven't tony blair spent most of the weekend trying to convince us that dragging britain into iraq was a mistake and once more action is needed again and not only in iraq but in syria as well joining us in the now is british m.p. george galloway he's a well known fan of mr blair why are former officials like tony blair and current ones like william hague still defending iraq it's collapsing do they really think that the current situation has nothing to do with the invasion in two thousand and three well there's a national consensus emerging here stretching from the mayor of london across parliament and most of the media including right wing newspapers that supported the war at the time that mr blair may have become mentally unhinged certainly einstein's definition of madness namely. to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result means your probably mentally unhinged seems to apply here because mr blair was as you said this very weekend not only defending what he did and there are precious few people anywhere in the world who will be found to come on televisi

the v.a. scandal, and iraq, and say president obama is incompetent. but how do you think he compares to other presidents you have served with? >> well, he did not get us into the iraq war, did he? and he wasn't involved in watergate. he has run a pretty honest administration. let's take first the v.a. v.a.f the reasons that the has a problem is he has got to take care of 100 million vets, and he's got to see it that he not only takes care of them, but that he sees to it that they get the care they are supposed to. that is against the skinflint congress that had a cut of $10 that ther 10% republicans were prepared to give. i don't have any real problems with that. a lot of these people in the ,.a. are getting their benefits and a fair number of these guys are waiting because they are not qualified to go in at this particular time. these are non-service-connected guys. service connected guys are not [indiscernible] what was the other one? >> i think we have covered everything as we are nearing the end of our hour. run out ofwant to here with my tail between my legs. to address what these no good republicans say. -- i wouldin a while kind of like to praise th

coming up, the neocons are back. they got us into iraq. shamelessly they are now experts for getting in again. big surprise. also the great senator elizabeth warren will be here. she's a huge hero to progressives in the democratic party and around the country. perhaps the most powerful elected voice among progressives now. in polls of democrats she's often second only to hillary. her voice will be heard. even if she doesn't run for president. it wasn't easy but congressman steven king, may have topped himself with his tweet after the u.s. patent & trademark office cancelled the washington are redskins trademark protections saying, obama raids redskins by weapon niezing uspto. cancels redskins logo. free people will not tolerate a kim yung potus. let me finish with what i said about the war in iraq before it started. this is "hardball," the place for politics. she's still the one for you. and cialis for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment is right. cialis is also the only daily ed tablet approved to treat symptoms of bph, like ne

into the border into iraq. the possibility that the united states will use air strikes to give the al-maliki government some breathing room. let's listen to john kerry. >> it's not whole answer but it may well be one of the option he that are important to be able to stem the tide and stop the movement of people who are moving around in open convoys and trucks and terrorizing people. i mean when you have people murdering is, assassinating in these mass massacres, you have to stop that, you do from the air or otherwise, americans obviously feel very powerfully about not putting booths back on the ground in iraq so we'll consider what option he are available to us. >> we've heard from president obama and secretary kerry and every official on down. they want to see efforts at reconciliation between that shia led government and sunnies across iraq, joy. >> "americ"america tonight"'s we house correspondent mike viqueria, thanks very much. >>> even then questioned whether the mission had made the country more secure after americans withdrew from iraq. here is his segment from 2011 report. >> even though the deadline for u.s

this morning, the man who helped lead us into iraq in the first place penned a scathing op-ed in "the wall street journal" questioning president obama's leadership, accusing him of abandoning iraq and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory there. this led to predictable outrage from many on the left. joining me now, former vice president dick cheney and his daughter liz cheney, who co-wrote that op-ed in "the wall street journal." thank you both so much for being here. mr. vice president, let me start with this. this is one item from "the washington post" posted by paul waldman today. "there is not a single person in america who has been more wrong and more shamelessly dishonest on the topic of iraq than dick cheney, and now as the cascade of misery and death and chaos, he did so much to unleash raises anew, mr. cheney has the unadulterated gal to come before the country and tell us that it's all someone else's fault." the suggestion is that you caused this mess, mr. president. what say you? >> well, obviously i disagree. i think we went into iraq for very good reasons. i think whe

