tv Book Discussion on Web of Deceit CSPAN February 20, 2016 4:00pm-5:11pm EST
other stops on our tour at www.c-span.org you are watching american history tv. next, barryand lando talks about his book "web of deceit: the history of western complicity in iraq". , to kennedy, to george w. bush. he argues that it comes after decades of intervention, including british airstrikes in the 1920's. the baath party coming to power. role in aericans' rebel against -- revolt against saddam hussein. >> good evening. i am one of the owners here. tonight, i have the pleasure of
, who has ay lando that he isof deceit" here to talk about. billed by his publisher on the jacket of his book as being an investigative, producer for 60 minutes for over 25 years. when i read that, i thought, this does not sound as glamorous to call somebody a research reporter as it does an investigative journalist. but i thought, he did not give the respect that was really needed in a book that shows such as scholarship and so much research. we will say that barry lando was an investee -- investigative
producer and a reporter. i was pulled over by the extent pages in the 50 back of footnotes and photography. he has done his homework in putting together the scholarly study of what happened in iraq over the last 50 years or longer. and together he has put this into documenting how the nations that have now denounced saddam hussein, secretly backed the dictator and his rise to power. the duplicity in dealing with iraq did not start with an iraqi invasion. we had broken iraq, as he demonstrates come along before 2003. ever since the end of world war i, we started on a course of a
-- and which we have provided weapons and information on both sides of the iranian -iraqi hostilities. even worse, our cia and other forces have worked behind the scenes to encourage both the shiites and kurds to rise up andnst saddam hussein, specifically when they started, we pulled the rug out from under was, theyhe upshot were hundreds of thousands of shiites and kurds that were massacred after we had incited them to rebel and then pulled out. thing, which has been a real problem, is that the
sanctions that we imposed upon quiteit was proved quickly within several years that they were largely ineffective. but even though they were ineffective, we continued them. ongoing sanctions, we saw a tremendous amount of civilian death. most of those were children. that when we watch these horrible pictures. on the evening news, these civilian deaths in iraq, we need to remember the number of civilians, including children, hundreds of thousands that have died because of an adequate nutrition.
this is all outside the view of cameras. this is wonderful tonight that we have a television camera, which will be able to record for us tonight, the description from barry lando how we have been involved in iraq and the duplicitous way for much longer than we think. so, here is barry lando. [applause] mr. lando: thank you. i should have let you just continue. [laughter] mr. lando: i am in canadian. i am from vancouver. with an announcement made yesterday, i do not know if you picked up on it, but there were huge oil discoveries found in canada. they may equal the deposits, the , andves in the gulf states
canadians are very happy about this. but then earlier today, there was a briefing apparently given out of dick cheney's office that there is going to be international intelligence estimate asked for about canada. word is, canada is working on a new class of weapons of mass destruction. [applause] [laughter] mr. lando: that is a joke. [laughter] mr. lando: the reason i wrote this book was, i had been interested in iraq generally, when i did writing for it for magazines and publications. and when saddam hussein was captured alive at the end of 2003, i thought there must be a lot of people in washington and other major capital, asking present leaders, republicans and
preferred heo had had been killed or blown himself up rather than been captured alive. it is a trial would follow. and at the trial of course, a lot of the links between foreign leaders and businessmen would come out. they had to, because they were involved in the crimes. that's what i thought. but that has not happened at all. that was one reason i wrote this book, a feeling of outrage if he will at the cynicism behind putting saddam hussein on trial, by himself. him and his leaders. a bloodthirsty bunch of men, and what ever happens to them, should. but put the much all by themselves, them talking about what american leaders did, american businessmen, european businessmen and leaders did, that was the ultimate hypocrisy,
if you will. a true victors justice. and that sent me off to write a book. because i thought you could really implicate every single american president from dwight eisenhower to today, to george bush, every american president in that time did something to iraq, the cia did something to iraq, in some way trying to intervene in that country is affairs causing a total of maybe 2.5 million iraqis dying in that. period because of these interventions. that is basically 10% of the country. it would be the equivalent of 30 million americans being killed or dying, because of the effects of what other countries did in the united states. now, i will not try talking to go through bit by bit what
each american president did. i will leave that to my book. but it did not just start with the americans, it started with the british after world war i. this is when the british were mesopotamiaate over , that part of the turkish empire that would collapse. and the british put together, winston churchill was in a key cabinet, they put together this artificial construct, putting sunnisds and shiites and in one country and that became known as iraq. the kurds have been promised independence at the and of world war i. woodrow wilson and others promised that the kurds would be able to form their own state. the promise was -- the great powers went back on it, one ofor reason, a lot petroleum. and the british wanted the
deposits to be part of iraq that they could govern. thought it would work out, even at that time there were many experts who warned that this thing is a recipe for disaster, these people cannot live together. trying to put them all together is not in. resultsted to -- the were, in 1920, almost immediately after the british mandate was awarded. when the iraqis, these new people found out that this was not going to happen, that they were not going to be independent and the british were going to roll over them, they had rebellions immediately. and the british found themselves in a very messy war, which had huge x engines -- huge expenses and cost millions of men.
