when the president left the room, i said i believe secretary wolfowitz got to him. >> paul wolfowitz, bush's deputy secretary of defense, has had saddam on his personal enemies list for two decades. >> every time he survives something, he sends the message to his enemies, i outlast my enemies and if you on the wrong list when i'm still around, you'll be in trouble. >> paul wolfowitz would become convinced that if we looked strongly enough, if we looked closely enough, we'd find the hand of saddam hussein behind virtually every terrorist attack on the united states. >> even before 9/11 wolfowitz and undersecretary of defense douglas fife had been driving policy on iraq. >> some of us believe you'll have a saddam hussein problem forever unless you get rid of him. >> meeting notes from the afternoon of 9/11 showed donald rumsfeld tasking a top aide to find the best info fast. good enough to hit saddam hussein. he asks the aide to get evidence from wolfowitz of a saddam connection with ubl. osama bin laden. >> we all looked at each other, like, what are they talking about? who the hell, s

only if wolfowitz and crystal have them on.erms of helping the region come together around this. no one benefits from an isis backed government that is capable of terrorism both in the region and abroad and may hit american interests. we do have to craft a meaningful solution. i think this new media landscape could be a part of that. >> goldie, do you think -- go ahead senator. >> let me just say, i'm not suggesting that what fwoez on in the rest of the world is none of our business. you know, diplomacy should not be considered a soft weapon. diplomacy is very important here. let me make one other point. what happened 10 and 11 years ago is not going to happen now because that happened not only were we deceived with bad information to go to war but it was also the case that happened in the shadow of 9/11. and you could do things in the shadow of that horror of 9/11 that i think you cannot do 10 and 11 years later. >> i agree with that. >> very profound point. goldie is there any military action you think the people would go alo

>> wolfowitz was correct, menendez is correct.nsequences for us, no matter what happens. whether you call it al qaeda, isis, whatever you call it, the group wishes us no good and has historically taken a lot of american s americans' lives. we have a real stake in this. the question becomes what do you do? that's a much more complicated issue once we decide it has consequences for us, what do we do, i think we'll have to talk about that. i talked to the administration over the weekend. on friday, tony blanken. frankly, i didn't have any incisive advice to give him. we'll have to see what options are available to us to try to dissuade and defeat the proponents of terrorism. clearly there's a lot of blame to go around. right now we need to look at what can we get done in an effective way that will have long term consequences, not just temporary. >> should this be separated almost from the iraq issue itself, which is that president obama should frame this as a, look, this is about isis or this is about this specific group that is wrea

>> well, when the media puts on wolfowitz and dick cheney and others who took us to war a decade ago, don't think that's responsible. their advice is not worth anything. they are the ones that created this mess. they are going on television now simply to blame others for the mess that they created. i don't think that's very helpful to the public's understanding of what is really going on or how we should be reacting. but if people like john mccain and lindsey graham want us to deploy air assets, they ought to sponsor a sense of the senate resolution, see how much support they get on the hill. >> and is there anything you want to ask ambassador wilson while we have him here? >> well, to be quite honest with you, i'd ask what could the u.s. do in terms of its support for prime minister maliki? is there any chance that the united states would say it's time to step aside? could there be a way in talking with iran to give somebody else a chance to make this more pluralistic or an exclusive government? >> i'm sure we could and i suspect our ambassador in baghdad is in close consultations wi

wolfowitz was wrong 11 years ago and wrong again today. pa paul bremer is giving his opinion, the guy who failed at running iraq after the invasion, said it's in our interest to stay involved. >> how can you advocate anymore people, any more lives going to risk for that country? >> because it's in our interest and there are two points about our interest. number one as the president pointed out on friday in his first statement, we cannot allow -- the world's worst terrorist group to get a base of support in a failed nation. this is not afghanistan which is remote and behind the mountains, this is the heart of the middle east with a lot of wealth and we cannot allow that to happen. >> paul bremer just said iraq was a failed nation and they want to do a do-over? >> no one who was involved in the bush administration has the right to talk about iraq with any credibility whatsoever. these guys failed big time. the invasion of iraq was one of the biggest mistakes in american history. thousands of lives lost and of course for a war that was starte

paul wolfowitz, what do you do then as a policy matter to stop this? >> it's a complicated situation. you don't just come up with we're going to bomb this or do that. i think a 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

