tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg June 26, 2015 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: it is a historic week for the united states supreme court. the court affirmed in a six to three hearing today that nationwide subsidies called for in the affordable care act are illegal. chief justice john roberts wrote in the majority opinion -- congress passed before the health care act to improve insurance markets, not destroy them." he was joined by ruth bader ginsburg, stephen breyer, sonia sotomayor, and elena kagan. boating with the majority, anthony kennedy, often called the swing vote.
three conservative justices voted against it. the decision makes a major victory for the obama administration on health care. the president spoke at the white house earlier today. president obama: today after over 50 votes in congress to repeal or weaken this law, after presidential election based in part on preserving or repealing this law, after multiple challenges before the supreme court, the affordable care act is here to stay. my greatest hope is that rather than be fighting battles that we have settled again and again and again i can work with republicans and democrats to move forward. let's join together and make health care in america even better. charlie: public opinion of the law has approved -- improved, but it remains a polarizing issue. joining me now from washington, adam liptak.
a supreme court correspondent from "new york times." i'm pleased to have him here. let me begin with the significance of this. does it put aside the legal challenges to the affordable care act? adam: there are more challenges lurking in the lower courts, but having served -- survived the supreme court twice unscathed it looks like this is a law that as the president might say is getting woven into the fabric of american society and will be very hard to pull out wholesale. is it possible that later congress might do something? that's possible but i don't think that the supreme court will take on this issue again. from the perspective of the supreme court this does uphold want to call the affordable care act. charlie: even though he had done it earlier, were you surprised by john roberts?
adam: we knew that the four liberal justices would put in favor of the administration. two votes were in play, justice kennedy and the chief justice. the administration was hoping for one, must he particularly delighted to get to. the chief justice was this time leading a unified and lopsided majority, really speaking in ringing terms about the law quite different from three years ago when his opinion was fractured. joined in whole by no other joint -- no other justice. with a grudging quality to it. we seem to have a shift from the chief justice. charlie: when you look at the issue itself, explain to us stakes -- the states that did not have exchanges. people argued that the subsidy did not apply. adam: there was a phrase in the law that if you look at all by it self you might well think that only states that have
established their own exchanges these days typically democratic red state, party run red states, are entitled to exchanges. the phrase is that the exchange must the established by the eight. the chief justice said -- that's so, if you bear down on those words that is probably the better argument. but you have to put those words in the context of a sprawling 900 page law and what it meant to achieve. he said that it would frustrate the purposes of the law, many interlocking provisions, to deny subsidies in maybe two thirds of the state to poor and middle-class people who need them in order to buy health insurance. charlie: justice scalia, in his dissent, call that thinking quite absurd. adam: right, justice scalia is a textual list. he thinks -- textualist. he thinks that the words is
written have meaning and that the mean what they seem to mean and that congress could fashion a new law and it is not for the court to save congress from its mistakes. charlie: so, any opinion in this historic decision? i assume it is historic. is it not? adam: i would say so. the technical legal construction argument may not have lasting presidential residence. at the symbolic resonance, the centerpiece of the obama legislative legacy being upheld by a supreme or thought to be hostile to president obama is super significant. charlie: skill he also said that the law should be called scotus care. adam: he really thinks that his colleague and friend, the chief justice, has gone out of his way to twist first constitutional law and next statutory interpretation law to rescue a
law that justice scalia seems to have no sympathy for at all. you know, there is some truth in that. president obama, while a senator, voted against the nomination of chief justice john roberts, but the chief justice has returned that favor in a very gracious way by twice of affirming the affordable care act. charlie: this week or probably next week they may announce what they think about same-sex marriage. will that be an historic decision as well? adam: that is probably a once in a decade decision, the culmination of the civil rights struggle. most of the signs on to a decision in favor of same-sex marriage in all 50 states. i think we will get that decision more likely monday than friday, but one of those two days. that will cap a term in the supreme court that has across a
