tv Book Discussion on Exceptional CSPAN September 20, 2015 8:00pm-9:01pm EDT
>> please be seated. well, good evening to all, i have the honor of being executive of for ronald regan presidential foundation and i want that thank each and every one of you for coming this evening. please stand and join me for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the unitedof states of ameria
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. thanks, please be seated. before we get started, tonight i would like to recognize one person in particular in the audience, ben. board of trust -- trustees. thanks ben for coming. [applause] it's often not easy, at least not for me. i think one is called on to do their very best and to go beyond a simple reading of an impressive resume when a guest has gone out of their way and
their lifetime in the realm of public services and performed for the american people. they need to be lotted, thanked and introduced in a thoughtful way. so that was challenged that i faced as i once again sat down and prepared to write an introduction of both vice president cheney and his accomplished daughter liz. for those who you who follow events at the reagan library you know that both of the guests have been here before. what to do to impress upon an audience once again that are something special. one theory holds forth that if you'veh introduced somebody before, well, stick with it. or in in other words, take the lead the easy way out. and thanks to the miracle of
modern technology, i plan to do just that. [applause] >> to be the we are in the presence of another true americanin hero. welcome to the regan library. [applause] >> a modern definition that i know his family and millions of people in this country would easily embrace, hero a man of distinguishedil courage and admired for nobilities. i like that one. how do you define someone who has quite literally dedicated the entire life to his country,
someone who has faithly served five presidents and in the process have come to the aid of the country in times of great crisis, if anyone who has counted, that's four presidents and not five as i previously noted. the fifth that vice president chain any -- cheney with great honor, not directly but with great honor, that was ronald reagan. first as a foot soldier during time in congress and then as a member with the congress committee, representative dick cheney of wyoming was a critical and respective player who helped regan program a reality. okay. not bad. [laughs] he lost a few pounds. that's good to see.
an introduction remains timely and true, but what's knew and exciting about their visit today is that they are here with the new book entitled exceptional, why the world needs a powerful america. now i don't know if the idea for their book has had its origin opinion piece they wrote for the journal. but they wrote then that the obama foreign policy doctrine of trying to lead the world from behind was in a state of collapse and ramifications for america were dire. their book just published expand in great deal and it is not only for those following the events in the campaign trail of 2016, but i am hopeful that it will becomein reading for decades to come.
that's what it is. historical evidence that american exceptionism that president reagan helped to defend. s been an assault that's quite simple a meeting to the undoing of american position in the world. with that, ladies and gentlemen, let me please ask me to joining me in welcoming to the state former vice president dick cheney and former secretary of state liz cheney. [applause] >> knock it out of the park. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. it's a real joy and an honor for
us to be able to be back at the reagan library and as john mentioned, the whole concept of american exceptionalism is one that president reagan wouldn't have even questioned, and in many ways were very inspired by president reagan, by the things he did and said, those during presidency and before, and his notion that it was critically important that the united states leadan the world is understandig that without us there was no one who would step in. hiss rejection of ideas of morl equivalent were at the forefront and you'll see when you buy our hope, which i hope you'll do, we open the book, the quote that leads the whole thing is by president ronald reagan.