it's going to impact iraq but you know i think there's a situation there that unfortunately we helped create which is one of the reasons among many that i was opposed to us going into iraq in the first place because i was afraid that once we went in there and withdrew that something like this would happen and now we're in a situation where we have no good policy options left well rock is a second largest oil producer and opac and has the fifth largest crude oil reserves when you look at the global economy how large of a role does iraq play in the world's oil market. well i mean on the margin it's a significant supplier and i'm bullish on oil anyway i think the price of oil is going up regardless of what happens in iraq but to the extent that iraqi production is disrupted by civil war that's only going to be more bullish for the price of oil and it's going to affect the global economy in that oil is going to be more expensive and that's going to be a negative unless of course you own oil and you've got to sell so there are some economies that might benefit those that are supplying oil into the market and others that have to buy oil are going to have to pay more for

said if you intervene in iraq, it will break into pieces into sunni and kurtish pieces and they were right. when the next president bush contemplated in 2003 going into iraq some of us again. if you invade iraq, it will break into three pieces as soon as you leave. that's what happened. we should have never gone in in the first place. the situation we face now is directly because we went in. >> so when you heard dick cheney's recent editorial, his writing with his daughter, i was curious to hear your response to his really blistering attack on the obama administration ask their foreign policy. >> dick cheney is a discredited hypocrite. he knew in 1991 that it was a mistake to go in. and that was the only time he's ever been right about iraq. why anybody would listen to dick cheney on iraq is beyond me. >> you said at one point, which i found interesting, what we're seeing is al qaeda fighting iran. something you said isn't necessarily a bad thing. can you explain that? >> well, the two forces that are really on the ground, both of which are enemies of the united states are fighting each other and that's al qaeda in their isis or incoronation on the one hand and they

the board on this, ralph, because so many even staunch republicans, even some of the neo-cons who wanted us to go into iraq have pause about us going back into iraq now. >> well, i'm not for sending the 82nd airborne division into iraq tomorrow, but let's see what air power can really do. i mean, the air force and the contractors are always telling us how wonderful air power is. frankly, air power can't solve this, but it sure as hell could hurt the terrorists, and the fact that -- i can tell you, we heard earlier from catherine is absolutely true. intelligence has been watching this build, watching isis build up for months and months. >> the white house claims it was caught off guard. >> the white house is lying! this president is a coward, and he won't make tough decisions to defend america, and, you know, at some point, yes, it's a hard decision. presidents are supposed to make hard decisions. bush was derided for saying i'm the decider, but megyn, that's what a president is, and i am not for willy-nilly foreign interventions everywhere in the world, but when you see the emergence of an al qaeda offshoo

not going to be military, and i don't know if you've noticed, but some of the guys that got us into the iraqng obama's policy. that takes a lot of nerve. being criticized for those guys for your war policy is like being called ugly by a towed. >> that's an insult to toads. i think that, you know, while it is almost laughable in a pathetic way of what's going on with the fingerpointing, the blame game acceptable no matter what the premise. i think the lesson going forward and why i hope to come back to you, senator king, we only know what we learned in iraq when we finally design our exit in afghanistan because, you know, the idea of american presence as distasteful as it is, john mccain says this better than i can, but if you look at the places where we've put our foot in, we usually keep a footprint there and now the plan in afghanistan is the same one that we've put in place in iraq. will it lead to the same kind of trouble there and that's one crisis ahead. >> that's the difference though because in afghanistan we are talking about a residual force. >> that's right. >> we've got to work o

