tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 16, 2015 2:00am-4:01am EDT
tomorrow before the senate environment and public works committee. we have live coverage at tim cook eastern on c-span3. the fda is trying to improve the food safety process. in the afternoon, the commissioner will testify along with other officials. more coverage at 2:00 eastern also on c-span3. >> now gop candidate donald trump holds a rally in san pedro, california. aboard the battleship uss iowa. mr. trump talks about national security and veterans' issues. this is 15 minutes. [applause] >> trump, trump, trump. tromp, trump, trump.
mr. trump: thank you so much. i did not expect that. they said, would you come over and speak. i got here. possibled, would it be to come and say a few words? an endorsement from your group with so many veterans, hundreds of thousands, i appreciate that. i did not expect that. i did not expect it. i did not ask for it. i will say this. i am with the veterans 100%. are our greatest people. they are being treated terribly. not only the number of deaths, is going that is, what on is incredible. as of two weeks ago wednesday, had the longest wait in
the history of the veterans administration. you go in and see a doctor, you wait for days. with me, that is not going to happen. the veterans hospitals have problems. when you have to wait hours and days and then have the doctor say, i am sorry i'm going on vacation. thanesn't get much worse that. we are going to create a whole new system. system apart. if they are not doing the job, the veterans are going to go to private doctors and hospitals. public hospitals. are going to reimburse those doctors and hospitals. you are going to get the greatest service of any veteran in any country because you deserve it.
[applause] mr. trump: that is going to be broken down into something that is going to be very special. you know it, we have illegal immigrants treated better than veterans. that is not going to happen anymore. appreciate it. unexpected to be here. they do not build ships like this anymore, folks. we don't do them this way. i said, what about recommissioning? the largest guns in the world. iowa.ned a lot about the iowa is a great place for a lot of reasons. we have been treated so well in the state of iowa. number one in the polls. we love those people, they are great. this is the great ship. that is a great state. i just want to say we are going
to come out with plans in a short time. we are going to be building up our military. we are going to make it so big and strong and great. [applause] mr. trump: it will be so powerful i don't think we are ever going to have to use it. nobody is going to mess with us, that i can tell you. presidentng to have a who is respected by putin. who is respected by iran. about for two seconds, the iran deal. now obama, obama and his people call him the supreme leader of iran. he talks about the supreme leader. him thecalling
supreme leader. he said it, after the ripoff deal is completed, he will never do business with the u.s. again. we are finished with the u.s.. they are taking $150 billion. isy are getting a deal that going to go right into nuclear weapons, sooner than you think. they are going to self police, think of that. .hey have 24 provisions what people don't understand, the 24 day provision doesn't start -- you know this, right? it doesn't start for a long time. the clock is ticking. we may never get there. deals,ne of the dumbest one of the weakest contracts i have ever seen of any kind. [applause] mr. trump: so we are going to do things in this country right. we are not going to sign deals
where we have more prisoners over there and we don't even ask if one of them is there because he is a christian. .e have a writer the whole thing is insane. they asked the president and the secretary of state kerry --i have been saying hillary clinton is the worst secretary of state. in the history of this country. the world blew up around her. it just blew up. it is like a different place. it is possible, because of this deal made by secretary kerry who has no cohead to negotiate, it may be he is going to supersede her. he may want to run for president. he has no chance she has no chance. we are going to see what happens. [applause]
mr. trump: we have many problems in our country. one of them is immigration. i took a tremendous hit when i brought up illegal immigration. for two weeks, i said, rush limbaugh was a great guy. suffered more in coming from the press than anybody i have seen. what you have now, you have what is legal immigration is all about, and i brought it to the forefront, he it is a problem. it is a problem. remember for about two weeks, this is tough running for president, and that you found out there is tremendous crime. admit is tremendous drugs point across the border. going to chicago, going to new
york, going to l.a., going all over our country, so the drugs are in, and the money pours out. not a good deal. we get the drugs, they get the money. the drug cartels are going wild, and they cannot believe how stupid are government is. moneyugs come in and the goes out daily, and i saw it because i was on the order, and i saw it, and everybody sees it every day, and we have the kind of people who can do something about it, but we have no leadership, none whatsoever. so we are going to build a wall. and mexico is going to pay for the wall. believe me. you know, a lot of politicians have said, oh, they are not going to pay.
they do not know anything. they never read "the art of the deal." i said the other day to my people, why is the united states mexico,ficit with japan, and china? let's start with china. almost $400 billion at year. now, if you are a company, and you are losing 400 billion dollars, you have to do something very fast. we don't. we have been losing hundreds of billions of dollars a year frankly for decades. it is not going to happen anymore. it is not going to happen anymore. japan, their massive ships built here, and they drop off the cars, right, they drop off thousands and thousands and thousands of cars, millions of cars, and we sell them beef. and they do beef, not want it because their farmers do not want our beef, so
they protest and send it back. now, mexico -- and i love mexico. i have many, many people from mexico that work for me and by my apartment, and the same with china. i have so many people. they pay me millions and millions. to hate china because they gave me millions of dollars to buy an apartment? i don't think so. the good than any banks in this country. they are from china. the problem we have is that the leaders from japan, mexico, and china and every other country we do business with, they are more cunning and sharper than we are. i love free trade. the concept is great, but you need smart people. people in smartest the country lined up. i know the smartest. i have carl icahn. i have the best business leaders, and they all want to do
it. they are wealthy because they make good deals like me. i make good deals. it is a talent. you cannot be a politician. look, i am fighting some very nice people, even though i am leading in the polls. they are very nice people, but they are never point to do anything with these countries. they are never going to be able to do it. it is an instinct. it is something that is special. they don't have it. believe me, they don't have it. it will be more of the same, so we are going to make our country so great. we are going to make it strong. to rebuild the military. we are going to make it so strong. we are going to take care of our , and in the end, in the end, i want you people to look around and looked at each other,
because this is going to be a special day. week, two weeks ago, in mobile, alabama, 31,000 people showed up on a rainy day. 30 1000 people came to see us speak, and we are talking about making america great again. last night in dallas at the american airlines center, 20,000 people -- the basketball arena of the mavericks. 20,000 people showed up, and i want to tell you. it was a love fest. everybody was -- think of it. 20,000 people. there wasn't one heckler in the whole room. i kept saying, there has got to be one. it was a word or two words that used to be used a lot, the silent majority, and they stopped using them. the silent majority, believe me, if that, and i think -- and i
think we can use it somewhat differently. i don't think we have to call it a silent majority anymore, because they are not silent. people are not silent. a are disgusted with our incompetent politicians. a are disgusted with the people who are giving our country away. they are disgusted when they tell the border patrol agents who are good people and can do whenob, they are disgusted they are allowing people to walk right in front of them, and they are standing there helpless, and people just pour into the country. they are disgusted when a woman who is nine months pregnant walks across the border, has the navy, and you have to take care of that baby for the next 85 years. they are disgusted by what is happening to our country, and you are going to look around. you are going to remember who the people are who are here because we are doing something special. this is a moment.