on marge 23, '83, he said, it is up to us in our times to choose, and choose wisely between the hard but necessary tasks of preserving peace and freedom and temptation to ignore our duty and blindly hope for the best while the enemies of freedom grow stronger day by day. we are, again, as we sit here tonight at another moment like that, at a moment that the nation is under tremendous threat and when we've got to decide, it can be very easy to sort of say, things are such a mess, washington is such a mess, i'm just going to try to live my life and focus on what's happening very close to me here at home and try to shut out the fights and debates that are going on. run of the reasons we wrote this book is to urge that people not do that and make the hope that
fate of republic in not doing that. to the question of whether america was born great, achieved greatness or had greatness upon her, the only possible conclusion must be all three, that we were born of this ideal endued by creator with certain rights. that made usre a model for othes around the world. in world war ii we became freedom defender. that's where the book begins. defending freedom around the war. at the end of the cold war because of the leadership of president ronald regan in large part, we became the world's superpower. it's not just our involvement in world affairs that has made the
difference, it's our leadership, willingness to lead, and my dad and i felt very strongly that when you talk toip your kids, my kids and his grand kids about what they are learning in school, it isn't what they are learning, they are not learning that america has been great force for good than any other history in mankind. because of us hundreds of millions of people around the world for decades have lived in freedom. and we wanted to not just talk about where we are today, although that's a critically important part of the book, but we wanted to put it into historically context and talk about the truth about america and what we did in world war ii and in the cold war and the first years on the war on terrible -- terror. if we forget what we did, we won't know who we are. we were very much inspired by
that and our kids have to have a place to go to understand the reality of what america has accomplished. one of the great blessings for me was being able to work on this book with my dad who along with my mom gave mary and me the tremendous blessing as kids of learning to love history and learning to love this great nation, and somebody who obviously has been involved as a participant, not as far back as 1939 but close. [laughs] >> and so i'd likedy to start tonight by e getting your impression, you know, when people talk about president obama, for example, one of the of the things we did was look at the context of the president and talk about the extent to which, where does he fall in the
spectrum and democratic and republican presidents and how does the policy sit, come before particularly on the democratic side of the aisle. >> okay. that's a good introduction. [laughs] >> i -- yout know, i've wrapped my brain the way president reagan operates the way -- >> obama. >> obama, operates the way he does. i was welcoming the way you are for a new president even though i didn't vote for them, i didn't work for -- i'm a republican, but i was deeply dye -- disturbed about 48 hours of his administration when he announced that he was going to close
guantanamo and investigate career professionals that carried out our counterterrorism program out of, the cia, in tes of the national security agency, our ability to be able to intercept communications with al-qaeda overseas or the the interrogation program. and we by the books, constitution he wants those people arrested. i thought that was an outrageous preposition from the point he won the election, he wants to put policy in place, but what i did not understand and prepared
for, for example, men or women who were patriots that put the life on the line. i found that deeply disturbing andei raised questions in my mid about why that would sort of be some of his first thing that is he wanted to do once he got into back. i thought back about it and -- and we spent a lot of time reading a lot of history and speciallyof interested in world war ii history and my own dad served in the navy in those years. but i -- as i thought about it, i thought about the fact that there hasa been, i think, over the decades for 77-something years basically a bipartisan consensus between republican and democrat alike oomn the proposition of the u.s. world in the -- need in the world and
that the included people like ftr,an truman eisenhower, jack kennedy. they didn't always agree on everything and differences between the parties often times in election time, but barack obama was clear outside that basic consensus that in my opinion based on my reading and study of history the fundamentally disagreed, was not in acore, if you will with what you think is a bipartisan accord by the u.s. history dominated over a period of time. that's partly what stimulated
our thinking about the book. ifst you look at the book and go through, you'll find documented very carefully where we believe that he has, in fact, done things that are not the way it would have been been had it been done by earlier presidencies outside the main steam, if you will, ofno presidential leadersp or even raising questions about how big a role the u.s. ought to play in the world, the policies over the course last six or seven years now, are remarkably at odds p with our history of wt we believe is t a nation and wht we are going to have to be able to do going forward if we are going through a patch. >> in 1983 president reagan gave a famous speech in the oval and
he talked about defense spending. he layed out the way defense budgets ought to be put together and explaininged -- explained first and allocate the resources to it. one of the issues that we talked about the book and we have a set of recommendations at the end is issue with defense budget. it's an issue that we heard some of the candidates talk about in this election cycle but i don't think it's gotten enough attention, and i'd like to hear you talk a little bit about that, the extent where we have to make exchange in that regard. >> sure. i'm often times asked what job i like the most, vice president, secretaryrd defense, congressmen from wyoming, chief of staff, all of them had something to
appeal, but my favorite job was being secretary of defense specially during desert storm and end of cold war, was a high point certainly in my career, but i came away with that, with deep regard for our military, reasonable basis and understanding of why in my view that role in commander in chief is the single most important responsibility by any president, more important than anything else we do, build highways, grow food, all the things the federal government gets involved in. but that is in my opinion, the single most important responsibility of the united states, it just is. and i also became very much aware of -- i don't want to get
tangled uprt in allot of argumes about the budget, but one of the most important things the length of time it takes to change course when you have to do that if you inherit, you can't write a check, turn the thing around over night and take off in the direction that you want to go, it doesn't work that way. i was tremendously impressed frankly it voled ronald reagan, i got to be secretary of defense and saddam hussein invadeed and president sent me over to get the sign-off for forces, and we went through all of that and we were able to deploy and relative short order over half a million men and women and produce what became desert storm, successfully military operations in history.
