tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg February 8, 2016 10:00pm-11:01pm EST
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with election 2016, the first one on one democratic debate took place in new hampshire last night. hillary clinton bernie sanders sparred over the records as progressives among other issues. >> this whole discussion began because i commented, not making overall evaluations about the secretary, she was in ohio, i think it september and november, and she got up and said something like, i have been criticized because people think
i'm a moderate. well, i am a moderate. that is where this came from. it was not me paraphrasing her, it was what she said. all i said, there is nothing wrong with being a moderate. you cannot be a moderate, you cannot be a progressive. turning to president obama, i think of your member where this country was seven years ago, 800,000 jobs being lost every month, one play fortune in dollars -- one which really million dollars in deficit. i think president obama, vice president biden, and the difficult leadership in the house and the senate have done a fantastic job. we are in much better shape today than we were seven years ago. although, my republican colleagues seem to have forgotten where we were seven years ago. that is the fact. but we still have a very long way to go. senator clinton: in the first debate, i was asked, am i moderate and progressive, and i said i'm a progressive who likes to get things done. and trade "here or there does not change my record as having thought for racial justice, having fun for kids rights, having fought against the kind
of inequities that feels my interest in service in the first place. going back to my days in the children's defense fund. it certainly did not stop me from taking on the drug companies and insurance companies before was called obamacare, it was called hillarycare because we took them on. we were not successful, but we took them on and kept fighting. every step along the way, i have stood up and fought and have the scars to prove it. so, again, i think it is important -- [applause] secretary clinton: i understand, senator sanders is really kind of its emissions out. charlie: the next are public and debate takes place this saturday. seven candidates will participate, including donald trump the finish second in iowa. joining me now, for manchester, mark halperin, and john. and from washington, it jerry of the washington journal. and john cassidy of the new york
magazine. i'm pleased to have them here. it is the final week and going into the new hampshire primary. what does it look like on the ground as we speak, in terms of where the conversation is, and what are the surprises that we might expect. john: on the democratic side, there's a pretty broad agreement that it are sanders in the head. that is a sizable lead. i think a lot of this will have to do with what the margin is, how does framed by the press and the candidates. if senator sanders leads to with a little momentum or a lot of momentum. people look on election night to see how he did with various groups, if you dominate with young people, does he draw a lot of independence, etc. on their public in fact i have never covered a primary like this.
there are six people fiercely contesting to leave here with some momentum. donald trump is a head still and all of the public polling and all of the private polling. the other campaigns believe that he is wonderful to not winning this big and maybe not all. the one candidate was momentum that is clear, is marco rubio. your pay bill like john kasich and chris christie, trying to stop the momentum that marco rubio took out of iowa. it certainly will. this is obviously to say the least, the most important debate of the entire campaign, because of proximity to new hampshire, and because the six candidates, i think everybody agrees that not all six will go on here from new hampshire to south carolina. the next contest that their
public and have, that debate will feature some choices to make, do people go after the front runner, donald trump who is leading here and on most every other state coming up, or will they go after ted cruz, the winner of iowa. or do they most likely look for ways to contrast themselves is marco rubio, who is position to leave new hampshire after finishing third in iowa, as not just the establishment avery, but the favorite for the nomination, depending on how he finishes here, and depending on if the old rules apply. charlie: if he comes in second in new hampshire, that gives some huge momentum? >> second, first or third, if he finishes behind as he did in iowa, any of those three make in the clearest establishment favorite, she had been edging toward becoming over the last few weeks and months as he is moved up in the national polls and as many members of the establishment of looked at christie, case it, and decided they do not want to bet on them. emily: what happens last -- charlie: what happened that could affect the difficult exciting go >> i don't think much, and the sense that there was nothing that change the fundamental dynamics of the race in new
