Like just an isolated place, off to where you can be around people of your kind. You know, that we can relate to each other. Im a disobedient child, youre a disobedient child, you do what you want to do, i do what i want to do, so we get together and were going to be even worse. It didnt help me in no kind of way. The one i went to, there wasnt no one trying to actually teach. All they were doing is just doing something with you at that point in time because youre a kid, they cant just kick you out of school or get rid of you. Thats for bad kids, like a babysitter or something. Do feel like anything that happened there helped you avoid ending up where you did . No, no. I think with me going there, i think that helped me end up where i am now. Its green versus green, green as in the environment and green as in money, with people all over the world marching over Climate Change. Ill look at capitalism and the economys part in this planets Climate Crisis. Also the first family of american oil takes a stand against fossil fuels, one of heirs to the rockefeller fortune talks to me. Plus ill talk to the head of the world bank about the cost of containing the Ebola Outbreak. Real money. This is real money. You are the most important part of the show. So tell me what is on your mind by tweeting me or hitting me on facebook. Com. Leaders from 120 countries are descending on the United Nations headquarters to try to agree on ways to reduce man made Greenhouse Gases which are blamed by most people for Global Temperatures that are 1. 3 higher than the previous centurys average. Joining them are Business Executives and environmental activists with agendas of their own to push. Meanwhile on the city streets, protesters calling themselves flood wall street attempted to blockade the downtown financial district to draw a link between economic policies and the environment. And todays protest came on the heels of a much bigger demonstration on sunday in which an estimated 310,000 people came out for a new york city climate march, the biggest protest of its kind. Now the momentum for combatting Climate Change is growing in unison with the amount of Greenhouse Gases getting released into the atmosphere. A new report shows worldwide Carbon Dioxide emissions from fossil fuel burning rose to a record 9. 9 billion tons in 2013. Globally those emissions jump, but they are up a whopping 61 compared to previous levels. China remains the worlds biggest polluter. And thats fuelled in part by newly built coalburning power plants, but the United States still emits more carbon per person than any country in the world. Underupsecretary general ban kimoon is calling for a noble agreement by 2015 that limits the world to lease than 2 2 2 sellssus rise in temperature. He wants rich countries to contribute at least 15 billion this year to a Worldwide Green Climate Fund that helps poorer nations cope with the Climate Change. Already these kinds of schemes are being proposed at the local level rich and poor alike, including right here in new york city. Patricia sabga reports. Reporter mobilizing against Climate Change on the streets of new york, marching with demonstrators sunday, the mayor stakes new york citys claim at the vanguard of urban Climate Action unveiling plans to slash Greenhouse Gas emissions in the big apple. Nearly threequarters of the outbudget is to come from heating and cooling buildings. De blasio s plan calls for retrofitting buildings and getting private landlords to go greener through a mix of incentives and legal mandates. The up front price tag is estimated at 1 billion, but the plan claims the citys economy will benefit through new construction jobs and energyrelated cost savings of 1. 4 billion a year. New york has already suffered a heavy toll from rising sea levels. In 2012, Hurricane Sandy caused 44 deaths and 19 billion worth of damage. De blasio also claims the plan will lower utility plans for lowerincome new yorkers who tend to live in older buildings. An argument that is likely to be a cloud pleaser. Patricia sabga, al jazeera, new york. A new book argues that capitalism, not carbon is to blame for the Climate Crisis. In this changes everything, naomi cline argues that capitalism hasnt only widen the gap between rich and poor but is destabilizing our economys life support too. She is a board member for 350. Org a global grass roots move to solve the Climate Crisis and she joins us now. Us. Thank you for having me. Its interesting what mayor de blasio says, he says not being Energy Efficient exacerbates the divide the rich and poor. We live in buildings and have shared services, but this idea that its creating inequality, you are arguing that inkwee a inkwee inequality was created by capitalism. Explain that. We know we are having a really lively and longover due debate about unequality, but what im arguing is that that same quest for shortterm profits, growth above all else regardless of the costs is the reason not just why peoples homes are being foreclosed on, but why our collective home is being destabilized. Do you argue if not for capitalism we would have done better . We would also probably not be as far advanced as