♪ everybody.thank you, we love you. thank you very much. ♪ >> our road to the white house coverage of the presidential candidates continues saturday morning. live from manchester. speakers include five candidates, hillary clinton, bernie sanders, lincoln chafee, martin o'malley, lawrence lessig . saturday at 9:30 a.m. on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. campaign 2016, taking you
on the road to the white house. >> next a conversation on research at the international space station. scott kelly.om this is an hour. john: good morning, everyone. bloomberg,tor at they're breaking news desk in washington, and i am the president of the national press club. we have a historic day here at the national press club. our guest life by video link from the international space station is astronaut scott kelly . here in the ballroom next to me, we have astronauts mark kelly and terry virts, but first, i want to introduce our
distinguished panel. 's right, thece washington bureau chief for the detroit news, robert, the deputy news editor for physical , and a kernel, a nasa , a senior frank editor for aviation week and jerry, theology, washington bureau chief for the buffalo news, as president of the national press club, and current chairman of the speakers committee. danny, the senior vice president for public policy wire and a press club member who organized this morning's breakfast, thank you, danny, and captain samantha, a european space agency astronaut. for the newsief aency of russia, tass,
reporter for the gray sheet, tom mcmahon, vice president of advocacy and public affairs for the association of unmanned vehicle systems international and a national press club board member. welcome to you all. [applause] john: i also want to welcome our c-span and public radio audiences, our live audiences watching around the world on the internet. you can follow the action on twitter. c live. #, np that is on twitter. one of the first calls made from document club, and we the moment, and it also marks the moment a high-ranking official was photographed at the national press club, he guessed it was then secretary of state william jennings bryan who made that historic call, san
francisco, and earlier this year, vince ate a speech here, doing some work for nasa, and asked the question, what would be the 2015 equivalent of that 1915 phone call? conversations that resulted from that question with some cooperation from nasa led us here today for another first for the national press club, a live press conference with live messaging going up to space, and it is a historic day and raises the question for the national press club president of 2115, which is, who are you going to call, and how far away are you going to reach? so it is very fascinating that we are here today, and i want to remind you all that our astronaut in space is scott kelly. to the space station in may to begin a 342-days did
-- i amnd that will be sorry. it was march, not may. this is his brother, who just corrected me. this will be the longest ever stand by a u.s. astronaut, and as of today, he is just under the halfway point to making history, and here on the ground, we have scott's twin brother, the retired nasa astronaut, captain mark kelly, and he is undergoing a study about spaceflight on the human body. we also have here on earth air virts, whoelterr returned from the space station. we expect it about one minute, we will be hearing from the international space station. what are you going to say to your brother if you are able to send a message to him?
mark: so you want me to say it twice? [laughter] mark: i should wait until we can say it on the screen. i talked to him yesterday, so we caught up. there is a phone on the space nation, for folks who do not know that. it is kind of like an internet call, and there he is. scott, can you hear us? >> houston, are you ready for the event? scott: i am ready for the event. this is the national press club. how do you hear me? scott: i hear you loud and clear. space station. john: welcome, scott. here, and ill room know it is about lunchtime there, and we just had breakfast. can you tell us what you are
doing today? scott: well, first of all, it is great to be with you guys. i know you are having breakfast because both my brother and t virts sent me pictures of your food. i guess they are trying to make me feel bad about what we have to eat up here, but today, we had some crew members departing late last week, so today is actually a free day. john: and what do you do on your day off at the international space station? scott: we have a lot of work up here with over 400 different science experiments going on throughout the year up here. we do a lot of work on the different systems that keep us off,, so mostly on the day it is a time to rest and recover from a very hectic schedule. i generally take a lot of
pictures of the earth, do e-mail, maybe watch something on tv. yesterday, we were watching the texans game, and the broncos game later, so that was nice. you are about halfway to your year-long old. how do you feel? what effects have microgravity had on you so far in this almost six-month period? scott: yes, so i feel pretty good overall. i definitely recognize that i have been up here a long time and have just as long ahead of me, but i feel positive about it. manage my work, my pace of work, and my energy right, i will have, you know, enough in the takes to get to the end. i am pretty sure i will. as far as physically, i feel good. some pretty good
exercise equipment up here, but there are a lot of effects of this environment that we cannot see or feel, like bone loss, the effects on our vision, effects on our genetics, our dna, rna proteins, and that is why we are studying, myself and misha on this one-year flood, and a think right now, the jury is out on it. we will have to get all of the data and have all of the scientists analyze it and some the results were peer-reviewed, the stuff that scientists do, so hopefully we will find out some great things about me and my colleagues spending a year in space. john: there is a lot of attention and interest on getting to mars. how will your efforts of their help us get to mars? scott: so are a lot studies we are doing focuses on particularly me and my russian
mikhail, and the international space station has a lot of capability to collect data on us. you know, we have an ultrasound. we have these devices that measure our vision. next week, we are going to do a lot of imaging and data collection and a russian device that actually pulls the blood down towards your feet, this lower-body negative pressure device, and from these experiments, we will hopefully issuest if there are any out there. if our vision gets significantly worse after nine months or a year, and even though they russians have flown onboard the mir space station for a year or longer in a couple of cases, they did not have the technology that we have today to figure
this out. you know, the space station is also a great experiment on sustainable energy and life support equipment and understanding how that works and how we can maintain ourselves with the systems for longer of time, and all of these things will help us go to mars someday in the not dod distant future. john: part of what you're doing is undergoing a twin study along with your brother on the ground. explain how that is working. do you have any results on the twin study, anything you can share, or will not any of this be known until after your experience is done and you analyze all of the data afterwards? scott: you know, i think most of it will be stuff that we learn afterwards. i have had some interaction with some of the investigators. you know, one thing that i found somewhat interesting, maybe not
too unexpected, is our microbiome, you know, the stuff inside us that is not -- you know we have more cells of bacteria that we carry around that isn't part of our body, but they live inside of us , and, you know, one of the principal investigators told me that while i was up here that she found it interesting that my microbiome arey completely different, and i thought that was interesting because we live we separate lives, but i thought it was an interesting factoid. the: the goal is is that at end of this, you will be able to document, or nasa will be able to document as never before the effects of microgravity on a human using a twin human to really get at a detailed level.
scott: yes, you know, it is really kind of a serendipitous thing that my brother and i are both identical twins and astronauts, and the fact that he is an astronaut and has a lot of experience with nasa means not only is he comfortable doing all of these types of experiments as the control person, but also nasa has a lot of data on him going back to when he interviewed in 1995, so they can look at the data and the data they collect from him over this year and see what kind of deviations we have on a genetic level, which, you know, could be a result of this environment, the weightlessness of the environment, the radiation that we see, and from that figure out other areas we need to know,igate so we can, you complete our journey to mars and elsewhere.
