from the united states to latin american countries. this report clearly placed u.s. military assistance to latin america in a cold war context. because what was being foreseen was the possibility of war breaking out between the united states and soviet union, and then there is disorder in latin america, united states has to become involved in order to protect the materials that it is getting from latin america, the strategic materials, and also the mid to late -- military facilities. nsc 562 advised that it is important that every ever be made to develop an effective inter-american military collaboration in time of peace to ensure collective hemispheric defense immediately upon the outbreak of war. i'm going to skip this one so we can get to the legacy. very quickly. i want to hazard, and it is a personal hazarding, of a description of the legacy that president truman left behind with respect to u.s. policies toward latin america. first of all, from explicitly affirmed the legacy which he had received when he became president. non-inte

we disagree with the united states. against thetervene united states cooperating with the iraqi government. we believe that is a decision the iraqi government should make. we may oppose it, but it is their decision. charlie: would you encourage the government of iraq to make sure sunniunni members of the out fromnot get shut government so they do not see what we have seen time after time? first al qaeda and that isis. >> exactly. we believe the iraqi government should be inclusive. charlie: encourage the iraqi government to do that. guest: we have done that. we have done it. charlie: the government did not do it, a strong friend of iran. guest: the prime minister is a strong friend of iraq. ,very government in iraq thankfully, has been a strong friend of iraq, and this is our advice on them. iraq needs to be an inclusive government with all segments of the iraqi population represented in the government. hereon maintains extremely -- relationsains good with the sunni community. parliamentr of the -- charlie: you do not d

we serve in the united states army, united states navy, etc. in that regard, it is a widely diverse force. on the battlefield, we are one team and that is where we stayed. thank you. >> question from the japanese media. i have a question to and a questions dera oninister ono military defense. we are seeing tensions mounting. in the two plus two joint statement, it is incorporated would ben's role [indiscernible] in the alliance. what specific actions with the u.s. take? japan, what would japan's role be in missile-defense? and what would the u.s. expect japan to do in the case of a lunch of a messiah -- of a missile? sec. mattis: we would take military action to take it down. , in the onodera: simply event there is an attack on japan, we will use the assets available to us for the missile defense and we will defend japan. but showed different circumstances occur, we will solidify the relationship we have with the u.s. with close communication. country.efend the that is what we discussed today. >> thank you, everyone. [captioning performed by th

states need to reevaluate the achievements of the united states and the failures of the united states in our region. >> rose: but does iran -- >> and based on that reassessment, it will see. the role and the place of various countries in the region. we're not competing with saudi arabia. we believe that iran and saudi arabia should be a part of a regional dialogue forum. i wrote an op ed in the "new york times" several years ago. >> rose: i remember. >> calling for a regional dialogue forum and i believe that is what's lacking in our region. we are ready for it. i believe as soon as our saudi neighbors are ready to engage in dialogue, in resolving issues through dialogue. not through pressure because unfortunately this has become a habit of the united states to impose pressure or to impose direct pressure. >> rose: does this include israel. >> i'm modest, i'm talking about our immediate neighbor and that is the persian gulf. in recent years from the iraqi invasion of iran to the iraqi invasion of kuwait to u.s. operations to liberate kuwait from iraq, to liberate operations from iraq.

on the united states. domestic,y useful for political reasons to say, we can counterbalance the americans with first the soviets then now the russians. i think then and now are quite different. chinak both russia and have far more at stake in their relationship with the united states than they do with one another. the area in which i see them having the greatest congruence of issues is in the united in the security council, where both of them have a statutory seat and their desire to have issues in the united nations. i don't think there is a lot for americans to worry about in terms of alignment in which we are the odd man out. david? thanks to me add my jonathan for inviting us here this evening and to mr. nixon for being here and all of you for coming to the panel. point pick up exactly the that tom finished. use of the u.s. shouldn't be too worried if russia and china had good relations. i think the first point to make is russia and china probably have better relations now than at any point since 1972,