whole range of issues, turned out to be surprisingly liberal. have a court dominated by five republican appointees who are generally conservative, but this term at least they have time after time deliver liberal decisions. charlie: why is that? adam: it may just be the selection of cases. it may be the mood of the times. you can connect the same-sex marriage case and health care case, assuming it comes down the way the people think it will, as an attempt to unite the nation not a patchwork of states where there are and are not subsidies, states where there are same-sex marriage or not. it may be the spring court tempting to have one united states. charlie: was there any great constitutional case decided in this term? adam: in constitutional separation of powers terms it may not have gotten the attention it deserved it
involved the question of whether congress could tell the president something about the status of jerusalem, the capital of israel. here again, the court makes what a lot of people would think is a liberal decision to say no -- the president wins, the president is allowed to decide. it comes up in the context of past courts. congress passes a law that says if you are an american with a child born in jewelry -- in jerusalem, instead of jerusalem you can have israel put in the passport. growth -- both president obama and his predecessor, president bush, said that that interferes with the president's power to run foreign affairs and recognized sovereign nations. the supreme court agreed there as well. charlie: likely to be any retirements in the next two years? adam: unless someone's health goes staggeringly and surprisingly south, i don't see
it. i think the next president may have two or three supreme court appointments, which certainly puts pressure on people in the presidential campaign, but i don't any just this voluntarily going unless there is a real health too. i don't think that one of the more liberal justices would risk supreme court nomination this late in the president's term and obviously the more conservative justices would rather have a more conservative president appoint his or her successor. charlie: when you look at the court today and look at the way that it operates is there a judgment that john roberts has been a good chief justice? charlie: i've -- adam: i think he is respected by his peers, very charming. charlie: ah. adam: there have been chief justice is that played favorites and were not straight with her
colleague, and he is not one of those. but at the same time the truth is that this court is often divided along ideological lines not reflect it in today's decisions but in the second one today, where justice kennedy joins either the four liberals or for conservatives. i think that the chief justice has been working to do away with that image. he is pleased when the press reports that this is a court that is not about politics but about legal judgments. charlie: in the history of the supreme court is it likely to say that o'connor and kennedy swing justices, exercise enormous power in terms of the outcome in what the court said was constitutional? adam: absolutely right, charlie. it turns out that the medium justice at the ideological center has completely outsized power. you see that in arguments where the moment that justice kennedy perks up with a western, everybody including his
colleagues becomes exceptionally attentive because they know that it is kennedy's vote that will decide many cases. charlie: adam, thank you again. as always, a remarkable thing we have watched in the court in two separate instances in which people thought there would be a real challenge to the affordable care act. not so much this time, but were surprised especially by the involvement of the chief justice , making the supreme court a very interesting place to cover. adam: very good to be here charlie. charlie: back in a moment. stay with us. ♪
charlie: the united states it's drawing -- is drawing its longest-running war to an end. schedule to withdraw from afghanistan in 2016, in march they announced the 10,000 u.s. forces would stay throughout this year. meanwhile, taliban fighters have regained ground. last year they suffered their highest number of casualties since the war began. then anderson is a course on it for "vice," on hbo. he has covered afghanistan for seven years and i am pleased to have him here at this table. it is not it to have you here. you have been to a rack afghanistan, i want to talk about that and other places. give us a sense of where -- what is the moment -- what was the
action on the ground? who is winning? who is losing? what is happening? how strong are the security forces on behalf of the afghan government? ben: in previous cases i thought it was a bloody stalemate, but now it appears that caliban has the upper hand and the afghans purity forces look like they are not on the point of complete failure but the numbers just don't add up. they are on sis a nibble. they are suffering the highest casualty -- casualty rates since the war began as well. this summer we will see the taliban retake several areas in their heartland, but they almost retook a major city recently. charlie: [indiscernible] adam:ben: i don't think it's going to happen, but i certainly fear that that might happen and those who do have an exit plan.