john:: nasa estimates that the recently discovered earthlike planet in a star system has doubled the earth's gravity. mentioned yours heroic experiments and your effects on gravity and talking about this, so as you anticipate the physical recovery needed to return to earth's gravity from the weightlessness of the space station, how do you think humans could one day adapt to gravity stronger than earth's? guess charlesw, i darwin proved that, you know, the species, different species in general are very adaptable to their environment, and they -- you know, so i think over the long term, it would not be an issue. have learned to live and work in a microgravity environment, i am sure people will be able to live and work in
an environment that is twice the amount of gravity, although i think to be comfortable with that, in that situation, it will probably take a little longer to optimal up here. much, but, youas know, when we come back from a space station, we do feel like you weigh 500 pounds, more than double your real weight. but it is something you adjust to very quickly, and i think we as a species, you know, throughout evolution, it has shown that we are very adaptable. john: how long has it taken you to get used to this environment of microgravity, and is it a constant process of adjustment, or is it something that you figure out, and then it is just there? scott: you know, that is a really good question, and you know one i have never been asked before. what is the process of
adjusting? far, i have found it is a continuous thing. gets, you know, less significant over time, but i do notice, you know, i can do things now that i couldn't do right when i first got up here, even though i had flown 180 days in space before. you know, my ability to move around has really improved over time and continues to improve, and you just get more comfortable. your clarity of thought is greater. your ability to focus, things found that thei adaptation has not stopped. it will be interesting to see where i am at six months from now. i know that on earth when they do experiments -- there you go. that is good. that is good.
earth, when they do experiments, they often put people down in a closed environment and leave them there for months at a time to see how they interact with one another. you're up there for a long time with your colleague. component of human this, the human interaction? are there subjects that you need to avoid in talking about, or how do you learn to live with one person for such a long time or people so long up on the space station? scott: you know, i think people find it hard to believe, but, 300know, so far in my over days, actually approaching one year in space, i have noticed very few conflicts. but oury does nasa international partners do a good job at selecting people who are easy to get along with in this
type of harsh environment, so, you know, especially on this flight. i have not had any issues. nor do i expect to have any. people have issues with me, hopefully not, but we get along great, and we are all one big team up here. we recognize how we rely on each other, you know, on a psychological level but also for our own personal safety, and it with myas important fellow astronaut here as it is with my other international colleagues, including the onboard.osmonauts john: all right, i am going to bring in your brother here in a minute, but do you think that you or mark got the better end of the deal on the twin study? scott: well, i think it depends, you know? is a privilege to fly on this flight, but sometimes
when he sends me pictures of his breakfast, i am a little envious. [laughter] john: and, mark, what would you say to your brother? : what, about breakfast? john: sure. mark: i communicated with him yesterday. about theresting texans and their performance yesterday. scott: well, fortunately, it is a long season, so i am very optimistic they will improve. i think there are areas where they need to, but regardless of how they do, i am a huge fan and feel fortunate to have football season here and something to look forward to on the weekends. john: and a question for scott. mark: interesting.
you see his feet. i think it is interesting to what happens to your feet in space, if your company sharing that with folks. so we dos, you know, not use the bottom of our feet much, so over time, any calluses that you have on your feet kind of fall off, and after about five months up here, you have a be feet, but then you have a big callus on the top of your toe, your big so, because you use that to move around. when i got that from my last flight, a few days after the flight, i was getting a massage at one of those massage chain places, because i was pretty sore in some places, and the "you have the softest feet i have ever felt in my whole life," and my response was, "thank you.
i am very proud of them." john: this is part of the long spaceflight missions as we contemplate mars and beyond in our future. you have been up there about halfway now through your full year stint, but do you have any advice to give to future astronauts who are going to be spending a long duration in space? anything you have learned that you can pass on to them? scott: you know, i was fortunate that i had flown, you know, almost six months my previous life, so i sort of knew what i was getting into, but despite i did have, you know, certain apprehensions, having to go into something that was going to be more than twice as long, so i intentionally, you know, thought about ways for me to get
to the end of this with as much energy as i had in the beginning, and part of that is having a good balance between work and rest, and i intentionally do not work at the same pace i did last time i was up here, where, you know, i felt ore i could go at 100% speed the full six months. i cannot do that, so i consciously tried to throttle myself back to the bit at certain times and have a really good balance between work and rest, and that is what i would encourage anyone who attempts to spend this amount of time in this type of environment, is that you just have to pace yourself. john: so in the remaining time you have of their, you are about half way, what are you most forward to the next six months or so up there? scott: you know, we have a couple of spacewalks coming up,
and i look forward to that. i have never done a space walk. doing one with a guy who just got something out of the refrigerator, so we both forward to that. that will be a challenge for the two of us, but what i am looking most forward to is just getting youhe end of this with, know, as much energy and enthusiasm as i head in the beginning and doing it safely and completing all of our mission objectives and getting all of the science done. john: ok, last question. what is the thing of all of the things that you miss in your , and now from earth after such a long time, what is at the top of your list of things you miss from being down on the planet? scott: so after being with other people, people you care about, your family, your friends, just going outside.
this is a very closed environment. you know, we can never leave, you know was to mark the lighting is always pretty much the same. the smells, the sounds, everything is pretty much the same, and even though i think most prisoners can get outside occasionally, you know in a week, but we can't, and that is what i miss, after people. john: scott kelly, i want to thank you for joining us today on this historic day at the national press club, and the audience wants to show their appreciation by giving you some applause. thank you. [applause] scott: my pleasure. john: all right, see you later. somebody passed up a question, -- maybe it was one of our
there are some large cameras in the pictures, telephoto lens types. are those to take pictures of earth, or what are those used for? : yes, those are for earth. where's scott was, there is a very large window. it is very high quality. sometimes we take pictures of farm fields or different experiments, and when we do not blocking theiment window, we can grab a camera and take some pictures. scott has been very good. i had the tendency to take big pictures, and scott was a big fan of getting that big, gigantic telescope, and it is one of the favorite things we do in space, take pictures. the room he was coming to us from? the lab,were in
looking back, and where joe came from is some exercise equipment off to the side, so i think he was in there, either running on the treadmill, or there is a texas size machine that allows you to do deadlifts and squats and that type of thing. --n: and how would you avoid he mentioned missing going outside. what would you do to avoid being stir crazy out there? : it is funny. i think right after scott get there, when we were there, i missed earth, and the russians were sending us audio clips of rain and wind and words and stuff, so there was one weekend, where there were 100 laptops, so we put this rain sound, so it was raining in the station for the whole weekend. everywhere you went, it was rain. that was one way. mark, i talked to your
brother about the twin study. study ont your twin the ground, and how much time does it take question mark how much are you being tested? : so far, my purpose has ,een to provide samples, saliva other things that will not go into, and be there for m.r.i. studious and ultrasounds, and sometimes i would be an a contraption, and i would not even know what they were trying to figure out. do what you need to do, so providing data over an extended period of time. sometimes i will visit houston and meet with the researchers and spend the whole day giving data. sometimes they will send somebody to tucson, or even once to select datay from me, and we will do this while my brother is in space and after he gets back for a period of time.
