tv Piers Morgan Tonight CNN June 7, 2012 3:00am-4:00am EDT
this is "piers morgan tonight." good evening. our big story. we'll talk to the man who ran the pentagon twice. with presidential politics heating up, battles raging across syria, who better to talk about this than donald rumsfeld. we'll talk about the cause closest to his part. his support for the american wounded warriors. debbie wasserman schultz joins me for the failed wisconsin recall. she'll tell me what thee thinks went wrong and why she says the vote will send a message to scott walker. we'll begin with donald rumsfeld. he was secretary of defense under gerald ford and george w bush. he's the author of "known and unknown memoir" now out in paper back. mr. secretary, welcome to the show. >> thank you very much. good to be with you. >> let me start, sort of your
reaction to wisconsin. what does it mean? we're five months today away from the election. what does it really mean in the bigger context of our election? >> oh, i think it's a little early to tell for sure. i guess i've been out of politics for quite a while, but as i observed it, it seemed to me that the governor announced what he was going to do, was elected, went in and did it, and then there was a great deal of opposition marshalled against him for doing what he had said he would do and for what the people of wisconsin voted for him to do. and then this recall was set up. and my impression is that what took place is the people of wisconsin decided that they did, in fact, vote for him to do what he did, liked what he did, and wanted to support him. what the implications will be for the presidential election is really unclear to me. it certainly was a defeat for
the labor unions that were so active opposing him, and it was interesting to me that the president of the united states was, you know, half an hour away from wisconsin but didn't believe it was in his personal interests to go in and give the democratic candidate who was opposing walker any support. so the obama administration must have concluded that the president would be better off not being associated with that weak ball and hitting it fresh as president. >> it does seem a strange decision by the white house. whichever way you look at it, i've got governor walker on the show tomorrow night in fact to discuss this in more depth. in terms of what he said today, he said this was about leadership for the reasons that you stated earlier. he decided to take a principled position, whether you agree with it or not, and he stuck to his guns even when there was a recall, he continued to stick by them and he won the day. you would have thought so close to an election that president obama would have done everything
he could to stop that happening because what it has done is different the republicans a real ton anything, hasn't it? it's sort of revved everybody up and put them into battle mode. >> i think that's probably true. i think that there was a great deal of effort that went into it within the state by the people of that state and there was some support from outside, and the only thing i can guess is that while it would have been very easy for the president to go in and offer his support, he probably made a decision that it was better in his long-term interests in terms of the upcoming election in november to not get involved in what he probably guessed would be a losing case. >> now you've said that president obama is one of the weakest if not the weakest president of your lifetime. do you actually mean that? >> i was asked by somebody if i thought that the current president was the weakest president, and i said i thought
the competition probably was president carter, that the two presidencies did not have the energy or the leadership. i mean, think of president obama on many pieces of legislation. instead of fashioning a piece of legislation, taking it to the congress, recommending it, urging it, working it through, he kind of left it to the congress to figure out what those pieces of legislation that he considered his major priorities ought to be. he didn't fashion them, he didn't take the leadership and that i found kind of unusual for a president to do. i think the other big example was his decision to, quote, lead from behind in libya where the argument was made that it was a humanitarian effort. and of course it lasted much longer than it would have lasted had they said at the outset that gadhafi would be gone when it's
over. now fortuitously gadhafi is gone now that it's over, but i think all the people in that country were very reluctant to support the dissidents and the revolutionaries, the people that were opposing gadhafi, because they didn't know whether gadhafi was going to be there when it was over. and they had families and businesses. they were very reluctant. two of the military, diplomats, business people. i think that absence of leadership undoubtedly prolonged that activity. >> people here watching this, mr. secretary, say hang on a second. donald rumsfeld was part of the george bush war machine rampaged into iraq and cost a lot of american troops their lives with an on-the-boot attack on the ground against saddam hussein which most people think now was a mistake. if you compare that to what you've just said as a criticism of president obama in libya, very, very different. he decided not to sacrifice any
american lives, not a single american troop's life was lost. gadhafi was overthrown, which was the objective, in the same way that the overthrowing of saddam was the objective. people will say, actually, we prefer president obama's way. that is a better use of the american military. it was just as successful and it caused much less economic and military pain to america. >> of course, the circumstances are entirely different. you're talking apples to oranges. you've got to remember, when saddam hussein was finally captured and pulled out of that spider hole in iraq and given to the iraqi people and the iraqi government and they tried him, convicted him, and sentenced him to death, it was gadhafi in libya who called in the west and said, i do not want to become another saddam hussein. i have a nuclear program. it's well advanced, and i am now
inviting the west in to come into libya and take over my nuclear program. i am giving it up. and that was a direct result of president bush's decision to go into iraq. and the world is a better place because gadhafi did not have nuclear weapons and gave up his nuclear program specifically for that reason. second, you now have in iraq an imperfect situation, but you have a government that is respectful of the various elements within the country, that's democratic, that fashioned their own constitution, and apart from israel, it's the only democracy in its early stages, immature to be sure, in the entire region. >> see, in your book you tell rather movingly the story about how your wife, joyce, of 56, 57 years had repeatedly after 9/11 woken up and said to you, don, where's osama bin laden.