i wanted to redo some of the documents from that. t time, because it sounds like an original version of the production going on today in iraq. this was a rehearsal for what was going on today. and he sort of wish that our leaders today had read these documents before they did what they did. colonel lawrence, lawrence of arabia, wrote to the sunday times on august -- in august 1920, when the wars are going on, british troops are dying. he said, the people of england have been led into a trap from which it would be hard to escape with dignity and honor. they have been tricked into it by a city withholding information. we today are not far from disaster. that was in 1920.
first arnold wilson, one of the first to be put in charge of the new iraq. kind of like a paul brenner, a few years earlier, he wrote that the british, when they came in, they said we are coming not as conquerors, but liberators. that sounds familiar. te, "theoads -- wro average iraqi, as opposed to those in baghdad committees -- they aresees -- content with our occupation." , who presidedill over the formation of the new iraq, began to realize that england was in deep trouble in it was going to cost the country
money and he began to try to lobby to george, to pull out. his idea was to set up three different countries, essentially. there would be a kurdistan and the shiites would have their own country which the british could -- would have their own country. this was in 1920. and he wrote a letter to come a a memo, he, said, evidently we are in for a costly campaign, which would be straining to the utmost our resources. it seems to me so gratuitous that we should be compelled to go on pouring armies and treasure into these thankless deserts. this is back in 1920. and an american missionary
warned the british at the time, you are flying in the face of four generations if you are try to make this a political entity. they have never been. then the british went about bombing, they sent in the raf to bomb and machine gun the arab villages that had grown up, the kurds and shiites and the sunni villages. of bomber harris, head britain's command, the same guy who did the firebombing of dresden. satisfactionbvious kurdsarab and the card -- know what real bombing means. they know that a full-size village can be practically wiped out and a third of the
inhabitants killed or injured by four or five machines, which offer them no real targets, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no effective means of escape. this was of course, 13 years, the british were bombing these villages and towns. 13 years before the germans outraged the civilized world by -- bombing britain. finally, this is something that many of you have probably heard. a king, the puppet king put in tulee british to roll -- this new construct of iraq. just before he died after 12 years of trying to do something for the country, he said, i say this with a heart full of sorrow, no iraqi people, but an unimaginable mass of human
beings, devoid of patriotic ideas, and viewed with religious traditions out of absurdities, connected by noon, tie -- connected by no common type, perpetually ready to rise up against any government whatsoever. out of these masses, we want to fashioning people which we would train, educate and refine, with circumstances being what they are, the efforts needed for this cannot be imagined. it would've been interesting if the current administration had read these documents earlier. toant to go ahead now talking -- i am going to skip over the things eisenhower did with the cia, kennedy with the coups that helped propel the baath party and
saddam hussein, to power. 1963, thereing, in was a coup the cia backed in iraq over a nationalist leader of iraq at the time he wanted the country to have more of the share of their petroleum, and you also turned to the soviets to have a balance from the west, this is the height of the cold war so he was viewed as a dangers leader by kennedy. and the other cold war years -- warriors in washington. 1963.verthrew him in the baath party came into power and saddam hussein was a junior member at the time. and at the same time, the cia provided lists to the baath party of communists who are to be taken care of. and these people, hundreds,
maybe thousands, they were picked up. we are talking about professionals, doctors, lawyers, students, they were picked up, tortured, and norma's -- and many of them killed and executed. saddam hussein was one of the young torturers at that time, working on what was applied by the central intelligence agency. 1991.ed to come up to place,ising that took one of the more horrendous acts carried out by american leaders. if you remember, george h.w. bush, after chasing saddam hussein's forces out of q8, called on the people -- kuwait, called on the people of iraq to rise up. he asked them to overthrow saddam hussein.