. >>> developing news right now, the white house formally notifies congress it is planning to send 275 troops into iraq. kpix 5's ken bastida joining us with the latest announcement. >> reporter: that's right, allen. president obama has ruled out putting anymore u.s. troops back into direct combat in iraq. he says these troops going in will help protect the u.s. embassy and other american interests. the white house is also considering sending special forces soldiers took as trainers for the iraqi troops. their main job will not be in fighting. over the weekend, militant fighters took over another major city in northern iraq. they are vowing to continue their attacks all the way to baghdad. the rebels also released these graspic photos claiming to have massacred more than 1700 iraqi soldiers. the state department reviewing its options in order to help out, including direct talks with iran. >> we're open to talking to iran. we had similar conversations in the past with iran regarding afghanistan. these consultations will be along those lines. >> the u.s. is sending more ships to the area. also arriving in the region, the u.s.s. verde. o

us. >> dick cheney is the man who took us into war in iraq on false pretensions. >> he was wrong every time. >> simply stated, there is no doubt -- >> you think the american people are prepared for a long costly and bloody battle with a significant american casualties? >> i don't think it's likely to unfold that way. >> if there's one thing this country does not need, it's that we should be taking advice from dick cheney on wars. >> simply stated, there is no doubt that saddam hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. >> not only were there no doubt, there were no weapons. >> we had a lot of evidence to indicate that in fact al qaeda was trying to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction. >> being on the wrong side of dick cheney is to be on the right side of history. >> simply stated -- >> you think the obama administration wanted out of there and to hell with it? >> exactly. >> good to have you with us tonight. thanks for watching. there is no doubt that this man, dick cheney, loves to go fishing. he's fishing right now oh, he's trawling bill time for those millenniums, the y

us to do vis-a-vis syria? >> i think that there is an organic link between the two countries. mind you, when isis used to be isi, the islamic state of iraq, they had not gone into syria. they were already using syrian territory for their operations in iraq. and once the syrian uprising took on the shape of a civil war, isi turned into isis and really exploited the situation there, took up territory. so this is a transnational phenomenon. their aim is to set up some sort of am ret that is going to be in eastern syria and western iraq. you know, pulling all those areas together where they have a stronghold and creating that entity. so, yes, it is important that while we deal with iraq that we also understand that there is also a syrian side of the equation, and it will be key to bring in some of the regional players. we're already doing that with iran. i suspect we need to do that -- we'll be doing that with saudi arabia. >> why do you emphasize am rat? >> well, cay la fate means a global entity where, you know, it's theoretically, according to medieval islamic political theory, sort of a general. you can have only one. the goal of isis in the short term is an em

dead and turned what was once one of the more developed countries in the arab world into its water us. make no mistake about it iraqwould not be the violent place it is today if the bush administration dick cheney had not lied its way into a costly unnecessary and destructive. things that played out in iraq ironically exactly as cheney said they would when he was asked back in the one nine hundred ninety s. about why the first bush administration which he was part of didn't march all the way to baghdad during the first gulf war. back then when he was against the war before he was for it cheney said overthrowing saddam would lead to chaos. once you got to iraq and took it over and took down saddam hussein's government then what he going to put into place that's a very volatile part of the world and if you take down the central government of iraq you can easily end up seeing pieces of iraq fly off part of it. the syrians would like to have the west part of eastern iraq the ukrainians would like to claim fought over for eight years in the north you've got the kurds and the kurds spin loose and join with the kurds in t

narrow-minded to say this is the fault, as many conservatives would say of president obama for pulling us out of iraq and narrow-minded to suggest this is bush's fault as well for putting us intowe're look the at an upheaval from afghanistan to libya, from syria down through iraq. we're looking at sectarian, tribal, racial, ethnic divided, exploding into chaos and violence and i don't think in is any one president's incapability of controlling. >> pointing finger, but can you learn lessones from past or current administrations? >> look, we've tried full scale invasion and occupation of iraq, we've tried limited bombing and air strikes in libya, tried nonintervention in syria. which one can we point to as success or the model going forward? >> i hear but. >> none. >> brian, to you. i was reading your paper last night talking about this, you just posted this week and you warn of unintended consequences and you're clear you want to do everything or make every advice in your power, not to, for the u.s. not to get involved but at the same time you're not taking air strikes off the table. you think that the u.s. has to be prepared for that. >> i think the u.s. should be prepared for