last couple days, there's been some kind of shock awareness of why we are listening to crystal, wolfowitz and bremmer opine on what to do in iraq. >> the structure of the arguments around this right now, very much look like the structure of the arguments back then, in that there is this kind of temp taking to advocate some immediate sort of intervention to deal with what is seen as an immediate problem, in this case, it's a bad situation in iraq. i don't think there's anyone who thinks that's not the case. without asking the then what yeah, and the then what question is the question that was failed to ask the first time around, called the 50 first state about what the iraq occupation might look like, do you think we've gotten better as a society at asking that question? >> i think there is some sobering effect to the last dozen years and people looking at iraq now looking at afghanistan and saying, for what have we lost these lives, sacrificed all the money and international standing and the torture and all the rest, we maybe have been forced into some sort of that, i think also, it is as

it's wise to remember what the neo-cons told us before the invasion like paul wolfowitz on how the war will pay for itself. >> the oil revenue could are bring --. they could finance its own reconstruction soon. >> why did we do it for a trillion dollars? or bill crystal's testimony before the senate foreign relations committee in 2002 when he said, american and alliance forces will be welcomed in baghdad as liberators. who could forget this line? i believe demolishing hussein is's military power and liberating iraq would be a cakewalk. today on "morning joe" bremer defended the bush administration actions in iraq. >> iraqis lusted to choose their own government. don't get into this we are trying to shove democracy down somebody's throat. >> we did take out hussein, right? >> right. >> america, not the iraqi people. >> right. therefore, what? >> therefore we then tried to impose democracy in that country. >> we did not impose democracy. get away from that. it's not true. the facts are in the other direction on that subject. anyway, it's not the point right now. we are where we are. >> w

former deputy secretary of defense paul wolfowitz calling for president obama to take military action. yes, this is the same paul wolfowitz who in 2003 when asked what the iraq war would cost told congress not to worry, that iraq would be be able to finance its own reconstruction because of its vast oil wealth. a war that ultimately cost $2.2 trillion. a sum that is singularly america's debt and our obligation. it should distress any american that so many of our politicians and journalists are so free and fast with their calls for military action again in iraq. while offering no answers as to why they would expect a different outcome this time. why would we again take up iraq, al qaeda as our national burden solely without a clear line drawn between our sacrifice and cost and our interest and our compensation. yes, our compensation. no answers by the president or those who would cheer his intervention without strategy to the fundamental question, why should the united states assume the duty and cost and blood and money that should at the very least be shared with europe? president oba

take president bush's paul wolfowitz who some say was the architect of the war. he has accused president obama recently of not taking a strong position in iraq. wolfowitz took a strong position on iraq's sectarian violence when he stated -- listen to this bizarre statement, mr. president, and this is a quote -- "there has been none of the record in iraq of ethnic militias fighting one another." look at what he said. "there has been none of the record in iraq of ethnic militias fighting one another." mr. president, for centuries -- that's wolfowitz. how about billy -- bill crystal. not the comedian. he's a writer. bill crystal, one of the architects of the iraq war who infamously predicted that american soldiers would be welcome as liberators in iraq and said the war would last two months. well, he was only wrong nine years and ten months. crystal also claimed there is no evidence of discord among the sunnis and shiites in iraq. no, only centuries of discord, centuries. yet, even in light of this incorrect assertion about iraq, crystal went on to say we need to ha

it's not just what's happened with dick cheney and wolfowitz, but actually what has happened in syriawar has now crossed over into the border in iraq. the u.s. policy positions on this latest isis position are quite incomprehensible. it supports isis in syria. it supports saudi money supporting sunni militants in syria. it it supports iran's position on the isis in iraq and more broadly speaking, it supports a position against iran, for example in syria and i think perhaps the one thing that might come from this very difficult situation for the people in iraq is a greater collaboration between the united states and iran, the united states and russia to try and build something from the situation that is not a complete disaster. upon. >> let me follow up on the contention that syria is president obama's war. >> what would you like to see from him if it is his war in syria? >> i think one can say, i think pretty factually that the president is getting criticized from both sides both from hawks who would like to see greater involvement and liberals who say don't open the door to engage mi

the question of bookers on our shows bringing in repeatedly people like paul bremer and paul wol wolfowitz who were as responsible for what happened. >> a strange kind of metadebate has erupted. everything that's happening there, it's hard to find good silver linings. the conversation politically here about who has standing in this debate, and they're people making the argument you can't constrain the boundaries of debate, people lose and people might have been wrong once before, they might be right again, what do you say to that? >> i have some experience with this? i put out a fairly ill considered tweet a few days ago, saying, how about this -- if you stump for the war, maybe we don't need your advice now. oh, you're going to lock up people that disagree. that's not my point. my point is, if you were really grossly in error on this particular topic, on the likely consequences of military operations in this country, at least you should have a little bit of deference or reticence in saying, i was wrong then. i think in the last couple days, there's been some kind of shock awareness of why

