I do not know where to begin even with the new headlines on ukraine, but let's go to iraq right now.
General dempsey overnight talking about the expanded vision across the border into syria.
Can our military project into syria, or should it stay focused on the three parts of iraq?
Well, it would be nice if they could only focus on iraq, but the fact is that i.s.i.s. or isil, the islamic state, whatever they call themselves, they see themselves as crossing the border, they do not recognize the border.
Unless you go after them in syria, you have only dealt with one problem.
They can go out of iraq and seek refuge, so they see themselves as not recognizing the border and from an american point of view, it would be a bit naiàve to not recognize that and deal with them where they are.
I think of the fletcher school in the wide study of our international policy.
I am honored to ask you this question -- what does no boots on the ground mean?
No boots means no fighting troops, but the united states as we know already has advisors that have been helping the yazidis get out of where they are.
But now what?
Now what you need to do to have these advisors work is to identify what the strategy to their best of their ability of i.s.i.s. is and try to figure out how to do with them if they threaten major cities or major facilities or the dam.
The dam was very important not just because they could have blown it up, which they might have done, but the dam needs maintenance, so you have to keep maintaining it.
It is a very serious problem.
I am glad they went after it.
It was an essential part of the mission.
They had to improvise to include that.
What do you presume is the depth of our intelligence now that we have added military advisers on the ground?
We have never really had good intelligence in syria because we have not had much relationship with that part.
We have syrian army relationships, but there is a lot of syria we do not know a lot about.
These people are not so good necessarily, the intelligence that we are going to have to utilize, whatever intelligence facilities we have, and get them in there to at least understand what the capabilities are of the free syrian army, which is not all that great at this point, but we may be able to do it without these people, but i think we are going to active a little bit more understanding of what is happening in syria.
Bop, there is concern lurking in the shadows, and that is the fact that six weeks ago, we had never heard of i.s.i.s., isil, and all of a sudden it is now dominating the headlines, foreign policy -- what are we doing wrong as an intelligence gathering entity?
One of the things we're doing wrong as we failed to recognize the fact that maliki had such terrible relations with the sunnis, gave the sunnis, gave i.s.i.s. an opportunity to attract a lot of support from disaffected sunnis, old remnants of the baath this regime.
People are not ideological bedfellows of i.s.i.s. but never the less saw it as better than the alternative.
He other thing we have to recognize is i.s.i.s. does things quite well.
They keep the infrastructure of the city's that they occupied so that they want to make the water run, they want to make electricity operate.
They're are beginning to see themselves as governance.
Quite not as -- not as terrorists.
They are terrorists on one hand, but they want to be able to provide facilities to people to make their lives better as horrible as their lives will be because of this terror.
You will support your president and secretary clinton and secretary.
With the cacophony we are witnessing on "surveillance" every day, every week through this summer, what is the level of intellectual panic within our defense department?
This is not international relations 101. this is not in the textbooks what we are seeing.
X it is not.
Part of their problem is they are reactive.
They are reactive.
They do not seem to know in advance -- they are reacting to events.
What is the theoretical construct our president is working under right now?
What is the foundational belief for republicans and democrats?
I think he has yet to present the american people with a construct.
He makes the point that when there is a human at hearing issue, we should help.
He is going to broaden that somewhat, but we do not have a broader narrative.
Secretary clinton versus secretary kerry?
Her view was if you support them, and they are about as moderate as you can get in this broad panoply of concerns, to help to create a more stable place in syria.
The weakening of the free syrian army has enabled i.s.i.s. to do what it probably could not have done if there were credible opposition.
Arguably perhaps even mr.
Putin in russia.
Ifn other words, if we are not defining a u.s. mission in iraq, we are doing in a in russia.
In fact, there are russian planes supporting them in iraq.
They are doing some type of ground support.
The one thing we need is a strategy which pulls china, the u.s., and russia and all of these countries that support a moderate position and don't want these islamic terrorists to prevail because russia is vulnerable, western china is vulnerable, we are vulnerable, even india quite we are vulnerable to overload as well.
We had headlines that were alarming for the financial market.
Russian eight envoy moves into ukraine, ukraine says that constitutes an invasion.
How concerning is this?
It is very concerning because we know the russians have pushed people in there.
We do not know all of the details because the information is very murky, but the russians are clearly pushing the edges and probably did send people over, whether they were in army uniforms or not, they are clearly encroaching on eastern ukraine.
That is dangerous because the question is -- where does it stop?
Ukraine says russia convoy is breaking international law.
To dovetail this into your tenure at goldman sachs international, would you suggest that ukraine, russia, and these tensions could dampen the real economy enough of europe to put europe back into recession?
They can certainly weaken it.
The cultural sector in europe is already hurting because the russian restrictions on sales of agriculture products -- it is more than that.
It is psychological.
It is certainly psychological, absolutely.
Russia is not the biggest economy in the region, but it is not unimportant to european countries.
Ukraine is not bigger, but it is a negative.
The third is if you get these
This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.