a deep breath and think through this and we're not going to make the kind of judgment you want us to make to get back into a war in iraq, gather these comments from lindsey graham who says this is the staging for the next 9/11, the unfolding of iraq? what's your response to that? >> they have no credibility. those who are saying these things have no credibility. we've heard it all before. and we've experienced the fact that they don't know what they are talking about. you know, again, we went to war in iraq under false pretenses. and you know, after 10 or 11 years we've spent 17 to $20 billion training and equipping the iraqi military, a military that it appears won't even defend its own country these days and it has a leader that is in desperate trouble and doesn't seem to know how to govern and creates divisions in his own country. we're going to send american troops back thinking after 11 years we're going to solve that problem. i don't think so. and by the way, when we talk about democracy, what about our democracy? i think the american people have a bellyful of wars in countries like iraq in which a lot of countri

the expense of so many. too many times to count mr. obama has told us he's ending the wars in iraq and afghanistan as though wishing. his rhetoric has come crashing into reality. watching the isis jihadist take territory once secured by american blood is final proof that america's enemies are not decima decimated. they are emboldened and on the march. rarely has a major american newspaper published that was so thoroughly shameless. again what is the cause? what was the catalyst of the instability that racks iraq today? the simple answer is the one that cheney and his daughter don't want to mention. the unnecessary misguided and frankly immoral war launched by the united states in 2003. we destabilized iraq. in many respects, we destabilized the larger region. and misfortune of barack obama is that he inherited this catastrophe created by the previous administration. >> even cheney once thought that it would be a serious mistake to occupy baghdad. this is dick cheney in 1994 reflecting on the first iraq war when he was secretary of defense. >> do you think forces should have moved into baghdad? >> no. >> why not? >> we would have been all alone. it wou

the groups. it's along sectarian lines. what that means remains to be seep. we see this in 2006. what happens is iraq was plunged into sectarian war. >> thank you for joining us from baghdad. >> security concerns in iraq prompted the united states to relocate u.s. contractors based there. president obama says he's considering all options to help the iraqi government. >> iraq will need more help. it will need more help from us and the international community. my team is working around the clock to identify how to provide the most effective assistance to them. i don't rule out anything. we have a stake in making sure that jihadists are not getting a foot hold in iraq or syria. >> we have more from washington d.c. >> the message from the disagrees developed over the day. first they were keen to emphasise that they wanted to build the capacity of iraqi forces to fight back the advance of i.s.i.l. fighters, and urged prime minister nouri al-maliki to be inclusive in its role. as they developed many options were considered. we have this? >> we are concerned about what is happening in iraq, and are not concerned at waiting. we are providing assistance, we are in dir

into jordan as they did into iraq. but this is a terrorist organization, and in the past used terrorist acts exclusively. now they have moved into iraq as a terrorist army, a small one at that. but using conventional tactics. there is no air power to stop them of any consequence, that's why they can do it. if they cross the border into jordan as a terrorist army as power would strip that away pretty quick. they would go into jordan as they have in the past for the last two years in iraq using terrorist activities to undermine governments, undermine the central government and helping to force the collapse of the government in jordan because the people would lose confidence in the government's capability to protect them. that's the theory of it. whether they could actually accomplish that is another matter. >> what do you make of the 300 or so so-called military advisers that the president has talked about putting on the ground there in iraq? there is some dispute about whether they're there, whether they're enroute, and of course negotiating legal protection for them, for the iraq government if they do ind

the breakdown generally has been that liberals are blaming george bush for getting us into iraq in the for about a million different things starting with the failure to negotiate a deal with the iraqis to keep u.s. troops there. i may be the first person on cable television to it say this, but they are both right. george bush got us into this mess. he started this fire. but barack obama -- by the way, he started this fire with a war that at least in retrospect looks like a big mistake. barack obama, on the other hand, somehow thought he could waltz out of the middle east with little risk and consequence and we are seeing how naive he is on that. so that's how opinion journalism is handling it as far as hard news, listen, american journalists lost interest in iraq after u.s. troops left what we like is bang bang. we like guns going off. that's why we're covering this for the extent we are, there's an equally important story that isn't as sexy as bang bang. that is, the divisions in iraq are so great it's almost impossible to have a civil society. and the idea of a democracy is almost de

