Congressman. Our next guest of the morning is representative garret graves of louisiana and here to talk about what happens when the areas of the country get ravaged by storms. Could you give us yours experience in louisiana and take us back to what you did before you came to congress . Sure. We have a wlabd slachbd surveyi company, so ive spent my whole life in the unique terrain. But a few jobs back, i was responsible for largely restoring the coastal wetlands following 2005 hurricanes. One of the largest projects in u. S. History. And made extraordinary progress helping to improve the resilience of the communities and of the ecosystem in south louisiana. What did you learn about the federal governments role in those situations from the job that you did . It is backwards. The entire parra dichl how we approach disaster is backwards. We end up spending billions following a disaster rather than spending millions being proactive and improving the resilience of our communities. And there are example after example that we could cite where we have wasted money and spent more money coming in after a disast disaster. You cant go around the entire country and city well make everybody resilient to a thousand year storm level, but you can use appropriate criteria and make principaled investments in some of the highest vulnerability areas and make them more resilient and ultimately save the federal taxpayer significant dollars. Youre seeing a trend right now while the coastal area of the continental United States in land area is about 10 of the land of the country, buts t. Represents over 40 of the population. And were seeing that trend increase. We have to get better at being able to have resilient communities that are living in the coastal area as this trend continues or we will go broke as a nation. So give us an example of how those areas can become more resilient before a storm happens. Sure. So you have all sorts of tools in the tool chest. Many years ago people thought that you just build levees. And they are certainly an important tool. Therng things like punch statimp stati. But in louisiana, we protected and restored our natural barriers using things like zoning ordinances, be elevation of homes, strong building standards. You have all sorts of tools that you can use and you have toed a dapts them to different areas. But you can make communities to truly resilient and you can make ecosystems he resilient. Representative graves here. And here to talk about the threats the coastal areas of the u. S. If you want to ask him questions, 2027488000. 20274 2027 202748 2027488001. If you live in a coastal area, 2027488 2027488003. We saw 15 build initially to recovery and relief. And what do you think about that type of spending . Its an extraordinary amount of money. I have a feeling that between harvey and irma, you will see tig increa significant increases in that. But that is similar to the numbers for the 2005 hurricanes katrina, rita and others that happened then. We spent roughly 150 billion and our back end calculation indicated we could have spent probably between 8 billion and 10 billion and prevented 90 brs of those dollars being spent and more importantly saved around 90 of the lives lost. We lost somewhere around 1800 americans in Hurricane Katrina. So the data is out there, the proof is on out there that we can do a better job by being proactive rather than being reactive, but these will be extraordinary Disaster Response efforts following irma and harvey. I was in houston this weekend gutting homes and the devastation there is amazing. One of the conversations that led up to the storm and currently still going on is the future of the National Flood insurance pral. What do you think about that program and what does it mean overall to the coastal areas . The National Flood insurance program, i think items problematic that weve taken one disaster and split it off into this federal program. You have all sorts of other disasters. Whether it is terrorism or things like wildfires, earthquakes, tornadoes and other things. I think we should move in two directions. One is in the direction of doing an allhazards type policies. Allowing the private sector to participate in those. Secondly, we can no longer take Flood Insurance and look at it so my my optically as just oftens insurance. We need combine the efforts. If you were spending billion annually as the federal government is, you would be connecting that to where you have vulnerabilities. Yet the federal government, total disconnect between where your vulnerability is under the Flood Insurance program. It is a flawed approach. And again, we end up spending more money by continuing to have this disconnected approach. 