from what we understand, from some of these researchers, one of them recently said that they are going to have more i on ation on scott and molecular and genetic information than any other human ever. not anw, that was official position, but that is what one of the researchers, their comments on this study, and there are probably 10 or 12 or toent experiments universities doing experiments, from all of the way of the university of frankfurt to stanford, harvard medical school, johns hopkins, i think the university of pennsylvania, so really pretty substantial research universities, and it will be what the data the shows on the genetic and molecular effects from this long-duration spaceflight. you know, my brother mentioned and there might be a cliff,
i think that needs of the bit of further explanation, right? so we have data on a lot of people after six months of being in space, so we have a pretty good idea of what happens in that six-month period, but we have no data after that six months, so maybe there is a bend in the curve. what i mean by that is we know that people's vision gets worse after a six-month period, but maybe after 10 months, it gets really bad, and imagine you are trying to send a group to live on mars for an extended period of time, but we find out by the time they get there, they are going to be nearly blind, that is a big problem, so that is part of the idea of doing this research over a one-year period, to find out if there are any bends in the curve. john: how sin can we get to mars? : i think our ability to go to mars is not so much based on
the technology to do that. i think that part we can figure out, and we can figure out the engineering and the propulsion system. ultimately, i think we can figure out what it is going to take to mitigate some of these physiological effects from being in space. i think the limiting factor and the thing that really controls when we actually do this is the public desire to do it. you know, we will need a lot of public support if we are going to take on that kind of endeavor , put a person on mars, and that public support then means that andet congressional support administration support, support of the administration in the white house. that is the most important thing, because a challenge like sending somebody to mars is going to be expensive, and it is going to take a long time, so without that public support, i would say -- john: both of you spent time in
that station and have the experience of adjusting back to earth gravity, and scott will have that in a more significant way because of the length of time that he will be up there, but what are the three or so moe unique things that your body experiences that you go through when you transition back to earth from the period of time up on the space station? mark: that is interesting. after my shuttle flight which was relatively short, about two weeks, i felt heavy, more than anything that the sense of gravity was pretty significant, and after my station flight of 200 days, i felt heavy, but the main sensation i had was one of being dizzy, where i could still walk. it took a few days before that dizziness abated, but the thing that really surprised me about the station flight, 200 days, was how quickly i adapted back to earth. i was prepared for much worse
and had months of lingering effects, but i adapted a lot more quickly than i thought. john: was that also your experience in the transition? terry: i flew some that were more or less, so i do not have that experience of being in space for a long period of time, but my observation has been when you're flying a space shuttle mission, it is like a two-week train wreck, of trying to operate and get everything you need to complete in this very short period of time. a lot of crewmembers working very fast. you do not have a lot of time to exercise. it is important exercise in space, so on a space mission, i like to do it to or three times. even though they are in space about six months, they are doing a significant amount of exercise almost every single day, and i think that helps. i think that is how you acclimated pretty well after 200
days in space, and it probably did not feel a lot different than being in space a couple of weeks. the amount of exercise and the amount of work you are doing during that time in space. john: i think both of you would isee, the technology imaginable on getting to mars. what happens with our astronauts once they get there? making it sodle astronauts can live there? how difficult will that be? and do we have any idea how long they will be able tuesday before coming back, or would they just not come back? terry: are we going to see that in a movie? mark: yes. there are two ways to go to mars. you can go the slow boat way, using a traditional chemical rocket, the kind like we have now, and if you do that, it is
six to nine months, and then you have to wait for the long way to catch up with the sun again to come home, so it is a three-year mission, which is a long time for your water systems to work and for your carbon dioxide removal to work, and it is a lot of food packets. it is a big thing. and the fast boat to mars is electric propulsion, using electricity. you pump out the propellant really fast out the back end, and the spaceship moves a lot faster, and you can get there in a few months. the problem to do that is you need a nuclear reactor in space to produce enough electricity. if you go the fast way, the problems of the human body in space are mitigated, also packing a lot less food and water, and the systems do not have to last as long. that is a decision we will have to make, how to get there be fast way or the slow way.
behind it,ngress got how far away are we from achieving this? terry: 1961 to 1969. getting to mars takes longer than getting to the moon. it could be done. maybe, that i two think mark said it. it is more a question of political science than rocket science. john: let me ask you about nasa in general. me, apollo 15 was the end all, because i was seven years old. i did not remember apollo 11, but i had the astronaut dolls or what everyone to call them, the little guys that i would play with. deal, right?ge
and then in more recent years, there was some thought that nasa had come on harder times. we were relying on the russians more and that nasa's glory days were over, and then we had the pluto flyby, and there is so and nasa seemed to be hip again. what is your view with where we are with the space agency here in the united states, and what do we need to do, if anything, to put it on the right future course? i can't talk about what we are doing now and let mark finish. mars rovers. we have three rovers active on mars right now, and the mars program is very robust. the human space program is very robust. .cott is up there now so nasa is very involved in space exploration. robotically and human. all.s not gone away at
we are flying with the russians right now, and that was one of the highlights of my mission, actually going with the russian -- sagues on the soy is any, edit has not ended in shape or form, and i think it has a bright future. marco: we have the best engineers in the world, and i think we can do anything we set our minds to, i mean anything. especially in space flight. it is challenging, but we have the resources to do these things. i think we need to pick missions that the public will be interested in, like the pluto mission. nasa 70 used to work at and flying in space, even i thought that was pretty neat, you know, to see pluto up close for the first time and see this image is come back and learn more about something that is or
is not a planet. i do not know what it is today, so we have got to pick these exciting missions, and then we have to allow nasa to do this. know, what often happens, you know, we will be asked to do something, and then either sometimes nasa will cancel a program, or others will. ability of our scientists and engineers to do these things. they do take a long period of time. often from one administration in the white house to the next, so i think people just need to be patient. we need to give nasa the resources to do these hard things, but we have the people and the ability to accomplish exciting things in space. john terry, we heard scott earlier say he was really looking forward to his space walk, and you completed three
spacewalks during your mission, and this helped prepare the space station for the new boeing and spacex commercial crew vehicle's, and you also gave us go pro shots, but can you tell us what it is like to be out on those walks and doing this kind of work? terry: yes, it was definitely unique. that was definitely a, going outside for the first time. in the pool, we practiced doing , and it is about from there to there, and reach over and grabbed, and on my very dost spacewalk, i went to that, and then i was, no, i am not going to do that, so i did cut, but it ist
amazing to look back and seat worth. at maybe a minute or two to do that. i i never really felt like had any free time while i was out there. john: market, -- mark: it is almost like we are so used to it, we take it for granted. what about the impact it has? mark: my brother mentioned that over the period of time he will be there, there is like 400 experiments going on in different laboratories. a u.s. laboratory, a japanese laboratory, a european laboratory, the russians, they do science in the russian segment, so it is an incredible facility. tore is a lot going on expand the output of the space station. you need just more people.