the islamic state of iraq and syria, or isis, occupy about a third of the country. clarissa ward is joining us in baghdad. clarissa what, can you tell us about these syrian airstrikes into iraq? >> reporter: well, scott, the iraqi government is keeping very tight lipped, but eyewitnesses on the ground say that they saw syrian warplanes cross into iraq and drop bombs on isis targets in the al-qaim border area. this crossing is very strategic for the isis insurgents because it essentially allows them to move heavy weaponry and fighters back and forth quickly and easily between syria and iraq. but, really, these airstrikes also illuminate the complexities of the geopolitics of this conflict because suddenly you have the u.s., which is also supporting the iraqi government militarily, and even contemplating airstrikes of its own, working in a sort of de facto alliance with the dictatorship of bashar al-assad in syria in this fight against isis. >> pelley: and not to mention the iranians as well. clarissa, thanks very much. the civil war in syria is now in the fourth year. more than 160,000 people have been killed. elizabeth palmer managed to get to syria's largest city, alep

iraq. they leveraged the money, weapons and fighters they have been using in eastern syria right now and moved them down intoraq and actually made use of both warfronts at the moment. they have moved stuff even now back and forth across both borders. this jihad activity has been attracting fighters at levels we haven't seen since the 1980s anti-soviet jihad. >> what do you make of the increase? >> there is a similarity to the afghanistan-pakistan model. meaning the syrian area is a rearguard area where they have relative safe heaven, the ability to train and gather jihadists from all over the world. that has been happening. when the army is trying to fight against them, they can't go into syrian territory. they won't do it. when we are trying to fight in afghanistan, we aren't going to follow them with some exceptions into pakistan. >> do they look at the united states at all? political leaders, presidents, does that factor in? or is it just all about we hate americans and the west, it doesn't matter who is there. we want to kill them. >> when it comes to what was referred to as the global war on terror, ame

the most stable what about iraq the u.s. won't want to see that because it doesn't fit into a bronze policy joining us in the now as american historian and journalist gareth porter from washington what's your perception here where does iran stand amid widespread turmoil that we're seeing in the middle east. well if you'd asked this question just a few years ago you might have gotten much more of a response that iran is like other middle eastern countries still unstable and subject to possible regime change that of course after the june two thousand and nine election which was contested and after which there was a lot of demonstration of the very large scale demonstrations particularly in tehran itself but that phase of the political history of iran has now passed and it has clearly been able to. sort of right itself in terms of political stability there's no sign of serious instability on the horizon any time in the foreseeable future in iran and therefore it really sort of stands out in the middle east as the one place where you can. see a predictable course of stability over the next few years. and i think that the obama

up next, as the president mulls air strikes in iraq, one of the first fighter pilots sent into iraq in 2003 brings us closer look at the history of warfare from the air. how about a "top gun" clip? >> yeah. >> i'm going to hit the brakes. he'll fly right back. >> he's going to get a lock on us! >> i got a good lock. firing. woo! [ male announcer ] this is the age of knowing what you're made of. why let erectile dysfunction get in your way? talk to your doctor about viagra. ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take viagra if you take nitrates for chest pain; it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. side effects include headache, flushing, upset stomach, and abnormal vision. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. stop taking viagra and call your doctor right away if you experience a sudden decrease or loss in vision or hearing. this is the age of taking action. viagra. talk to your doctor. [ female announcer ] we love our smartphones. and now telcos using hp big data solutions are feeling the love, too. by offering thing

the people who took us into iraq, who tied us into this blood feud should cease and desist from ever again saying the word iraq. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. stay tuned now for "weekends with alex witt." >>> a call to arms in iraq. new action today as extremists in that country march toward baghdad. now the u.s. might get involved. reaction ahead. >>> the fallout from a shocking week in washington. in the end, which party might benefit from a surprise election result? >>> new developments in the search for malaysia flight 370. one effort to find it involves reward money. >>> it is a moment that stunned movie goers. see how one company delivered a message to a crowded theater. >>> good saturday morning, everyone. welcome to "weekends with alex witt." i'm frances rivera. here's what's happening this morning. hundreds of shiite men are heading to volunteer centers to join the fight. it is against the radical sunni militants who have covered a large sloth of the country and are advancing on the capital. president obama addressed potential u.s. involvement but also

