damascus. there are millions of syrians, local coordination committees that are part of helping the free syrian army. yes, al qaeda is at almost five to 10,000. an islamic liberation front that is not our allies. certainly if they are there is part of a gi. the majority of syrians are far more diverse, even in egypt. the brother had less of an egypt. even in egypt the majority of muslims rode up against the brotherhood they re is that is going to happen. it will only happen post assad. i would ask the colonel. if you want to defeat them it would only happen post assad. john: look if it s only 10%, remember you want to argue, 1%, the united states of america cannot, although we seem to be doing it right now, be seen as supporting one side. the other side, a nation called
realize allow capitalism to happen. he recently surprised me by saying, aid is just a stopgap. commerce an entrepreneurial capitalism take more people out of poverty and aids. yes. but if the singer can get it, why can t our politicians? chris wonders about that. we should stop all foreign-aid. americans billions is doing bad by trying to do good. and that is roughly the title of his book. so what you mean? ultimately when it comes down to a stage provided humanitarian aid, there is a fundamental gap between is the tension our rhetoric of doing good and the actual results. oftentimes harry bad and harm the very people we intend to help. john: out? there are a variety of ways. one is that when you inject millions, if not billions of dollars of foreign aid into an already corrupt and is
hezbollah. the first thing that will happen, her friends would get it. it s a tragedy. i think that we are all war-weary nation and cannot get involved in another war. all the sudden killing a child with gas is worse than jumping a building on them. 120,000. but now he once again. again and again i keep saying, were getting in on this side of al qaeda. john: in america the american media can agree on who is a moderate in our congress. how do we possibly know in syria. the intelligence officers, most of them don t even speak arabic. the moderates are not there for her work. on the ground we have had a number of contacts with those in the local coordination committees all-around syria they re really just want to open
john: who is more eager to go to war? republicans or democrats? republicans. republicans. i think the republicans. more wars. john: i would have thought that. over syria it has been mostly democrats. polls show more democrats than republicans support a military strike. is this hypocrisy, liberal and conservative changing their position depending upon who is president. no says historian thaddeus russell. what do you mean? this is a progressive war. i mean that the ideology of progressivism, which is about 100 years old as always said, we are obligated to uplift and save the world, not just in the ghettos, but outside our
originally usually supportive of the intervention in vietnam saw killing millions of people in that case and became wore a fight. by the end of their ideology, the consequences of it, and for a brief moment in history turned against intervention. and also because they did not trust the policymakers to lead those words. john: now barack obama is president. i trust myself. this is a good cause. one of the things we have been seeing is a return to their of original interventionist imperialists truce. john: mostly republican supported the iraqi war. we have a long list of republicans who have changed their position on that. i think we are rolling in here. first the senators and in the congressman and in some other well-known republicans. this is not hypocrisy. not at all. the so-called neocons who drove us to war actually all began in