the space station was 1998, so 17 years now. it is starting to get kind of old. break, andt to people have to fix things when they break, and that takes time away from doing the science. you do not have an electrician or plumber or somebody to clean the place up, so the crew members, they are the mechanics. they are the scientists. they are the secretary. a guy who is fixing the toilet when that breaks. you are the made. you are cleaning up on the weekend or during the week, so it really comes down to crew but to add crew members is complicated. you have more crew members, and now you need another return vehicle onboard that acts as a lifeboat is something happens. you also have to be up to support the extra people not only with food and water but oxygen, you know it or to grieve
--you know, air to grieve need moreo we would to get more out of them. an -- then an international effort. looking at long spaceflights in the future, do you envision these will be international collaborations, or will they be more u.s. efforts? mark: my own view is that it view is-- terry: my own that i think the international program aspect of it allowed it to make it through congress, and going back to the political science versus rocket science aspect to it, the international program makes it something that can survive over a longer period of time. plus, it is great to have the ingenuity, and you can gain some efficiencies by having different countries build different modules, so one country does not
have to build the entire thing themselves. john: someone passed out a question about elon musk, who recently talked about mars and using a thermonuclear device as an option to make mars more habitable. any thought or comment on that? yes, i saw an article on that. i do not know the science behind -- nuking a planet, and elon is a very smart guy. car company, and a big solar company. you know, he tends to know what he is talking about, but i do not know the science behind nuking the planet. john: another person in the
audience rights that the u.s. russian relations are tense on earth but seem very productive in a. what can leaders on earth learn about your cooperation on the international space station? terry: preparing and getting ready to launch, and they are very capable, very friendly. with a great time in space misha, whoasha and is up there now. the station has accomplished a lot of things, and the most important thing is the international relation aspect of it. it has been evolving. ups and downs in relationships on earth, and the space station has been a very positive weekend -- beacon on life. john: terry, 3-d printing. please describe this for the
future and for the space station , benefits, if there are any. are there any lessons learned that can improve on the technology in the near term? terry: samantha, this was her baby in space, but 3-d printing is a great concept, and you can imagine going to mars. you are limited to one bag only, so you cannot bring all of the tools that you need, and if you can actually print out parts or tools, for example, that can really save on the amount of mass you have to launch. we did make a little wrench, and it was made out of plastic. wrench, and metal it was the first time it had been done in space, and it was more of a technology demonstrator, but it was cool to see it print out in space, and we sent it back down to earth for analysis, so we did not keep it, but that is a technology
that has a lot of promise, i think. mark, when you're up there, what is the thing that strikes you the most later on? well, what became obvious to me, in 2001 during my first is that we live in an island, in a really unforgiving environment. you look back at the earth from a distance, and you have few people on board the space shuttle and the space station, and we have got 7.5 billion people on this ground ball just floating in the blackness of space with really no other place to go, and that becomes a very -- that was pretty striking and observation, and and by other astronauts that fly in space, so i think it gives you a little bit more of an appreciation of our planet and
what it does for all of us and the need for us to consider that and take care of it. john: terry, as we have talked about, the space station crew has conducted hundreds of experiments, including many that have been developed by science students and transmitted up there. do you consult with these same students when question's arise, and if so, how, and which student experiments were the most interesting or challenging? : sometimes we talk to when weor huntsville are doing experiments, and sometimes if it is complicated, they will tie us in with this rightist who made it. it depends on the experiment, and i am trying to think of what -- the student experiments we
had. most of the experiments, you just do the experiment, and you do not really know who came up with it, but as far as student experiments, what i do remember if they built some equipment like storage bags. there is something that was little satellites, little cartridges of air jet that fly around, and that was a big student-led experiment with m.i.t. that my crewmates were talking to the ground, and that was very interactive. students could make software and fly them around, kind of like the robotics that kids do these days, like a competition that they were flying. john: mark: i mentioned relying on others earlier on transport. do you think ending the space shuttle program before the was a replacement slowed the u.s. space program?
in other words, was it a good transition, or could we have done better? the columbia accident happened in 2003, and after columbia, it was a joint decision made to retire the space shuttle because we realized that if we continued to fly it, you know, for another decade, we would probably lose another spacecraft and a crew. we did not want to do that, so this was a decision made by congress and the white house and nasa, including the astronaut office. that is the right thing to do, to retire the space shuttle. what it allowed us to do is to speed up the development of what the next would be. and you get into testing developing and building the newware for a new system, a launch system, a new rocket, a new spacecraft, it get expensive really quickly, like upwards of $2 billion a year to do this,
that it just happens to be that the space shuttle operating budget was about $2 billion to $3 billion a year, so there were two things he could have done. we could have retired the space shuttle and use that money to develop a new spacecraft, or we $2 billion orten $3 billion more out of congress and the white house and develop a new spacecraft at the same time. nasa's budget is only about $19 billion, so you are talking about a 15% increase in nasa's budget to build a new spacecraft. in the fiscal environment over the last decade, how hard do you think it would be great agency 15%et an increase of about in their budget? it would be really hard to do, so i absolutely believe we made the right decision. would haveonally flown the space shuttle every year for the rest of my life if i could. it is the best spaceship ever.
i loved it. part of me still wishes it was still around, but at the same time, we did make the right decision, because the space shuttle was designed -- they were each designed to fly about endeavour, that was flight 25. they were not designed to fly the40 years, so that was issue we were dealing with, so it put us in a position where we had to rely on our russian partners to get crew members to and from the station right now and over the next couple of years still, and we will be back with u.s. crew members on u.s. on your soil here in no time, and i think it puts us on a good path going forward. john: for either of you, if you were congress, where would you focus the resources for nasa?
would it be a morris mission? would it be a mission like the pluto flyby? going back to the moon? the space station? where would we need to put our focus? terry: we would do everything. john: but if we did not have unlimited resources, what would you prioritize? mark: i will let terry say. not focus on just one thing. doing aircraft research and also space exploration and human expiration, so i would not divide it up. terry, you stay connected through your favorite pastime to earth, baseball. as i understand,
you posted your favorites. >> boston is very easy, san diego. it is when you get to the very middle. kansas city, hundreds of miles of flat. st. louis, cincinnati. so, the ones on the corners were very easy to get to and the ones on the corners of little tougher to get. i think i did get them all. i still need to go through the files and check the ones in the middle the country. pittsburgh is hard to get with all of the hills in the middle of pennsylvania. workingnk my brother is on getting the football stadiums, i think because of what you did. host: before i asked the final question, some housekeeping. i want to remind you of our
astronauts will be available down the hall for stand-up interviews after this concludes. i want to remind you the national press club is the leading organization for journalists. we fight for a free press worldwide. for more information, visit our website press.org. institutee journalism visit press.org/institute. i would like to remind you about some upcoming programs. archbishop thomas one ski of miami. bishop cantu of new mexico, and of catholicwu relief services will discuss pope francis us upcoming visit o washington, d c and a discussion on college athletics and the chair of the national endowment for arts will discuss initiatives at a
breakfast. i would like to present our in-room guests with a national press club mug. much cherished. you cannot easily find it on the space station. very valuable. we'll have to figure out how to get it to your brother. bags give me an extra one. >> give me a next her one. i will get it to him. not very useful in space, though. [laughter] john: the new mars movie is coming out. i am a star wars junkie. grew up that way. will inch of you tell me what science enjoy, if any and will you tell me about what you think about the movies and science fiction that you see out there.