their opinion is more important than mine. they are very afraid. there are attacks in cobble regularly, more regularly than there ever were. charlie: so, how did he get to this point? the afghans who did not have a central government? was there too much corruption? all of the above? it happened? adam: -- ben: in the beginning the rush to a rack played a major part in what we are now seeing in afghanistan. the worst warlords of recent history were put back in power. the very people whose behavior led to the taliban and sweeping to power so easily in the first lace. people were so sick of corruption and violence they thought that the taliban would be good muslims who provided security and justice. by putting those people back in power it planted the seeds for the insurgency that we saw later on. the nationbuilding effort was not taken seriously until 2009
2010, and by then it was far too late. the policy that president obama adopted was counterinsurgency. they cleared entire areas of the taliban and did a good job doing that. there was never anything to transfer to the afghan for -- afghan security forces. the government was never anywhere near ready. charlie: could they have been ready? 8 this is a very long term project. the u.s. marines could not defeat the taliban with all of the resources. what chance has the afghan security forces? the afghan security forces is still funded completely by foreign aid. the government cannot pay any of the bill for their own sick or divorces. charlie: could the marines although we had underground, if we had double that and used every means that we had to wipe out the taliban, what is been impossible? 8ben: by the time they took it
seriously, it was too late. charlie: swept into pakistan. ben: then a deal could have been done. the taliban have a much stronger position now than they have been. i think that almost everybody, eluding the caliban realized things had to change. then there would have a chance to do a serious nationbuilding project. charlie: any connection between the caliban, isis, or al qaeda? ben: i am following reports closely. it looks like the so-called isis in afghanistan so far are disgruntled alabama members looking to get some attention respect, instill fear into people, printing flag and pledging allegiance to isis. i would not say that isis at l has a presence in afghanistan. the taliban and actually wrote a very polite letter recently
saying -- you have no place in afghanistan -- don't get in the way of what we are trying to do, if you do there will be trouble. i don't think that's a serious threat. charlie: are the caliban willing to negotiate? ben: these are very mixed signals. one of their main preconditions is that the u.s. has to be out which is now the case. as you said in the beginning the summer or spring offensive has already started. they've already killed a large number of people. some elements are talking plenty of other elements are still fighting. which only strengthens the negotiating table. charlie: the remark is often made in the political environment that the fact is the united states will have no troops behind in iraq contributing to the rise of isis. in terms of how many troops will leave after 2016 -- what is the
best thing to do? ben: if you leave a vacuum, it's filled by other players. there is a vacuum right now and a pianist and. -- in afghanistan. 10,000 troops isn't that much. for every infantry troop or soldier out really doing something, there are between 6, 8, and nine in support of that is in. 10,000 there is a fairly small fraction of them actually doing something. the fact is the security forces need a lot of training and equipment, it is a very long-term project. an extra 12 or 18 months i think one of the big misunderstandings in a dennis dan was that some of the large group of people that wanted things to change radically by removing the caliban they thought that would have an easily and we are now seeing that our allies actually have
very few ideological differences with the taliban on many issues. in some areas i have seen the afghan police doing things -- the most hideous crimes imaginable. child rape child murder, spectacular levels of corruption. charlie: these are by the afghan security forces? ben: and there is a militia force now that the u.s. a's for that is expanding now because art interior thierry rating so badly. trying to change an entire culture in the space of a few years from outside especially when most of the population doesn't want those changes, i think was a pipe dream. charlie: some argue that we made a mistake getting into the afghanistan after russia was kicked out. ben: if you present what happened then to obama now, it probably looks like a dream
scenario. three years after the russians left, the u.s. troops stopped engaging. the government stayed in power for three years and then. i think -- you could almost describe what's happening in afghanistan today is a civil war. 450, roughly, soldiers are killed every month. higher casualties than at any point since the war began. charlie: did the corruption go away with karzai? ben: absolutely not. opium is the best example of that. apart from a few years here and there, it has gone up every year. if we were out in helmand with the police chief himself and we were walking through poppy field after poppy field and then we went back to the police base for
lunch and within the police base there was a poppy field -- these poppies are not getting destroyed. everyone is involved. charlie: it is a lot of money involved? ben: their economy is based on the opium trade. it's big money. primary income as well. charlie: what is the lesson for the united states and all of this? ben: we travel to the various frontlines and in the last we went to kurdistan. going from baghdad to their is like going from baghdad to paris . kurdistan, it strikes me now because of the dispute, it is thriving. the lesson there is that we are very good at removing the taliban or whoever it is. real change after that had to come from within. charlie: with a plan. [laughter] ben: that definitely helps it -- as well.
