iraq. two iraqi leaders, including a deputy prime minister and a governor and his -- of a majority city province discussed their status in a post-saddam iraq. ken: good morning. welcome to the brookings institution. i am ken pollack. i am a senior to the center for middle east policy here at the brookings institution, and i'm absolutely delighted to bring this program to you this morning. all of you know in the last few months washington has seen two extremely distinguished visitors from iraq, prime minister al-badi was here in march, and just recently, in april, and just recently we had the president of the krg. as you all know there are many different communities in iraq. all of them in great tension at the moment. some of them virtue and more with one another. and as we all know at the heart of iraq's communal differences like it's sunni community. we all now know that it was the alienation of the sunni community that began after the 2003 american invasion which drove the sunnis of iraq

are we part of iraq? if the answer is yes, we should include a government for all iraqis and you have to be accepted and security forces. even when you come to fight against isis. so what sort of partnership the government can do if the government failed to make a partnership with those who are fighting a global threat. now something around 2012. everyone knows that the western part of iraq some signals is from the governor and buyer to prime minister to have to deal with them. the question who laughed isis. so the central government and the central security forces which control the security to deal with the control of isis. the question we keep saying that iraqi security forces were not built on that model and this is the added. many are being defeated and mostly a few hot arid of isis. isis presented itself putting in their mind the dealing of the government. so they will protect you and discover more than anyone else because millions of people are sunni and are killed now by criminals of isis. assuming

we are not doing it in iraq. what i saw on the ground is american advisors out with the troops tent to make it better. >> the obama announced they'd send advisors to iraq. they are on root. u.s. boots on the ground is not the answer to the problem, and hasn't been an announcement for the last six years. special operations command is working to involve qatari's emrarties actors in providing their people and local people that understand to do the fight themselves. >> they would disagree. i would put boots on the ground. >> you heard a former u.s. ambassador to iraq suggesting that the united states may be needed to get involved in order to address the threat. what do you think. we agree that the united states has expertise, which is why the obama administration sent advisors, we've been involved since the larger troop drawdown in advising the capacity and support for the local troops. the united states population have vehemently supported a president in the last two elections, and his commitment to drawing out of t

democracy but fragile and threatened yes it is a real solution and yes iraqs iraqs iraqs. the mobilization is just for people who follow and wish to fight they are just people from the shia who fight and most of them is a good guys and they want to protect iraq and equipped equipped and trained from outside iraq and of course if you see that. and true that as soon as the struggle between this militia and the sunni provinces have stopped, even though this militia overcome or sunni area, all that stopped the problems will create between inside the militia and shia provinces and that's the problem that they face and the struggle between that would be more than the struggle with the sunni after that. so we are not going with this. if we work outside the constitution outside the law, we are not going to step up iraq. we are going for more problems. of course now there's shia sunni problems but in the future it will be shia problems. i think when i'm talking about the constitution of ninevah, if we create an autonomy we right a constitution and even though they are small minorit

iraq can wantnot be iraq without muslim. that would be like the united states without chicago or without san francisco. there are key points i want to discuss with you. these points mean success or failure for the liberation of mosul and the world's fight against isis. success in the battle and just as important, what comes after this, is good. this in addition to the importance of fighting isis are con frequent steps towards national reconciliation in iraq. after 11 years of just talking about reconciliation, but no actual steps taken, the sunni and iraq will no longer be interested in more talk. the sunni need to see actual and concrete steps. i will agree with him most of the time, and outline only these points so we can have your question and a good discussion. i'm talking about mosul as a model, but i think what i'm talking can be for all the sunni areas. first, the people of mosul are the key to liberate mosul. the mosul people must be shown why. liberation is better for them than the regime of isis. history shows that

invaded iraq. jeb bush said he would have invaded iraq, and would not have invaded iraq and then said he didn't under the question. somebody else said to him said maybe he misheard the question. marco rubio said at one point not understanding the question. over the past week he changed his statements whether or not the iraq war was a mistake and he had this awkward interview on sunday yesterday when chris wallace confronted marco rubio and his evolution on this issue. the problem is not whether they are good about talking about this. whether they figured out how to make sure they sound consistent as they answer it in different contexts, talking to different people about it. the problem is not skill. the problem is not whether they are good answering the question. the larger problem is, what is seen as the correct answer to this question. because, while jeb bush and marco rubio have been getting in trouble on style points for not exactly knowing what to say and supposedly flubbing this answer. these