>>> the book i called "the american genocide: the united states and the california indian catastrophe, 1846 to 1873". the author, benjamin madley. professor madley in your book you write that between 1846 and 1870, california's native american population plunged from perhaps 150,000 to 30,000. how did that occur? >> guest: so, there are many thing wes understand already about this story. we know that disease, exposure, starvation, those were all major factors, not only in this population decline but in the suppression of demographic rebound. what we didn't know in so much detail and with so much clarity before this book was all of the factors and how they played in. systemic unfree labor regimes, kidnapping, hundreds of homicides and over 370 separate massacres carried out by vigilantes, volunteer state militia men and elements of the united states army, all of which come together to provide a very convincing, damning argument that what took place in california between 1846 and 1873 was in fact a case of genocide according to the 1948 u.n. genocide convention. >> host: why 1846? >> gu

states irradiance could not go back to toronto to say that united states would be willing to except the enrichment they needed that it right -- writing. because their fear was if they did they could seek to cause a significant disunity in the gaithersburg book festival + 1 so it was creating a problem when actually they were getting much closer to each other but something was needed to bridge that trust gap and that is where oman's stepped in once again to the raw onions and writing explaining under no circumstances the person of both of president of the united states and the supreme leader could protect and then traveled to iran which he did in me directly face-to-face with the iranian supreme leader and convey to the iranian supreme leader the contents of the letter. they no longer rejected because they did not trust the united states but because they had confidence in the united states had confidence waiting for the breakthrough to actually happen. right now we hear so much about the sectarian straits and the arab persian division after this was settled will sides were lucky and

during the war, the united states had implied that once the war was over, the united states would support economic diversification and economic growth in latin america through economic aid. in particular, an economic conference was promised. there would be a little conference, the oas, a military conference, the rio treaty, but an economic conference that would form an inter-american economic alliance. at that conference, latin americans hope to discuss commodity price stabilization, economic diversification, controls of foreign investment and a substantial economic aid. indeed, to put words in the mouth, what they were thinking about was a marshall plan for latin america. but the truman administration postponed the conference. every year, there was a different excuse or what they could not have it. the united states had new challenges. the soviet union's domination of eastern europe. the greek civil war. the stagnation of western european economies and the collapse of chinese national ist forces. by comparison, the assessment of latin america was that let -- latin america was largely imm

i would agree that the united states cannot really just let it go. if we got to the point where they carry that out. -- where they carried that out. from the north korean 1's, whiche, the b- overup and make dry runs the southern half of the peninsula that they claim is still their territory, theoretically -- this is hostile. we call it a deterrent. they consider it provocation. essentially, we are both right. if they go through with this, they are stepping it up significantly. the united states would have to figure out a way to respond in kind. i would argue in the most restrained and yet still strong way possible. i do not think we want to get to that point, though. let's say we fire a couple of coast of thethe north korean, essentially do the same thing of and then pulling -- of enveloping fire. both sides can pretend we are not at war yet, but where do we go from there? i think we want to head this off. not get to the point where they go through with the bomb plan -- and move on with a kind of diplomacy that i am happy to hear patrick cronin is sa

states and the united states allies. china is the largest trading partner of those countries in the world. --t point is often most of that trade is in the form of intermediate -- they go --china way do dependencies go? 25 percent of exports come to the united states. go to thena's exports united states, japan, and south korea. 80% of exports go to those three countries, plus the european union. exports go to china. that is a very disproportionate kind of inner -- interdependence. as for russia, they cannot do that woulde another really accelerate come sustain -- accelerate and sustain. they both need relationships available in the west. they both seek to gain some opportunities and advantages by becoming closer friends with one another? of course they do. we do not have to forfeit that. with the hard numbers. look at -- look at the hard numbers. 24% is down a whopping 2% since 1979 when china began its fabulous rise. we dropped 2%. is aboutorld economy 17%. that is almost exactly the same as china's share of world popula