he said that this would be a way to avoid bloodshed. these people, his message was broadcast repeatedly by the cia stations across iraq, and it was also related by pamphlets. many of them dropped by american planes over iraq as saddam hussein's forces were retreating. and the people of iraq rose up. the shiites from the south rose up, spread like wildfire, all across southern iraq. the kurds rose in the north, as well. units hussein's military began to join the uprising. they thought, this is the end of saddam hussein, they wanted to see him done away with as well. but, when it turned out that it was a popular uprising, not just the military going to get to take charge, but a popular uprising, the united states got
scared. george bush and james baker were fearful that iran could extend its influence over iraq. they were afraid that the kurds might try to establish an independent country and turkey would not like that. everythingll this -- in the region, they needed to put a stop to it. they turned their back on the uprising, they refused to meet with any of the rebel leaders who are desperately trying to seek them. and further, they of course, it is well-known that they let saddam hussein continue to fly his helicopters against the villages and towns, going in with machine guns and bombs, and in some cases actually use chemical weapons on the uprisings. it went further than that. i talked to an american, special forces sergeant serving in the
front lines at the time, just a few kilometers from where the uprisings had taken place. he told me that thousands of these rebels were fleeing for their lives, rebels and their families, wives and children, asking for food and medical aid, but also asking for arms. they were not asking the americans to fight for them, they were not asking for the u.s. to go into baghdad. they simply said, give us a weapon. winston churchill made the plea, just give us the arms and we will do the job. that is what the wanted -- the rebels wanted to do. instead, the market forces were given the order by the pentagon to destroy the huge stocks of weapons which they had seized from the defeated military. huge stocks of weapons were blown up, rather than turn them over. meanwhile, the battle helicopters destroyed the villages.
as a result, the leaders, the military leaders of saddam hussein who were beginning to sway, saying that they should go to the rebel side suddenly realized, no, saddam hussein is likely to remain in power now and they immediately switched back and joined the forces and i waiting the uprising -- annihilating the uprising. what followed was about 150,000 shiites slaughtered by saddam hussein's forces them as the american forces withdrew. in the north, the kurds, similar things happened and the spread to the mountains and many of them died near turkey, where they are picked up by television. cnn was there and you had terrible pictures of thousands of kurds on the mountainside, freezing cold, kurdish men and
women and children. luckily for them, they looked more like us, they had lighter skin. so the americans could identify with them and the french as well, he made a big pitch -- who made a big pitch to save them. baker said, i do not want to do with any of this stuff, this really was not my fault. but these pictures continued and finally james baker went into turkey, realized what a terrible public relations disaster this was, and george bush decided, he really could act. and he ordered saddam hussein to stop flying helicopters in northern iraq against these people and set up a protective zone for them in the north, which remained for many years. in the south, no television cameras. that is why many more shiites were killed and kurds -- than kurds.