terry: i always enjoyed it. star wars was the big thing. i remember reading arthur clarke as a teenager. he wrote some great stuff. inre is a space station north orbit, i watched it when i was in space. a lot of it came true 50 years later. i just watched interstellar while i was in space. a lot of that stuff is not going on on board the space station. there are a lot of one wholesome stuff. you have to watch it a few times. course, they have to make it exciting. scott brought up a big projector. --watched "gravity close "gravity" one night. the mechanics of where everything was, what it looked like, was very well. they got it done. do not have giant
explosions and fireballs. they have to do that to make the movie interesting. out there doing science experiments, you probably would not gross very much at the box office. [laughter] john:, how about you. i was reading about, saving humanity, it is interesting to see how an author or hollywood uses an existing technology in their movies. younger, like these i used to read a lot of like, robert heinlein. about what itnk would be like to be in space one day and i think that is
havetant because people ambition. they can a picture themselves at a different place at a different time. john: do you ever think about, you and mark, all that data they have on you, we could clone you. what about as a youngster, so fascinated with the space program. young people who want to go to space someday get on that career track. what would you suggest they do? >> brigade asked this question all the time. the answer is, do what you are passionate about. everyone has different skills and abilities. when you are created to do, go do that and do that well. there is not one path to being
an astronaut. there are engineers, scientists. mark and i are both engineers in our previous lives. -- scott isedical. a medical doctor. the idea is to do what you are passionate about and what your gifts are. on the cusp of a big seachange with access to space. i think there is a very high probability that the young people in his today, sometime in their lives, even if they are not a professional astronaut, will have the ability to go into space. they see movies like galactic where people are starting on the road to space tourism. it is exciting. we will see a lot more. right now, there is probably about 550 people who have ever been in space, and i think that number is going to grow substantially over the next decades.
think there is more excitement now about aspects in space than at any other time? >> i think the reason is, for are starting to think maybe this could affect now. maybe it is true. maybe and some of our lifetimes and stead of taking a flight from new york to london that typically takes about 6.5-seven hours, maybe some of us will be taking that flight in the space shuttle. about 40 minutes. there is no reason why that is not possible in the coming decades. able or starting to think about this. john: how about a round of applause for our guests? [applause] john: i want to thank our
gentlemen. i am the associate director here at the atlantic council and behalf of my colleagues, i would like to welcome you here today. like to welcome our live audience who are watching at home. we sit is a vertical juncture for iran, the united states, and its allies, and the entire international community. after 30 years of intensifying fictions and isolation, iran is entering a new gauge -- a new age of engagement. at the atlantic council, we view this moment as one that holds opportunity. ae task force has served as comprehensive source of analysis on iran. by bringing together key americans, iranians, and regional stakeholders, the task force has made significant strides in wondering -- in our understanding of the jpcoa. until now, we have heard perspectives from outside iran on the deal. today, we will hear about the deal from the iranian
perspective. we will hear about their intended role in the national community, and international community, following the deal. we will be joined by the senior fellow with the middle east peace and security initiative. he will take a broader deal of the iranian intentions and the broader gulf of the middle east. i would like to thank the fund for their generous and continued support of the iran task force. we will introduce the speakers and moderators he discussion. thank you. thank you for coming on this beautiful day. once again, i think our timing is excellent. apparently, the congress appear to hold its nose and allow the agreement to go
isward, one of the questions how will iran behave in the region. will it take additional funds from sanctions relief? and the words of opponents, march into a fifth capital. will it -- on more interventionist policies, or not? for that reason, without it would be important to have a discussion. we have a guest from tehran. he is a professor of political science at the faculty of law and political science at the university of tehran. he has served there as the director of graduate studies. been a visiting professor and graduate scholar at the middle east institute. role atheld a prominent the center for strategic research, which is a think tank in iran that is close to the president. his areas of scholarly research
included iranian contemporary politics, the nuclear program, and political islam. political ain science from the university of tennessee in knoxville. sobbed,.have -- he is more than 13 years of experience working as a analyst advisor of the middle east. he is a military and security expert with the focus on the arab states of the persian gulf. he has a ba from the american university of beirut and two masters degrees from the university of saint andrews and the university of maryland. i recommend to you and at slug paper that he did a couple months ago that dealt with the issue of containing iran. to comenvite our guests up now and take a seat. we will begin with a question. gentlemen, why don't you come appear. -- come up here.
in the middle, and then on the other side. she has written a new paper that is up on the website. you can read it yourself. i will begin by asking him to discuss some of the points in this paper. anti-pose a question to him. a few years ago, i interviewed a very astute journalist in iran. himold me, when i asked about iranian influence in the region, he said we are not going to stretch our legs beyond the we have. my question to you is, how big is that carpet? how big should be, how big will it be, and what is the nature of the debate that is taking place in iran about iranian regional policy?
>> thank you very much. i appreciate you inviting me to share my ideas with you regarding the iranian nuclear program. about the anecdote that you to discuss. like there was a time when the controversy was much bigger. we used to carpet on most every space. basically, there is not one rule in iran regarding the region. as i have mentioned in the report, there are two views there.
which callsically, for stabilization. the other calls for basically, stabilizing force in the region. in other words, sitting there, -- weou are seeing theire, have a problem with the refugees, with drugs, narcotics. some worry about pakistan as well. we worry about iraq and what is happening there. lebanon, andia,
yemen. that in the next 10-15 years, the primary objective of foreign policy should be stabilizing the regime. thatshould be a country produces security. their argument is we cannot be an island of security and be dismissive of the insecurity around us. that is the official view. that is the dominant view in iran. alternative view, which recently, gained popularity. in the think tanks, among those at the university, they argue that iran is already
outstretched. we do not have any more sources to give out. we are the primary source infighting. there are many militia in iraq. that is not our fight. basically. , why wouldargue that we make ourselves the target? they have not yet attacked. it is not because they are not capable of doing so, but it is because they have not made a decision to do so. in other words, they can easily invade into our territory. why do we have to do that? the argument is, our engagement should be minimal.