i thought back on that, we were blessed because ronald reagan had been president ten years before, because we believed in a strong america, military, gave us the quantities that we need, people who had been attracted to service, the f-15 fighters, the fighting vehicles, tank, all of thosetr things that he had beeno much a part of or continuing in his administration, that's what we use to win in desert storm in remarkable order ten years later. first thing i did after desert storm was over i called president reagan. he was then retired living in beverly hills andrs i thanked hm for -- when i first got him on the phone i thanked for the 620-dollar toilet seats.
dick, they didn't cost $600. [laughs] >> i at one point during the welcome can he ceremony, i had the opportunity to go visit a president, mrs. reagan at their home in bel-air and was intensely interested in all aspects of desert storm, also our relationship with the soviets, things he had been voled -- involved as president. he sat on the foot stool facing me directly and focused right on my face and started asking me questions, and i think part of it was an effort on his part to companies -- compensate with him memory problems he was dealing with. i thanked profusely for what he
had done because he was directly responsible for what we were able to do tin years later. now going forward with what barack obama has done, the military is terrible shape today. we just had the army chief of staff just retire, superb soldier. ray was the guy who actually operated on the ground and delivered on the surge and was successful. he commanded for a significant period of time, but ray made a spiech -- speech before the congress. he just retired. he said that in terms of the readyiness level of the united
states army, that it is worst than it has been any time in the history of the united states. thatea goes back 200 years. it'sod announced that we are now operating the air force with fewer aircraft and older aircraft than any other time in our history since the air forces set up and that was right after world war ii. all of the chiefs, the current crop retired, but in the last year given testimony in congress that given the current state of affairs readiness and so forth, that they're not capable in a crisis of being able to execute the national strategy that the military is called upon to do. military is in terrible shape. we have not had a budget prepared in a normal way where you lookil at the attention threats around the world, you decide to meet threats and goes through the process in the white
house. now we have to think all the sequester, this is a as a result of budget of 2011, what it was, it wase adopted because the assumption on the part ofat the congress is we will never life with this, this is so bad and it's going to impose so much painso that we'll come up with a better solution. now we have a sequester and quicks in and all the spending accounts, defense department, 17% of the budget, 50% of the hit. we are now at the point where very serious question about how well we perform in a crisis about our capacity to meet the threats that we see around the world because of what's happened during the obama era. it's a huge concern to me and our recommendation is in the
book and sort of number one in terms of an agenda to the next administration on what they need to a focus on and worry on. >> and we were finishing our book, the agreement on the iran nuclear deal was announced, and so we have a section in the book that analyzes the agreement. one of the thing that is -- things you talked about in the speech was concessions that were made at the end have the potential to beom devastating. you talk aboutof the lifting of the restrictions of icdnc program. it's a very direct and tough criticism of the deal, obviously the administration is out there making claims about it. i'd like to hear you talk about sort of the issues and the concerns that you have with the
deal anadd particularly what you think about some of the claims the administration made just in the last few days. >> well, it was intriguing. i gave a speech yesterday and the white house response was to put up on their website basically an attack on me. they didn't answer any of the policy questions that we raised or the people have raised about that, and i don't mind getting attack. it goes with being vice president, you know, if i wanted to be a popular and well loved i came to california and be a movie star. [laughs] >> i wouldn't be viceey preside, but no, it -- it's a terrible deal and it in so many different ways. one is the president has made a will the of claims for but claims are not valid.
stop proliferation of nuclear weapons. no it won't. others in the region are going to want theirs. they're not going to have all of those countries, saudis, em -- emarates and so forth and not allow iranians with nuclear weapons. some will acquire their own. some have money to buy. there's no doubt in my mind what this agreement will precipitate in the area. part of the frustration is at the end of the negotiations, we were told it's just about the nuclear question. it's not about terrorism. it's not about what iran has done and terrorist organizations.at
it's not about ballistic missiles they said, it's not about conventional weapon, but it turns out that when they finally did the dale it was about all of those things. obama put all of those on the table. so as liz mentioned the embargo on ballistic missiles are doing business, has been lifted a few years down the road. same thing for the approach on conventionaled weapons, but sine the agreement was signed earlier this year, ginl -- general who commands the force, worst of the worst, iranians that are deeply involved, one of the key activities in recent years is building ied's.