turn the united states into a "sea of fire" and saying the united states would suffer "its final doom." but kim jong-un himself has not said a word. even the regime's threat to test a missile off the coast of guam was issued by a north korean general and trump tonight asked about north korea's threat made the point loud and clear, he wants to hear the tough talk from him himself. he said "let me hear kim john un say it, okay? he hasn't been saying much for the last three days, you let me hear him say it" perhaps giving north korea an off ramp. athena jones is out front near where the president is staying in bedminster, new jersey. is anyone inside the trump inner circle worried about the president's continued rampup of rhetoric against north korea? >> hi, erin. if anyone in the president's inner circle is worried about his fiery rhetoric, they're not saying so publicly and if they're expressing that concern to the president privately, he clearly isn't heeding it because we continue to hear this rhetoric several times this week. as you mentioned, five times this week, whether it's on t

they do not have to lose jobs to the united states. not parters -- this is of nafta, but is hanging over it, the question about building a wall between the united states and mexico. that is a huge issue between the united states and mexico. there are potential elections in mexico next year. you can expect that to become a big part of discussions, this free flow of people over the border. there are certain conditions in nafta that they allow professionals to come over with visas, but i do not know how much they are going to talk about immigration at this point. host: from alaska, independent caller. caller: good morning. the fellow asked about people driving in from mexico and canada into the united states. i spoke to you on the phone about six to eight months ago. you guys told me they had to drop their loads, and the loads were picked up by american drivers. i had mentioned that d.o.t. has regulations for a logbook and everything. so at that point, it was a nonissue. regardless of what the regulations are in mexico, they have to drop

at least some understanding of the united states in the world that you do not have in the united states you have germany now opposing u.s. sanctions on russia. the public you know this is not the german government this is the german public this is not the swedish government this is the swedish public so you have people who are opposed to war opposed to militarism opposed to nato expansion of close to us bases in germany expressing their viewpoint and that's you know not typically in news in europe and especially not in the united states. you know you could say that over the last four years trump and obama helped make america great again or at least a great threat. one of the countries that views the u.s. as the major threat is turkey it comes amid a rile between the two nato allies but the pentagon recently slamming ankara's our present decision to buy a russian air defense system rather than opting for nato technology washington says the russian equipment could be incompatible with other systems used by the nato alliance generally speaking it's a good idea for allies to buy into or pro

an effort to make cuba of state of the united states of america. that is one idea circulating in the minds of spanish rulers in cuba. another thing circulating was they should be in camaraderie with the slave owners in the south in order to defeat the north. but as i said, if the south had they would be after cuba ousting the spanish. at the end of the day they decided to open the report to the confederate state of america. after the defeat of the confederates, there was tremendous pressure on cuba to abolish slavery, and a bloody war interrupted to that end, leading to the rise of a figure who may be known to many, antonio masao. he was considered to be a hero amongst black americans. you have many black americans today who carry the name. come on now. >> [laughter] prof. horne: this eventuated in years of war, and as so often happens -- as the cubans and spanish are slugging it out, tiring out both sides, the united states decides to intervene in the war of 1898 and knocks out both sides and takes over the island of cuba, and as noted tried to im

well the united states have to go back to why the united states wants to be in asia at all ok why does the united states intervene ten thousand miles from mature and to and to answer that question you have to go back to the open door policy sounds boring but the bedrock foreign policy of the united states is the open door policy and when china closed the door after world war two initially the united states wanted to set up a client regime in china but that failed the communists took over and closed the open door and so the united states decided that career would be its first bastin against the encroachment of china and the closing of asia to american economic penetration ok but i mean let's talk about this the in this new killer thread i mean why don't they want to talk about that that's very important and that's pressing right now can you answer that for us go ahead home well you know the the real the real threat for the united states from the beginning was always china and you know we talk about one hundred sixty thousand troops stationed across the. western pacific but there are als

we serve in the united states army, united states navy, etc. in that regard, it is a widely diverse force. we look at our coins, out of one., we're one team and that's the way we stay. thank you chlt >> question from the japanese media. >> i have a question to secretary mattis and a question for minister onodera on military defense. north korea has planned to launch a ballistic missile and seeing tensions mounting. in the two plus two joint statement, it is incorporated that japan's role would be [indiscernible] in the alliance. what specific actions would the u.s. take? and for japan, what would japan's role be in missile-defense? and what would the u.s. expect japan to do in the case of the launch of a missile? sec. mattis: we would take military action to take it down. minister onodera: simply, in the event there is an attack on japan, we will use the assets available to us for the missile defense and we will defend japan. but should different circumstances occur, we will solidify the relationship we have with the u.s. with close communicati