the iraqis have not forgotten this and the idea that the shiites would be throwing flowers at the american troops after they invaded in 2003 was exaggerated. that i speculated if theand who knows, but revolution had been in -- been a success, if george bush had supported it, these fears they had, there would've been more iranian influence. kurds would have had an autonomous state. turkey would be upset about that. but all of these other fears are really what are seen right now, but in spades. much worse situation today, much greater danger of iranian influence today in southern iraq, then there would've been if the revolution had been allowed to go forth back then. this is 2020 hindsight, but it
is an interesting point. also what happened, probably about 2 million iraqi lives would have been saved. these were iraqis who would not have been slaughtered after the uprising, these were about 500,000-1,000,000 iraqi's who , these are embargo upwards of estimates as much as half a million iraqi's who died since the invasion. that is about 2 million lives. again, almost 10% of the population. embargo also has a very interesting effect today, way iny in which -- any which we don't really understand, because it was not reported at the time. americans did not understand it. there were exceptions, 60 minutes did a strong case about
it. it generally americans i don't think understood what was happening and maybe they did not care. a group of harvard, the embargo is so devastating because it cut off all trade, everything between iraq and the rest of the world. that included all medical supplies, even medical journals were for bidding to be sent. -- for bidding to be sent. and the country had been dominated -- devastated by bombing. --erproof occasion systems water p or fixation -- purification systems had been destroyed. and the embargo prevented them plants.airing these which meant, there is very water.treatable
there were all kinds of epidemics, which usually hit children. and the hospitals were in such desperate situations, they could medication, they were not allowed to import anything. so the medical facilities were destroyed. you had thousands of children brought by parents to the hospitals, the hospitals not able to do anything for them. not able to really operate on them if they had serious cases. a group from harvard went to iraq at this time and they did a study, not just for the medical columns, but they looked at the psychological state of children of iraq. out comparisons of other devastated countries, uganda, the sedan -- sudan, and
mozambique, and they said that the children of iraq where the most traumatized. four out of five children were scared about their families. the experts concluded that a majority of iraq's children would suffer from severe psychological problems throughout their lives. the loss of prospects, the feeling of threat that it would all start again. the impact of the sanctions make us ask, if these children are not the most traumatized population on earth. this is what they concluded. i want to point out that it is that generation of children that are now in power in iraq today. up forll open things questions. [applause]
>> you can use the mic please. saddam hussein -- audience member: the ottomans ruled iraq for several hundred years prior to 1920, what was their magic formula for keeping order? mr. lando: i am not too sure about their magic formula, they did not try to rule them all in one specific country. the people had a much more independent in a way -- independents in a way. there is no attempt to bind them all together. as i understand it.
audience member: do you have discussion in your book of the oil for food program and if so, what do you say about it? mr. lando: absolutely. that is one of the first questions people ask about the embargo, the oil for food program, and the corruption. the oil for food program came in in 1996 and loosened up things, so that when that came in iraq was given permission to sell a certain amount of petroleum to import supplies for the iraqi people. the problem was, the food program, even the amounts allowed to be brought in, it amounted to maybe a dollar per day for an iraqi, at most. these figures were given to me by those who were administering the program and who quit in
disgust at the program. it was a fig leaf for the outside world, to say, we are now letting them in this program. the oil for food program was not just for food, it was for basic necessities. so when you talk about, imagine trying to live on less than one dollar a day, being able to import on less than that, and that includes huge machinery as well. you want to repair plants, electrical generators, that goes under it. as i said, those administrators at the u.n. in iraq resigned, rather than continue to run it. and as far as saddam hussein's corruption, he made off with hundreds of millions of dollars, perhaps billions of dollars, through that system as well. there were kickbacks paid to him to get the iranian oil, the iraqi oil. again, first of all, people say
that a lot of the money went to buy things he wanted for iraq. other amounts went toward weapons, which they did not need. it is a side issue, because the amounts involved were nothing like what iraq needed. worst of all, the people running the program, the united nations and britain and the u.s., they control the embargo committee and they knew that. they were getting reports back. one of the most shocking documents i found, it was on the internet at some of the else had found, the intelligence agency did a study in 1990, after the bombings occurred and a leading up to the first gulf war. showing iraqidy water vulnerabilities. why were they studying the
vulnerabilities of the waterproof occasion -- water and theyion system predicted that if it could not. -- and itre would be happened because the united states and england prevented iraq from importing things to rebuild the system. question about: the impact of this book. fundamentally, the american identity has a sense of virtue and self-righteousness, especially on international matters. in that sense, what you can see on display for the state of the union is fundamental to the way that americans think about themselves and it goes back into history. they are more than willing to incompetence, but never
evil. , theytry and go there have little future in this country and it is no surprise that this stuff does not make it into the media, this is a self sealing process. do you have any hopes that this book will have an impact? mr. lando: 10 is has helped -- one always has hopes. have, what you say is true, i have been following the coverage of the trial of saddam hussein and he is no longer there, but the trial is still going on. lieutenants are on trial for the massacre of the kurds, the genocide of the kurds in the late 1980's. when that was going on, that is when they were using chemical weapons against the people in villages. me in readingd
the press, this includes the washington post, all of cnn and major covers, there has not been a word about what america did and did not do at that time, as far as the massacres going on. 's father,george bush and ronald reagan, turned their backs on the kurds. iraq,ut off trade with cut off credit with iraq in prevented the united nations from investigating that saddam hussein was using chemical weapons. this began in 1983. and again in 1988. i spoke with a former dia officer who had been stationed in iraq at that time and his purpose was to provide satellite
information to the iraqi forces, so that they could target uranium. this is even though they knew that the iraqis were using chemical weapons. in 1988, they suddenly discovered that the iraqis had graduated from mustard gas tuner of gas, so this was a -- nerve gas, so this was a big advance. they radioed washington, do we want to keep giving to these guys? they said, pull out. they pulled out for a few days, went back to the u.s. well meetings were held -- while meetings were held. the decision was between choosing saddam hussein and chemical weapons, and the iranians, they went with saddam hussein. so officials were sent back into iraq and they continued cooperating with the iraqis as before.