and my issue with you when you say that president obama is weak is how weak can a president be when he ordered the hit on osama bin laden and he took him out? only today we saw another senior al qaeda member, abu yahya al libi yesterday get taken out. this is a series of victories that president obama has had using predominantly in this case drone attacks where, again, there is no loss of life to america troops. it's a very different way of going about taking out the bad guys. and there are lots of people who say this not a sign of weakness for president obama, it is a more sophisticated and smarter way of deploying the american military than the one that you and george bush deployed. >> well, you keep saying i said he's the weakest, and i've said once and i'll say one more time only that i was asked a question. in my adult life if you look at
the presidents, how would you rank them on that subject, and i said i would rank this president as a general leader up with president carter. now you can phrase it any way you want, but the way you're phrasing it is twisting it in an inaccurate way. i did not volunteer this. i responded to a question and answered to the best of my ability. i think that what you're talking about, however, when i answered the question, it related to his presidency. it related to his handling of the economy, his handling of the congress, and his handling of other matters. i have praised the fact that he took the capabilities that were developed by his predecessors, special operations forces, unmanned ariel vehicles and used them properly with respect to a being at thatting the compound in pakistan that ended up killing osama bin laden.
anyone who sees that has to give credit for that and acknowledge that that was a success and he's to be congratulated for it. i don't think it was a terribly tough decision. i don't think you spend ten years investing money in special operations forces, investing money in intelligence and then leave it to your successor and then think that a successor would not go after osama bin laden, the face of al qaeda, the man who masterminded the attack on america on 9/11. so i think he did the right thing and i credit him for that. and certainly i'm delighted to see how al libi has been killed. >> let's take a break. we'll talk about israel and syria.
this is an intolerable situation. we cannot be satisfied with what's going on. and the international community has got to take further steps to make sure that assad steps down. >> that was the current defense secretary, leon panetta talking about syria next week. back with me my special guest and former defense secretary, donald rumsfeld. let's talk about syria, mr. rumsfeld. it is a very, very difficult
situation whichever way you look at this. this is different than anything we've seen so far i think in the middle east in the sense that syria is a very small country compared to somewhere like libya. we're not entirely sure about the makeup of these rebels. what we are sure about is unlike libya, we have a situation where the chinese, the russians, the iranians and others are simply not prepared to toe the cooperative international line. where does that leave america? what does president obama actually do when you have great powers like russia and china saying we're not playing ball? >> well, it's a tough situation for the united states and for the administration. you're quite right, iran is propping up syria determined to keep it as its ally and agent. they are actively together working to fund terrorist organizations, to fund
insurgents in iraq, to make difficulties in afghanistan, and to supporter or list organizations around the world. and i think what mr. panetta said is clearly desirable, that assad not be there. the question they have to face is what's going to replace them. and the alawites are a very small minority that have been controlling that country for many years now. they are very strong-handed. they have killed thousands of people. his father killed thousands of people. he is now killing thousands of people. what the option is, to answer your question, is to provide some covert support to the elements that are opposing assad. see if you can sort out some people that would be better than assad because there are some that might be as bad or worse. and to the extent you can, provide some assistance to them
and then make it a calibrated decision as to how you can find ways to get additional countries to be supportive in the hopes that it will work. you've got to remember that a lot of assad's father's people are still around. they're tough. they are dictators. they're brutal. they maintain themselves in power and they get up every morning and that's their goal. >> this is a problem, isn't it, because he has to have gotten a lot of support amongst the key people he needs to remain in power there. he's very aware politically that he has the effective support of china, russia, iran, so on. so he's feeling probably, i would imagine, fairly secure, and yet what are you doing is committing a series of atrocities. only today at least 78 people killed in one tiny syrian village. it's an old farming place of just 200 people in the hamas province. 35 victims from one family alone. these atrocities are happening on an almost daily basis as the