of his strategy in iraq and in afghanistan. and i thought that i would start a by doing this critique on how it has gone by saying obviously it's gone great. since september 11 we have had 14 september 11's. it's been a successful war on terror. >> not so much. >> i will try to do my best james risen impression but we agree some things we will probably clash on before he gets here but the attacks could have and should have been prevented by the national security apparatus. there were a number of indications that something was coming. this indications were missed in what i believed to be the greatest failure in history worse than pearl harbor. after the attacks of september 11 have the united states was unprepared for the kind of war it had to fight both in afghanistan and the war that it chose to fight in iraq and it chose to fight partly as a result of another intelligence detailing the leaving that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction which he had a program that was destroyed and ended after the first war in iraq af

policy in iraq and syria. i want to thank each of our expert witnesses for appearing before us today on this critical and complex topic. senator mccain: before i go any further, the secretary of defense and chairman of the joint chiefs were invited to appear admittedly very short notice, and we will be asking them to appear after the recess is over depending on whether the bill is on the floor or not, but we certainly would like to hear from the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs. today we have general jack keane, former vice chief of staff for the army and chairman of the institute for the study of war, and general keane, we are pleased you could take time from your duties on fox news to being with us today. dr. fred kagen, who is -- that's a joke. dr. fred kagen, -- kagan director of the critical threats project at the american enterprise institutes. colonel derek harvey, u.s. army retired, director of the global initiative for civil society and conflict at the university of south flor

what is the right question to be asking about iraq. you have other ideas. >> going forward, we decapitated iraq to a disastrous effect. we did libya, also. the syrian people decapitated their own government and the yemeni people decapitated theirs. the problem for the next president is going to be the fact that we are in a post imperial era. no one wants to go in control of it. we are in a post colonial period and a post athor tear yan era. unless they learn how to live together this region is going to be a human development disaster area for the next president. >> what is the right question for the next president? >> basically i mean you heard lindsey graham say i'm going to drone them. good luck with that. frankly, i think we are at the cusp of an incredibly new problem. post imperial, post colonial. i haven't heard anybody who's got an answer for that one. >> can't buy diplomacy anymore. >> the thing we should think about iraq is, why didn't people ask the question what next. if you remove it barack obama said before the war, we are

which iraq's own forces can't adequately fight back. isil continues to edge closer to baghdad. it has now taken the crossing, the last syrian government-held border crossing between iraq and syria, which sits on the main highway. and in syria, isil fighters are reported to have spread across palmyra, going door to door executing as many as 150 suspected assad government loyalists. >> reporter: some of these men will be sent teem into the sunni heartland to fight isil. others will stay behind to protect the strategic town that the islamic state of iraq and the levant has tried to control in the past. for these shia militiamen this battle is not just about recapturing territory. they are protecting routes to prevent an isil attempt to advance on shia holy sights in neighboring provinces. >> translator: i volunteered to join this battle to protect our holy shrines. we don't want isil to advance further and threaten the shia holy sites. >> reporter: it was a controversial decision to use shia militia men in a sunni province, but the governm

the excessive heat in iraq. so if you're doing this, you're probably going to have to cut the inspector short. if you're really intent on going to war, you're going to have to do it even without. that's the second point. third point, my boss got put out for the united states secure council to give the most species presentation on iraqi m.d. that anyone has ever been called on on in american government to rendure on the american council to the american public and to international community. and powell showed afterwards it was very effective. why was i very effective in because it was colonel powell which had mother teresa poll ratings. he was 77% on the polls an she was about 80%. you're looking at the individual who went out to the c.i.a. and prepared colin powell for that presentation in terms of orchestrating all the analysts from 16 different intelligence agencies working daily and nightly with george tenet and frankly on three pillars of that presentation, mobile biological laboratories, existing stocks of c

iraq split apart. the security environment deteriorated and everything we fought for, everything that was sacrificed on behalf of the american taxpayer and american soldier, was just squandered by president obama. president bush made plenty of mistakes. smart enough to adjust in 2006 but president obama's decision to withdraw all forces in the face of sound military advice has come back to haunt us in iraq and syria, and if he doesn't ate just his policy this problem's going to get worse over there and eventually come here. >> you don't accept the notion nuri al maliki was the prime minister of iraq at the time rejected u.s. requests. >> no. >> that any u.s. troops who remained would have immunity from iraqi prosecution? once he rejeshgtsed that the u.s. got out? >> that was a complete absolute lie. i was on the ground talking to maliki and every political leader in iraq, they were willing to have a follow-on force but the administration got the answer they wanted. the president wanted to keep a politi