quite frankly if you enter the united states illegally, you are removable from the united states, without a visa or permission. if you come over with a visa and overstay you are removable as a judge. it's not up to me to decide whether it's the right or wrong thing to do. the one thing i'll tell you is it you allow individuals who enter the united states illegally to remain in the united states illegally, as unmolested as jonathan sandwig said likely would happen to individuals who simply entered the united states illegally. you're going to get more of them and this docket will swell. that's what we're talking about today. why is the backlog so high? because we weren't enforcing the immigration laws against people we created perverse incentives for people to smuggle their children to the united states and we created perverse ways to enter the united states illegally. the smuggling fee went way down because people would just simply come across the border and claim credible fear. this was a problem for the smuggling gangs and they didn't have anybody to smuggle because quite frankly, you di

free trade between the united states and mexico. also he and exceeded a plan -- he initiated a plan was colombia that basically rescued colombia. most americans don't know we have been giving money to colombia every year since 1999 and that has transformed the country into a peaceful and prosperous place. barack obama, wildly popular in latin america. free-trade agreements with places like peru and panama. respected for normalizing relations with cuba. obama perhaps received the highest honor a u.s. leader could receive in latin america. he was at a state dinner in 2008 in one of sarah's -- in buenos best, and the world's tango dancer asked him to dance. the president did do very well. sure, not all latin americans would want to dance with democratic presidents. mexicans would denounce woodrow wilson for dispatching general pershing in 1916 into mexico trying to chase down contra via -- pancho villa. lyndon johnson, any discussions would probably never get tested the anon. -- never get past vietnam. thinkin americans tend to favorab

it is not just about the united states during the war. everything from the summer of 1914 to the peace treaty of june 1919. our collection is the most comprehensive collection of world war i materials in the world. it is not the largest, but it is comprehensive in that we do deal with all nations involved in the war. we are not just centric to the country we are located in. in the museum, when you are going to the exhibition, you see about 10% of the museum collection at one time. the rest we use for research, references, loans to other institutions, and just to make sure we have an encyclopedic collection of the war. when we are teaching about the history of it, we want to cover everything. point z.t a to where i am standing right now is in front of a wall that depicts the various shoulder sleeve insignia worn by the american expeditionary forces in world war i. these were used to identify the units and to create a feeling of belonging to a particular unit. our visitors are fascinated with the shoulder sleeve insignia but they were not r

you are breaking up the united states. that is your goal. >> they are hostile to each other, and we are a nonviolent movement. california is nonviolent. you know our gun policy. it does not have to be hostile, tucker. we are all still here. >> tucker: why would the rest of us americans lets california go without a war? >> well, i mean, it is really not up to the rest of the states, really, but do the rest of the states really love california from what i have been hearing, from the rest of the states, we are snowflakes and hippies and we do not -- we are in huge debt crisis, the hospitals are overcrowded, although rumors -- >> tucker: those are not rumors, i do not think of californians as hippies or snowflakes, i think of them as poor people because there is more poverty in their state than any other. that is a fact. it is not out to california, it is up to the rest of the states whether california can leave the union. but this could easily turn into conflict. it did in the 1860s when south carolina tried it. have you thou

united states. president richard nixon visited this rogue state in 1972, changing the course of america's relationship with it, and transforming the international situation in ways that greatly favored the united states at the time. the reason i'm starting with this is not because i think the situations are completely analogous, but it do believe that there are parallels between them in the options we face. in 1972, there really was no way to make the people's republic of china give up its nuclear weapons or give up its ideology, although the united states had and everything in its power to prevent it from getting nuclear weapons before hand. but the nixon administration realized that it had two choices. the first was to have a powerful and nuclear armed china that was completely isolated from the rest of the world and had no contact with the united states. the second option was to have a nuclear armed china that was integrated into the international community and work together with the united state

