public opinion wins wars. even in the climate of suppressing losses or enhancing victories war correspondents did good work and got news to the public. >> this is edward morrow speaking from london. there were more german planes over the coast of britain today than at any time since the war began. >> i wanted to go overseas and i wanted to get involved. >> 25-year-old paul green arrived in north africa in 1943. his paper was the star's and stripes. >> it was run by the military. you know, there was censorship in various places but there had to be some censorship. >> paul green was there. >> it if it was terribly important that they get an eyewitness report out not just for the soldiers but for americans back home. >> oliver: the words and images came at a price. the casualty rate for photographers and correspondents was four times greater than the military in general. >> i didn't want to die but on the other hand you have to be in a certain place to get the story. >> all of a sudden mortars start to come in. y

civil war. and my dad floated back to new hampshire. he still treasures that. jim has also helped me with my work, since i've jumped off the tenure track. one of the things i have done in the last decade is make sure that my hometown remembers that they had a very significant civil war hero come from little genesseo, new york, james wadsworth, who was the richest man in the north, who gave up everything at the age of 53 to enlist in the army. he eventually ended up dying after the battle of the wilderness, and there really wasn't any commemoration of him in his hometown. i always joked that if little genesseo had been in the south, there would have been a statue before the body was cold, but that was not true in more reserved upstate. so when we started a campaign to get a statue of general wadsworth put on the courthouse lawn where it should be. a courthouse without a statue is naked after all, james mcpherson came and gave the inaugural lecture of our campaign, attended a reception with people

because we have known no war like this war. it is very different from wars. in the usual sense of the word. ofou in any other war, 2% of the population, but most of those were lost from disease. if you compare that to huge wars, wars where we lost mess men, the great world wars or the most recent great war, world war ii, you will find that very quickly after that war, japan and germany were our allies. world war ii veterans go to germany and japan now to visit with veterans of that war without a great deal of bitterness. indeed without bitterness. healing from war, a war among countries appears to take place at least when men are sane more easily. healing from civil wars, it seems to me, occurs only gradually. the enemy does not go home, he lives with you, so to speak. in a real sense, if we look at the so-called healing from the civil war, from the black and white point of view. from looking at it from both points of view, it seems to me fair to say that that healing began only with a passage of the civil rights statues of the 1960s. for blacks, the war left

the war of national survival is a war without any rules. >> in this war of national survival truth andtures casualty. he jumped the board producing propaganda films. they mixed real footage with actors cast as japanese pilots. like he put it simply public opinion wins wars. even in a climate of suppressing or enhancing victories war correspondents did good word. edward r. murrow got clues to the public. >> there were more german planes over britain than at any time since the war began. >> i wanted to get involved. >> 25-year-old paul green arrived in africa in 1943. his paper was the stars and stripes. >> run by the military. you know there were sense tocen in various places. there had to be some censorship. >> from the fall of berlin wall gre paul green was there. >> it was important they get an eyewitness report out not just for the soldiers but for americans back home. >> the words and images came at a price. the casualty rate for photographers and correspondents was four times later than the military in general. >> didn't want to die but you have to be at a certain place to get the

so there was more panic over germans in world war world war i than in world war ii. yeah, stan. >> the invasion of russia by germany was a major disaster for them, and it sounds like that actually started before we got in the war s is that correct? >> the germans were attacked on june 22, 1941. they attacked, japan attacked us on december 7th, 1941, so it was, there was a five month difference between the attack on russia by the germans and the attack on the united states by the japanese. the germans expected to win the war in two or three months. they thought that the communists would fall apart because there was such disloyalty to the communists, such hatred of the communists among the people. they didn't realize how tough it was to do anything in a police state to somehow upset the equilibrium. and the russians fought for their motherland, and the propaganda to fight for the motherland whether it was communist or not was strong enough. about 20 million russians died in the war. but the germans could never capture moscow. they got within the gates of moscow the day

it means in war and justice of war. if you try to consider the philosophies of just war theory, there are two things you want to examine. is the war fought for quote, unquote, just purposes? and is it fought with quote, unquote, just methods? and you can examine any american conflict this way. you can sort of mix and match the two ideas. you can fight a just war with unjust methods. and you can fight an unjust war with just methods. in the case of the american civil war, we certainly don't need to consider the question of the justice of war because both sides believed if they were fighting for a just cause. but the question we're looking at today is that first one. use in bello, justice in war. did that -- this war show justice in terms of the way both sides treated each other's prisoners? and i would say both sides had the advantage of having -- of understanding the conventions of war, the respectability, the respect that needed to be shown both sides because prior to the war, they were all won and the same nation with