but support the right people who are streetwise as well, people who know who to deal with and not to deal with. charlie: you never have those kinds of relationships and bonds. ben: i have some friends who work for ngo's in a rack in afghanistan and the best example i can think of his emergency. they operated a number of's in afghanistan. just a tiny fraction of the money that we spend daily in afghanistan. if your interest is in nationbuilding. in the long run that is how you reduce extremism in countries like this. charlie: in the absence of doing that is how the caliban rises. charlie: the taliban are doing a better job of providing security and justice in white a few areas of afghan and.
charlie: you said that none of the child rape was conducted by the afghan security forces. ben: far less. the afghan police force are notorious for abducting young boys, sex slaves at night, servants during the day. charlie: movies have been made about that. ben: i did a documentary, i cannot repeat the language he used, he used the worst language imaginable. he said -- they basically have to have sex with something, what do you expect to do? it in hideous language. charlie: you were in iraq. did you see the money? ben: we were with one of the shiite militias. i was staying outside of the mosque. charlie: one of the ones that was trouble for us in iraq. ben:
plenty of american blood on their hands, for sure, now being aided by u.s. airstrikes. i was sitting outside of the mosque waking -- waiting for the operation to take to the street. and remodeling literally walks in front of me. charlie: gray hair, no helmet nothing. ben: nothing. i was thinking to myself, head to the face, that he knew that we were westerners he would kick us out straightaway. in fact he did find out we were there and kicked us out. he heard that we were there to cover this operation and was very angry about it. i think that he just said -- leave, now. he later said -- it would not surprise me if he just got his men to stick a bullet in your head and tell everyone that they were killed by isis during the fighting. i have no idea if that's true or not, but we had to leave and did not get to cover the operation. charlie: talk about the fighting
in iraq respect to the battle against isis. you have got iraqi militias. is he directing those militias? as you are suggesting? ben: absolutely. created and commanded by iran. absolutely. former ambassador ryan crocker, we spoke to him for the work we are doing on a rack and he said there is difference between them and isis. charlie: no difference between them? ben: terms of the way that they behave. charlie: beheading and? ben: yes. charlie: i see. i assume that the militias had directed all of their hostility towards sunni's, as well as isis. ben: that is the big fear. in the areas where they clear out isis, they take revenge against the sunni population.
i think that one of the biggest mistakes of the war was allowing maliki to have a second term. the first, i think i feel i put that question to ambassador crocker and he said he was the only man who would have done that job at the oink. but he had a record of governing along very sectarian lines. that should have been enough. mullally actually got more votes in the election. most iraqis voted for a secular coalition. but maliki was given a second term. i think that that directly led to the rise of isis. charlie: you are saying that after they dry them out, they are ultimately is that is isis was in terms of beheadings, in terms of pillage, in terms of violence against women? charlie: -- ben: you could spend half of the year on youtube and see the exact same crime that they are committed -- crimes that they are committing. charlie: the argument is that if
we do bring the militia in here there is our choice, but what choice can you make if you need them to drive out isis? ben: the big question that i left with was -- i think isis could be defeated in iraq. against the and bar tribes they might do well. the shiite militias are beating them. the big question is -- what happens next? it looks like they are set up for another round of sectarian war, just like we were before. that was tens of thousands of lives lost. people being killed just because they came across the wrong checkpoint and answer the wrong questions about being shia or sunni. charlie: they didn't have the right answer. ben: we met a man in iraq and wikileaks released a cable saying that his preferred manner of killing was an electric drill. that was who might be in charge of ice is had defeated them.