in the coastal area, and i run, basically, in syria. sunnis are really interested to have representation in the government, why should we not let them have it? it is not all that much concern for us. power, confided the basically, that is going to be a threat, not for us, but for the and to somedanians, extent, the americans. they want toknow come to the south, they want to fight. the fight is going to be severe. it is going to be a serious fight. normally, if we assume they are not totally crazy, only
partially crazy, the national -- the natural trajectory would be for saudi arabia to join in and going rather than forward into the heavy fight. of the second worldview is basically, to withdraw and to make engagement to the minimal level. group argument would say this is somewhat naive. the longerk, an in term, you are not going to face problems, that they are not threat, bring a major you are wrong. they will be a major threat for
us in the long-term. if the south announced what would be your position? argue, is the most important country with territorial integrity of iraq and syria. iran withdrawal some that position, the the integration of these two countries are easy to imagine. the first view, the dominant questions a cortisone. what would be your position if iraq claims independence? be, weond argument would have important intelligence
security and commission infrastructures. we can benefit from the situation. they're not going to cause a major threat for us. these are naive arguments. cortisone isnce of opening up the region. then, we are going to face an entirely different middle east. many areas may claim for independence. tois not appropriate andcally, support oppositional movement, or accept the independence of any one of these territories. we have to preserve the
integrity's. >> thank you. that is helpful. most in washington are not even aware there is a foreign-policy debate going on in iran. as you have mentioned, and written in your paper, the dominant view still in iran is force formust be a stabilization. what iran calls stabilization, arab countries call meddling, or worse, in the affairs of arab countries. i am going to ask you to give nasir'salysis of the sear paper. and how you think the iranian debate could be factored into the debate that is going on. if there is a debate, and they have not already reached a conclusion. how they can be influenced to see iranian activities in an less negative light. >> my wife tells me my speaking
skills have regressed. i will go back to basics with a few slides. the iranian intentions and iranian capabilities are two points. what iran wants to do and, regardless of what it wants to do, what its capabilities are. i will address both. the issue of iranian intentions are still the question mark for me. i read with great interest, the paper he wrote. to me, or i hear of a significant debate going on inside iran, i look for evidence of the debate, news commentary, statements by iranian leaders, and even some reporting about it. i also look for a clear description of what the players are, and what the reviews are. i did not hear that today. i understand that there are certain limitations with which you have to deal with. i think it would be extremely important, and i
cannot overstate this, for the community in washington, and for several key players in the region, to know who is advocating for what inside iran. this is hardly an academic exercise. to the issue of capabilities. this. see if i can work outink i have that print for you just in case. i am very quick with the slides. in the issue of capabilities, it is very important because the american policy debate about iran and its regional role, those capabilities are either completely misdiagnosed, or worse, neglected. i would like to offer a little bit of nuance into that because it is important. never underestimate what iran can do in the region to advance its own interest. 1983, 1986.in the iuds in iraq. those killed dozens of american soldiers.
196, to be exact. that lasted for eight years. at the very end of it, the other side of it, the iraqis, heavily financed, and arms to the teeth by the west, that site was the one that was on life support until the very end of its life. the iranian nation support -- survived very well. ,ezbollah, the very successful the most lethal, and the most disciplined, that is because of iran. jihad is not as effective, but the most important security threat to israelis at this day and time. let me say it bluntly. lebanon will not have a president unless iran says so. hezbollah has no meaningful future without the decision of iran.
serious future is a function of iranian design. national security is a function, among others, of iranian design. gulf security overall, is a function of iranian design. iran has succeeded in entangling its main adversary in a very vicious fight in yemen. influencehe dominant in iraq. isis is the only force that can threaten it today. there cannot be any major ports in that part of the world, without iran having a say in it, or one of its surrogates. major questions of war and peace are iranian decisions. those are small -- those are no small feat. bargainingnsiderable power in the region. if you are sitting in tehran today, you feel good about the original position. however, iranian capabilities are a very mixed bag.
this is where the bad new starts. news starts. involvedthat iran is in today has stabilized not a single state and has failed to build feast. -- build peace. it comes with a heavy price. it comes with a price of telling the world it is supporting an illegitimate militia that has revolted against unelected and legitimate president. that support will either reconstruct the country, or helping to achieve a political solution. the iranians have been isis inul in protecting syria. that comes with heavy casualties for as paula -- four hezbollah. militarys, causes some
overstretch. terrific piece about that, and the risks of overstretch. there is a truth to it. some of the most important and influential, people in iraq today, rumor has it fired a very angry leader to his counterpart, complaining about the iranian commander's handling of iraq-sunni politicians. perhaps, italy and eating them and not handling them with careful -- perhaps alienating them had not handling them with care. the commander is now back in action to hold him in check or perhaps, just watch over his shoulders. there is also a price for ulfkening arab and g nationalism.
anti--iranianism is at an all-time high with the sunnis today. because of yemen, and here i get to military effectiveness, because of yemen, some of these countries are learning how to wage combat. and of the most important powerful weapons on the earth have never been news for the iranians. with all of the talk about iran's prowess in asymmetric warfare, we have to remember, this is a country that has very modest conventional capabilities. the iranian air force is irrelevant in any military withrio or any dogfight arab gulf fighter jets. iran has considerable skills in land warfare, due primarily to the iran-iraq war. the last thing you should be
worried about is iran's land capabilities. territorial conquest should not really be occupying the top of our list of concerns. iran's missile arsenal is quite impressive. it is not reliable. it is not precise. it is not as lethal as we think it is. haeover, its adversaries ppen not to be defensive. progress,been some let's not overstated, over the last 2-3 years and integrating those missile defenses regionally. in short, iran is very good at asymmetric warfare, but whether it is on land, or at sea, the most it can do is create problems. not necessarily win wars. let's put to rest any notion close the thread
anytime it wants. it's a way cannot. in closing, i know have taken too much of your time, barbara. it matters less what the intentions are up iran, when we try to assess the country's regional role after the nuclear deal. what matters more our actions. those big much louder. the iranian capabilities i described are clearly not inadequate, or inferior. they also do not match the rhetoric coming out of washington. that we are about to witness a rising, regional nation built on conquest and domination. that is simply not true. there may be a debate going on inside iran today. i think an equally important, if not far more important debate that should be happening, is between iran and the arab gulf states. how it happens, i don't know.
it does not matter what the intermediary is. it matters that it should happen as quickly as possible. barbara: thank you. we have a lot to respond to. ir, i think one thing we all have to keep in mind, and he wrote about this in your paper is that the iranian policies are waste on iran's threat perception. iran feels the major threats come from israel and the united states. the support of hezbollah are based upon that. i would argue that hezbollah would continue, even if there was not an iran because it is strong with lebanese society now. i am sure that there are many in iran who would love to hear what you have to say. think that they have
such a capability. the second part of your talk i reality. clos to we have a number of issues. first of all, regarding the saudi arabia and and yemen, they're all different. the impact of yemen is minimal. the fight with yemen is mostly the failure of policies. i'm sure iran would love to get the credit. is, we have spent only a few million dollars. that is all.
any illusion in , that we cannot do anything in yemen. we have not been able to stabilize the situation. is meddling in the affairs. i expect to hear that from the saudi's, the politicians, but not from you. there is a difference between perception and reality. that is too far from reality. the americans have reported
repeatedly our influence and yemen is very limited. gcc, you know to me, saudi's have adopted the policies regarding iran. and i guess, before the revolution. we call it the containment policy. they try to contain iran. a our building important infrastructure inside iran, and a number of the provinces, training students, spending money, giving money, and building mosques inside. they have tried to build along the iranian border. in other words, the saudi's are in pakistan spending money on all of this.