world stands still. so what do we do? because the options it seems to mostobservers which are we strangle him through sanctions which are effective and work. that may not be as easy as it sounds. secondly, some kind of military action. if you were president obama, what is the thing that you do to stop right now any more of these atrocities? >> the idea that sanctions will work as long as iran, russia, and other countries are supportive of the assad regime is mindless. the sanctions will not work. the only choice that the president has is to do what he's doing, find some way to persuade iran, which is impossible in my view, and rousch sha to stop propping up that regime. the next thing is to do what i said, to engage in some covert action. work with some of the dissidents.
try to figure out somebody that would be better than assad and then provide assistance to them. the next step would be to move as they did in libya, for some international aircraft. what's the likelihood of that happening? you know, at the last minute president george w bush urged saddam hussein and his country to leave the country and have safe passage. what we've seen in egypt with mubarak and the doc, ill, sentenced to life imprisonment. you can be sure that assad is looking at what happened to mubarak and knowing that he is being accused of atrocities at the present time, the chances of assad leaving are about zero. he has to see in his mind's eye. he doesn't have the opportunity
to get out of that country and take his family and be gone and allow something better for the people of syria. >> let's take another short break. i'll come back to you talking about israel. you don't think the israeli administration can really trust president obama. we have product x and we have product y. we are going to start with product x. the only thing i'll let you know is that it is an, affordable product. oh, i like that. let's move on to product y, which is a far more expensive product. whoaaa. i don't care for that at all. yuck. you picked x and it was geico car insurance and y was the competitor. is that something you would pay for year after year? i, i like soda a lot but for a change of pace...
back now with special guest donald rumsfeld. mr. secretary left with a pondering question about israel. you've intimated this week that you believe one of the big problems at the moment in relation to the american-israeli relationship is that the israeli administration doesn't really trust the obama administration not to leak sensitive information. the reason that's so crucial right now is this whole issue of whether israel will take any kind of military action against iran, and if they did, whether they would notify president obama's administration in advance.
clarify what you said there and why you fear what you fear. >> well, i have to clarify the way you stated it at the end of the last segment. you misstated what i said. what i said is that we have seen repeated leaks out of this administration, leaks with respect to the way the special operations forces engaged with respect to the attack on osama bin laden, leaks with respect to a doctor who may or may not have provided some assistance with respect to the pakistani. i was asked the question, do i think that the israelis would contact the united states government if they planned to engage in an attack on iran and my response was, i think they would be very careful about doing that for fear that it would leak out of the administration. i did not say that the president would leak it. i did not say that it would be
intentional to damage them. what i said was exactly what i just said, and i think that anyone, any rational person putting themselves in the position of the israeli prime minister and asking the israeli air force to go engage as they did in baghdad against the iraqi nuclear facility, as they did in syria against the syrian nuclear facility, to go engage in one way or another with respect to the iranian nuclear facility, the last thing you'd want to do would be to telegraph that to another country where you did not have total confidence that it would be held privately. >> right. i don't mean to -- just to defend my own position, that is pretty much what i said. >> it's indefense sibl. >> i set this up by saying that you basically did not believe that the israeli administration could trust the obama administration. in a very much more eloquent and elongated way you restated what i said.