but those other related issues are all on the table, lifted the sanctions that have been imposed on force and irgc, to buy f-300, it's a very capable russian built missile. he's already over there. they are remained in place. he's already been to moscow doing the deal. you go through the sequence and i don't want to take urep the whole night talkig about them -- [laughs] >> about the problem, but one of the keys has been in the nonproliferation treaty which was signed about 1970 and every
country has signed nonproliferation treaty, the u.s., britain, russia, china and france. they're the guys that all have weapons and the nonweapon states which is everybody else including iranians signed up in there, for example, not to enrich. the t iranians have demanded as part of the agreement to be allow today enrich and sanction their right to enrich even though it violates the nonproliferation treaty of 1970. it also pairs up the un security resolutions, five of them promoted by the united states. three went on unanimous votes, all of those are targeted in the iranians because of their bad behavior with respect to uranium
enrichment. they're now zeroed out and we've sanctioned the ability of the iranians to have enrichment capability. only one underos the mpt for dog that is in direct violation but all of that hahs been ignored and thrown out of the window, so as you go through the process andol think about what's been de here, i think the outcome is bleak, i think it's a terrible direction to go down, i think we have done a lot of work over the years with respect to try and avoid the proliferation of weapons. i think the president has put on agreement that is bound and determined topr create enormous pressures for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the middle east and we are going to have to live witsuh all of that in the future. >> you know, i think another
point or way to sort of sum up how people should think about the agreement, sometimes when you hear the president say, it's better than nothing and remember this is the man who has been telling us he won't accept a bad deal and now he is saying, this bad deal is better than no deal. it seems to me, number one it won't accomplish what he said with respectac to nuclear weapos for a number of reasons, but also the regime is swiss cheese. it won't enable us and it's been amazing with -- what john kerry is saying. it will give them international cover and legitimacy because
suddenly you have business run run-in and at the same time it gives them all of these benefits, the lifting of the restrictions my dad mention, so you'll have iran, which is sworn to destroy israel, sworn recently to do anything it can to attack america, which death to america on a daily basis, now provided with funds, with weapons and a pathway to a nuclear bomb. and when you d think you have a president of the united states who has put all of that in place, it really -- it's very, very difficult to understand why he would think, you know, you said itid ten years ago, a president i ps going to be providing the money and the weapons that iran needs to attack the united states. that's exactly what this deal does even before you get to the issue of a pathway to a nuclear weapon. it's a very dangerous deal and
it gets back to this notion of sort of the president's view of the world and one of the things thatus is a theme that runs through the book that we spend a lot of time on is the extense for which you have presidents roosevelt, truman, eisenhower, nixon, ford, reagan, that weakness is provocative. this president doesn't understand that. it'll be interesting to hear your assessment if you look at places like russia and china what the impact of his unwillingness to defend red line, to project american power, what impact that's having in ways those relationships going in the future. >> we've been focused over the last few days, obviously, on the
uranium situation. but you also must look at russia and look at china. i want to talk about the strategic situation, capacity to deal with, one of the great strengths the u.s. had with world war ii as we always had a significant advantage from a technical standpoint in all of the basic technologies that you need in the military. things like aircraft, preition guided, if you look carefully of what's happening in russia and china you will see evidence that the fact that gap that's been a great advantage for us, nobody has's been able over that period of time, you began to worry when you see what's happening. if you look at russia just
yesterday, you saw an article, a clips that i get that the russians are building undersea unmanned robot submarine that would be able to do all of those things under water that we can now do with drones, an underwaterse drone. that has all kinds of ramifications for it. pictures and publicize what they're doing. if you go to china, there's only been one year when the chinese defense budget hasn't gone up by double digits. only one. that doesn't happen anymore because of this sequester. we are very concerned about our submarines.