of 4 of slaves were in the war when the war started. they literally fought their way from slavery to freedom. not only did president lincoln need these people to win the war. robert smalls who starts out -- who's from the great state of virginia -- i mean, of south carolina. he starts out working for the confederacy. he was hired out by his owner to work for -- contract laborerer working for the confederacy. he wasn't being paid. he gets a chance to turn this over to the union army. you know this story. he becomes a soldier in the union army. he goes back home, ee electriced to state legislature and eventually to the united states congress. as a comeman. so, those people who had this myth about african-americans joining the con fet rat army. they weren't about to arm them because they know what happened to robert smalls, right? he not only shows up at union army, he showsed up with his own weapon, his ship. >> that's right. >> and he becames -- he shows up with his own weapon. he brought his own weapon to the fight. not only did he brin

the civil war. and how the war's outcome and immediate aftermath have impacted racial issues ever since. speakers include yale university and franc smith, who heads the african-american civil war memorial and museum. this two-hour event took place at the john hopkins event for international studies in washington, d.c. >> so, i'd like to just start with david blight, and then we'll take it from there. >> thank you, joe. thank you all for coming. thanks for inviting me on this panel. usually among historians we are fragmented into writing about the south and north, the west, new england, womens, blacks native americans, whomever, so it's great to be on a panel you called species history. i like that. the human species. after all, that's our subject. i've written a great deal about this problem of civil war memory. all i'm going to try to do is place us somewhere and then just to try to trouble the water a little bit about what we actually mean by civil war memory and why it never has quite healed, per

gets us involved in a war. woodrow wilson, world war i. franklin roosevelt, world war ii. lyndon johnson, the vietnam war. george w. bush, the wars in afghanistan and iraq. you name it, every president who's disclaimed any desire to get america involved in a war somehow manages immediately or shortly after the presidency to do just that to get america involved in the war. just switch here for one moment. do we have the slide up? i don't know why i'm getting that thing. willkie gave roosevelt a bit of a run for his money doing obviously far better than hoover or landon. still, roosevelt wins by 12 points. wins pretty easily in the electoral college. holds the entire south, as he would every single southern state in all of roosevelt's four elections. usually by majorities of 60% or more. willkie's strength is confined to the plain state area and the midwest, primarily. it's a pretty thumping victory for roosevelt. certainly not a ratification of the idea that america should get involved in the war, but a ratification of this idea that roosevelt pushes right at the beginning

all through this war the congress who had voted for the war, the republicans and supported the war would not vote the money to pay for it. they wanted to borrow it. only it wasn't like today where they could keep borrowing. in those days we were a small country, and we had to borrow it from somebody. well, we had run out of borrowers. and as a result in february we decided that we were going to pay for the war. so the fiscal underpinnings that would support a strong national defense was agreed on. and we became a completely different entity in the world. we were now a strong country, a country that could be -- not be taken for granted, a country that the european powers had to pay more attention to than they did in the past. second thing happened now, the english also decided to the change their policy completely towards the united states. they could see how powerful we were. the battle of new orleans was noter relevant. it was very important. -- not irrelevant. it was very important because we won. the delish were not expecting -- the gish were not expecting us to win. and the englishma

both for cause and comrades and tried by war. abraham lincoln as commander in chief won the lincoln prize. among the many things that distinguished mcpherson's career is relevance of his work as we struggle not to only understand civil war and reconstruction but our own times. his dissertation and first book, struggle for equality 1964 appeared during the heroic years of the civil rights movement, during a time that his advisers termed the second reconstruction. in both reconstructions, northern activists went south to work for racial justice and were accused of doing so for less than noble reasons. before mcpherson's work, they argued that absent ligsists were motivated by status, greed and other unflattering factors. mcpherson showed many during civil war and reconstruction were religiously motivated, sincerely altruistic, committed to democracy and racial justice. mcpherson was a pioneer in african-american history. he followed his dissertation of the civil war, with an argument among other things that black soldiers were cruc