is banking on iraq's military to hold its own and keep iraq from imploding. the security vacuum left in iraq since they left in 2011 since the u.s. troops invaded in 2003 make that a pipe dream. al jazeera america national security course dents jamie mcintyre joins me from the pentagon. ash carter said over the weekend that iraqi fighters have lost their will to fight. >> ali, to say that the u.s. is disappointed in the performance of those iraqi fighters in ramadi would be to risk serious understatement. the iraqi forces have a lot of things they blame for the loss of ramadi including ineffective u.s. air strikes and lack of support from the shia government in baghdad. pentagon officials tell a slightly different story. sources tell me by the way, that the iraqi forces in ramadi had a 10-1 numerical advantage over the advancing isil fighters. there were about 10,000 iraqi forces including 7,000 iraqi security forces and then another 3,000 federal police and special operations. the pentagon believes they should have nefr been overrun by this much smaller forc

takes iraq. the senator got towards an argument earlier in the segment that really upsets me. the sacrifice we meet in iraq for the iraqi people was tragic. we lost many, many liesvves. to say we should put more lives on the line or else those lights have been wasted is a bad argument, it is a disingenuous argument. i am as conservative as it gets but i will not beat obama over the head for getting us out of there because it is a lost cause. anybody who says those lives we sacrifice were wasted, then that person is playing politics and it is a disgusting tactic that i can't tolerate anymore. one more drop of american blood in iraq and i will blow my job. thank you very much. guest: i am -- i will blow my top. thank you very much. guest: i understand his concerns. i don't think we should ever take anything away from those individuals. one thing that happened earlier that i would like to touch base on -- i remember in 2002, i was elected governor of south dakota. i went to the governor's meeting, a

isis is much more than iraq. our forces should be what the -- our focus should be what the president started out with defeating isis. that will take political will, and war is a test of will. it will take accepting risk. it will take accepting casualties. it will take focus and it will take increased u.s. resources -- and it will take honest evaluations and assessments. what i fear is this -- i hear a disturbing and frightening echo of the summer of 2006, when administration -- when a different administration, senior government officials, and military senior generals came before this committee and in the face of compelling evidence that our strategy in iraq was failing, these officials looked at you and defended that strategy and told you that overall the strategy was succeeding. you and your predecessors took a strong bipartisan exception to those opinions. many as a result of it wanted to give up on iraq. others wanted to do something about fixing the problem. i hope you choose the latter and get on with helpin

it's just the death of another person here in iraq. and 1500 died last month. >> in that sense it's symbolic that everybody faces these dangers in iraq not just the journalists >>> according to the committee to protect journalists, 15 have been killed in iraq, 2013. most were targeted. ned parker of reuters said he did not want to be number 16. on april 3rd, parker filed is sorry from tikrit on government-backed force, recapturing the city. iraqis that took issue with his support went on facebook threatening his life. and on an iraqi tv channel, it led parker to conclude that he was no longer safe. after a decade of covering iraq, he left the country. >> here was the liberation of tikrit, a major city the most significant victory that the iraqi forces have achieved against i.s.i.s. and the reporting that came about it was focussing on the transgressions and happened on the battlefield. but by and large i think that reporting itself did not focus on any positive events that happened with the liberation of the city and rather focussing o

but a fake united iraq has opened up more space for terror on to consolidate power in iraq. you mentioned the kurds and the crews have been crucial in the battle. but you have an article that shows it is not just kurdish men going into battle. belle: it is kurdish women as well. it is not -- this story tells the story of the scottish women. a journalist of theirs has been to meet the whiz women and they are leading a movement against iaf on a roll that leads to damascus. he says that they are making some serious progress in the fight. they say that it is important for them to fight against i.s. and to join that fight because women are targeted, raped, and used in battle. genie: in neighboring turkey, the president is being lampooned by much of the international press. tell us about that. belle: if we begin with a french paper, it has an article that headlines "offerman folly -- ottoman folly or go it mocks the present upon how, which is 200,000 square meters inside, and it has more than 1000 rooms. the increasingly authoritarian leader is trying to make turkey a leader of th