hampshire. i do not think there was any moments there was lot of pyrotechnics on the stage last night. it was a very fun, interesting, limiting, dramatic electric debate, having sanders and he'll a clinton on stage together, one-on-one for the first time in this race here in i say all of those things in the sense that i think for a democratic voter, who wanted to understand the clear distinct differences on policy and on philosophy that divide the two of them, and there are many, they were made more clear, and drawn and sharper relief and we have seen in any part of this race so far. there was half an hour at the beginning of the day were the two of them went at 101 in the way that they wish that most of them were, talking about campaign finance, and theories of change. if you are watching that is a democratic voter, you would get it. i would say, there's nothing in our media environment, that would change the fundamental contours of this and suddenly
made bernie sanders lose them into or hillary clinton game. he has been ahead for a long time ahead here, and i think he is still ahead. in the same way, after last night. emily: what did you think -- charlie: what you think about last night? >> there is a race here. i frankly have been wondering for about a week why the clinton campaign has been playing this as if there is an actual concept. we are just run to determine how much she is going to lose by. what i thought about, what was really interesting last night, both of them were really speaking to their biggest vulnerabilities nationally. hillary clinton has been campaigning here today, she
campaigned with a bunch of female surrogates, she was really speaking to the issues, specifically about her role as a gender pioneer, as a breaker of glass ceilings. bernie sanders obviously has issues with latino and black voters was talking a lot about flint, michigan. i think what we are seeing in new hampshire is that in the absence of a really read how contest, it is essentially being used as a way for both of these candidates, through free media to speak to the voters directly about what they perceive as their vulnerabilities and i tend to shore them up. sec. clinton: enough is enough. if you summoned to say, sandra eckley. you'll not find that i ever changed a few or a vote, because of any donation that i ever received. i have stood up, and i have represented my constituents to the best of my ability and i am very proud of that. charlie: you said it was a contrast between clinton, the doer, and sanders the dreamer. who benefits from that definition? >> i was up in new hampshire for the debate, in the hall, and i
agree that it was electrifying and the sense of actual political theater. i do not know that it changed anybody's votes, either, but i do think it defines the difference in the way i try to describe this morning. the hillary clinton pitches, i'm a realist, i'm an achiever. i get things done. i said progressive goals and achieve them. bernie sanders dreams about them and does not have a clue how to get there. bernie sanders says, if you do not drink big, you do not change things. we've been listening to the washington establishment try to chip away, and it does not work. you cannot have a clear contrast and sounds or approach than that. you get to pick, but you really do get a choice. i think that everybody has known all along that new hampshire was -- territory. i think the clinton people are playing hard new hampshire because they want to reduce the margin of victory for bernie sanders in that state. if they do that, i think the narrative will be, she did better than we thought there. it is onto from the country for the clintons in the south and nevada, and that is a new ballgame. are they trying -- i think there try to shake the narrative that makes the loss in new hampshire
look acceptable to everybody who wants to vote for the clinton in the end. charlie: you wrote about bernie sanders and the new populism. what is the new populism? >> bernie obviously burst on the national scene in the last two months, but you have to go back a bit to see where he comes from. there has been a populist movement growing in the u.s. for about a decade, really, starting off with the antiwar movement in 2003 and after the financial crash, the occupy wall street movement, it seemed to disappear. it cannot really disappear. young progressives were there. elizabeth warren took up the mantle for a while, then she decided not to run. bernie has filled the gap that is there and run with it. he is inheriting a sort of new populism, which we also see in other countries.
a rejection of establishment parties like you had in greece. like you had in spain and the u.k. to some extent. now we have an american version of the populism. charlie: how prominent is this new populism? >> that is earlier finding out now. it seems to be bigger than most people expected. i think there are two elements of it. the diner progressives, on the left wing. and they are trying to drag the democratic party is far less as they can. the elizabeth warren supporters. then, a whole new group of people, most of them young, who were not previously involved in politics have been drawn into the brady campaign -- brady campaign. mostly millennials, but not exclusively. this seemed to think about politics and a slightly different way than people of our generation. charlie: who could drop out after the new hampshire primary? mark: based on resources and attitude and poll position, i think governor christie is probably the most honorable, although he is pushing as aggressively as anyone to improve his standing. and most of the public and private polling, he is in sixth place. i think if he does not improve, he would tell you that he'll probably get out.