war and how the war's outcome and immediate aftermath has impacted racial issues ever since. speakers include david blithe, edward air, and frank smith who heads the civil war memorial and museum. this two-hour event took place at the johns hopkins school in washington, d.c. >>> i'd like to just start with -- with david blithe, and then we'll take it from there. >> thank you, joe, and thank you all for coming. >> thanks for inviting me on this panel. usually among historians, we are fragmented into writing about the south and north, the west, new england, whomever. it's great to actually be on a panel called species history. i like that. it's the human species, after all that's our subject. i've written a great deal about this problem of civil war memory. but all i'm going to try to do is place us somewhere and then just to try to trouble the water a little bit about what we actually mean by civil war memory and why it hasn't ever quite healed, perhaps. there was a speech made by the african methodist bishop in 1905, nathaniel hall in boston, the 100th anniversary of the birt

story. >> world war i begin as the people's war.t ended with the stalemate of trench warfare and unparalleled death and suffering. britain had to turn to its empire. they joined up and shipped out for europe's war. >> over 60,000 of these troops traveled 9,000 miles coming here on the steep and rocky cliffs of the peninsula in turkey. >> april 1915. they had the british counterpart under general sir ian hamilton. there was opening a supply line to russia. what was being reported in the australian press about the conditions for the australian commonwealth troops? >> things were going well. they weren't admitting to any major defeats which in fact was a slaughter house. >> at the age of 30, his father went to investigate problems to the hoops. >> he was shocked by what he saw. he was shocked by the british general who were charge of the whole thing. ordering suicidal attacks. >> generals were on out on the ships drinking their gin and tonics. >> you had to agree --. >> oliver: from these miserable trenches thousands of young men charg

and i was right i mean if you talk about islamic wars you had the war desert storm you had the war against afghanistan you got the war in iraq the war in libya now they're talking about syria now they're talking about iran. of what benefit has this been to the united states when you see where we were in one thousand nine hundred and where we are today and where china was in one thousand nine hundred and where china is today and i'm going into any of these countries haven't invaded anybody and they're moving upward as brazil and as our india and what do we do one and all these places i don't think we can you can't replicate the middle west in the middle east thank you you thank . happiness and tragedy. roshan. and beatrice. family. and does a lake. on the bottom of a coffee swamp. well into the future to the peaks of the looking glass at what will be the homes of the future where the walls might just be smarter than the residents every day trash protects you from the elements outside and the whole system works to save you money we shine the spotlight on the latest building projects all arou

-- they started the war. and by the way, if a fight were to break out in this room, as soon as the police get here and settle everything, the first question would be who started this? that's right. president lincoln didn't start this war. as a matter of fact, you know -- south carolina seceded from the union. president lincoln hadn't been sworn in yet. they seceded in 1860, president lincoln doesn't get sworn in into march. as a matter of fact, when the war started, when frederick douglass declared the war started, frederick douglass said, i wish the north had started this war. in other words, i was there -- cared enough about our freedom so they would have started this war. since they didn't care to start this, david blight, he said thank god for the slaveholders. that's right, somebody had to start this. you can't finish what you don't start. somebody had to start this. and so he said somebody had to start this. and harriet tubman said god ain't going to let president lincoln win until he does the right thi

when the baltimore exchange editorialized the war of the south is the war of the people but the war of the north was the water of a party carried out by political schemers, military authorities shut down the paper and arrested the editor whose name was francis scott key howard. not by accident. the irony here he was the grandson of the author of the national anthem thrown into ft. lafayette prison. was he guilty anything more than expressing himself? well, his surviving files included secret resolutions pledging to support the confederacy and the rebellion. marshall suppressed four of the city's other pro-secession journals. asked to justify this by congress, lincoln said are all the laws but one to go unexecuted? and the government itself go to pieces lest that one be violated? accusing rebels of what he called an insidious debatching of the public mind. he said that he could but perform this duty or surrender the entire existence of government. i purposely dwelled on these examples from 1861. probably because they're less known than the later incidents but also because they definitel

and i was right i mean if you talk about islamic wars you had the war desert storm you had the war against afghanistan you got the war in iraq and the war in libya now they're talking about syria and now they're talking about iran. what benefit has this been to the united states when you see where we were in one thousand nine hundred and where we are today and where china was in one thousand nine hundred and where china is today i am going into any of these countries haven't invaded anybody and they're moving upward as is brazil and as are india and what do we do on in all these places some i don't think we can you can't replicate the middle west in the middle east thank you thank you. it's all designed to keep you close then you're all right world as a prison. you know you leave somebody in there for a couple hours like that in a stress positions. you have this fear of the unknown and this stress sort of building and. ten twelve hours they chose songs are. going to war coming up here into iraq. with a. piece of pizza. every day trashed. and the whole system works to see. the. technology.