well iraq is appealing for international help to fight islamic state of iraq and levante and iraq deputy prime minister says i.s.i.l.'s capture of the key city of ramadi is a big disaster from which iraq's own forces can't adequately fight back and i.s.i.l. continues to edge closer to baghdad and has taken the crossing and that is the last syrian government held border crossing between iraq and syria which sits on the main highway between baghdad and damascus. and in syria itself i.s.i.l. fighters are reported to have spread across the ancient city of palmyra going door to door to government loyalests and we report now from baghdad. >> some of these men will be sent deep into iraq's sunni heart land to fight i.s.i.l. others will stay behind to protect the town that islamic state of iraq and levante tried to control in the past. for these shia malaysia man this is not just about recapturing territory, they are protecting roots to anbar and shia sites and neighboring sites. >> translator: i volunteered to join this battle to protect our holy shrines and we don't want i.s.i.l. to advance fu

>> republicans have criticized president obama for not leaving troops in iraq. some have said if american forces had stayed, there would be no isis. but emma sky believes that was never in the cards. iraq's prime minister maliki, had a new set of patrons, his fellow shiites in tehran, and they made him an offer he couldn't refuse. >> that was part of iran's deal with him, we'll give you a third term, but the conditions are, no american soldiers. that was what tehran had demanded. there was no way it would have gone through the parliament. >> one thing is clear, it was only iraq's army that could have stopped isis, instead the iraqi soldiers threw down their weapons and ran. [ phone ringing ] >> hello -- >> next on "blindsided." what drives these people, what makes them tick. you'll go inside the mind of a radical. meet a man who was prepared to die for a fantasy. the idea of an islamic califate. nascar® driver.rs, i'm kevin nealon, comedian. and i'm arnold palmer, professional golfer. know what we have in common? we talked to our doctors about treatment with xa

now isis in iraq. if you want to commit billions of american dollars, thousands of american troops, we can get some stability. the american people aren't going to support that. it's a long way of answering your question in the affirmative, it's such a catastrophe, that it is incredibly hard to figure out how this gets solved moving forward. it's a lesson for why we should never put someone in the white house that is so cavalier about the intrusion of the ground troops in the middle east. >> thank you. >>> the president warns of a new threat to national security. we get a look at the contents of money bin laden's bookshelf. >>> rand paul announces a filibuster against the patriot act. and hillary clinton makes a bold hire for her presidential campaign. we'll tell you who that is ahead. ♪ twelve o'clock pop ♪ ♪ we're gonna pop around the clock tonight. ♪ pop in new tide pods plus febreze a 4 in 1 detergent. now with 24-hour freshness. bin laden's bookshelf has been released. some of the documents

in iraq mosul is a christian city, the second largest city in iraq, and christians have been living there for 1700 years. as you know better than anybody. after the fall of saddam, the numbers of christians in iraq were estimated christians are living -- estimated to be about 45,000. how many christians are living there? sister diana: very few. only those held hostage there. we don't have the exact number. yet they are maybe a couple hundred or less. rep. higgins: a hundred or less. most of those who have fled have lived up to kurdistan? sister diana: about 20 minute distance southwest of mosul. after a week or so our displacement happened, which never thought that would happen with a couple hours that we were forced to leave which take -- it's about one-hour distance from my hometown to kurdistan. took us 11 hours to go there because some were marching, some were driving. because it was a traumatic stage for us. i would say like very few christians have stayed in mosul or that they couldn't leave because they were asleep when that happened. rep. higgins: is the hope of the christians fro

that was -- the invasion of iraq in march 2003. my former colleague argues that the invasion of iraq in march of 2003 was the worst foreign policy mistake made by the united states in this nation's great history. for those who like steve are stunts of the subject that's really saying something. i think that the assessment, however, is correct. so the invasion of iraq and 2003 certainly not just intelligence failure, also a policy failure of the first order. and the military failure at an extraordinary level and the failures of the war in iraq, which is largely not exclusively the subject of my new book, "night fights" began early with the decision to unnecessarily invade iraq with the failure to properly plan for the occupation of iraq that followed, with the unbelievably bad decision to completely disband the iraqi army a force which had frankly melted away, had not been destroyed in the invasion in 2003 but was ready to provide security on the streets of iraq after that invasion, and a decision made in the bush administration tha