charlie: the interesting thing to me is that the same thing is true in syria. you have got the same issue there, what follows a sod is whether he goes peacefully or what happens. ♪ >> this is a bloomberg news special report, breaking news out of his. the prime minister has called for a referendum on the deal offered by european creditors for his country in the bailout. >> the referendum is scheduled to take place one week from sunday. the german chancellor, angela merkel, and ecb chief, mario draghi, have been made aware of the plans. >> higher taxes commitment detention cuts, cyprus opposes them. right now we want to get to our correspondent joining us from
there. tell us what it is like on the ground. >> it is late at night here, the announcement was made past midnight. most people on the street have not even heard that this announcement has been made, that a referendum will be held. a few people listening to the radio told me that they were so rise the announced and not sure how they would -- how they would vote. it's not clear what the bailout conditions are or what the creditors are asked for. one thing that we do know is that the greek prime minister has asked for and extension of the bailout plan, perhaps allow them to make these payments that are due on tuesday, though it is not clear if they will accept that are not. >> this seems to have caught quite a bit of people by surprise. >> it certainly came out of the
blue for us. we were led to believe that there would be meetings tomorrow regarding technical discussions at the highest level. the government between cyprus and the german chancellor, merkel and the other eu leaders in brussels. at some point this evening there must have been a conversation that led to it is vision that a referendum must we held. remember, over here in greece he has been under a lot of pressure to reject these measures for food and things like that. it was entirely on your -- i'm clear that if he returned with an agreement like this that he would be able to get it through parliament. >> the was a greek poll that said that 69.7% of greece wanted to stay there no matter what the cost. >> they do understand the staying in is the best thing, but the cost requires such
painful austerity that they are torn about how they would vote. alix: the real question is -- what happens to the banks? we are told that the banks will open as normal. will controls have been planned but if they have some week of uncertainty with an imf payment due, who will want to keep their money in? >> the huge stress has been that money has been regularly leaving the greek banking system and every day the ecb has had these calls about increasing emergency liquidity assistance to the greek tanks and they have been keeping them afloat but now we have these nine days where we don't know what will happen and i'm wondering -- what is your sense us and mark is the ecb really going to keep greek banks afloat were nine days while we wait on this and people presumably get even more nervous about the banking system? >> it is unclear. it has slowed down because
people thought there would be a deal that come through and every day the city would meet on whether the systems would have enough cash to take out. we are told that there will be no capital controls planned, but whether or not they will continue to receive emergency assistance, we can't short area charlie: -- should we -- we can be sure. alix: stay with us, mehul:. carl, have you seen anything like this before? carl: i have not seen anything like this in recent years. certainly if we go back to the situation in argentina where we were rolling through governments , there might be somewhat of a parallel. this is telling us not only that cyprus is blinking, but that he has negotiated as far as he
believes is possible and he will leave it up to the people in greece who want to stay in the eurozone. recent polls suggest 68% to 70% of the population wants to remain there and if the price tag is these austerity measures, they will have to deal with that. at the same time, his popularity, his approval rating has been deteriorating. he pushed this as far as it could possibly go and now he is putting it up to the people for a vote. my expectation is that they are not going to like it but they will collectively plug their noses and accept this bringing a real possibility that we could have a turnover in the greek government potentially a no-confidence vote for the prime minister and a new political party moving and power. >> in recent days the greek stock market has been incredibly volatile, but there has been huge rally this week on the expectations that we were going to get a deal.
obviously we are not going to get a resolution anytime soon. i guess, would you anticipate seeing more volatility across the markets? carl: the markets will be in a cliffhanger mode as we wait for the outcome. there will be some public holes by midweek and headed into the weekend with a sense of whether the referendum will pass or not. we will have to wait to find out the details of the proposal and then watch the public and the actual poll results when the referendum is held, but my gut instinct is that the greeks know that they have to make some concession to stay in the eurozone and that they will begrudgingly accept it. alix: what does this mean for the rest of europe? how will europe take this referendum and uncertainty? carl: in some sense there will
be a sigh of relief that we have officially gone into the endgame and that there will not just be kicks down the road again and again and the highly we will have some sense of resolution here, whether greece goes or stays. my best bet is that they will stay, but i think that people will be relieved to finally be moving beyond this and focusing on other issues. >> stick with us, carl. we want to bring john in. john, thank you for joining us. have you seen anything like this for? john: this is pretty spectacular. it seems that they were pushed as far as they could get pushed. he was elected on a platform of not touching the pensions. although merkel gave a final ask and best offer, i think that