they know what our aircraft carriers are able of doing. you can look at what they are south china sea where they have gone in and built man-made islands and shaw low reefs -- shallow reefs and they are claiming part of the south china sea which has been international waters until now. look at what putin has done in ukraine, crimea. i think he has aspirations of spectacular activity, with respect to the luthenia. they have all significant minority russian population. they are 100% dependent on
russia natural gas. they're all members of nato. questions is can we do that. i think putin is determined while obama is in the white house to take advantage of that. he knows weakness when he sees one. ite is provocative and i thinke also has as an objective and desire to under mine nato. i can see him pursuing a strategy, a series of operations based -- we are the only ones with nato. he watches, he can read the
newspapers. he has set up a lease, somebody suggested the other day and more dangerous predecessors. so there's a lot of concern both on the part of the chinese, on our part about the chinese and the russians, and both the chinese and russians are working very hard to try to fill those gaps, places where we have military capability that they haven't been able to advantage previously like ballistic missile in aircraft carrier and threat that poses to us the weakness that we've imposed on
ourselves and missile capability we were going to built in poland and czech republic that obama through away. but it's a multiplier you see one problem, one weakness, one budget cut that adds onto the other and they do something move in eastern part of ukraine and what penalties have been imposed, not much. you see china moving into the china sea, not much. they look at obama's approach to this syrian red line when he was goingth to get active militarily when assad used gas on his own people and assad did that and obama turned around and walked away from him. they're simply allies and adversaries do respect the
united states. there's just more evidence added specially the nuclear dear that pounds home the adversaries that have nothing to fare -- fear from the united states. >> let's talk about iraq. the video that the white house put on with criticizing you with the decision to liberate iraq. anybody who referred to isis team is really not in the position to bee lecturing on the topic of when i iraq. but let's talk about iraq, your sense of what you did, why you did it, was it the right thing to do and what impacts it had that other people may not be fully aware of. after we did desert storm, the question was whether or not we should go to bagdad then and there was unanimous view that we should not.
there wasn't anybody urging it. what happened between that and 1991 and 2003, an item called 9/11 when we lost 3,000 people. in the united states saw the world trade towers done, pentagon, would have taken the white house and the capital building if it hadn't been because passengers on board. remember, 9/11, 19 guys with air line tickets and box cutters. that's what they had. not a lot of evidence, bombs, gas, nuclear. if you looked at the history and
the sole question of proliferation, one of the things we were concerned about is proliferation of nuclear weapons. it wasn't something that just came up on one intelligence report prior to 9/11. you go back to 1981 and bagdad, saddam hussein had nuclear reactor operating. now, outside of bagdad israelis took it out. sad -- we took it out in desert storm. you fast-forward to 2003 and we made a judgment based on the fact that we were getting a on the of1, intelligence that said that saddam hussein was in nuclear f business, we went down and took down the saddam hussein regime.
it had significant impact on the proliferation problem. but also what happened after we took down saddam hussein, gadhafi had centrifuges and weapons. when we took down saddam hussein, five days after we dug him out of his whole, gadhafi, was going to turn over all nuclear materials to the united states and he did. very wise men. that did a couple of things. think of what would have happened in libya in subsequent years if he had not turned over to the united states when he was finally overthrown and isis moved in, killed gadhafi, they would have inherit it had --
inherited the libbian. mr. khan was the engineer and he gone intoni business for himsel, black-market operation. libya was his biggest customer. he had been involved with the north h koreans, if you go backo 1997 in a meeting in hotel in dubai it was khan and khan's people who got $3 million in return for providing the basic design of centrifuges for iranians. we shut him down. he went to house arrest in
pakistan. we shut down his black-market operation. those are all examples where we usede military to halt proliferation. the other kind of thing was in ' 07, he had photographs of israeli intelligence, nuclear reactor by the north koreans that was '07. the israelis took it out. imagine what would happen if they wouldn't have taken it out. that's another instance where we were very lucky. but it's only a matter of time, and i think we're safer today than we would have been if we hadn't taken down sud aim --
saddam hussein. it waser very important. i think and i believe then and now i believe we did the right thing in 2003, the world is less threatening now but barack obama is about to turn it over with the deal with iranians. >> isis, do you think it can be contained? >> i'm not sure how it would be contained without the forces, you can pray, somebody who can go in there and do it for you, but i think isis is such a deadly combination, first him we had one in a hundred of years where they now established a regime, government under law, extraordinary radical, we've
seen what they do recruiting even here in the united states. we see stories of young people encouraged of going to syria and sign up with isis and be part of the new system. very potent, very deadly force committed to the destruction and i worry about some of the refugees that are flowing out of syria and into europe. some of them, they will be people operating, members of isis, but are trying to transfer their -- their revolution now to europe because there's already a cig -- significant presence of them there. i think the only option on isis, i think they have to be destroyed. you are going to have to do it sooner or later. it's going to be costly or take
longer. one e of those governments over there has fallen after they acquired capability, and then we'll have great, great difficulty situation where you got great instability and rest, terrorist and control and they have control on deadly weapons. >> let's talk about hillary. [laughs] >> secretary clinton had a very interesting approach to e-mail. [laughs] >> as secretary of state. i would like to get your thoughts those on her decision that she could conduct all of her business, including sending top secret emails on a private server that resided in a
bathroom in denver. what do you think that says about her fitness to be commander in chief? it's not a trick question. >> not a trick question. [laughs] >> i think the question of the private server, anybody who has been there and gone through to processes whether secretary of state dealing dealing with highly classified information. there's a reason why she did it. in the last couple of days they found that there was -- there were top secret papers on it, on that server that's the highest clarification there is.