iraq. in fact what has happened since then is the other way around. i am large iran has rejected ideological influence particularly in the last year or two in two iraq that was unanticipated. pass, in ways that demonstrate that the arab identity trumped their unit affiliation. the most common example of this was during the iran-iraq war the iraqi army consisted largely of shiite personnel and suffered relatively few desertion or no faction to the other side during the war. likewise interview polling data that was collected during the course of the u.s. occupation of iraq in the last decade also confirmed that there was a great deal of distance, psychological distance between the overwhelming majority of iraqi shiites in iran. yet we are seeing the change we see perhaps as a partner in response to the emergence of groups like i says in the transnational sunni jihadist identity. voicing out the emergence of the encouragement of iran are they transnational shiite jihadist identity and has a bi

was the iraq war a disaster? you know, saddam's gone. >> was it a mistake to go to war in iraq. >> i don't believe it was. the world is a better place because saddam hussein doesn't run iraq. >> was it a mistake to go to war with iraq. >> it was not a mistake given what the president knew at the time. >> she just said was it a mistake. >> the question i was asked is what you know now. based on what we know now. >> was it a mistake to go to war with iraq. >> i'm asking. >> you yeah, i understand. it's not the same question. >> that's the question i'm asking you. was it a mistake. >> it was not a mistake for the president to decide to go into iraq because at the time. >> i'm asking you. >> in hindsight. world is a better place because saddam hussein is not there. >> was it a mistake or not. >> i don't understand the question you're asking. whether we should have started -- but saddam's gone. that's good, right? presidential candidates marco rubio and be soon to be presidential candidate jeb bush have been getting d

policy in iraq and syria. i want to thank each of our expert witnesses for appearing before us today on this critical and complex topic. before i go any further, the secretary of defense and chairman of the joint chiefs were invited to appear admittedly very short notice and we will be asking them to appear after the recess is over depending on whether the bill is on the floor or not, but we certainly would like to hear from the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs. today we have general jack keane, former vice chief of staff for the army and chairman of the institute for the study of war, and general keane, we are pleased you could take time from your duties on fox news to being with us today. dr. fred kagan, who is -- that's a joke. dr. fred kagan, director of the critical threats project at the american enterprise institutes. colonel derek harvey, u.s. army retired, director of the global initiative for civil society and conflict at the university of south florida. and bryant who is the

in iraq." the united nations says it's rushing tied nearly 25,000 people fleeing ramadi for the second in the meantime a month. the u.n. reported 115,000 people fled a ramadi in april. the u.n. says it has helped more than 130,000 people over the past. bodies some burned, literatered the streets as local officials reported mass killings of iraqi security forces and civilians. it goes on and on. i just want to, before i turn to my friend from south carolina, i just want to point out my friends, this did not have to happen. this is a result of a failed, feckless policy that called for against all reason the total and complete withdrawal from iraq after we had won with an enormous expenditure of american blood and treasure, including 187 of them in the battle of ramadi. in 2011, senator lieberman and graham and i argued that the completely pullout from iraq would, -- quote -- "needlessly put at risk all of the hard-won gains that the united states has achieved there at enormous cost in blood and t

the problem really is not that iraq's army has collapsed. it's that iraq has collapsed. isis is at heart an insurgency against the governments of iraq and syria. and so insurgency can thrive without some support from the local population. isis gets that support from the discontent of sunnis in both countries who feel they're being persecuted by the shiite and alawite governments. a polling firm in iraq has conducted more than a million interviews in the country over the last decade. they point out that the vast majority of sunnis in iraq des pies isis. more than 90% of iraqis in sunni predominant areas regard it as a terrorist organization. but he writes, isis has been able to capitalize on the deep profound discontent sunnis felt with the central iraqi government. the sectarian partitioning of iraq with shiites move to shiite areas and kurds and sunnis doing the same began with the civil war in 2006 but it has accelerated dramatically. today sunnis cannot find towns in iraq where they can resettle. we need to face the facts. iraq today no longer exists. in 2008, 80% of

when we went into iraq, they did not attack, it was the saudis. why did we go into iraq? the only way we were attacked is when we let them into our country. no one does anything about that. they common and you say we were attacked. we should pull out completely. let them fight their own war. the only reason they attacked in the first place was because we were in their countries. can you answer that? guest: i did not bring up 9/11 or anything earlier on, but the ideology of osama bin laden and the jihadists is not just about our presence over there. they were not have struck at us in my judgment -- i have studied their writings and strategy -- they would have struck at us in the west in any event. it is part of what they are and what they believe in. it is easy to say it is because we were there or because of bases in saudi arabia or because we support israel. if israel was removed tomorrow, it would not change them under vision for a good number of these hard-core extremists driving this kind of fight. there is a threat to the homeland. we have to make judgments about how