and i was right i mean if you talk about islamic wars you had the war desert storm you had the war against afghanistan you've got the war in iraq and the war in libya now they're talking about syria and now they're talking about iran. of what benefit has this been to the united states when you see where we were in one thousand nine hundred and where we are today and where china was in one thousand nine hundred and where china is today i am going into any of these countries haven't invaded anybody and they're moving upward as is brazil and as are india and what do we do one in all these places i don't think we can you can't replicate the middle west in the middle east thank you thank you. it's. i'm growing. pains. it's. a mission of free accreditation free in-store judges free arrangements free. three stooges free. download free broadcast quality video for your media projects a free media dog to our t. dog tom. a little bit of. a fresh attempt to negotiate a cease fire in syria this time by the red cross' people have high hopes an eminent reform referendum on a new constitution will help en

war. everybody will be very bad not only through it n. not only to the middle east all work or oil prices are very high now because of this ok gilbert if i can go to you i think patrick kind of put it really out there very openly it's all about regime change that's what this is about it's not about the nuclear program the united states and its allies particularly israel want to regime change there for some reason they think it will be better advised. to you know i mean that change the regime you get the regime or the nuclear weapon you have a choice well you can read strange you say well can you give one of your picture i guess we don't have or some people have sovereignty from don't go but what do you think about this. well you summed it up in the last sentence the word rational came up here and i'd less like to put it into a context as to who is behaving more rationally in the sense of working up to their own interests yes america has interests in the middle east and i think going to an

secretary of war jefferson davis. because geoff davis hjeff davis bit of confidence in young captain mcclellan in the 1850s he was part of a handpicked group that he sent to the crimea in the siege of sebastopol. mcclellan established a reputation then as being very, very intelligent in his approach to dealing with british and french engineers and sent some excellent reports back to the united states war department. picked up a lot of life experiences while he was over there in some bad neighborhoods. when he got back, though, he looked at what the army had to offer him. kind of a stultified period in our history. unless you were particularly fond of chasing comanches along the rio grande. that didn't really offer quite so much to a young man on the way up as did an offer from the illinois central railroad. as you know, railroad construction and expansion was a dot-com boom. he submitted his resignation to the army to begin his engineering career and within a year he was moved up to the position of vice president with

use in bello, justice in war. did that -- this war show ers?ice in terms of the way both and i would say both sides had the advantage of having -- of understanding the conventions of war, the respectability, the respect that needed to be shown both sides because prior to the war, they were all one and the same nation with the same matched history. many of them with the same religion. manythof sial conventions and i about how conflict should proceed. but during the course of the war, we're going to see that questions will arise about the ethical treatment of prisoners. ones that will -- questions that will defy the conventions that both sides had prior to going into the war. so as we examine this question, we can think about it in terms of just war theory. was justice committed to these prisoners? and what ways should justice have been upheld? now, to understand the prisoner of war system, it's very simple because it ped and if you understand these three phases and when they come about, you could easily undetan proceeds. there are -- there is th

both parties deppricated war, ad others would make war rather than let it perish. and the war came. and as we learned today in our panel about 1861, and the war continued. thanks to tom and jack and john and craig and adam and mr. chairman. thank you all, too. [ applause ] >>> you're watching american history tv. 48 hours of people and events that helped document the american story. all weekend, every weekend on cspan-3. next is a film produced in 1974 by the u.s. army. portions of the film was reported in the pentagon in the hall of heroes. the hall of heroes was dedicated in 1968 by president lyndon johnson and canskand contains t of the recipients of the medal of honor. the series focuses on historic battles, figures and traditions in u.s. military history. >>> the long years stretched behind us into the past, forming corridors of time which echoed to the bugle's sound of valor. those years and that valor have been given tangible focus here in this quiet shrine of tribute, the hall of heroes. here in a ring of the pentagon, this space is dedicated to a nation's remembrance. not o