jeb bush is an interesting case. his chances to finish in the top two or three at this point do not look great. though i don't relate out. he and others have suggested that he will go to south carolina where the bush name means a lot. super pac still is a lot of money. i think donald trump barring some huge -- he goes forward and cruise and rubio goes forward. that leaves john kasich, right now, looking to be someone who might surprise, the more we talk about it, the less of a surprise it is by definition. because he is not running a particularly negative campaign and he has appeal to independent and spent a lot of time in the ground, he may well move up, but if he does it, he is made it pretty clear to us at a breakfast saturday, that he will think about going up. i think bush, case it, and christie are the main ones you may see have to make tough decisions after tuesday night. charlie: and donald trump. did his nonappearance in the debate leading into the iowa caucuses, and the fact that it did not do as well as expected in diyala caucuses, do anything to slow him down in any way that
might not be decipherable in the pulpit results that we have so far? john: i think there is a clear sense, if you're up here right now, on the ground, there is no doubt that among all of the other republican candidates -- campaigns, there is a sense that donald trump and their private survey data, and if they gator -- they have a sense that some of the air has come out of the trampoline. the public data does not to that very much. he is still in the lead by almost all accounts. he is clearly deflating a little bit. the question is, there is a political element of this anti-psychic elements of this with donald trump. it is why i think it matters a lot if he wins here or does not. i think if he finishes second or
margaritas about them, you could see a lot of air command of the bubble real quick. mark: if you look at what happened in iowa, the court donald trump vote did not diminish, it just did not grow. the late breakers all moved summerhouse to ted cruz or group you. if you look at new hampshire, i do not think the ted -- core vote is going into her. a lot of people decide late. half of the voters last him around said they decided in the last week. are the late breakers all going to move someplace else other than donald trump, if that is what happens? he can win, but no one impressively, that is entirely possible. charlie: is he campaigning differently and i -- in new hampshire than he did in iowa? >> first of all, he is not been in a state consistently since the iowa caucuses. he is left and went to arkansas and back to new york. today, he had to cancel an event because he got snowed out. he canceled a town hall meeting. he's also been doing much more traditional new hampshire, small-scale, sort of small-scale for donald trump retail offense here, both like visiting the manchester police headquarters yesterday, town hall meetings with a couple hundred people
rather than multiple thousands. i think responding to some criticisms that he has heard that all he does is hold big rallies here, that is out of step with the state. he is doing things different way. he will go back to the maker rallies to close this thing out. he is clearly, a little defensive and is responding to a sense that everything he did in iowa did not quite work. charlie: -- >> i totally agree with john. it is a trap. he got to where he was by being an undiluted commodity. he was going to be as brash as anybody. he was going to say to hell with the way the system works. he tried it when he skipped the fox debate. i think a lot of people and i love you that as contempt for iowa and having him to conventional politicians stuff is treated them down to size.
i think in the long run he is contributing to his own deflation. by changing his role book. i think eventually, you're going to see him revert to the same old donald trump because that is the thing that got him here. charlie: what is the success of marco rubio at this point? what happened in iowa that might affect his own momentum in new hampshire. what is he doing? where the issues propelling him forward? >> in my view, i think he is succeeded by not being donald trump. and he is succeeding by not being -- by being phenomenally --. they say marco rubio is to robotic or mechanical. he does not mrs. marks. every debate is a good debate for him. not a great debate. he has a message that crops -- cuts across several different lanes. he is singular right now in this
field. charlie: where can he win a primary? >> great question. >> we don't answer to that question yet. >> i think under the right circumstances it is possible you could win here or south carolina, michigan, ohio. >> florida. >> at he can get other establishment candidates out of this race, it sets up pretty nicely for him. particularly if it is a three-way between him donald trump and ted cruz. he is being himself. he's been likable, relatable, being about the future, not
engaging in attacks, but is pushing back when he is attacked. and also, as is on iowa, he is very good at surfing the way. he is very good at having success begets success. he's good at crating the perception of momentum. and taking the actual momentum and making it more momentum. i think that if there were other candidates in this race who were having success, it might be different. i think is poised to do what he did in iowa which is to consolidate a lot of the vote, not a plurality, surly not a majority, but a lot of the vote in his lane. suggesting you place in several different lanes. john: i would say there's a consensus among the public and campaigns appear that donald trump is falling a little bit and marco rubio is rising quite a bit and that the question going forward is that marco rubio could win the new hampshire primary. the question is whether donald trump's decline which is small,
but steady, and whether margaret is momentum keeps going upward. the debate will matter a huge amount. and the closing as for the campaigns put on over this weekend. there's a chance that those lines will cross and that margaret will shock a lot of people ended up winning the thing on tuesday. >> the other thing is, marco rubio has the most to gain from all of these other subsidiary candidates dropping out. he is likely to pick up, even 2% or 4%, those numbers add up. one of the really interesting storylines that will be developing at the debate is this rivalry between jeb bush, fuse to be margaret's mentor, and marco rubio. i think bush will go after be a very hard. there is been a suggestion that bush on to step aside so that margaret there can emerge as the consensus candidate to confront ted cruz. charlie: is there receptive and he -- is the bush camp receptive? >> the response to that was in the negative. >> older woman vote reliably here. i think they're up for grabs. i think that jeb bush needs attention. donald trump gets attention wherever he wants. margaret it gets attention. ted cruz gets attention. you have jeb bush and john kasich and chris christie all struggling for attention. i think for one dailies, jeb bush got attention.