>> not so. if you go back and read the transcript of what you said at the end of the last segment i think you'll find it is quite different. >> let's agree to disagree. let's move onto the wider brushstrokes. it is a fascinating book. i have to applaud you. you've given all the profits of this book to a whole series of military organizations which i think is extremely laudable. it's hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars and i think that's something that people in your position should take a leaf out of your book. i do applaud you. in terms of your whole career, you're now entering your eighth decade. what have been the great highs and the great lows? if i was to pin you down and say, what was your greatest moment in office and your worst moment, what would you say? >> oh, i think probably the worst moment is being engaged in a war. once a president makes the
decision to put american lives at risk and you're a part of that process and you see the lives that are lost and you see the human beings whose lives are changed through serious injuries, you can't help but feel the ugliness of war. i think probably the highest moment i would probably say would be participating with gerald r. ford when he came into a presidency following the only president in history who had to resign with an economy that is as bad as it is today, with the ugly ending of the war in vietnam, and because of this man, gerald r ford's basic human decency, he was able to help steady the ship of state and recognize that the reservoir of trust in our country had been drained and helped refill it basically because of his decency as a human being. >> many, many of your friends,
mr. secretary, have said that your personal greatest achievement has been hanging on to the wife of yours who i had the great pleasure of meeting in los angeles, joyce. you've been married 56 years. quite clear to me who wears the trousers in this marriage. tell me about your wife. you dedicate the book to her. she's a remarkable lady. >> she is. she's -- we went to high school together, and we ended up marrying at the end of my senior year in college, her senior year. went into the navy. we've been together ever since. she's born in montana. she's a marvelous human being, and when people ask her how in the world did you stay married to that fellow, rumsfeld, for 56 years, she says, he travels a lot. i thought she was kidding. >> that's exactly what she said to me. when you weren't listening, i said to her, how on earth did you put up with donald all these years? and she just said, he travels a lot.
>> exactly. and i thought she was kidding. >> i think it was very obvious to me though that she's been a great rock in your life. you've had, as every family has, difficulties along the way. how important is it to any political leader, do you think, to have that kind of person at their right-hand side? >> oh, i think any -- any person in tough jobs is so fortunate to have someone who can walk up to them and call them by their first name and tell them what they really think and add some balance and perspective and dimension to a life that gets quite hectic sometimes when you're serve an important position. >> do you think you've been misrepresented over the years? do you think you've built up a reputation that is perhaps not entirely accurate? >> oh, goodness. i don't know. you know, dogs don't bark at
parked cars, and if you're not -- if you're not parked, if you're doing something, somebody's not going to like it. that's acceptable. then if you do a series of things, you end up collecting some people who didn't like it. and i accept that. you know, the people in the press have their jobs and we have ours. people can agree or disagree. i've been privileged to serve this wonderful country and feel grateful for the opportunities i have, and i hold no bitterness or unhappiness about anything that's happened. >> finally, mr. secretary, would you just tell me about the cause that's closest to your heart. it is about the wounded warriors. you've given lots of money from this book to help the various charities that help them. tell me about that. >> well, you know, after church on sundays, joyce and i when we were in washington, would go to walter reed hospital or bethesda naval hospital and go visit the people who had volunteered to serve this wonderful country of ours and held up their hand and said, send me.
and we'd go into the hospital and joyce was terrific. i always was wondering, what in the world can you say that will help them understand how much the american people appreciate their sacrifice and their service to our country and their patriotism and their courage? and we'd go in and meet with them, and what you would hear from them was their anxious desire to get back to their troop from their families, their pride and support for the young men and women who served. their willingness to accept the loss of an arm or the loss of a leg and to pick up and go on with life, and we would walk out of the hospital almost every sunday when we were there thinking, we didn't inspire them, we didn't help them through a tough time, they helped us through a tough time. the courage and the perseverance and the patriotism is absolutely inspiring and i just feel privileged to have been able to
have served with them. >> certainly. donald rumsfeld, your paper back is out now, "known and unknown." it's been a pleasure. thank you for joining me. >> thank you. >> coming up, debbie wasserman schultz and her first interview since the failed wisconsin recall. gnome this summer. it's the travelocity spring into summer sale. you can save up to 50% on select hotels and vacation packages. so book your summer vacation now and save up to 50%. offer ends soon. book right now at travelocity.com. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything.