all of this stuff you would think people would want to talk about when they are talking about the trial that is going on right now, but there has not been a single word about it. the next trial that is coming up will deal with the uprising, the slaughter of the shiites. and the press reports talking about that, 100 iraqi officials have been indicted, there is a lot of associated press with that. maybe 1000 words on it, but no word on mentioning that george bush caused these people to rise up. it sounded like a total iraqi operation. is it is noter: too political, can you comment on the failure of the administration to capitalize on the bigger report -- baker report and trying to implement
the bipartisan recommendation? i find the situation today and people asking for solutions, it is like a young kid going into a porcelain store and smashing a fine crystal and then saying, find a way to put it together. they have so destroyed that country, taken it apart, whatever feeling of nationalism has blown up -- it has been ripped to sunday and the people have to go back to basic tribal roots. out of fear. you are terrified of your next-door neighbor. he is now the enemy. directlysh is responsible for that and u.s. intervention is responsible for
that. these people are now, they are already in a civil war. -- it wasks back found that casualties in iraq today are greater per capital than they were during the civil war. .his was the bloodiest war iraq is in that right now. so it is important to recognize that. the people hate each other, and there was an account in the new york times yesterday, one of the first american units trying to go into baghdad to bring some unit and the iraq he army did not show up, said the american unit was forced to conduct house to house searches by themselves. they do not speak arabic, these
are kids that are 19 years old from the united states and they do not know anything about that part of the world and they are in the middle of the civil war. the iraqis finally show up and laugh at them. and all of a sudden there is gunfire. the american commander does not know who is firing, they have suspicion it could have been members of the iraqi military that is supposed to be working with them. you read an account like that and you say, what are they doing? how do you get out of this? i think that the baker commission, they had one very important idea which bush ignored, you have to deal with the neighbors. talk to the sally's -- saudis. they do not like the united states, but i do not think that they want chaos on their doorstep either. they do not want to be sucked into a war themselves.