ming up support for endless war, paul wolfowitz. on guitar you kidding me, how does this guy keep getting booked on television, lindsey graham. >> this stubborn-headed president who thinks he knows better than everybody else, who withdrew troops. stubborn-headed, delusional, detached president, but that's the last bad thing i'm going to say. [laughter] >> jon: my wicked tongue. [laughter] [speaking with southern accent]: i'm so bad... at foreign policy. now pour me another julep. >> jon: like any terrible band, they're nothing without their lead singer, old johnny rotten. johnny rotten judgment. his advocacy of the iraq war was legend, his sophisticated knowledge of the region unparalleled, in that it did not parallel with anybody who had knowledge of the region. >> there is not a history of clashes that are violent between sunnis and shias, so i think they can probably get along. >> jon: that is a true statement if you don't count the long history of violent clashes between sunni and shia. he's right, throughout history there are l

. >> that was paul wolfowitz on sunday, a man sounding very much like his 2003 self.y choosing to gloss over the sunni/shia schism in iraq and preferring to focus on labeling any violent terrorist group in iraq as al qaeda, even if the new group now threatening baghdad is not technically al qaeda. the pro-invision crowd has crept out of the woodwork attempting to rehabilitate their own record on iraq often by attacking president obama for not fixing the things they broke. even former british prime minister tony blair got in on the act this weekend. he wrote in his editorial the 2003 invasion has no bearing on events today. we'll discuss that in a minute. because there is one more attendee to this iraqi class reunion, al zawahiza abu musab . it was his presence in iraq that the bushes, never mind the intelligence, kept using to draw a link between saddam hussein and the 9/11 hijackers. eli lake is the senior national security correspondent for "the daily beast." eli, we have now seen the return of the conflation of what's happening in iraq with 9/11. i didn't think it

who helped engineer nine eleven we remember being lied to by by dick cheney and rumsfeld and paul wolfowitz. who intentionally set out to get us involved in a war for per. this is that we're completely contrary to our interests americans understand that today and so that so as we see these chicken hawks and i say chicken hawks because most of the most all of the people that are on there beating the drum for a war if you drill down and you say well did you ever serve at all did you ever carry a rifle did you ever have bullets flying over your head what you'd find is the story the dick cheney story not only did they not serve but they tried desperately to stay away from places like vietnam by getting deferment after deferments after the firmament based on political favors so what we have now is we have these folks showing up on sunday talk shows and you almost have to say why would a book or put a dick cheney or a paul wall for wolfowitz are wrong so why would they put him on television at all and you have to conclude it's because there's nobody else that will go on in say talk this loony tal

that's right, paul wolfowitz used the phrase an obscure shia/sunni issue there. we're not sure that that's an obscure issue. anyway, let's go on the ground. richard engel is now in baghdad and nbc's ayman mohyeldin is in northern iraq. richard, let me start with you. you're in baghdad. do you sense that this is a city that's preparing for a battle? >> reporter: yes, i do actually. i am right now in the square, which is where that famous statue of saddam hussein was pulled down as u.s. troops, marines came in, and eventually toppled saddam hussein. right now mostly the streets are empty, not a lot of people. people are afraid, they're staying inside their homes. prices are going up because some of the roads leading into the capital have been shut off because of the fighting. food prices are up 50% in some cases. fuel prices are also up. we've seen the iraqi army deployed, not just in their bases but putting their armored vehicles, their .50 caliber machine guns in front of the gates of their position. heavy military presence at the airport. we've been driving arou

people like paul bremer, wolfowitz who were the architects of the u.s.nvasion, occupation and destruction of iraq. people like bill crystal who have never suffered any impact on their career trajectory for being so disastrously wrong about what happened happen after the u.s. invaded iraq. u.s.pedia go to these people, to these pundits because they are power. >> i mean for goodness sake, you are seeing again people like judith miller, paul wolfeowits, others who were totally wrong during the war on iraq. i just can't help not to think about a very bad movie and now, the producers of that very bad movie have decided to produce a sequel to it. >> is this situation escalating from what you can gather toward bombing and american special forces on the ground? thousands of american lives lost in helping to liberate iraq, give a chance at democracdemocr. >> americans fought and died in mosul. >> one of the dominant frames for u.s. media coverage of iraq now has been to treat the country as a place where americans have suffered and have died and you are seeing an