. >> khanki [han-kee] refugee camp northern iraq. a family is burying a young woman they say was killed while escaping the group calling itself the islamic state. her father told us what happened. >> they are part of the yazidi religion one of the groups targeted by the islamic state of iraq and the levant also known as isil. no one knows exactly how many yazidis were killed because isil-held territory is off limits to journalists and human rights workers. but tens of thousands had to flee their homes after isil fighters captured their towns and villages in june. isil now controls as much as one-third of iraq's territory, including the second-largest city mosul. though its power and influence expanded in syria, it's here where isil was born. during the nearly nine-year long u.s. occupation. fault lines travelled 600 miles across iraq to look at the consequences of the fight against isil -- and how u.s. allies are also helping to divide iraq more than ever. >> when isil advanced this summer people across the country's northern provinc

why did they take to us iraq? that's the same reason they want to take us into damascus and why they want to have permanent war with iran. my concern continues. thank you both. >>> coming up, as the republicans shift right. hillary clinton is tacking left. that are the democrats trying bait progressives against hillary clinton. some trouble making. that's coming up. plus, character. who has got it today? dade brooks will be with us. and everyone has something to say about the fin at of madd men. a couple of stars from the show. check out fusion and find out why ford is the brand more people buy, and buy again. i like the grill. the sexy look to it. epa-estimated 37 miles per gallon on the highway. are you serious? fusion is amazing. my opinion of ford has dramatically changed. take the ecoboost challenge at your ford dealer. and for a limited-time get a fusion with zero for sixty plus one-thousand bonus cash plus seven-fifty cash if you own a ford or qualifying competitive vehicle. >>> jeb bush is looking out for

i believe authority in iraq should be split up, but not iraq itself. we need to have -- which will have a double effect. i mentioned she is sunni and kurds -- shia sunni and kurds and also protect minorities. i believe this will transcend the unity of iraq, first geographically in ninewah province. the geographic autonomy will be at least will have at least three effects. this will give the sunni community its own autonomy when with its own special prosecution. this autonomy will protect minorities within ninewah province. and autonomy will help of baghdad with the rights of the people of ninewah province. we tried in the past to follow up the constitution steps but unfortunately, prime minister maliki adopted his position. the second stage i envisioned navy ninewah province with saddam. with the krg and other sunni provinces about their own relation under the umbrella of the iraqi constitution. in conclusion, i want the people of mosul first be involved in the creation of their city. second, to have a chance to choose their own representatives. third,

in iraq. the provenÇal capital of the anbar province has fallen to isis fighters. u.s.-led coalition air strikes were certainly not enough to keep the iraqi military from being forced to flee the city. joining us now from the pentagon is our own correspondent barbara starr, and from beirut lebanon, senior international correspondent, nick paton walsh. the deputy white house press secretary downplaying the situation in ramadi saying he's confident the tide will turn back. he says very soon in ramadi. he says the air strikes the u.s. led air strikes will continue. are you getting that same sort of upbeat assessment what some are calling spin coming in from pentagon officials? >> absolutely wolf yes. this is the line that you're hearing this morning across washington from the administration. secretary of state john kerry already saying he thinks ramadi could be retaken very soon by the iraqi forces the pentagon saying it's a setback, but it's only a setback for today. that iraqi forces will move

bush to overthrow saddam hussein in iraq. >> i know there are a lot of questions about iraq over the last week. i've made it very clear that i made a mistake, plain and simple. >> reporter: yet it's far from simple. the former secretary of state has elsewhere suggested she was, in effect duped into approving the use of force. >> it was not used as i had expected it to be used and the entire implementation strategy was flawed. >> on my orders coalition forces have begun striking selective targets of military importance. >> reporter: at the time of shock and awe, clinton was new york's democratic senator and now calls it a major test of her own decision-making abilities. >> this is probably the hardest decision i've ever had to make. >> reporter: further clouding the issue is the troop surge president bush ordered in 2007 widely regarded as a successful campaign that left iraq at the dawn of the presidency far more stable than it is today. >> reporter: the question we need to ask hillary clinton now is would you have supported precipitous withdraw from iraq? >> reporter: secretary robe