in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you from paying up to thousands of dollars... out of your own pocket. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... with all you need to enroll. put their trust in aarp medicare supplement insurance. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. the prices are competitive. i can keep my own doctor. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. call now to get a free information kit. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. and the advantages don't end there. choose from a range of medicare supplement plans... that are all competitively priced. we have a plan for almost everyone, so you can find one that fits your needs and budget.
with all medicare supplement plans, there are virtually no claim forms to fill out. plus you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare. and best of all, these plans are... the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. when they told me these plans were endorsed by aarp... i had only one thing to say... sign me up. call the number on your screen now... and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan. you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, to help you choose the plan that's right for you. as with all medicare supplement plans, you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare, get help paying for what medicare doesn't... and save up to thousands of dollars. call this toll-free number now.
scott walker talks to me tomorrow night about his big win in wisconsin. what does it mean to the party and the president. congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz chairs the democratic national committee. she hasn't spoken since the failed recall. welcome, congresswoman. >> thank you, piers. >> donald rumsfeld concluded that the only possible reason president obama didn't go down to wisconsin to try to win this thing is because he knew he'd lose. your thoughts? >> well, i wouldn't -- it's not really surprising that the secretary would say something like that. the president deployed his entire machinery, grassroots machinery on the ground in wisconsin, 40 offices, 408 40 million dollars.
we came up short, but at the we came up short, but at the same -- of the ultimate goal, which was to make sure that governor walker couldn't adopt his extremist policies and continue to hurt middle class and working families but apparently succeed in slipping the state senate. the state senate is likely to be controlled by the democrats. we're going to be able to stop governor walker from being able to really continue to pursue those extremist policies. ultimately we were at least in part successful. what we demonstrated, piers, was that democrats are not going to just lay down and allow the middle class and working families and workers to get run over when an extremist governor has run amuck. >> you keep calling him this extremist who everyone apparently is terrified of but the reality is he won. he won pretty convincingly. the only one laying down it
would seem to everyone else are the democrats. how are you claiming some kind of weird victory out of this? >> there's nothing weird about flipping the state senate. last year there were recalls of state senators that were put on the ballot and there were recalls last night. as a result of those victories, the state senate has gone from being republican to very likely being democrat now. and really i'm certainly not going to call it a victory. like i said, we lost the actual recall of the governor, but -- >> let me just jump in there. my point. if you keep calling him an extremist but you accept that he won, what does that say about the people in wisconsin? are they all a bunch of mad extremists? >> no. what it says is that voters look at a recall very differently than they look at a straight up election. if you look at the exit polling, about 70% of the voters that cast ballots yesterday were uncomfortable in some way with
the actual recall of a governor. so while they didn't like his policies, they didn't think that they were comfortable with a recall. at the end of the day i think if you asked any republican governor in the country if they would trade places with scott walker for the last year and if they had it to do it over again take the same steps that scott walker did and had to go through a full recall and -- >> you're -- scott walker's probably thrilled that he had to go through it now. it's made him a national superstar. it's revved up his party. he's the hero of the hour so i would imagine he's thinking, bring on the recalls. let's move on to -- >> i can't imagine that he would be saying that. most governors in the country wouldn't trade places with him having to raise $31 million and really having to spend the last year defending policies -- >> let's move on.
move on to president clinton who in an interview with harvey weinstein who was standing in for me while i was on royal duty in london. he defended mitt romney. he called his career as a businessman a sterling career. what did you make of that when you were watching it? were you choking on your soup? >> yeah. i wasn't choking on my soup. certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion, including president clinton, but -- >> was his opinion correct? >> no. i don't agree with president clinton on that point. in fact, mitt romney is basing his entire candidacy on his experience in the private sector, and the only application that we have in government to -- of mitt romney's sterling private sector experience is when he was governor of massachusetts in which he brought massachusetts from being 36th to 47th out of 50 in job creation. >> what are you going to do about the road -- >> come on, piers, let me answer your question.