easier to start wars and ending and as you said it is true said there is a law live in war going on between iran and israel and united states president obama for his created here is international community to to impose that office sanctions on iran and it needs some time to see how it will work ok and that is it is nor it is very irrational toward war talk about war war we state every above you will be very bad not only at the end not only to the middle east all the world of oil prices are pretty high now because of this ok gilbert if i can go to you i think patrick kind of put it really out there very openly it's all about regime change that's what this is about it's not about the nuclear program is that the united states and its allies particularly israel want to regime change there for some reason they think you'll get a little bit better accuracy a better outcome you know i mean that changes the regime then you get the regime or the nuclear weapon you have a choice well it's really strange i use a weapon you can overload you guess we don't have or some people have sovereignty so

there will be a war. one last point, however, if you read the very, very brief little speeches that lincoln gave from the back of his rail car as he made the rail journey from springfield to washington, i don't know how many he made, but you can find eight, ten printed. rarely more than a couple paragraphs. when you read them carefully, you can see he's not rattling a sabre but he's telling his audience, i may need to call on you. he doesn't have to tell them why. but he's gradually preparing the north for the fact that he may have to do something, something more. >> before i turn to tom, just -- since i know one thing statistically, i might as well throw it out here. 101 is the total number of speeches made on the inaugural journey. not all in print, but some repetitions. there was actually one occasion, i can't remember the city, after indianapolis -- what would come after indianapolis on the -- it wasn't cincinnati. it was ohio but it wasn't cincinnati. >> columbus? >> yeah. he does get very, very bell

the mexican war? who wants to -- what is the mexican war? it's a story that involves the civil war characters not in the civil war but just as interesting. >> you mentioned jefferson writing the declaration with adams and franklin looking over your shoulder. was mccullough looking over your shoulder in this? >> i appreciate you asking me about mccullough. is there a conspiracy of publishers, i mean do you guys all get together and say, you know, let's make the revolution hot, and so everybody gets together and writes -- i was not aware of david mccullough's book, and i was thrilled that it's receiving the attention it's receiving. here's a message to hollywood, john adams' biography is a number one best seller. it's not about his affairs and all this bogusness, thank you american public for recognizing that. i'm thrilled with that book. as i said in some interview that, i'm so happy that new york considers this valuable, and that new york cares enough and believes that the public might actually buy these books. because that's the only way th

at that time i came here, i said cold war was a long big war. great war. covered almost half a century. after the cold war, still, there's no new set of norms reflecting the needs of the post cold war situation, there's no congress like congress of vienna vienna, there's not a new international organization, and also, there's no reform of the existing international organizations, there has been many discussions on the reforming united nations system, but still united nations is functioning like before, the last indication was veto, in the -- as if cold war was continuing. so, we have to make first, we have to see big picture. we are facing a huge global economy crisis and a policy crisis around turkey but you have to understand where we are coming from. since there was no adjustment of international system and no new set of norms and no set of reformation of the international organizations, i can tell you that there were three big earthquakes in the last 20 years. earthquake is a good analogy for turks, and maybe for americans who came from los angeles, ma

both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive. the other would accept war rather than let it perish. and the war came. " in a way that recollection sets the stage for tonight's discussion because it sheds light on lincoln's thinking both at the beginning of the conflict and as he looked toward inside conclusion. and in his mind, washington in 1861 was literally crawling with what he called insurgent agents, committed to destroying the union. his responsibility then and his justification later was that anything he did to help the nation survive was justified. and sometimes that determination took extraordinary form. i know chief judge kay and chief judge litman will be amused i hope by this story. but when chief justice roger towny acting in his capacity as a federal sir curt judge challenged lincoln's suspension of the writ in maryland early in the war, the president simply ignored it. but barely resisted, supposedly, an inclination to have the chief arrested for interfering. during the war, the court did not again attempt to judg

afghanistan war. he is also made the case on the campaign trail that there should definitely be no negotiations with the taliban to end the afghanistan war. he was for and also very much against the iraq war, for and very much against a timetable to end the afghanistan war. because he has taken opposite positions equally ferocious and opposite positions on all of those core issues, is there a path out of that in terms of him trying to come up with some coherent way of explaining all the different positions or some way to apologize and make the contradictions go away? >> possibly the smartest play for romney at this point is to make foreign policy a kind of culture war issue. and you've sort of heard him do it in a variety of ways throughout the campaign, almost like he's testing the message. in which he just wants to save had, obama doesn't believe in freedoms sufficiently or he's somehow not tough enough to protect the country. and if he can convince voters that that's the kind of threshold issue, th