25 billion in debt, some have called to resolve that debt and let it go. It should be. Here and is why. From Hurricane Katrina alone, you had 16 billion in debt attributable to the storm. The chief engineer said this was an engineering failure. He didnt say it was a failure of Flood Insurance policy hholdr policyholders. If that were a private sector scenario, the Engineering Company would be liable for though damages. Yet in this case were holding the policy holders, in fact this year alone i believe it was 400 mmd in interest alone on that debt payment. The other big spike on where you had the debt at contributrib had the debt at contributriutabs hurricane sandy. I think when you take 240es tth events out, the program is solidly in the black to the tune of billions of dollars. So those were an 2340omalies an think in those instances, the government does need to step in and provide assistance. Well take some calls. John in silver spring, maryland, youre on with representative graves. Good morning. Caller yes, sir. Good morning. My question is youre talking about the investment that we need to make in preventive measures. And which i fully agree with. But how do you respond to the kret ticks who will say that the outcome of those investments is uncertain, therefore we should not waste money on uncertain results . Similarly, there are no shortage of people who will say when you talk about zoning measures, building requirements, et cetera, there are people that will say that is just the government further intruding on thousand they want to live their life. How do you respond to those criticisms . Those are good points. Number one, with models today and this is what i did in a previous life, you have very developed models that actually can help to inform and predict the drought comes, whether they are computer models, physical models and others. And so i think that while we dont have 100 certainty in the performance of projects, the there is pretty robust modeling capabilities out there that can help inform us on the best solutions to help improve the protection of different communities and coastal areas and other vulnerable areas. So i do think that we can actually get pretty good assurance on the outcome of projects. On the whole deal with building standards and zoning standards, look, we too have to respect the rights of private Property Owners. And so im not saying that we come in and say you cant do anything here. But what i am saying is that in certain areas, we make it clear that if you are going to develop this area, you have to comply with robust zoning and building standards that are represented to, that correspond to the vulnerabili vulnerability. So for example building much higher, building to a stronger standard in regard to being able to withstand certain wind speeds, so where youre not increasing the governments liability or the homeowner or Business Owners liability, but youre simply complying youre using standards and tools in the tool box that correspond to the risk that those properties are actually good opposed to. Republican line, james, go ahead. Caller yes, i would like to comment to the representative for being such have such knowledge, such knowledge in this area. And my concern is that he will not get a lot of push back from his colleagues that are also republicans due to the fact that this sounds so progressive and youre so knowledgeable. And im worried about you getting push back from your own party. Thank you very much and ill listen offline. Thank you. I appreciate the concerns. So look, this is an issue where it takes time to go through and educate people. And whether that be other members of congress that havent been exposed to this or the general public. And so we have spent a good bit of time and well continue to have hearings, meet with individual members of congress, have different listening sessions and other forums where we can experience actual data to back up this. There is a prejudice of perception that any federal spending spraps wasperhaps wast spending, but the reality is if you use the right criteria, i think that you can demonstrate that you actually will save extraordinary dollars by making investments. And there are different reports out there by the Congressional Budget Office and others that show that principaled investments shows return from 3, 4 and i think some of the projects that we carried out in louisiana actually in excess of 10 in cost savings for every 1 we invested in certain projects. Baton rouge, democrats line, denny, go ahead. Caller yeah, my question for the representative is, he cited robust models to predict flooding. And as a known Climate Change denier, i was wondering how he squares dealing with the side of science to flood prediction models when he is a known climate denier. Im not sure who you are talking about. I actually have been very clear that in my previous job as i mentioned, we carried out resiliency projects. And if you can go back and look at our efforts in 2012 for example in the coastal master plan, we used the Climate Change sea rise projections. Ive noted on numerous occasions that we measured sea rise and changes in climate and all of 240es we those were incorporated into our models. And when you combine the sinking or settlie ining of land in sou louisiana with the relative sea rise were experiencing, there are some of the greatest rates in the world. So it would be a pretty big mistake for us to not take those changes into account whenever we were using our modeling to inform which projects will perform best under future scenarios. No not sure where you got your information, but ive been clear that that is something that we do need to take into consideration. Just looking right now, in fact at home last year in