i think that they are delighted to see the u.s. in trouble in iraq, but i do not think that they want to have the entire region explode, either. but bush has totally ignored this. point theer at what american people say, just a second, this is not what we want. how much longer can dick cheney say, he said last night, we are going anyways. and it has been a great success. and you wonder, what world are these people living in? any other questions? yours,t answer years -- but -- [laughter] audience member: you bring our revelations about the responsibilities of the united states and the crimes of saddam hussein, not taking action, in
fact, covering up atrocities. misleading the world and always behind the massacre and genocide of the kurds, you bring out the lack of the united states taking action while the saddam hussein and evencring shiites, as american forces were occupying parts of iraq. what do you think the consequences of our failure to take any action should be? we see dutch forces failing to take action, eventually this led to the downfall of the dutch government. what do you see, or what would you like to see, the outcome of your revelation? .r. lando: it is too late i hope that people learn a little bit. one thing i have learned,
looking at that part of the world is that anytime somebody has gone in there with an idea about subversion, they have had their head handed to them. the russians learned that in afghanistan, they are going to try to clean things up and it lead to their downfall. afghanistant into and started arming the regime and they ended up having their head handed to them, as well. it produced al qaeda. everything the west has done in that part of the world, the formation of lebanon, it is in chaos today. idea you can change them is wrong and you should not be trying to do it. they went in and they overthrew modes and death in iran, because he was a dangerous neutralist,
he wanted a greater cut for iran of the oil deposits. britain did not want that and they got the u.s. on their side and overthrew him in 1953. he was a relative -- relatively moderate national. -- this would have been different if they had left him in place. but all of these attempts to change things made things worse. you talkedmber: about iraq in a civil war and going back to the treaty in world war i where they created an artificial country and did not give kurds their nation, and blended the shiites and sunnis together, which really could be
divided into three. kurds, in their ,wn state, and i call the arabs and the kurds have kurds in turkey, syria, and turkey is afraid of a state. syria does not like it, but there could be a kurdish state. in terms of the other two parts, you have the sunnis surrounding saudi arabia, jordan, etc. and you have iran and a shiite state. so do you see this country in a civil war dividing itself into principalities or states, which seems to be already going on. baghdad has had ethnic cleansing. mr. lando: in a way, baghdad is
already being partitioned, there is a shiite part and a sunni part. and i think that will happen throughout the country, because of fear. people are scared of losing their city, you do not want to live in a shiite neighborhood. it is already going on. the number of iraqi refugees is astonishing, you talk about hundreds of thousands of iraqi people who have fled the country are gone to other parts of iraq. audience member: 1000 and jordan alone. mr. lando: and go back to a population of 26 million people. what is the percentage? and we let it happen. is, but the danger is that if there is a sudden withdrawal,
these people who are faithful of neighbors -- fearful of neighbors, and now there is tremendous hate, then the stops will be pulled out. and the spotter that has gone on -- slaughter that has gone on, will not compare. many more people will be killed. it is easy to say, we should just withdrawal. but it is too easy of a solution. and now people say that this is iraqi -- iraq's fall. it is their fault. settle their problems, and if they cannot do it, why should we be there? the fact is, we gave them enormous problems to deal with. the problems that american politicians brought are nothing
compared -- saidnce member: eisenhower this was the democratic rebuttal, and at one point is bush going to pay for a new executive to say that? mr. lando: the idea that bush will string things out and pin it on somebody else, but if the republicans become part of the opposition, it would be hard to pin it on the democrats. maybe in the end, they will try to pen on -- pin it on -- i am sure that they are trying to find a scapegoat. in the peaceer: treaty of world war i, they never looked at the map, they gesture a line. line.w a that is how they formed q8 -- ku
wait, too. mr. lando: thank you. audience member: several times you said you were surprised at the american media when they report the history, positioned as you are with 60 minutes, can you offer thoughts as to why the american media has been so poor earlier on and the current struggle? mr. lando: i do not know. audience member: the nature of it, is it fear or pressure. run-- of democracy has several times a clip that she has of bill clinton, which he asked him if he confronted -- when she confronted him on the essence of his policy into what it was doing to the children of iraq, and he denied any
knowledge of it. he denied that it was having that effect. ,r. lando: madeleine albright did aked, and 60 minutes report on it, and madeleine albright was asked about the children of iraq and she said, you know, maybe 500,000 iraqi children have been killed. died inldren than what hiroshima. asked if it was worth it, madeleine albright said yes. they cannot deny what was going on. audience member: and she said later that that was the stupidest thing she said in her life. mr. lando: a lot of people i interviewed said that she was upset that she had said it. [laughter]
mr. lando: right. audience member: i have a question that is a little different. i would like to thank you for writing about book and letting us know about the history of what is going on. i am reminded of the american revolution, when people were doing this kind of reporting, benjamin franklin, they also had a call to action. it was not just about reading, reporting, it was about calling the people to act on what is happening. i do not see that happening now and i wonder if you can respond to that? mr. lando: we have major marches going on tomorrow and papers say that this could be the most radical members of congress being scared of connected with it. it was that cowardice among members of congress that led to this whole thing happening to begin with. asked for
authorization, they did not have to go with it. they were scared of being unpatriotic, scared of the major news presenters. the flag in the lapel, honoring americans, we cannot put that on the air right now because it would not be proper. audience member: will you be marching? mr. lando: yes, as a matter of fact. [applause] audience member: -- >> anymore questions? here he comes. audience member: let's look for a solution. why are we so set on keeping iraq together and making it work, when the numbers seem to make it impossible, with 60% of the country shiite, and coming out of great animosity and hatred for being subjected to rule, through the
insurgencies, the kurds have voted and made it known that they want a tonic or --andendence -- a tommy we aredence, yet mandating that we keep the country together. they say that when the soviet union divided into commonwealths and states, our policy was to put them back together again, talk about suicidal independence. how could ukraine be independent? when claudia broke up -- up, when croatia went off, our foreign-policy was to keep them under milosevic. and we see what happened there.