they realize that it really was up to the greek people. that is where it belongs. it will be up to the greek people to decide whether they want to stay in the euro or frankly be burdened with a huge debt to gdp ratio that is designed to last 30 to 50 years. or whether they just feel they have been pushed too far on the her -- the whole euro by an. germany does have to take responsibility for inviting greece into the euro and signing up on the financials and ultimately putting them in a situation where it was so much money that there was no way out without a substantial right off. alix: john, nothing is open on
-- right now. new zealand will be ground zero for how the markets are taking greece. how do you think that they will was on? -- they will respond? john: because of the pressure brought on by the ecb, i think it's very possible that this actually's stew a resolution for what's been a lingering kind of malaise on greece and to some extent the eurozone. i don't necessarily think it's the worst in the world. it's very possible that the greek people will rally around their nationalism and the like and kind of maintain them at -- their deposits for the week
prior to the referendum. >> john, i wanted to go to that. greek officials say that they will open the banks on monday. we don't know yet how the ecb will react, but you think that there is a possibility that the people will want to hold their money in the banks out of a sense of patriotism, nationalism, what is it, waiting for the referendum before deciding what's next? john: it's kind of hard for the ecb to be real excited about spending any more emergency lending under the circumstances. it's also possible that no additional the money will be needed. in that case the greek population will continue to hold our for the next week until they decide which way they want to go. alix: our reporter there joining us from athens, mehul: what are
the chances that there is not a run on the greek bank? mehul: absolutely unclear. they have been existing on these emergency liquidity assistances. the understanding we have been told to have is that the you will continue this emergency assistance as long as the political process continues. it's not clear whether the process has been needed because the prime minister has kicked the question back to the greek population. alix: everyone, thank you so much for joining us on this friday evening to help us write down this news. carl, mehul: john joining us as well, thank you very much for your insight. joe, that was a really, really exciting our area >> the common thread was that none of them have seen anything like this for . yeah, we are sort of going into the unknown here.
alix: we want to be clear, the headline for you is that we will hold a referendum on creditors in athens. the greek people will vote no for the deal. we do know that the ecb is holding a meeting on greek bank assistance on sunday. we don't know what kind of shape a will be in when we come to work on monday. there is also a meeting happening in brussels. a meeting tomorrow is happening among leaders on this deal. >> this will be an extraordinary nine days. alix: remember that that june 30 payment is just around the corner. thank you for joining us, we will now rejoin charlie rose now in progress. ♪
ben: they came up behind us, i moved forward of it. -- a bit. somehow on a corner between the ied's they were deaf and blind for a good few weeks. killed or maimed. charlie: reporter or soldier? ben: photographer who lost those of his legs and an arm. that is terrifying. you ask them all the time -- is it worth that? is it worth losing limbs? he would say no, but it's worth risking them. not worth that kind of injury. i have had some close shaves and have been lucky so far. charlie: what is the closest shave? ben: that was very close. and in the middle of firefights and afghanistan that lasted for seven or eight hours.
charlie: is war the only thing that interests you? ben: not at all. i have done some environmental stories. some work on slave labor in to buy. i think that conflict is -- i don't know if that's what i'm good at, if that's the right phrase, but i can get young men with weapons, i can cope -- i can get them to open up to me. charlie: where wouldn't you go? ben: i have never said no to a job. charlie: if isis said -- come would you talk about anything you could want to? ben: that is a good point. there was a palestinian relationship -- filmmaker with a relationship who -- with those guys. there was talk of me going in there. charlie: and? ben: they promised to let her the guaranty of my safety. my problem is not a guarantee of
safety the problem was morally i had a very big problem. going to speak to men who take pleasure in the heading. journalistically i could not see a really good reason to go. we had done the film already. we had shown the nature of these ties. we knew what they were capable of and what they wanted to do. i didn't know what was to gain from doing that stuff. morally i would have felt very compromised. of course it would have been completely on their terms. charlie: you could see what was in their mind, either way. ben: reports of those treated well and returned safely. i think it would have been physically possible to do. but i could not bring myself to not be able to challenge these people who are taking set challenge in killing people, including colleagues. charlie: are they the worst? ben: the worst i have seen in my