>> no, no. i know where you were going there. i'm actually fascinated by the fact that you have president clinton appearing to be diametrically opposed on this key battleground point. >> no, see, if you listen to the rest of it. >> not a very helpful scenario. >> no. piers, if you listen to the rest of president clinton's interview he made it very clear that he thinks mitt romney's practices and the way he carried out his private sector experience does not make him suitable to be president of the united states. president clinton is 100% behind president obama and believes that president obama should continue as president of the united states. the rest of it is window dressing. there's no getting away from the fact that the only example we have of mitt romney's supposedly sterling private record experience. on top of being 47th out of 50th, he lost manufacturing jobs at twice the national rate. when it came down to it he had
very little, if nothing, to show for that private sector experience as governor of massachusetts and made things worse. i think if you look at president obama's record by comparison taking us after inheriting the largest set of problems at once than any president since fdr, three years later, even governor bob mcdonald on "meet the press" acknowledged that it was president obama's policies that helped virginia be able to not have to cut their budget. >> i'm going to have to cut you off in mid-flow there. hopefully president clinton is watching tonight and will be better informed about the less than sterling nature of mitt romney's business career. >> i hope so. >> debbie, thank you very much. >> thank you. we'll have a good old debate about what we've heard tonight. there's been a lot of d.c. bones tossed on the fire. [ male announcer ] what if you had thermal night-vision goggles,
with minimal collateral damage. but rather than neutralizing enemies in their sleep, you'd be targeting stocks to trade. well, that's what trade architect's heat maps do. they make you a trading assassin. trade architect. td ameritrade's empowering, web-based trading platform. trade commission-free for 60 days, and we'll throw in up to $600 when you open an account. thank you. what a place. what a welcome. tonight, america's choice 2012. mitt romney campaigning in texas. scott walker's huge victory in wisconsin. ben smith, editor in chief, and dana lash, editor. welcome to you all. let me start with you, michael hastings. interesting hearing donald rumsfeld and then hearing the
obama camp about all of this. i mean, whichever way they try to spin this, this is a big victory for the republicans. >> sure. >> and a big defeat for the democrats, isn't it? >> yeah. i mean, i think if you're sitting in chicago at the obama campaign headquarters, you're very, very concerned by this loss. it wasn't just a loss, it was a big loss. especially with the amount of money that walker's people could raise and how effectively they deployed that money, i think you really have to be concerned. >> when you look at scott walker, rising star. in a funny way being recalled might have been the best thing to happen to him. it put him on the national stage as a leader and he won the day. >> i think right now conservatives more than anything want somebody like ike who takes on the democrats. this elevated him as being a folk hero. he'll have a big role at the convention. >> a while ago when he was getting into all of this, he was impressive. he's an impressive person to interview. he has that steely side that you need plus a little bit of the
old box office film star approach. there's something about him i think that's going to be very attractive. could mitt romney pick him as a vp? >> i don't think so. i think part of romney's message is going to be about how he united both parties in massachusetts, got things done as governor. i think there's a toxic climate in wisconsin, something that walker carries with him, isn't something that romney wants with him. >> dana, money, money, money. how much is the financial aspect of all of this what really is significant from this? because they clearly went down the republican's and it blew the democrats away on the money side of things. that's how they won. no one's including the $21
million that labor raised for democrats as well. this is all out of state cash that they funneled through and put together with the cash they got -- >> when the democrats squeal about money, are they being disingenuous? >> they are completely being disingenuous. it only happened with barrett. >> turn to something else donald rumsfeld said about the status of president obama as a president. he calls him one of the weakest ever, likend him to jimmy carter. >> totally delusional. >> a fascinating debate coming from him. the way they conducted foreign policy is polar opposite. many would argue president obama's strategy has been better for america militarily and financially. what do you think? >> i think you have to remember that donald rumsfeld lost the first job in the white house from the ford administration to
the carter administration. there's a reason he doesn't like carter going way back. i think there's a lot to criticize about president obama's foreign policy. when compared to the previous administration, when compared to the sort of debacle in iraq, letting the afghanistan policy drift away, if you look at the sort of successes that obama's people claim with libya, bin laden, you go down the list. i don't even think one can compare it. i think it's a cheap shot. >> dana loesch, how do you -- what, do you argue with that point to start with? do you quibble? >> completely. i completely do. i don't think that we had any business at all being in libya. it posed no threat at all to our national interests and i think afghanistan, we ended up losing objectives in afghanistan. if iraq ended up being a debacle, quote, unquote. >> quote, unquote. >> the mission in afghanistan. let's talk about foreign policy. let's talk about leaking foreign policy secrets to hollywood.