the united states did not, unlike today, the united states was no arsenal for democracy, let me tell you. the united states sent food and blood and muscle and bone, men to the front to fight in world war i and other parts of the globe, but primarily on the western front, because it did not have the facility to make guns and planes and tanks and even trucks on the scale that were being made in france at the time. but there was one thing that the united states was particularly good at, and that was telecommunications. now, this particular picture i'm showing you is a world war i poster, trying to recruit men to operate telegraph, telephones and radios, and the size of the font on the radio makes you think it is important but, in fact, the primary instrument of general ship in world war i was the telephone. now, of course, it had been invented in the united states by alexander graham bell who like many great americans was an immigrant. he came from scotland and invented the telephone over here. it was superior at this time than these other technologies because, first of all, the telegra

the united states cannot afford to wait any longer. this new assessment is alarming but it's not surprising because north korea has been on the path of trying to be able to fit a nuclear warhead on a ballistic missile capable of reaching the united states for some time. and with more time north korea is going to refine those capabilities further. so there's a lot of urgency now to stop north korea before it can deploy a reliable icbm that's capable of targeting the united states. >> so are you saying they should accept the fact that they're going to have this technology, they're going to have this capability, go to the table and try and find a way to have common ground between north korea and the united states and get them to either stop developing more nuclear weapons or to find a way to deter them from using them? >> well, i think that the united states should keep denuclearization of the korean peninsula as a long-term goal and recognize -- >> but does that look possible with this regime, kelsey? >> well, i think it can be possible

it should be the united states. you can talk to north korea and say we not going to these negotiations -- in washingtonency and in think tanks to negotiate north korea policy side. they will have a list of demands for us and we have to decide if we are ready to meet. i thought it was curious they did not have that either especially after trump-pence that i would be willing to meet with the leader of north korea face to face. everyone thought that was a bit over-the-top. curious they do not take advantage of a low-level meeting. i think congress can play a useful role and is playing a greater role in foreign policy. it is particularly a good comment by john mccain, a hawk and well-established. basically said the president should not have said what he said. the president basically implied we will use nuclear weapons and threaten a country with nuclear weapons here we have not heard that in a long time if ever we have heard it before. behink john f. kennedy may with the cuban missile crisis, but that is ill advised, to

what is peculiar to the united states is mr trump. during the campaign he was really playing with fire, he ran a really very xenophobic and racist campaign in my view and that xenophobia and racism has really energised the radical right in an ugly way in our country and we saw that in full display in charlottesville a week ago. so to be clear about this, you are the boss of one of the highest profile civil rights organisations in the united states today, are you saying that president donald trump is an out and out racist? i don't know mr trump... i don't know what's in his heart. all i do know is his actions have been racist. they've been racist for quite some time. as some of your viewers may know, mr trumpjumped on the birther bandwagon, claiming perhaps president obama wasn't born in this country. that was a true racist canard. not only did hejump on it but he lied about it repeatedly, saying things like he had sent investigators to hawaii and we were going to be amazed at what they saw and what they found. none of it was true. the

in other words, when you're president of the united states. so i studied afghanistan in great detail, and from every conceivable angle. after many meetings, over many months, we held ourfinal meeting last friday at camp david, with my cabinet and generals, to complete our strategy. i arrived at three fundamental conclusions about america's core interests in afghanistan. another aspect is integration of diplomatic, military and other power towards a successful outcome. someday, after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement which includes elements of the taliban in afghanistan. but nobody knows if or when that will ever happen. america will continue its support for the afg ha n will continue its support for the afghan government, and the afghan military, as they confront the taliban in the field. well, we know that president trump has spent months deliberating on this, but it is interesting that he has evolved, to use one word. what do you think made him change his mind? i think the complexities o