august, we had a 1,000 year storm in north louisiana, in march we had a 500 year storm. Texas i think had a 500 year storm i believe it was last year. And then of course Hurricane Harvey i believe they are projecting to an 1,000 year storm or glatser. So greater. So either im really, really hold or we are seeing changes and trends that we need to make sure that we do take into account because that is the fiscally responsible thing to do to prepare for the future, not just the past. Is that some of push bag that the previous caller talked about. Im not sure where he was coming from, but there is a resistance in many cases to talk with federal spending and federal investment in Infrastructure Projects and others. And i think in many cases, there are awful examples of federal dollars that have been spent on Infrastructure Projects. But if you use the right criteria, and i remember when the legislature had given us 200 million which sounds like an extraordinary amount of money, and it is, but we had a problem that was probably about 60 bmd. Billion. So we developed a prioritization tool or information tool using all these different models to inform us where we get best bang for the buck to where were making principaled investments and getting as much return on those dollars as we can to where i can sit before our legislature and defend the investments that we were making and explaining why some projects werent funded and others were. And now la fayette, ellen, go ahead. Caller yes, mr. Graves, ever since the flood of 1927, we have gone crazy with levees around here and weve forgotten that the silting from the floods from up north were replenishing our coastal land every year. And that has really basically stopped with all the levee systems. And every time an oil Company Wants to put up a new platform in our marshes, they dont use the old little alley way, they just cut a flew swatch through t the marshland and its leaving a bad trail throughout our whole marshland. Nflew swatch through the marshland and its leaving a bad trail throughout our whole marshland. Lew swatch through the marshland and its leaving a bad trail throughout our whole marshland. Ew swatch through the marshland and its leaving a bad trail throughout our whole marshland. I dont think its just putting up new levees all the time. We need silting, we need our environment to go back to god how really wanted us to have it instead of an engineeri acting like god. Apparently they decided to make a bayou go backwards to flow downwards. And because they didnt have the funding to finish the second part of the project, a town that never flooded as long as i can remember, and im 57, is now flooding every year. Ellen, thanks. That i, thahey, that you thi. You bring up good points. I think the more that we can developyou think. You bring up good points. I think the more that we can develop or manage our coastal system in louisiana in a way that mimics what Mother Nature did, well be barry ofetter off. After the 1927 flood as you noted, the corps of engineers did come in and put lever have is oig on the river. The state of louisiana was growing about three quarters of a square mile per year prior to the corps building the levees. After the levees, we started losing around 28 square miles of land per year where now the state of louisiana has lost about 2,000 square miles. If that were the state of rhode island, it wouldnt sxits exist are more. So we have had extraordinary land loss. And ill never defend the corps of engineers on decisions like this. I think it was a fatally flawed decision. One of the greatest environmental disasters in our nations history. And the fact that it was carried out by the fegz and yet there are resisting efforts for us to restore the coast, but i do want to make note in the 6 1 2 years roughly when i was working for the state, we did more coastal recent tore rstoration work tha period. We put it up probably 30 or 40 in our states history. So that is a really important component. Next on the oil and gas activities, we have to figure out how to make sure that we can coexist with our ecosystem and our great fisheries and have our energy production. One of the top fisheries producers, one of the top oil and Gas Producers in the United States. We can have those thing coexist. And youre right, dwrenlg dredging out a canal, it was irresponsible and i think to some degree contributed to our coastal loss. And that is why we actually put aggressive management techniques in place to require even greater restoration by those companies or any company that wanted do activities in our coastal area. And weve already seen the benefits of those changes in management. She mentioned the army corps of engineers. Remind viewers the role they serve in disaster planning and your particular take on the corps itself. So i have to admit, there are some really good people within the corps of engineers. But as an organization, i think its fatally flawed. I think that it is way too expensive. We have projects in louisiana where they have studied hurricane proestection. They are in control of managing our major rivers and streams and water glt wa waterways. But also for restoring the coast. We have a project southwest of new orleans that the