charlie: what is the difference in their publicans in terms of economic policy? >> with the -- >> reveal is trying to distinction himself a bit i say you will expand tax credits. donald trump -- trade. he says he will impose tariffs. the court tax policies are still ronald reagan-esque. it is were to win the nomination or get close, whether you be willing to reverse course on that. and be more populist, the polls all show that their support raising taxes on the rich. a more progressive policy which bernie sanders and hillary clinton are talking about. some of donald trump you would think, theoretically, would not have anything against that. so far, he has adopted a mainstream tax policy. charlie: what is the argument that chris christie, and jeb bush, and john kasich make
against marco rubio tomorrow night? >> what is the achievement? what is the record? what is the substance that make this guy a plausible president? there's an element of that coming from jeb bush. the boy in the bubble was a wonderful chris christie phrase to describe this in a nutshell. that is the essential argument. this is a barack obama redux. which is to say that a freshman senator, very impressive, but when you look behind the screen, there is not much there. i think that is probably the best argument that they have to make. i think the marco rubio response is essentially, a generational one. it is working in the democratic primary. there is an element of that interpublic and primary. i think the other effective marco rubio response is, i am the one who looks like i can be hillary clinton in the fall and i think that has some residents in the party. charlie: i do, too. i think electability has a residence.
let's close the ted cruz. did ted cruz have strength in the long run? what is his campaign from here? are there that many evangelicals in new hampshire to come to bat for him? john: i think ted cruz as people what knowledge that there is a real feeling on his support here. i don't think they believe he can finish better than may be third in the new hampshire primary carried -- primary. he will go to south carolina and be one of the main contenders there. along with the winner of this race, and maybe a couple of other people who come out of new hampshire. he is a guy, because of the invalid -- tea party support. he will be in that grouping, the top three or what everyone to call it in south carolina. in the march 1 sec primary, he has done a lot of organizing their and has a lot of money there. a lot of seven support. he is a player for sure, for at least the next several weeks for -- unless somebody takes some of
the wind out of his sales down the line limit. mark: we have seen rick santorum and rand paul leave the race. for ted cruz, it is a dream situation, the opposite of what conservatives usually face. the ted cruz lane is not just ted cruz. you have the establishment lane very crowded with donald trump floating in his only. charlie: when i take away from this is that expectations -- can marco rubio do better than expected and maybe even when? does hillary have a possibility of exceeding expectations and narrowing the race in new hampshire, may be gaining five
points are 10 points beyond expectations, is that the takeaway i should have. ? >> there is reality game and expectations game. they are equally important right now. >> is hillary clinton comes within 10 points, it will be seen as a relative victory for. charlie: thank you all very much. ♪ charlie rose: danny bowien is
charlie rose: danny bowien was named the rising star chef of the year by the james beard foundation in 2013. his new book is called "the mission chinese food cookbook." david chang calls it "the portrait of an artist still in progress. i am pleased to have danny bowien at this table. danny bowien: i am pleased to be here. charlie: david chang is god around here. god. danny: he is an angel. charlie: for us, he is god. this is what he said in the
forward to this book. "i tried his food in san francisco before coming to new york. to be honest, i was upset this guy was doing something i wanted to do forever. but i got over my anger relatively quickly when i saw how well he was executing it. danny is genuinely innovative in how he thinks about chinese cooking." god. danny: from god. charlie: [laughter] danny: he is amazing. he was instrumental in me getting over a lot of fear of opening in new york. and just kind of going for it. you look at this guy was just going for it. it definitely helped when you come to new york and he signs off on something like that. charley: what is it like to come to new york? danny: it was crazy. it was scary. it's exciting and scary. then you just get down to it and do it. charlie: cooking, that is all it
is. danny: it is really tough. charlie: but new york is the toughest? danny: honestly, every market is tough to crack in its own ways. but i think new york is really tough. but it is also extremely rewarding because it is so tough. charlie: it is the enchilada. danny: the enchilada grande.charlie: you know what is intriguing about you is your story. adopted by parents from oklahoma, from korea. danny: i was three months old when i was adopted. i grew up in oklahoma city. it was a great town. i love being from there. charlie: they have a great basketball team. danny: they were not there when i was over there. i don't know any professional sports. charlie: what was it like? your mother was an inspiration? danny: my mom was a major inspiration. my dad worked for general motors. he loved it. he worked there until he retired.