vietnam war in the late 1960s and late 1970s. that made me more and more aware of the connection between protest movements, the military, and the political context in which both the war and anti-war movement protests against it took place. in other words, the connection to politics and to the military became increasingly a focus of my thinking. i think the climate of the times. and in 1976, textbook publisher approached me and asked me about writing a new textbook to take the place of the old james c. randolph by then randall donald on civil war and reconstruction, perhaps naively and foolishly i agreed to under take that project. that evolved five years later into a college textbook ordeal by fire. at the same time van woodward approached me about writing a volume in the oxford history of the united states, which turned out after first going to be the guilded age reconstruction guilded age volume to be the antebellum and civil war volume and somewhat naively having signed one contract in 1976, i signed a second contract also in

and i was right i mean if you talk about islamic wars you had the war desert storm you had the war against afghanistan that got the war in iraq the war in libya now they're talking about syria now they're talking about iran. of what benefit has this been to the united states when you see where we were in one thousand nine hundred and where we are today and where china was in one thousand nine hundred and where china is today i am going into any of these countries haven't invaded anybody and they're moving upward as brazil and as our india and what do we do one in all these places i don't think we can you can't replicate the middle west in the middle east. thank you thank you. wealthy british. let's let. the. market. find out what's really happening to the global economy with. no holds barred look at the global financial headlines kaiser reports. we have. all. right enough. but. when i was called. yes so you can liberate other women and you certainly can't do it through the barrel of a gun only effective social change you can be the afghans themselves ask dan many women we believe are going

the war to end all war was over, or so many of us in our inexperience believed. but a mere heartbeat of history, two decades, would prove otherwise. a lot of our fire power was at the bottom of pearl harbor. with what remained, we paid a little something on account. and while we bought time, 14 million americans responded by training for the greatest and most destructive war in history. so began world war ii, and before it was over, 430 from among the 14 million would win the medal of honor. some would come upon their moment on islands of the pacific, others in african desert or the steep and hostile terrain of italy. but for each, it would be a moment when somehow the price that action might exact from them was left unconsidered, shouldered aside by their individual commitment to meet the need for that action -- d-day. 5,000 ships and on every one of them, men thinking of loved ones, of home, of just how much they had to lose. >> my darling, we got your letter dated may 25, and as always, i've read it a dozen times. i keep them all. we'll read them together some

, especially american civil wars, but the other civil wars in comparative context. during the course of it, our host gave us tours of israel and jerusalem. one day we walked to the top of temple mount, holy site for all three major religions of the crossroads of middle east and israel, judaism, christianity and islam. joe and i were wearing bermuda shorts on that rather hot day. when we got to the top we were required to cover our legs. so we had to rent skirts as a consequence there were several photographs. joe and i think that probably this will be on the jacket of our next book. let me take this opportunity to thank all members of the panel who have been friends of mine as well as in some cases former students for many years, even decades. i am most appreciative of the work they have done to put together the volume, the struggle for equality for essays in my other than but also to organize this conference. especially i'm grateful to vernon who i think almost single handedly with many hours of effort put together the pieces of the conference and pieces of the boo

world war ii. and the lead-up to world war ii and this huge controversy that we're not going to try to resolve right now. you know, did roosevelt do enough, did he not do enough to help the jews and you know, the simple answer is, did he do everything possible? no. did he do more than any other world leader, including winston churchill? yes. far more than any of them. could he ultimately have stopped the holocaust? no. united states didn't have troops on the ground in europe, except for italy, until when? come on. you all know. june you have 1941. it took months to consolidate. but we'll talk a little more about this when we get to the world war ii period. so by 1937, 1938, attention is beginning to shift. you know, the first term is all about the great depression, domestic policy, changing the fundamental politics and policies of america. by the time you're getting towards the middle of the second term, foreign policy is becoming extremely important, and would soon come to dominate domestic policy

they love a war that promote war there's also a security aspect to this because of the department of homeland security but war is about the most profitable thing for any of the institutions connected to the government and these people they want to increase their profits and they do so by promoting war and instigating wars they work with the government we see now you know the run up against syria and the run up against especially iran they'd like all these countries destroyed and turned into into new colonies or dependencies and i think other countries are. head of this pakistan even saudi arabia if we look at some of the plans that have been discussed to totally take over the middle east all and have the us empire run it so it's a very alarming thing it's all too real i would argue it was it had been all too real by the time i was in our gave a speech really we never got rid of it from world war two because they started up the cold war almost immediately after the war as a justification for keeping the whole thing in operation keeping the money flowing to the favored clients of the u