corps of engineers has been studying over 20 year, spent over 80 million studying it and have not stuck a shovel in the ground yet. Meanwhile weve had over a billion in fema claims in the same area. Its ridiculous and its an example of how we spend significantly more money after a disaster rather than being proactive. Just over to the northwest or west northwest of new orleans, we have another project that it literally took the corps of engineers 42 years to finish the study. Think about that if you were a private company and you went to a client and said yep, you bet, ill have this for you in 42 years. You would be fired and you should. Yet these kinds of activities have been allowed to continue. So we have to have fuchlhave fu reform in the way that we manage these projects otherwise we will continue to be bleeding cash after disasters rather than being proactive and getting the projects finished efficiently. Susan, arizona, youre next. Caller good morning. I have a Family Member on the west tampa bay by the coast and then i have a Family Member in savannah and one in georgia. All three are specifying that the engineers and all these people that are supposed to make sure that the houses are not built as low as the coast, they are supposed to go by the regulations to keep their houses up and built strong. And i dont understand why this hasnt been taken care of. They wouldnt have been flooded. Its not Climate Change. We have fires here in arizona because of people not taking care of their fire when they build a fire at camp grounds. We have floods in florida that the dams are so high, that it lets the water through and flooded the other county. So its not Climate Change. I want your opinion on how are we going to go forward and get these engineers to make sure that these houses in georgia, savannah, west of tampa bay to do the regulations to keep the housing built up high so us taxpayers wont keep paying for the same repeat, repeat, repeat about that. Thank you, caller. Yeah, thanks. It goes back to what i talked about where i talked about improving the resilience of communities. In some cases, it may make sense to go in and elevate or raise individual homes. In other cases it will be most Cost Effective to build things like levees, pump stations or other natural protection to help improve the protection of a community. But what has happened is you have homes that lets say were built perhaps 30 years ago and at the time, the engineers believed that if they have built 3 feet above the ground, they were going to be safe at 3 feet. Well, as Additional Development has occurred in other areas, they may now be sending more water into the community, maybe more drainage. So that 3 feet that was okay decades ago is no longer sufficient. Well, a house isnt Something Like a car or other types of mobile or portable structures. A house is usually pretty static. And so coming in and picking up for example a concrete slap, you very easily an raising a concrete slab, you get into six figures of cost per home. And so it gets really challenging when you talk about taking a static sfrukts liketrua home and trying to make it dynamic by raising it every time new science or data ghos indicating that that 3 foot of elevation was insufficient. So you have to look at all the tools in the tool chest. In some cases you may need to provide may need to elevate some homes, but in other cases i think it will be more Cost Effective to try to protect entire communities by doing Community Based resilience projec projects. And in some cases as the government does through the agriculture and fema, homes are bought on out if they are determined that they are in some cases repetitive flooded homes, and it juit doesnt make sense continue to pay for the flooded homes. It makes more sense to simply have those folks move out. But i think its important to note that homes in many cases, they are static and you just cant lift them up. So you have to look at other solutions. Peter in brooklyn, hi. Caller i work in the Insurance Industry and ive been witness to a lot of evolution in the industry. One of the recent things i noticed is after 9 11, the government stepped in and insured terrorism over a certain amount and so over the last probably, i dont know, 10 to 12 years, there have been so Many Insurance Companies in the commercial sector and the private sector or the personal line sector, they making railroaded profecord pro. I feel like they need to be forced back into the flood market. And sort of in the way that terrorism insurance is done where the government accepts a certain limit of liability for every event and then they can foist that i dont know if its a regulation or however. But i just wanted to hear your thoughts on forcing the private Insurance Market back to the table. As you know, private insurers were part of the flood market years ago. They largely exited. There have been efforts in congress such as a bill dennis ross and congresswoman caster have offered that does help to open that door a little bit. There is a bill that has come in Financial Services committee that tries to open that door a bit. I agree that using a model like tria, the terrorism Risk Insurance or price anderson used for Nuclear Power