and so, i had a pretty stable, great childhood. great parents. my mother's inspiration, even from cooking -- charlie: when she died? danny: i was 18. charlie: that was a huge moment for you. danny: it was very, very pivotal. for the first time ever, my mom had provided for the family. she made food. and things of that sort. as far as inspiration goes, i was always stay with her during the day. when school is out, instead of go play sports whether kids, i would just watch her cook. when she passed away i took over the cooking responsibilities. charlie: you had a feeling for it, and instinct for it? an interest i and it? danny: not really. i kind of enjoyed cooking, but it wasn't at the level of seriousness. i just liked making food. what i enjoyed the most was bringing people together. having people together was important for me. having a gathering. charlie: what is your schedule like? danny: i have a two-year-old. it started to level out. i think having my son helped me learn that i can't work in a restaurant 90 hours a week. my schedule is usually -- my wife and i trade who wakes up with him on certain days.
i wake with him up on monday, thursday, and friday to go to daycare. he starts to sleep later, around 6:00. take him to daycare, go to work, check in with the first restaurant. charlie: what's the most surprising thing about being a father? danny: that it is difficult. [laughter] charlie: that's not surprising. danny: any parent you know will say it's difficult. danny: the most surprising thing about being a father -- in a positive way, lately i've found that no matter what stresses me in life, when you see your child, it's amazing how uplifting that is. charlie: here is my comment on that. when you get married, you find
someone whose life is as important as yours. when you have a child, you find someone whose life is more important than yours. danny: yeah, totally. you said it. it's so true. i found myself in a lot of ways. things about myself that i did not know. i had feelings i did know i had before. charlie: like what, for example? danny: it's interesting. being adopted, my parents are the ones i grew up with -- they are my parents. but i felt this connection with my son lately. it's wild. charlie: i had not thought about
that, adopted parents. if you were adopted, and then you become a parent, you feel something about the blood thing differently. danny: it is kind of crazy. it is really amazing. feeling that -- it's my family. me and my wife, my family. it's amazing. charlie: so you want more. danny: i don't know about that. [laughter] new york is tough -- anywhere is tough. one is good for now. charlie: what's interesting about your career, did you roar out of oklahoma city into san francisco? danny: i would say i rushed. charlie: you wanted to go do things. danny: yeah, definitely. charlie: what was that thing you wanted to do? you wanted to be somebody? danny: i wanted to get out of oklahoma. i do not really attend college. i tried to, and it was not for me. i played music. i was in a band for a long time. the band broke up. i do not have much. i was working for an optometrist's office. i thought i wanted to be an eye doctor. the school thing and eye doctor, you have to do those two things together. that i went to check out a
culinary school. you have always been interested in food, why don't you check it out? i went there for five days. charlie: hooked. danny: i was hooked. but not only on culinary school, but just that san francisco was amazing city. but yes, i did rush out of oklahoma. charlie: this is what anthony bourdain has said about you. and a few others. "mostly first-generation immigrants from asia are changing, redefining, and defining forever what american cuisine really is." danny: that is nuts. charlie: nuts? danny: this is crazy for me to hear, chang and bourdain. these people are, like -- charlie: they think you have got something. danny: i mean, they have something for sure. charlie: but they think you have got something. danny: i think i have something too, finally. charlie: did success prove it to you? danny: i think success proved it to me.