we had the british spy apparently who was outed and that absolutely put into just risk the whole mission. >> when you have -- >> the bottom line -- we shouldn't have been in libya. >> change the subject. >> no. if iraq was a disaster, then what was libya? >> let me stop you in full explosive blow. isn't the reality when we get to the election real, which is coming up, president obama will stand up and say, i said i'd get rid of bin laden, i did. >> right. >> when i went into libya i didn't lose a single american troop unlike the catastrophe, as he would put it, of iraq. he pulled the troops out of iraq and afghanistan. on the foreign policy stage very hard to see many negatives, isn't it, for president obama? >> well, he actually increased the troop numbers in afghanistan so we could argue about afghanistan. that's almost a whole separate conversation. as it concerns libya, that was
nato. we had a canadian commander in charge of everything in libya. with bin laden, great. i think it's great that he gave the call to go in and use the navy s.e.a.l.s and capture osama bin laden. he's always going to go down in the history books as that having happened on his watch. he shares credit with george bush on that because there's no way he would have been able to go capture osama bin laden had it not been for the infrastructure put in place by the previous administration. that's a fact. we can agree whether or not he would have used s.e.a.l. team 6 or another manner, but the fact remains that infrastructure was put in place by the bush administration. >> let me bring in ben. syria is a real quagmire. nothing like anything else we've seen so far. what do you think the smart thing for obama to do is? >> i think rumsfeld did have a point, that all of this talk of sanctions does not seem to be effective. the choice obama faces is whether to intervene militarily.
i don't think anybody is saying send in the marines. >> he can't do that because you've got the chinese and the russians and the iranians stacking up on the other side. you can't have american troops going in now but what do you do about the humanitarian catastrophe that is unfurling before our eyes? >> i don't think you've seen any leading national politicians with an answer. obama a few weeks ago was at the holocaust museum setting up a commission not having atrocities happen. there's no nice mechanism for dealing with the situation. >> it is a mess. thank you very much, ben, michael, dana. i'm sure we'll have you back very soon. coming up next, only in america pays tribute to the greatest generation. [ female announcer ] irritated, itchy, summer skin?
for tonight's only in america, this defining day exactly 68 years ago today, precisely 6:30 a.m., the world was saved. that was the moment that d-day began. 156,000 troops in the u.s. and u.k. and the allied nations stormed the beaches of normandy and france as the mission unfolded winston churchill
praised general eisenhower. he said there was a brotherhood in arms between us and our friends of the united states. invasion changed the course of the war and of history. "life" magazine has now published rare and extraordinary rare color images from d-day. among the photographs, one showing gis marching alongside flowers in bloom. and here a band of brothers, stopped in the french countryside taking a picture with two young women and a girl. and here, guarding german prisoners of war. more than 5 million british men and women served in world war ii, all the heroes here in america and u.k. are heroes in the truest sense of the world. 86-year-old jack fetcher is one of those. he fought in world war ii, volunteering for the army before he could finish high school in texas. he never had the opportunity to graduate until last week. decades later, he returned to the high school making a promise he made to himself to him, to
everyone he served in the greatest generation. you risked your lives, you gave your lives, all in the name of freedom. that's all for us tonight. we begin tonight keeping them honest with an investigation into why autistic kids in this country, kids with severe behavioral problems are being shocked with electrodes at a school in the united states. we've been looking into this school for years. it's the only place in the country that actually uses electricity to shock students. now the united nations point person on torture, yes, torture is pressing for an investigation. the school is in massachusetts called the judge rotenberg center. they claim that electric shocks and other forms of what they call aversive therapies are the only way to control some students who are a danger to themselves and others. recently outrage over the school exploded when the public for the first time saw video of a student being repeatedly shocked.