wolfowitz.ise institute. sir, very good to have you with us. as i was just saying there, we're doing it again. they are pointing fingers. the left and the right. whose fault is this? the republicans are spending a lot of time blaming the current administration for this situation. most notably speaker boehner says president obama is taking a nap as mosul falls because he pulled us out of there and it's a mistake. isn't it fair, mr. wolfowitz, that if the president were taking a nap it would be on the sofa, the status of arms agreement that the bush administration put in place there of taking troops out? >> i thought you said we should -- i was not the architect of the war. if i were the architect it would have been handled very differently. you say we should be talking about what needs to be done and you're going back into this discussion about who is blaming whom. look, we are in a very urgent emergency situation. to portray it as some obscure thing between shiia and sunnis that americans couldn

just you know let everything fall go to hell and he's being interviewed as an expert i mean paul wolfowitz is on t.v. as an expert bill kristol this guy's got more blood on his hands than anybody in my lifetime well actually it's not true lyndon johnson richard nixon but still it's just. the and then john mccain in two thousand and eleven when maliki refused to sign a status of forces agreement with the united states so that obama had basically no choice but to pull all of our troops out john mccain tweeted out last american combat troops leave iraq i think president bush deserves some credit for victory right declaring victory just like bush on the u.s.s. abraham lincoln and now he's saying oh you know it's a mess because obama pulled out too soon well obama didn't pull out now push this out it's amazing to me how this right wing talking point why john mccain's has become like such conventional wisdom that hillary clinton was asked about it today at a town hall on on c.n.n. frank your thoughts on all this well i don't think that we were. i don't think we're in any position to declare vict

neil: paul wolfowitz knows this region better than anyone. gas prices are climbing with all of this. not a surprise but what is is, of the politicians say in the middle of this dash gas tax? [ 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. of taking action. means keeping seven billion ctransactions flowing.g, and when weather hits, it's data mayhem. but airlines running hp end-to-end solutions are always calm during a storm. so if your business deals

this is the same paul wolfowitz who said when he was asked what the world cost, you will congress noty, that it would be able to finance its own reconstruction because of its vast oil wealth. enjoy that ultimately has cost $2.2 trillion, a sum that is singularly america's obligation. this should distress any american that so many politicians and journalists, they are so free and fast with calls. while offering no answer as to why they would expect a different outcome this time around. and so why we would again take this without a clear line drawn without our interests and our compensation. yes, our compensation. and no answers but a president who would cure the intervention without strategy to the fundamental question, why should the united states assumed the duty and the cost in blood and money, that showed at the very least be shared with you. president obama as the wind is let's pray that he is strong enough to insist on the farm were rigorous rationalization of any u.s. return to iraq. and let's pray that americans insist this time on a clear statement of national purpose before t

neil: paul wolfowitz knows this region better than anyone. prices are climbing with all of this. not a surprise but what is is, of the politicians say in the middle of this dash gas tax? after this. means keeping seven billion ctransactions flowing.g, and when weather hits, it's data mayhem. but airlines running hp end-to-end solutions are always calm during a storm. so if your business deals with the unexpected, hp big data and cloud solutions make sure you always know what's coming - and are ready for it. make it matter. i got more advice than i knew what to do with. what i needed was information i could trust on how to take care of me and my baby. luckily, unitedhealthcare has a simple program that helps moms stay on track with their doctors and get the right care and guidance-before and after the baby is born. simple is good right now. (anncr vo) innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. neil: is this instability in iraq were not enough to push up gas prices is no bipartisan push to hayek the gas tax it is

cheney and rumsfeld and wolfowitz had a meeting with all of our oil companies. they were all the ones you named. it was recorded. theser. cheney is said to there,en was you go over this was before we attacked iraq. military to to send guard the oil fields. do you know anything about that? host: was this on the discovery channel? she hung up. guest: adam had to address that. -- i don't know how to address that. i don't know how companies like halliburton or hired. want.s. government did not saddam torching all the wells like he did on his way out of kuwait. they may have taken steps to ensure that. i cannot address that question. host: dennis is next. good morning. isler: the question i have people don't believe the news. we are all being programmed. a lot of americans died over there. what do you say to those people who died for oil? as a treasonous to use our military to help corporations get oil and other things? face wears a suit has a flag pin on the recall could -- lapel. thank you. guest: i don't have a flag on my lapel. terrible, iomething am not expectin

joining us is paul wolfowitz. ambassador, welcome.put it this way, we focus on iraq appropriately enough, it's where the worst things are happening right now. but what we're dealing with is a region wide phenomenon of al-qaeda and particularly al-qaeda in syria and iraq. i think the challenge is not to stop the violence from escalating. the challenge is to defeat al-qaeda in syria and iraq first, but then also to stop the spread of taliban violence into pakistan, the growth of al-qaeda in libya, and we should be saying al-qaeda, when you say sunni and shiite to most americans, their eyes glaze over. if you say al-qaeda, people understand what we're talking about. and that's what these groups are. >> true. they've taken over the sunni area. has the al-qaeda affiliate isis. so i'm seeing like many that if you go and say you're protecting the government, tale becoming all shia government. so we're taking a side. correct? >> that's the challenge. we've had that challenge in other situations where we don't much care for the government, but