you are an expert on iraq, but even more, you are a friend of iraq. you may have my special thanks for that friendship with iraq and our friendship. thank you for organizing this forum. and i want to talk -- i want to take this opportunity to thank the people of the united states, all american forces, who support them president obama's administration and the congress united states congress assistance to our common fight against this. as you say here isis. i welcome this chance to express my view on iraqi's situation. a sunni political leader as one who born of many

in syria and iraq. this is something which is definitely going to problem security forces to beef up security across the country and also goes against the saudi-led air strikes targeting forces in yemen and those loyal to saleh. >>> in yemen a bomb has exploded at a mosque in the capitol sanaa, 13 people were injured. the targeted mosque was used by shia houthis. i.s.i.l. has claimed responsibility for that attack. yemen and planes from saudi-led coalition are in three yemen city and explosions rocked sanaa after the air strikes there and planes targeted an air base near the international airport as well as a stadium and a guard camp. there were also on aiden in the province to the east of the capitol. iran cargo ship banned for yemen is in djibouti and said the cargo of food and medical supply also be unloaded and taken by the world health organization taken to the port under houthi control. ♪ now iraq is appealing for help to fight islamic state in iraq and the levante and deputy prime minister says

there's sensitivities because it leads to the question are you trying to break down iraq? the more that the united states or other actors within the region invest in sub national actors or nonstate actors for the benefit of trying to defeat terrorist organizations like isis there are advantages to that because they're more cable as we've seen with the kurdish peshmerga. and the frag member tations of states could accelerate if we're working in the short-term to defeated threats and to deal with a capitaranian issue. and again, i'm not arguing against it, it's just a phonetial downside risk that there's the notion that we could further inadvertently fragment these entities. >> thank you very much. i pressure it very much where i'm coming from is that we simply have no strategy in that region, no one that has been communicated clearly to any of us. so i think establishing at least a safe zone, i do believe that the peshmerga in kurdistan is moving time-out iraq. but at least establishing a safe zone that is free of isis is a step in the right direction. i think we need think

problem of iraq and syria. last summer iraq effectively eroded the borders between these two countries. what we did was we had a series of different tactics. some of which have been implemented, some have not. if we can all bring our thinking together to talk about how do we actually have an integrated strategy that focuses on isis both in iraq and syria. on the second level, the regional level, and here i hope we can think a little bit more about this but for essentially the last four or five years the middle east has slipped into this period of fragmentation. not only has iraq and syrian state structures collapsed we've seen libya and yemen fill these strains and a big part of what's going on and the challenge of isis is the struggle between the regional powers, i rap and saudi arabia but there are other actors too. much is sectarian but the conflict is multi-dimensional, multi-faceted. our resources matter but iran saudi arabia others have been funding their own proxies. and what i think is missing in terms

because iraq kicked us out after 2011 and because the maliki government instead of running an iraq for all iraqis favored the she as and kicked the sunnis and kurds to the curb, it created conditions for isil to be successful. a horrible example of the previous iraqi government badly mismanaging the situation. >> there's a lot -- let me say, there's been criticism the way this administration handled that handled the maliki. the maliki government was the creation clearly of the previous bush administration. >> absolutely. >> it's very clear from a lot of observer that this white house was more than willing to accept yes for an -- no for an answer and get out of dodge. to leave iraq -- >> there's criticism, but i think the fact are the facts. it was president bush who committed the u.s. to leaving at the end of 2011. president obama was willing to have the u.s. stay under certain conditions. i don't think it's an onerous condition to say if our -- if american troops stay they should be able to get immunity from prosecution in the country where we're staying. and it was very clear that th

the excessive heat in iraq. so if you're doing this, you're probably going to have to cut the inspector short. if you're really intent on going to war, you're going to have to do it even without. that's the second point. third point, my boss got put out for the united states secure council to give the most species presentation on iraqi m.d. that anyone has ever been called on on in american government to rendure on the american council to the american public and to international community. and powell showed afterwards it was very effective. why was i very effective in because it was colonel powell which had mother teresa poll ratings. he was 77% on the polls an she was about 80%. you're looking at the individual who went out to the c.i.a. and prepared colin powell for that presentation in terms of orchestrating all the analysts from 16 different intelligence agencies working daily and nightly with george tenet and frankly on three pillars of that presentation, mobile biological laboratories, existing stocks of c