and i don't -- i'm not a hillary fan, okay. [laughs] >> that's breaking news. >> yeah. [applause] >> i'm getting a look that says move on. [laughs] >> as you look at 2016, i know you mentioned to me before you came in that you wanted to use the opportunity tonight to announce your endorsement. [laughs] >> that is a fast one. not part of the program. i haven't endorsed anybody yet. i know a lot of the candidates, worked withar them over the years. i've consciously stayed away from endorsement for a couple of reasons. what i'm really concerned about and liz has been concerned about is we want with our efforts that we made with the book and
continuing stuff i do on behalf of the party also republican o out and raise money for the republican party rather than candidate because they have a lot to do as well too. but the thing that concerns me most is to make sure that these issues, the kind we've just been talking about, national security issues are front and center in the campaign. it ought to be if it's the most important thing the president has to do and worry about. it ought to to be top of the agenda. i'm interesting in out the various candidates will respond to our suggestion. i don't expect to be able to dictate policy at all. i think the records there that
obama has taken prim-rose path here, the president, men or women, has to take on the path when they arrive in office and i want to make sure they are up to the task. >> so no no endorsement tonight? >> no endorsement tonight. >> sorry. it was the case that as we worked on the book there were days specially when we were doing the research and the writing about the obama era that it could be -- the president traveling the world and talking at every opportunity, taking every opportunity to make sure that he had conveyed to foreign governments, foreign audiences,
that he believed america had not listened. he denied to daniel ortega, lies that ortega told about america. the president's responses, i'm glad that he didn't blame me for things that happened when he was 3 month's old. before he got to japan, the american embassador sent a cable to washington saying that the japanese government hador rejecd the idea that president obama traveled to her -- heroshima and apologized, no understanding at all of importance of ending the war when we ended it and why it was ended.
we want to end tonight with something that is more hopeful, and that is first i want to just read to you something that charles had written and then end by asking my dad to read a section from the end of the prologue in the book. one president can rescue us. the right first in the oval can restore alliances and power and leadership, defeat our enemies and keep us safe, but it'll not be easy. there are difficult decisions to be made and very little time. we face great challenges as a nation before and the right leaders have brought us through. as charles observed, quote, it is one of the enduring mysteries of american history, so mere
providential that it should produce at every hinge point, british colony giving birth to greatest thinkers ever. the crisis of the 19th century brings forth lincoln, 20th,fdr, we're living at another hinge point of history and we require a president equal to this moment. we must choose wisely. i want to ask my dad to read about another duty we have as citizens. >> as citizens we also have a duty to protect our ideals and our freedoms by safe guarding our history. we must ensure that our children know the truth about who we are, what we've done and why it is uniquely america's duty to be
freedom's defender. our children should know about thd e boys and the battles of midway, they should learn about the courage of the young americans who fought -- excuse me, the light is bad, encourage about young americans who fought the nazis and the japanese. they should learn why america was right to end the war by dropping the bombs and about the fundamental decency of the nation and the north atlantic treaty organization. they need to know about the war of holocaust and what it means to promise never again. they should know there once was an empire so evil, it had to build a wall to keep its citizens in and the free world lead by america defeated him. they know to know about the terrorists who attacked us on
9/11, courage of first responders and her rism -- heo >> they should learn about great men like marshall and eisenhower and ronald reagan. we must teach them what it took to per vial over evil and what it will take in the 21st. .. in the 20th century and what it will take in the 21st century. we must make sure they understand that it is the brave men and women of the united states armed forces who defend our freedom and secure it for millions of others as well. our children need to know they are citizens of the most powerful, good and honorable nation in the history of mankind the exceptional nation. ordinary americans americans have done heroic things to get guarantee
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on