in the destination country, canada or united states. an important commercial partner or investment, investor or shareholder. >> thank you. >> could we hold on for a question from the floor, operator? go ahead, catherine. >> the us and mexico said they want to finish negotiations if possible because of upcoming elections in both countries. if you could comment on if that is a realistic timeline and if you could comment on longer negotiations that are drawn out impacting agricultural markets. >> discussed this at lunch. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mexico is two plans. the first one is to conclude the renegotiation or modernization of the agreement as soon as possible. affecting the dissent of the free trade agreement. the idea will be we will be finished at the end of january. but it is not -- we will wait until the timing and essence the treatment will come. understanding that nafta will continue operating, we will wait. we say in aviation, in the case -- a very improbable case that the united states decides to leave nafta

the united states congress. second, taiwan democracy and economic development, rebuild economy, rebuild democracy. don't forget, the u.s. has a lot of economic with taiwan. have to advise taiwan's authority. what kind of policies of -- with china. need to help the people in taiwan -- i just like use my presentation to let you know these very important three scenarios in taiwan, and don't just look at the so-called rhetoric you. you have to look, really look deep, into what happened in taiwan and you can know whether it is your efforts or liability. that's my presentation. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. russell chow. >> first of all, thank you, dean, walter, and the heritage foundation for the invitation to speak her at this timely event. heritage is a special place for me because actually over a decade ago i cut my teeth here at a young intern, and so for me this is sort of a homecoming, to be able to speak on this stage and with such a distinguish ed group of co-panellities itch want to

russia and the united states and here it is the united states that has walked out of it for some unknown reasons they have to come back and explain the situation in afghanistan turn a wristwatch when truong i don't want to get us on to become an area of competition and rivalry well i want afghanistan to become a place of cooperation i appreciate very much your aspirations but you know again better than i do that competition is a ruling the day in international side only yes it shouldn't be bad though why would the afghanistan of all the other war torn countries be an exception it should be an exception because if they don't call parades afghans will rise against those who have the key to the students in an afghanistan today it is the united states they just bombed us with the biggest of the bomb that they had short of a nuclear bomb a country that they call allies and would one expect me to keep quiet. well at least they would say that they they have the green light from the from your successor as afghanistan's wrong and wrong no they didn't even from the off going to go well this is not

states our defense defend russia in a different united states because. every post. conflicts should be defeated well it's interesting you say that because it leads me to my last question i know that in your previous capacity you had to do a lot with warring parties and the mediation you participated in trying to find a solution to the sri lankan conflict then i'm sure you would agree with me that the mediation is a very challenging and often very ungrateful process how do you see yourself in this new overall of the un executive general are you more of a mediator or are you perhaps just an administrator or responsible for implementing something that has already been agreed upon i think both i mean we. just launched a campaign called clean seas to. norma's presti pollution which are destroying our oceans but also being a mediator and if they. are learning from our maybe ten years trying to. succeed. most of the many other people killed how big. those will. listen to the u.s. when they go there. so essentially what you're saying here is that even if you had

mexico sends 80% of its exports to the united states and depends on market access to the united states in a very specific way. trade is pretty balanced that as a proportion of the economy that depends on trade and a bilateral trading relationship, mexico depends more. that means when mexico started to hear during the campaign, candidate when the workingd, that it's mexicowas at risk, to think seriously about how it would manage the prospect and the threats to withdraw from nafta. in a sense, the trump administration has been pretty consistent in the language they put forward. they will seek to renegotiate. early on it was a little different, but early on, we had that language. the basic response and we are starting to hear it from mexico in terms of strategy is that mexico had a concern that just in economic negotiation and trade negotiation, mexico may not have the leverage it needs to get to an acceptable outcome, to maintain market access to the united states. things like a need to have a comprehensive dialogue and a discussion about the future of the entire relationship. we've hear

and other parts of the united states at the time did not belong to the united states like the french colonies and louisiana for example, or florida or texas all of them had slaves so when the europeans first arrived when they colonized the native people themselves are also participating with the enslavement. >> host: as we move south when is it abolished like massachusetts or new york? was that leading up to the civil war?. >> the of revolution did end slavery to a certain extent in the united states so we see lord dunmore in 1776 in virginia say the fight for the british you can keep your freedom that is one of the first emancipation and proclamations that he did to get soldiers because he did not have any. so trying to figure out what the heck to do so i better take advantage of these people who want to be free so that was one of the first "emancipation proclamation" that the same time the revolution brought a kind of moral conflict to those who were the founders of our nation and people began to abandon the institution of slavery in the northeast say you can see where slavery had