career may be the -- the rebels of liberia or sierra leone. the khmer rouge is closest. charlie: they have an almost similar ideology. charlie: -- ben: yeah, yeah, they are more of a death cult. i'll is used to think that every conflict had a political solution. isis has made me question that completely. what would the negotiation be? what would a deal look like? charlie: that's your interesting, i asked a leading american security is now member in the armed services what it would take and he said -- we would need 100,000 troops. the question then becomes -- suppose you make that kind of commitment? what are you stepping into? charlie: and it -- ben: and again, what comes next? you would be shut -- fighting
alongside these shiite militias who are just as bad. charlie: i would presume that they would say that there is no cooperation except working through the iraqis to figure out where the airstrikes should be. is there more of a cooperation between the militias and the americans in charge of airstrikes? charlie: -- ben: i think it will be because they could not take it on their own. charlie: they had failed to take it on their own. that is where they start, in the beginning? ben: i think that that has provided a model for the level of cooperation in the future. remember, i described why some welcome to the caliban in the first lace. those conditions existed in a rack but many of those refugees welcomed isis. who could've assumed that life there under maliki would be such help? that is what you need to stop happening. charlie: the tray is talks about
that all the time, getting the politics right -- general betray us talks about that all the time, -- general portray us -- petraus talks about that all the time, getting the politics right. your friend, is he alive? ben: i think he is alive. charlie: is he directing things? ben: the taliban right now, the taliban right now we have to say in brackets that it could mean 30 or 40 different insurgent groups. it's very different from the taliban of 2000, 2001. i am sure that most of them are just fighting to defend their own back gardens. charlie: take a look at this final clip, you with local forces on a base.
>> do you talk back to them, or just listen? ben: they were 400 meters everywhere. that man is one of the good men. one of the capable men. killed after we left by a massive ied. that is the second largest city in helmand province. charlie: you commented on a piece i did it this table of marines in falluja. what was it that they said the thought reflected more better, more accurately to the dealing of with people on the ground? ben: people assume that when you go in, embed, that you are somehow pro-war and that they
are somehow pro-war? the interview that you did shows better than anything else i've seen on television that they know better than anyone else how badly wars were. they know better than anyone else that a lot of the fighting and dying that happened there has been for nothing. in some cases it has been worse than for nothing. it has been to introduce someone in power who was so bad that it led to another round of civil war, of sectarian war. i don't see talking like that on television very off in. you could just tell that the knowledge that they shared was so hard earned. the most hard-earned knowledge. charlie: if you see your brother is killed, you take a place like falluja then you leave and then you read one year later that all
the work that you did and all the lives that were lost have simply been offended again. you don't want to say died in vain but the commitment that they make in the lives that were lost, the bravery required, all of a sudden it's back the way it was. it's got to be hard. ben: that is probably one of the biggest contributors to the ptsd issues that we read so much about. charlie: post-traumatic stress disorder, yeah. ben: they died doing a job for them and their friends around them, but i think they knew back then that the overall goal was an eventual handing over to the afghan government or iraqi security forces. that that was the major flaw in the plan. charlie: does the ukrainian conflict interest you beyond reading about it? ben: no, someone else and knows that well and covers it in detail, i leave that to him. charlie: thank you for coming
we live in a pick and choose world. choose choose choose. but at bedtime? ...why settle for this? enter sleep number... don't miss the lowest prices of the season, going on now. sleepiq technology tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. you like the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store. right now, find the lowest prices of the season
treasure after another. >> this is wonderful, this is also a problem. you must have exhibitions that show all the things. when you have 10 petitions in one room it's difficult to shape each one. charlie: so, here we are. how good is your picasso collection? >> we have some fantastic. pieces like this don't exist. only in moscow. this is a wonderful condition. this is the best casa we have. this is on the level of [indiscernible] this is our collection of matisse. one of the best in the world. charlie: look at this, look at
this, look at this. this is the morocco period. >> this is the fantastic matisse. the best one. charlie: you have something on loan? >> yes. these pictures are there, music and dance, dance is right famous. the last was given to the museum of the time -- viton. charlie: i love the color. >> this was a big collection of american art masterpieces postwar. given to us from the american foundation. all of these masterpieces of
♪ emily: it all started with a line of code. that is now the foundation for dropbox, a cloud-based file sharing service that allows you to share and store and access any file from any device anywhere. today, dropbox is valued at $10 billion with 400 million users in 200 countries around the world. joining me today, cofounder and ceo of dropbox, drew houston. my life is stored on dropbox.