1961, we signed an agreement with saudi arabia that all oil in the world will be traded in dollars. , that oilnt into iraq was leaving. us going into iraq, halliburton was not allowed into the country. host: bring it back to airstrikes. caller: why continue this? in 1961.ted why continue this? we know what's going on here. by thears are started south. in the military contractors -- they are in the south. host: republican line. nick from florida. let's move on to judy in florida as well. democrats line. caller: hi. us engaging inf airstrikes and putting special forces on the ground. i think it is very important we do that. people in this danger frommize the the extremists in the middle east. it is almost unbelievable to conceptualize what a threat it is to the people in the region. us that we are not so far away from that danger. frightening to appreciate that reality. host: you identify as a democrat. a previous caller said if president obama goes down this road, it would divide the democrats. what do you think of his statement? caller: i think it might happen. but i think there are some that are more important than poli

using helicopter fire. they will be making the push, it's likely, towards some point to go into the city. and they'll use helicopter fire, which will be bombing the islamic state of iraqnd levant hideout in tikrit. pro-i.s.i.l. social media says they are ready to rappell invasion, and have the iraqi army on the run. >> thank you imran khan, live from baghdad. >>> some iraqis have been forced to leave the country, particularly if they require medical help. we met some in neighbouring jordan, and we have this report. >> reporter: families like these are risking a journey from western iraq to jordan, this man says they had to take the risk, because his daughter needs medical help. >> translation: we are going to take her to jordan for medical treatment. in baghdad they don't have doctors that can help her. they took the back roads from baghdad on to ramadi. they have suffered a loss on route. in the car behind them is a woman in mourning. >> translation: i have come from iraq to see a psychiatrist because my son died 21 days ago, a victim of the fighting. he died in dhuluiya, in a car bomb. >> in imam here they receive some victims of the wars. it's places like this wher

fundamental point, which was brought home to us in 1990 when the saudis agreed to everyone's surprise, to allow american troops into saudi arabia after iraq innovated kuwait, they said to us, if this were the united states of jimmy carter or ronald reagan that walked away after a few american casualties, we would not have said yes. we believe president bush is serious. we have to convince people in that region, kurds, iraqis -- maliki is a big part of the problem and he's not all of iraq. we need to find people there. and most importantly, i would say in syria where u.s. policy, in absence over the last three years, has sent a signal of lack of seriousness throughout the region. i would do something in syria. it's a bad situation. it's now dominated by assad and by isis. we should be finding people -- >> we keep coming back to the idea that somehow, military intervention, dexter, is somehow going to make the situation better. we have a lot of experience of u.s. forces in iraq failing to produce the kind of outcome that we thought was going to materialize. >> right. well, i don't -- there's plenty of options short of military intervention.

i think the american people better grab hold of this decision facing us in iraq. we were wrong to go intowe knew we would eventually have to leave. why? because if you know you're going to have to leave, you're admitting to yourself, or should be, that you can't control events once you've left the scene. the country will be controlled by the people we leave behind. this was true in vietnam. what we're living through right now is the lesson of vietnam. those who live in a country end up determining its future. and those who come in, even for a good number of years, eventually head home and leave the country to return to what it was before. why on earth did anyone believe that we could overthrow the people who ran iraq and think they would not try mightily to regain power once we left? whether we left in 11 years or 15 or 20? it's always going to be up to the people living in the country to decide if that happens. it's not we who have kept the nazi party returning from germany, it's been the german people. it's not we who have kept the militaryists from coming back into power in japan, it's