i think failure proves it to you, too. bourdain and chang, it gets me every time. charlie: what is it that draws these people do you? you share something. danny: it is a non-spoken thing. we are all chefs. we are all creative. with them and me, i have no idea. six years ago, i was just reading about these guys. they were my idols. they still are. charlie: you are their idol. danny: no, i am their friend. it takes me a second -- i never got the chance to soak it all in or realize what it is. it's nuts. charlie: you know what i say? keep at it, work hard, enjoy it. that is the secret. danny: that's the important
thing, enjoying it. actually giving yourself the time to process everything. charlie: here's the other thing. you've sustained difficulties along the way. danny: yeah, totally. charlie: you come here and start mission chinese. and what happens? danny: well, a lot of good things happen. [laughter] we put it up through anthony bourdain. the good thing about doing this book, anthony said we were great, just do whatever you want. it was due in about a year and a half. it took three years to write
because the restaurant closed. writing that book, we opened the restaurant, close it twice, reopened two restaurants. we opened mission cantina and mission chinese ii. it is a dialogue about what mission chinese food is. we wanted to keep track of what was happening. charlie: what is mission chinese food? danny: my life? [laughter] we wanted to keep a journal for ourselves. just to keep track of everything happening. charlie: i have alluded to this. anthony bourdain writes, "what follows is not just a cookbook. yes, there are recipes for some of the most dangerous, flavor packed dishes you are ever likely to find, yes. but it's also a uniquely american story about how to do everything wrong and have it end up brilliantly, gloriously right."
that is your story. danny: very kind words. that sums it up, though. it is true. getting all success we had out of the gate and losing a lot of that success -- it could have gone really badly. it is an amazing story. i am happy that i am here. charlie: you still love to cook. danny: i love to cook still. it got kind of dark for a minute. when i found that when everything seems wrong, i can just cook. everything can give you going wildly wrong my life, but if i can just cook, everything seems
want is someone like that with access to billions of dollars in oil revenue. charlie: tell me the status on the ground today in libya. jean-marie: you have a very fragmented country. there are two competing governments that have no control over the country. you have the islamic state with the main stronghold in the caliphate.
at the moment there is an effort to bring all of the various political actors together. isis is growing. isis has been attacking oil facilities and there's a fear that isis could expand and that is why there was so much talk about a military option in libya. he said president obama is being pressed by some of his national security aides including his top military advisers to approve the use of american forces to open another front against the islamic state. mr. obama is wary of another intervention in the middle east. he has told his aides to redouble the efforts to find another option.
frederick: these factions have signed an agreement that was brokered by the united nations in december. the problem is that this government is just a piece of paper. it has not been able to exert its authority on the ground it. that is the real concern in european capitals. who are they going to work with on the ground. what is europe doing. they are part of the effort. my understanding is that they are poised to help out with a possible stabilization force. i think the brunt of the counterterrorism effort would be carried out by the british and the french. charlie: but what about the united states? frederick: oh, absolutely including the united states. charlie: the president has a desire not to be drawn into deeply with combat troops. a small footprint. what are the military options being presented to him at this time alan? allen: he has made clear that there is not going to be a big
intervention of u.s. combat forces on the ground. no country is going to put a large presence of u.s. combat forces. so you will see the same mix that you see in iraq and syria and afghanistan. special operations forces, airpower, and to drone us. the problem is that you need to partner with somebody on the ground as your other guests explains, there is no unified libyan military force to partner with.
so if we partner with militia a and militia bees going to view us as the enemy and they will allied with the islamic state to strengthen the islamic state. if you are well equipped the islamic state you need to unify that you libyan military first. only then can there be a western military intervention. to help the local military force destroy the islamic state. otherwise we are going to be having a hornets nest that will scatter the islamic state that we will not destroy. it is really hard to get that unity government. the only reason the opposing factions in libya are even thinking about a unity government is because of the threat of isis. so if we have to go in and
damage isis then the competing factions will have less incentive to unify. it is a little bit of the game of chicken. it is not that different from what was going on in iraq. if we had attacked isis with full force. then the government in baghdad would have been no incentive to make a deal with the sunnis in iraq. you obviously don't want isis to seize large swaths of territory or oil fields. but you don't want to go in and be the army that destroys isis because then there will be no unification in libya and that will force her isis in the long run. i think isis at the moment does not have the capacity to have a major expansion. what we've seen recently of isis is that they have attacked oil facilities but it was hit-and-run operations. the major ground offensive, it was hard to see. what could happen is that isis could attack. i agree with the previous
speaker. the war against isis is not going to be one with moms. it is going to be won by people who are on the ground and prepared to fight. when you look at the politics today in the eastern part of libya you have a general who is seen as anti-islamist. he doesn't have the capacity to keep people you need to peel off
some of the islamist group. if you had a big military operation with bombings you might have the opposite result. you might have people who join isis instead of being peeled off isis. i understand president obama's hesitation. charlie: some people argue that this is even bob gates was opposed to doing what we did at that time. is there some residents in that argument when historians look at what is happening libya. allen: certainly. this libyan situation unlike iraq and afghanistan where president obama could argue that this was a negative legacy left to him by his predecessor george w. bush, the libyan catastrophe is of president obama's own making. there is a country that was led by a leader that was actually an ally in the war on terror. it was not a perfect country, it was reforming. it was not a safe haven for terrorists. what president obama did was he went in and destroyed libya. created anarchy.