what is the united states? the united states is a republic. a republic. an island of republican practice in a sea of monarchies and dictatorships. what kind of an example do we think we're setting as a republic if we tolerate slavery? in fact, encourage its growth? what are we saying about the very idea most precious to all of us and that is the idea of republican government in which all men are created equal and in which the people are sovereign? doesn't that suggest that republicanism is a fraud? how can you talk about sovereignty of the people and then take a big chunk of the people and then say they can never participate? why do they do that? doesn't that make republicanism laughable? i mean, least the monarchs are consistent. give them credit. you know? the king of barateria says, i am the king, you do what i say, you jump when i say, and ask how high on the way up. there's no attempt by a king to put a sugarcoating around monarchy. but here we are as a republic, we're supposed to be enunciating this enlightenment principle of the sovereignty of the

a target in the united states. use ally not to be the world policeman but others take the lead. it's a huge, huge challenge in this hemisphere. yes, ma'am and then up here. >> so my question with the noters and glacier melting and the trade that could happen in the north is -- if there's no longer polar icecap and russia long stapgding desire for warm water port so can you give us sort of a 20-year outlook on that? >> i can. assuming that global warming helicopterrings we're going to see within 20 years we'll see the -- sea lane of chiewngs, the shipping lanes, open all year round. that means we have to create systems of buoys to mark them. we have to provide search and a rescue. we have to ensure that mariners can operate safely and crew tankers l and g tankers so we have to create a regime to do that. we need to cooperative relationship with russia. the problem is, we have an extreme geopolitical confrontation with russia over o syria, where they support assad over invasion of ukraine and intrusion. so how do we

the number of people in the united states is at a record high. one in four americans, almost one in four americans in the ages between 25 and 54 are not even employed. , males-american workers' with a diploma, has plummeted 40% points since the mass wave of unskilled migration began. the reality is that come if you just use common sense -- yes, i will use common sense -- the reason why some companies want to bring in more unskilled labor is because they know it reduces wages and labor costs. our job as a country, to is our duty? to a u.s. workers. if low skilled immigration was an unalloyed good for the economy, why we having growing at 1.5% for the last 17 years at a time of unprecedented new low-wage arrivals? the facts speak for themselves. hand, like i said, you have alter high school workers who are at the back of the line, which makes no sense in the year 2017. let me go to neil monroe. targeting the black unemployment rate which is historically higher than the average american? is that what you are looking at? doubt, verye is no sad and ve

i think it would be best for the united states, because if the united states would look at its achievements -- quote unquote -- in our region, and see what it has achieved. it has made all of the wrong choices. its allies are accusing each other of supporting terrorism. i believe the united states needs to take a fresh look at the situation in our region and see how it is dealing with important issues of stability and security in our region. and decide for itself where it wants to stand. charlie: but as you know, at the conference in riyadh, the saudi -- the summit in riyadh, saudi arabia and some of the arab state allies asked the united states to join them in isolating iran. so they believe you are engaged in these activities that the united states suggests you are. javad sharif: i just want to ask you who was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks? charlie: who do you think was behind it gekko was this individuals or an attack by the state of saudi arabia? javad sharif: we know the individuals came from saudi arabia, 15 of them. we also know the ideology came from saudi arabia. if you just ch

this is how the united states government operates. and we know this because of declassified defense intelligence agency reports. so not only are we hypocritical, but also bipolar in many ways. because we think we can not just be two-faced, but we think we can also manage certain situations in a way that just defies reality. so, and of course, coming back to it all, it is the very people who live in these places, who are being burned to death and ripped apart. and i think it is easy for us to forget that. as we talk about this as i stand here in my suit and tie, and drink my cup of coffee, that as we speak about this, american bombs are ripping apart men, women, and children as we speak. it is not abstract at all. >> one thing i forgot to meantion -- oh, i'm sorry. a number of people mentioned reliance on airstrikes as a big part of u.s. strategy. would that undermine humanitarian pretext argument, as well? >> absolutely. the other thing, too, i recall there being a report that was released by the united nations last fall. and i was re