that is because they feel they have to have a base to contain iran. the same thing in afghanistan. there is a reason for them to contain us. think being arab, or muslim, or anything, gives you entitlement to intervene in these countries. in a how much money they are spending. syria,are in rock, lebanon, it is basically on the basis of threat perception. plus, on the basis of that threat perception, we defined the strategic depth of our forces. the strategic depth would be then, lebanon, syria, iraq. not yemen, of course. we have tried to have an infrastructure to do two things.
first, stop israelis from taken military action. number two, basically retaliation in case of another attack. we are not there to challenge the saudi's. we are not in lebanon or syria, or iraq because they want to challenge the gcc or saudi arabia. we don't see saudi arabia as a threat. we don't prioritize them as a top threat. they are at the bottom. don't consider to be a threat. we have not developed infrastructure to deal with the challenge. if they are in lebanon, they are not there because they want to challenge the israelis. becauset to be there they want to challenge us.
if they are in iraq, they are not challenging the u.s. or the israelis. they are there because they want to challenge as. in all of these areas, the saudi's are challenging us. not as challenging them. we do not consider them a threat. coming and blaming iran, iran is challenging the saudi's -- that is strange. even stranger is they can , they, as you mentioned combined population is greater than iraq. in terms of population, in terms of military, they have far more sophisticated weaponry. they have a super power behind it. they have a lot of economic growth. they could easily banish us. why can't they then?
a matter how many times president obama tells them, we are behind you, we are going to give you this and that, we are going to support you, no matter how much we tell them, believe us, we are no threat. we don't want to do anything with you, but inherently outsource the security. who offer thei's securities to someone else. they will seem insecure. that is natural and that has been the case throughout history. always, they worry that possibly, the other guy is going be sold or bought by the other side. they think that there will be a higher price. he will pay a higher price to the americans. they think they'll be left to themselves. unless they rely on their own
resources to provide security for themselves, they are going to feel threatened. to what we tell them, or what the americans tell them -- no matter what we tell them, or what the americans tell them. we are a convenient enemy for them. particularly for the policymakers, for some of those -- they could easily attack us. attacking americans has a cost. the israelis has a cost. attacking iran is convenient. we are a convenient enemy now, which will seem there are a number of psychological desires springing from. the type ofust behavior, forget about the words.
as you mentioned, actions. tell me the actions which iran has taken against the saudi's. tell me the actions, forget about the situation at the beginning. thesehe past 30 years, are the number one, number two actions you have taken against the saudi's. tell me. after all, we had a very good relationship. we have a very good relationship with kuwait. it was only four or five years we have not had a good relationship. the only country that does not have a good relationship with us is the uae. ironically, we have more than 20 fights a day -- flights a day
from tehran to the bay. it is strange that there is this myth of the iran threat. it is a convenient enemy. i don't want this to become a debate between you two. i am going to open it up to the floor and ask you say your name and for the microphone. please, as the question. wait for the microphone. a peer in front. -- up here in front. i have the privilege of being on barbara's iran task force.
betweenikened the jcpoa an arranged marriage between two parties that do not trust each other. a prenuptial agreement that only deals with the dowry. doould like to know, what you think really convinced iran that this was a good time to have this particular agreement? what can i rent over the long-term to make it succeed? people will be coming out of the woodwork to make it fail. i think that the jcpo was a by thestroke administration. they critique the administration because, while they can put things in place, they stink at execution. go back to asia, go back to all of this nonsense like the affordable health care act. they screwed that up on execution. what would you recommend for the longer-term for the administration to make sure this agreement has every opportunity for success. if it does fail, what would be plan b.
how do you put in place the means to implement that? >> very quickly, i want to discuss the issue before. the reasons that may diplomacy and necessity. the reasons that necessitated it number one, war. basically, it is not a good thing. ,ave to eliminate the chances even a slim chance, of a war. that was the number one reason without diplomacy was a necessity. from the u.s. side, the u.s. we need to achieve the
objectives. basically, there were three scenarios of war. know, my argument is different. a war is going to guarantee the weaponize asian. -- the weaponization. if we decide to make a bomb, we can. if we've not made the decision to make a bomb, it is because it does not serve our interest. it is going to increase our vulnerabilities, not security.
war, the u.s.ught thought war was not going to help them to achieve their objectives. the second issue was sanctions. those who negotiated the new sanctions new that sanctions had been impacting our economy. they had not made us desperate. i was having a dinner once with a colleague in tehran. she asked me, can you take me to a place in tehran that does not have impact of sanctions. i've told her, do expect me to take you to the store, or the shelves are np -- are empty. people were jumping all over the place. people it wase going to improve their lives. that is why we had to do something. lifting the sanctions was very important. for americans, they thought the
matter how much sanctions can be crippling, it is going to force capitulation. no way that can happen. they concluded, it is not an option. they thought diplomacy was a better route. was thed factor territories. we had second-generation centrifuges. sanctions for the reactors. after two years, we would have come back. the iranians would have suffered through the process. you are talking now,
40,000-50,000 centrifuges. sometimes, it was not attractive to anyone of us. these three factors made it necessary. are number one, a momentum was created because of the iranian election. no one can plan to create a momentum. momentum's happen. they were tempted to use the momentum that happened because of the election. in his campaign he said, the centrifuges. also, the next factor the
presence of two things. at the same time, they wanted the diplomacy to work. the americans wanted the diplomacy at times, and the iranians did not want it. their radians wanted it sometimes, and the americans did not. they both wanted to succeed. these two factors facilitated the deal. the last factor was a regional issue. from lebanon all the way to syria, they were in trouble. iran, iraq, and also afghanistan, we thought, we have to pay attention to the issues. they are far more important than 5000 centrifuges or 10,000 centrifuges. we thought that, this region-ish isthe -- this regional issue
a start. we can use the presence in the region. they did not want iran to explore. i want to add to the question in terms of recommendations for the administration. we've heard a lot of talk about compensating israel, from theing the gcc iran a deal, as though it is detracting from the security, rather than adding to it. my question is, the provision of more sophisticated weaponry to israel in particular, but to the cause aell, will it kind of arms race and for conflict in the region i could not agree with you more. we are what we are, but the implementation has been miserable.
have played a week and masterfully and the americans have played a strong hand miserably. was noblete purpose from the start. i will leave it to i will leave it to nuclear exports like bob einhorn and others on what the best way is to make sure that this deal does not fail, but i will give you the three recommendations that are quite broad, that could be useful for the immediate future and the next 10 to 15 years. you have to have clear language and consequences of failure to comply with the provisions of the deal. that's not an option. you have to get serious about campaign deliverables. if you show hesitation or ineffectiveness, the united states will wind up with far fewer friends in that part of the world. compensation, i don't like that term. i think at the end of the day what contributes to region