and the same thing, we have a suicidal intent to keep iraq together, when i see no way that it could ever work. in terms that we would like to see it work. mr. lando: i agree. tonomous staten au set up. the question is, what degree? will you have separate countries or not? that is part of the solution. fact, i domber: in not know the strategy, to stop the civil war? mr. lando: i do not know. they just keep saying, we will not stop until we achieve victory, but what is victory? audience member: we went in there to get rid of weapons of mass destruction, and we succeeded. that was easy. mr. lando: they were not there. [laughter] audience member: saddam hussein
is gone, he has been executed. even though you rightly put out -- point out, we put him on trial ourselves and listened to all of the responsibilities that made his atrocities possible. but, you know, it is interesting. we are not learning. and if we try to go in there and put in and to a civil war by fighting both sides, that is insanity. and if we take one side against the other, then that will not work. and it is not clear what our purpose is. the easy solution -- mr. lando: i do not know if bush was ever accused or clear about what his purpose is. audience member: you know, he achieved his purposes. he has punished saddam hussein
for attacking us, iraq no longer has the capability to be an imminent threat to the u.s. mr. lando: and saddam hussein never attacked, either. audience member: we knew he would be a threat in building up forces that never existed. so we get to say victory income and come home,-- like his father did. >> one more question. this is the last question. and i will pull rank and ask a question after you. mr. lando: i would ask you all o read 1984, there is a famous scene where the hero is confronted by the agent of the state, who makes him understand that he who controls the present, controls the past. and he writes the history of the past and that is what is going on in iraq.
audience member: i was curious to know if you made reference in the book to the episode that involved april glaspie? mr. lando: the episode where she was called in by saddam hussein and he said, iraqi troops are going to the border with kuwait, and he said to her, we have problems with kuwait, and i talked about this in the book, a lot of these problems are created by the cia. these are problems that they were having. that is another story. but she was called in and saddam hussein said we have problems, and she said, we will take no stand in disputes with you and other countries and she got her head handed to her for that, because exactly the same statements were made publicly by
john kelly. he was the assistant secretary of state, who after that occurred, was called up and publicly he was asked by hamilton, if iraq invades kuwait, do we have any treaty obligations to kuwait? and kelly replied, no, we do not. days before saddam hussein attacked. and a letter was sent to saddam hussein that made it clear that the united states would not react. this has been put on april glaspie, but it was the administration. i want to goer: ack to agent omen -- to question about american idealism
believed in liberty, justice, freedom, all of that. toe you had any access behind the curtain of what goes on in the military, state ifartment, meetings about there was dissension about what these ideas- been voices, are there there that we are not the type of country to do these things? mr. lando: there has been dissension, i do not know if people talk that way in these administrations, but even in past administrations, for instance, when george bush turned his back on the uprising, there were several younger members that argued that we
should not. that we should order saddam hussein to stop flying the helicopters and let the uprising go ahead, we do not have to go to baghdad themselves. one of the people arguing was paul will have its -- so, there has been difference of opinion. >> >> i think that is it. [applause] here "history bookshelf," from the best history writers of the past decade every weekend. you can watch our programs anytime when you visit our c-span.org/history. >> american history tv on c-span
three programs that tell the american story. theontinue our series on 1966 the annan hearings. hearings. >> our position is equally clear and easily decline -- president johnson did so in the following terms. our geoff davis independence of south vietnam and its freedom from attacks. is independence of south vietnam and its freedom from attacks. this has been the objective since 1954. it has been pursued by three administrations and remains our objective today. >> dean rusk gives his testimony defending the policy.