he left the door up for a p premptive strike by the united states. the president also is publicly declaring that he has no plans to fire robert mueller as his russia investigation heats up. fbi said he was surprised the raid of the home of paul manafort. >> and pouring more feud on the top republican in the senate. he called mitch mcconnell's failure to get obama care repeals and replaced a disgrace. this after he posted multiple tweets slamming the majority leader and urging him to get back to work. this hour, i'll talk about the north korea situation with our panelists. first, let's go to sarah murray who is covering the president in new jersey right now. we heard from the president not once but quite today as he facing escalating threats from north korea. >> that's right, wolf, in a rare and unexpected move, he took questions from the press today and he made clear he has no plans to tone down his rhetoric when it comes to north korea. >> i will tell you this, north korea better get their act together or they will be in trouble like few nations eve

the united states says, oh, threat. it's a threat if this new government is going to sort of align with the soviet union then that's a problem that needs to be rectified when they assassinated him, so i don't really need to know for you to see that kind of conflict into which these african american ambassadors were stepping as kind of the face of the united states in africa, kind of putting the best foot forward even while the united states foreign policy was doing something praps a little bit less than savory talking about ñ the cold war context. you cannot think about these traveling throughout the world let alone africa without situating that firmly within the cold war. there is other -- context too. there is no surprise that you have african american musicians in africa trying to best face ton united states. there is also context of vietnam which is going rather badly for the united states. the mood has soured about u.s. foreign policy generally. it put some of these on rather awkward position to feel like they are

the united states has a view. we should not be shy about expressing those views. >> we have time for one more question and then i want to ask our panelists, what ever is asked, any final thoughts on american leadership? this is really the core of what we are talking about this weekend. >> former member of congress, jane? >> thank you. fabulous panel. essentiallyorder is a multilateral concept. the organizations that grew out of it are multilateral. and yet president trump sees things much more in bilateral terms. tpp, heing overboard said he can cut better deals with each of the countries. my question is, the bilateral approach -- is it productive in an age like this? >> and is it sufficient? this is a good final question for each of you. take it where you want to take it. if there are issues you want to cover, please do. steve, let's start with you. answer jane's question in a roundabout way. i will start with something that madeleine albright says and if i get it wrong please correct me. matalin is wont to say t

the united states today possesses somewhere around 800 u.s. military bases outside the 50 states and washington, d.c., and that is a number that comes from a list the pentagon puts together periodically. their total runs to around 700 but i have been able to detail scores of bases that are simply left off, secretive bases. the total is somewhere around 800 bases worldwide in 80 countries, and unprecedented collection of military bases on other people's soil. it is incredibly important to point out that of course guam is u.s. soil, however the u.s. military and others treated as effectively a foreign country. one major general speaking to reporters said, we can do what we want here, and essentially the military has treated guam and the people of guam that way for decades. guam is a colony. people were not embarrassed in washington and the 50 states, were not embarrassed in past decades to call guam a colony. it is called a territory, but it is a colony. the people effectively have a kind of third class citizenship. they cannot vote for presiden

the united states to united states today to take very seriously about how it would negotiate the prospects, to withdraw from nafta, et cetera and sends the trump administration from the camp paint on has been pretty insistent in the language to seek to renegotiate every negotiation does not work, they will withdraw. for a long time we had that language. the basic response we heard early on and we are starting to hear it again from new mexico in terms of strategy was mexico had a concern that just and economic negotiations in trade negotiations with the united states, mexico may not have the leverage it needs to get to an acceptable outcome. and it started to talk about the comprehensive dialogue with the future of the entire relationship from the secretary to say that mexico feels quite a bit in terms of security cooperation, and never a terrorist attack on the united states across the u.s.-mexico border and recently has done an awful lot in terms of dealing with the movement of central americans to mexico to the united states. in 2015, mexico deported more central americans than the unite