plants, there are models out there are that we could model a Flood Insurance private Flood Insurance program where the government comes in when you hit a catastrophic number and provides some type of assistance. But back too what what i opened with, an allhazards type approach. Should we separate or shoulditie competitive allhazards approach. One concern is that the private insurers will come in and cherry pick. They will choose the low risk and moderate risk policies and leave all the high risk folks in the federal program, which one of the ideas behind insurance is that you have a diversity of risk. You have low, moderate and high risk. Well, if you cherry pick the low and moderate risk and only leave the high risk in the federal program, the solvency of that program is going to just be a disaster. Whereas you will continue to have the private Companies Reaping likely many profits by having these low risk portfolios. So i just go back and say again that i think our approach is looking at an allhazards type approach may make more sense. I know after Hurricane Katrina, we had a really tough time trying to determine what damages were attributable to wind as and he opposed to storm surge or water. So the private Insurance Companies were fighting with the federal insuranceopposed to sto water. So the private Insurance Companies were fighting with the federal insurance program. And if you have an allhazards type policy, its much cleaner. And carol from mississippi, go ahead. Carol from mississippi, go ahead, please. Caller yes, my question, sir, i used to work for the corps down in new orleans and i know levees were old and floods that were in that area even in mississippi. But some of the area never been replaced correctly. And ill just be honest, the corps is only as big as the if egg when federal government when you vote on that stuff. But some people shouldnt live on that area. I studied history back before we became a nation and this is nothing new. Just people are living in the time were living. Earthquakes in mexico, california, all happening at the same time. So that hes all i have to say. Keep the good work up. Keep louisiana moving forward. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for the call. You know, it is accurate that you have certain areas that are very difficult to protect. And so you have areas where folks want to develop and in many cases they could be sitting ducks. And so that is why you have to use all the tools in the tool chest and its important to note that in many cases things like levees and floodwalls and pump station may be something that the federal government through the docorps of engineers is responsible for, but you also have zoning ordinances and building standards that a state, parish, county or other nonfederal units of government are responsible for. So these entities, the federal government, state and local governments, need to on Work Together using all of those tools and in some cases it may not make sense to development some areas. Or if areas are going to be developed, you tell the Property Owner look, if you develop here, you are going to be spochrespon for liability that results. And its not going to be heaped upon the federal government because it is very difficult or perhaps irresponsible to build in some areas that are vulnerable and you wouldnt want to subject people to flooding in the disasters that were seeing now in texas, florida and other areas. Before we let you know, Steve Scalise was severely injured in that incident. How is he doing and when is he expected back in congress . Steve is a fighter. One of the things about being whip, you cant take no for an answer. And he certainly hasnt accepted i think what early on could have been his fate. Weve been on the phone with him a few times and he sounds fantastic, sounds incredibly strong. And spirits are very high. All he wants to do is talk about legislation and moving the country forward. Ultimately the decision will be up to the doctors. But if it were up to steve, i think the week after he got shot, would he hahe would have. But it was a very serious injury and hes taking the advice of the doctors that are managing his care right now. And are no sense of his return . Not yet. But again, steve willno sense o . Not yet. But again, steve willno sense o . Not yet. But again, steve willno sense o . Not yet. But again, steve willno sense o . Not yet. But again, steve will beat all odds and will be back before most others would. Representative graves here to talk about the threats to the coastal area. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Several members of congress are in their districts today damaged by Hurricane Irma and harvey. Mario diazbalart says he is assessing damage and talking to neighbors. Seeing lots of brush and tree debris and asking locals for please be careful and patient while city crews clean up. While other mefbs congrembers a food and supplies for people dealing with the disasters. And were waiting for the White House Briefing to begin. Well have it live here when it does. In the meantime, take a look at some of todays washington journal. A lot of information, a lot of documentaries and other materials have come out with the vietnam war. Why do you think your version was needed out there . I dont want to say anything negative about the others. I think that we will be constantly discussing vietnam as long as were a country. And that is important. But unfortunately, we have spent most of the last 42 year since the fall of saigon not discussinging it and there has been so much new information, new scholarship, new access to vietnam. Veterans are coming forward with their poignant story. Protests of the war are coming forward. And i think what this film does is aggregate all the most recent scholarship and speak to veterans from the United States and people across a wide spectrum of american views because we have no political agenda or no ax to grind. But also interview people in North Vietnam and South Vietnam and civilians and soldiers and guerrillas to get a 360 view and create a space where we can finally find a way to do it and fortunately we had an underwriter in bank of america that was willing to say, you know, we want you to take on complicated he questions aquest have a National Dialogue about that. So we feel fortunate that weve come out of this Ten Year Program ready to share with the country aimed at everybody. So as far as this new scholarship, where did they come from, how did you find them . We found people in vietnam, the United States, through word of advice, from our advisors. One veteran would tell us about another veteran. We went to families who lost one, people who protested the war, people who went to canada. And we just tried to represents as many perspectives as possible. And one of the things that has really stuck with us over the course of making this film, we probably met 1,000 people, interviewed 100, 79 are in the film, and each person really opened their soul to us. And shared some of the darkest moments of their lives and some of the most profound experiences that they have had and helped us to really get into deep the Human Experience of this extraordinarily complicated tragedy. And you found that even among the vietnamese. Absolutely. I think that humannaturally in e the other exactly that, the other. They are diminished, they are not human. And what was interesting is that our American Veterans are saying oh, my goodness, the vietcong and North Vietnamese sound like me. And these were the people who pop late my dreams, who were my enemies and now i understand where they were coming from and what they felt. And you realize that the experience of war among the grunts, the people on the front lines in those moments of terror, at the ambush, taking the hill, their experiences are very similar. They have been similar all through time. Ive done films on the Second World War and civil war and other films ive done and there is obviously a uniqueness to each one of these calamities, but also a strange very human similarity that you want to play on both of those. What we understood is that there is more than one truth in war. And that we tend to particularly with something that didnt turn out so well for us, tend to say its only one thing or else we get locked in our hardened silo of our opinion or we dont listen to the other. And what we tried do is create that space where not just our participants could feel like their voices were heard regardless of their opinion, and i dont even want to talk about a political spectrum, but just regardless of what their experience was, but that our viewers could as well. And that is an important thing for us. That because we didnt have a political agenda, that we wanted to create a space where all americans could finally sit down. We talk about the cliche of national conversation. Its not about that. We want intimate conversations. Dad, will you finally talk about what you did . Grand made, w gra grandma, why did you go to that protest. If you want to ask them questions, 2027488000 for the eastern and central, 8001 for the mountain and pacific. And if you are a vietnam veteran, 202748a8002. We will show you a bit from the documentary, this is one so soldiers perception of what happened. Heres what he had to say. Just adapt. You go there with one mindset and you adapt to the atrocities of the war, you adapt to killing, dying, you know. After a while, it didnt bother you. I shouldnt say it doesnt bother you as much. When i first arrived in vietnam, there were some interesting things that happened and i questioned some of the marines. I was made to realize that this is war and this is what we do. And that stuck in my head. This is war, this is what we do. And after a while, you embrace that. Tell us more about this person. This gentlemans name is roger harris and hes from boston. And he was very generous to share his story with us. He was in vietnam in 67 into early 68 in the marines up around a dmz in one of the most dangerous plays, one of the most highest casualty areas. And he was extraordinarily open about how difficult this experience was, what it was like to feel that you werent going to come home and how he tried to explain that to his mother in a phone call, one of the most devastating moments in the entire film. Just what is the purpose of all of this. He is wrestling with these prophetic questions. And when he gets home, he comes out of the plane at Logan Airport in boston and he cant get a cab. And he realizes its because hes an africanamerican and the cab drivers dont want to go to roxbury. So what is going on at home, racial strive is following him to vietnam and back home again. And he embodies some of the essential questions that the fe fill. A film asks. So how many chapters do you have . Its ten episodes. Film asks. So how many chapters do you have . Its ten episodes. So how have . Its ten episodes. 