for the complete schedule, go to c-span.org. trying to decide which candidate to support. decide between the governors or ted cruz and marco rubio. >> the most important issue to me is national service. there are more than 5 million young americans ready to step forward and serve their country americorps and the peace corps. >> during reconstruction, greenville sent a biracial delegation to write a constitution that ended slavery, gave black men the right to vote, and property rights to women. greenville was chartered as a city the following year.
they worked with the c-span citi es tour to explore the rich history. learn more about greenville all weekend on american history tv. the history museum, we want to highlight all aspects of the korean war. this is our exhibit called "the 1950-1953."r: korea full of art by artists mostly present during the korean war. it highlights the conflict and shows that though korea is this forgotten more, it deserves to be remembered, and the men who served and fought their and lost their lives deserve to have some recognition back into the world wars and the vietnam conflict.
this is an introduction to the exhibit itself. we can get back on information to the beginnings of what is going on in korea. the sovietetween union and the united states and the immediate aftermath. they are just giving you an introduction. we have some artwork hereby herbert hahn who was in korea. he was not originally a painter. he was involved in photography. some of his superior officers heard that he was an excellent doodler. they encouraged him to become the new painter for the u.s. navy. have artifacts from the uss los angeles. it was a navy cruiser. we have a your book on loan from
the navy. we also have a sailor swimsuit that he would wear in korea. this is to give you a taste of all the events as you go through. some of the key things that would happen that are synonymous with the korean war. we do have a lot of art featuring helicopters and fighter jets. the united states was far behind the soviet union when the war broke out. we are using a lot of planes that were in use in world war ii. they move quickly to catch up with the red army. we have a lot of images focusing on some of the new planes that were invented. korea.s its debut in
greatare also a lot of famous people who fought in korea. original a lot of the astronauts like new armstrong and buzz aldrin. john glenn. john glenn's copilot was actually baseball hall of famer ted williams. you have all of these amazing men known and unknown other than to their families. they thought in this new way of finding that korea unleashed. this is my favorite portion of the exhibit. we highlight jesse brown from mississippi. he was one of the first african americans to join the navy. struggled when he joined the pilot program. they did not want him. because he had to be in the navy they had to pass it swim test. they kept trying to say he could not swim even though he repeatedly passed the test.
he outlasted them and said you have to give me my wings because i will not drop out. and in theto korea summer of 1950 his plane is shot down and he essentially dies of exposure. one of the gentlemen with him will win the medal of honor for trying to rescue him. his body today remains in north korea. this picture in particular is based on a photograph. it is painted by clifford lee from chicago. he is a world war ii veteran. he does not fight in korea, he saw the image and decided to make a portrait of it. it really does highlight not only his story about how important korea and race relations are in the united states. wasy s truman's main goal racial integration. theas one of the first of modern presidents to embrace the idea of civil rights, much to
the chagrin of party members republican and democratic. in 1948 he issued an executive order forcing the integration of the military. he used his constitutional power to get it done. the korean war will be the first fully integrated or that he will fight. known for his westerns and cowboy depictions. here is a lot of his work exploring the day-to-day life. because the hospital areas were not close to the front lines. people given the care that they need until they can get to a
more permanent facility. it's made famous because of the more popular television show. mash. this is where it gets its start. these mash units would continue to be used. the purpose of the exhibit is to highlight the details of the korean war. most of the fighting is in the first year and is a ping-pong between north korea and south korea. communism andeen capitalists. it's between the east and the last.
the military action taken by the united nations which has rarely come into existence. and truman's first foray into the policy of containment. so it's really the struggle between ending the war as quickly as possible. in the meantime, douglas macarthur has been fired due to insubordination. matthew ridgway's commanding united nations troops. joy.man, a vice admiral this is a color pencil and nontraditional paint by herbert hahn. it does highlight how talented he is. it is incredibly lifelike. in 1952, stalin dies and the bureau decides i don't want to fight in korea a longer.