he created a failed state. in that vacuum is where isis has come in and is a threat not only to the region but to u.s. national security interests. president obama ran his whole campaign on criticizing president bush for destroying iraq. and creating a threat to the region. then he use later president obama did almost the site same thing in libya. is something that historians are going to puzzle over for decades. charlie: there are whole lot of threats from qaddafi that he was going to go into benghazi and kill everything in sight. the french were strongly arguing that we had to go in on humanitarian grounds.
allen: he did indeed. susan rice and samantha power were saying that there was an incipient genocide in benghazi. some of us at the time thought that this was unlikely to be the case. now that we have more more evidence, we have a u.n. investigation of what was going on, it is clear that qaddafi was not targeting civilians. he was targeting rebels. and the war was about to come to an end because the rebels were losing. they were about to be chased out of the country. at that moment the rebels came up with this idea we can overthrow cannot and have her own country. president obama's advisers including hillary clinton fell for that propaganda. and the president himself fell
for that propaganda. we should not get fooled again. charlie: people are arguing that they have got to do something now. you can't allow isis to grow because of the oil revenues that are possible there and all of that. you've got to do something. that is the argument of the moment. jean marie: the problem was not the military intervention. the whole notion is what kind of government can you build in libya. the focus on the hardware. the focus on the bombs. it makes people forget about what can be done on the politics. on the politics much more can be done. i would say libya was never a real country. it is a combination of tribes. if you want to have a political success in libya you need to work from the bottom-up.
the situation in benghazi is not the situation in syria. it is not the situation in tripoli. that is what you need to work at. to be honest i think there's been a bit of neglect of libya in the last two years. that needs to change. charlie: you may want to comment on that. frederick: there was no state to destroy. the army was virtually nonexistent under qaddafi. the real problem was not the decision to intervene which was not obama himself but was the arab league and the europeans as well but the follow-up. there was that crucial first year were think the international community in the west was so focused on helping libya with elections that they neglected the security situation. they neglected the buildup of
the militias and building a strong army and police. the spinal cord that you really need to ensure a successful democracy was neglected. that comes to me from acknowledgments from the united nations and other diplomats. that is the real problem. we are where we are now. the real challenge is building viable institutions. a government and police and democratic rule of law. these of the things that are going to ensure that extremism doesn't come back. the islamic state cannot be defeated through bombs alone. charlie: obviously the president understands that. defending what he is done in syria. at the same time, he's concerned about isis. territory as a recruiting tool for isis. the idea becomes what kind of footprint and military combination would you do that might have some impact. commandos, special forces. paramilitary cia. frederick: there is a huge risk and start partnering with militias at your going to further fracture the country and create warlordism. they may be calculating they will only support, only give
assistance to factions on the ground that support this new unity government. the president probably believes i think his advisers believe that we cannot wait for a libyan army to form because that is going to be years. it could be a decade. we can't wait that long to have a credible partner on the ground so they are going to war with whatever they have on the ground to try to mitigate the damage to unity and to political stability. charlie: how long do you think before we see a decision by the president? frederick: i don't know what the calculus is on this. i firmly believe their troll trying to get a settlement and get this unity government to agree on the formation of its military structure. the real sticking point going back to your other speaker is the inclusion of this general in the east.
>> leeann visited highest since november of 2014. it is also pushed the yield on forn's 10 year bond to zero the first time. that is an unprecedented low for the g-7 economy. to an apartment in the obama says false if i data was not a cover-up. haveing material suppliers issued an internally quarry into the issue. shares are down