18 hours. Its a weekly series. Each episode will be played twice a night. And essentially its a chronology. The First Episode is kind of the table setting, introducing you to new characters, but also 34r5ising you with a geopolitical context of the french coming in in the mid 19th cents ch seven century through to kennedys inauguration. And then we kind of get gl granular. The next episode is kennedys administration and then youre into six month periods for a while and then it begins to open up. And the last episode takes us from the peace treaty of 73 to the present. Literally to the present understanding the ways in which our two countries have now been together, the way in which were all both countries conflicted about the war and struggling with the meaning. They lost so many people, they are beginning to wonder was it worth it, could we have done it a different way, not so much willing to ignore the cost. And they suffered unbelievable losses. Just as we continue to debate in our country all of the issues that swirl around vietnam that echo today. Mass demonstrations against the current administration, a white house obsessed with leaks, a pr lying. Big document drops of classified material. Accusations that a Political Campaign reached out to a foreign power. This is all we started this film ten years ago and there are hundreds of things that echo, richl, with t rhyme, with the present. But we finished it almost two years ago, so we corespondent have anticipated what the current moment was. But all those things are part of the vietnam war story, not part of the prentsent, but yet we ben to realize how helpful history can be to understand tpresent. And because were involved in such hyper partisanship, to pull this out and say we can have a conversation and not let the dining room conversation descend into an argument, that it could help us understand not just then, but now. Lets start with some calls. This is marty. Go ahead. Caller yeah, my brother fought in vietnam and came home and he didnt volunteer to go. He was drafted to go. And because of the respect for our country, he went. He came home and he was never the same. So he over the years let a little bit out here and there. And regardless of what the war meant or why we were there, it affected him the rest of his life because he never experienced anything like that. He said people made it sound like we were brutal and we werent near as brutal as the vietcong. And the people in villages. And the children that they sent out with candles that they had made and the soldiers would buy them and then when they would lights them, they would explode. So, you know, i dont agree 100 with war. Them, they would expl. So, you know, i dont agree 100 with war. But i know that this president doesnt want war and isnt in it for war. And we better have a good reason as far as hes concerned to get involved in a war. Okay, marty. Thank you. Im sure that is not first kind of the sense of story being told by those coming back from vietnam. No, thank you so much for sharing the story of your brother because ive spoken to many veterans and many people have had similar experiences of coming home and not being able to explain what happened to them or what they saw, what they did. And that is true in all wars. But in particular with vietnam, it was complicated because of the asymmetrical nature of the warfare and not knowing who the enemy was. Youre going into a village and you dont know if these children are your friends or enemies. And for the vietnamese fighting against us, they saw it as a total war. So everybody willing to fight would fight. And that caused even more complicate moral questions for our country and our military. And our soldiers were caught in the middle of it. They didnt ask for this. As your brother was drafted, so were many soldiers trying to do their duty. And i think our film, weve tried hard to just represent this variety of experiences and let people let their stories speak for themselves. And the question of whether we should go to war is a profound one that we think our film engages and this is why. So thank you for sharing that. This is a vietnam vet, danny in arizona. Caller hey, good morning. First things first. Im 68 going on 69. A little overweight, type 2 diabet diabetes. But a big fan of ken burns. Thank you. Caller and in your civil war document at the end, when you had the two civil war veterans and one was from the north and one was from the south, and one turned and looked at the other one and says and was it all surreal. Now i know what he meant. Yes, indeed. Caller now i know what he meant. Its crazy. Its hard to believe we did Something Like that and survived. Danny, this is exactly what the last caller was talking about. You hit the nail on the head. I just think we