. >> do you agree with rick, that if the cheneys and wolfowitzs are going to be pressed about 2003, then obama officials need to be pressed about the way no residual force was left in 2011? >> i think that was asked in the president's press conference. it ought to be pressed more, i agree. and their answer is always about the protection agreement that ma l maliki wouldn't sign. i'd like to know how hard did they push to get that agreement which is they now say is the reason they got identity. >> political reporters are blurring the issues. there's one about whether or not we should have gone into iraq, which i believe we should have. the second part is the mishandling of building of the troops and trying to win. it's two different issues. don't blur them. >> even chris matthews on msnbc is praising megan kelly for her handles of the former vice president. >> of course. because it's great television. television producers are going to book these people because it's great to see people say you had it wrong, you did this and you did that. and actually hear some blthbility. because people lov

. >> when paul wolfowitz testified before the iraq war, he said there's not going to be a problem. there's no history of ethnic strife in this country. they didn't know what they were doing. they didn't know the region, they didn't care. and there's no way that we're going to be able to send in air strikes or limited amounts of military supplies that's going to change the general political dynamic. if you don't address that, nothing else matters. >> as i said a few moments ago, if we can't figure out richmond, we can't figure out baghdad. thank you, gentlemen. thank you, congressman. and thank you david corn. coming up, we all remember where we were 20 years ago. the murders of o.j. simpson's wife and her friend. the white bronco chase, the trial of the century. tonight, we have new information on the case we didn't know about then. a witness said he saw o.j. simpson disposing of evidence. plus, the hard right is triumphant over eric cantor's defeat this tuesday. now hungry for more victories to knock off more incumbents. and clearly they want the next majority leader for the house

because what happened was we went to war after they told us, paul wolfowitz told us there are no sectarianles in iraq. he was talking the eric shinseki at the time, remember that? they're not going to rise up against each other. there's no evidence of that. then we went in, were there for 11 year, then drew down as president bush set up a timeline and we asked to keep some soldiers there and al maliki said no to an agreement. we left. they're ringing us up on the phone asking us to come back because the half a million men we trained have melted. is there anybody pushing back? >> pushing back meaning against acti sure. nancy pelosi is. nancy pelosi says it was a mistake to get in there in the first place and we don't want to make a mistake and get back in there, but here is the point. i don't think we go back, if we go back and we're not going to go back to anything like the 2003 invasion with hundreds of troops let alone thousands of troops. if we go back, we're not going back to try to fix iraq. the only reason that makes sense to go back is for our direct national security interests beca

>> one guy who does not agree with general petraeus and by extension my friend the general, paul wolfowitz. his argument is this. either we get involved in this and try to stabilize this or we'll all regret it and whatever they're doing over there, they'll do over here. tonight, 8:00 p.m., fbn. >>> her heard drive destroyed. her e-mails gone forever. meet the computer guy who says, the irs, bs. (vo) after 50 years of designing cars for crash survival, subaru has developed our most revolutionary feature yet. a car that can see trouble... ...and stop itself to avoid it. when the insurance institute for highway safety tested front crash prevention nobody beat subaru models with eyesight. not honda. not ford or any other brand. subaru eyesight. an extra set of eyes, every time you drive. at od, whatever business you're in, that's the business we're in with premium service like one of the best on-time delivery records and a low claims ratio, we do whatever it takes to make your business our business. od. helping the world keep promises. when a pro at any 2014 pga tour event sinks a hole-in-one,

specifically, there in that clip that we just showed, that was paul wolfowitz trying to shut up then chief of staff, eric shinseki, who had said publicly, we would probably need a much larger force to try to hold iraq together than the bush administration wanted to say that we would have to send. iraq did descend into chaos and then into sectarian and regional civil war, as soon as saddam hussein was ousted and the army was disbanded. over more than eight terrible years fighting there, the american fight in iraq was not so much against the iraqi army, which basically dissolved on contact with the initial invasion in 2003, before it was formally disbanded, the fight was instead between iraqi factions and terrorist groups and insurgent militia groups fighting against each other and against u.s. forces. and u.s. forces ended their combat operations in iraq, on the timetable established by the bush administration in 2010, and therefore, the iraqi government would not consent to any agreement to keep u.s. forces after that point, well, then, u.s. forces did leave. all of them. and natural