we are. What im arguing is this crisis hit us at the worst historical moment. It landed in the main stream in 1988. That was the year that james hanson testified and said im sure there is a connection between co2 and warming. Thats when governments set their first targets. So i look at, okay, what else was going on. And what was happening in 1988, the first free trade deals were being signed, and it was the moment of triumph for deregulated capitalism. What we just heard from the mayor, right, you need to invest in the public sphere and decide which parts of the economy do you want to grow and what parts need to contract. Obviously we need to contract the parts that are pal looting and expand the parts that will get us off of fossil fuels. Youll create more jobs this way, but you need to plan. And this crisis hit us when all of these words became dirty, planning, no, regulating, we cant do that. So thats the argument, and now we have waited so long that we need to act with such decisiveness that it does challenge this core logic of indiscriminate growth. We are doing very well with fracing in this country. Lots of people accept that it creates earthquakes, because it creates prosperity, but people wonder why fracing companies are allowed to put xhem calls in the ground and not tell us what it is. Why do these things even exist . Because fossil fuel companies dont just have enough money to burn, they also have enough money to bribe even if that bribery is legal. We know this is the wealthiest sector in the economy, exxon mobil made 45 billion in profits a couple of years which is more money than anybody has ever made in history in profits, and they have an enormous impact over the political sphere. We know there are all of these knockon benefits to climate protection. We have healthier bodies, better designed cities. I mean like the greenest cities in the world we know are some of the happiest cities, the problem is its not all winwin, and i think thats the biggest barrier, is that ever since the 80s, its been were not allowed to talk about pal looter pays environmental itch, it is polluter pays. And the logic is, because they are the problem, they will come up with the solution. Right. But if we were to apply that logic to banking regulation, like do you really think if you were to get all of the big banks together to fix the financial right . 73 countries and a thousand companies coming together to device a way to put a price on carbon. That seems to work in the capitalist fuel. If i want to pollute, then i have really got to know what the price of doing so is. That seems to have logic. Putting a price on carbon is going to get us part of the way there. The thing is what michael mann calls the procrastination penalty. We have known about this for decades, and all the while our emissions have been going up. The world has a finite carbon budget before we lose our chance of staying below 2 celsius warming, which our governments have decided we dont want to do, so within that budget we need to move faster than just a carb carbon tax can do. Were willing to talk about these easy gentle market mechanisms, but were not talking about the fact that we have to say no to the companies arctic. We are both canadians, and canada is a disproportion at it sands. It is. Wealthy. Well, its interesting, because merrill lynch, banc of america just issued a report that was incredibly damaging to the canadian government, because thats what Stephen Harper has been telling canadians, this makes us rich. In fact it only accounts for 2 , the tar sands. And it says now it is destroying jobs because it has become so expensive to manufacture. On the other hand lots of studies show, if you were to invest that money in renewable energy, and public transit, you would create seven to eight more jobs. So it just involves saying no to some very powerful actors, in canada we have basically a merger between oil and state, and thats been a huge barrier to action. Thats why our Prime Minister tomorrow. Thats a good point. Naomi cline thank you for being here. The rockefellers vast wealth flowed from oil. Now the heirs are turning away from that key to their oh, i love pet day. You guys are just two big softies. Cut it out. Look at these guys. Oh, you. [laughter] ohhh they just unlocked our channels for a week ohhh. And. They just made it free. Ahh. Looks like its xfinity free channel week weve unlocked a collection of channels on tv and xfinity on demand, like encore, nick jr. And disney xd. Totally free for a week learn more at xfinity. Com freechannelweek. Thats why im a cat guy. Here is some irony for you on the day when the world is up in arms about Climate Change. An American Family whos fortune was built on oil is joining the month to divest from fossil fuels. The rockefeller Investment Fund said it would cut investments tied to coal and oil sands to less than 1 by the end of this year. Rockefeller will sell other investments in fossil rules as quickly as possible. About 6 is invested in a variety of energy companies. And im talking about money controlled by the heirs of John D Rockefeller who cofounded standard oil and become the First American worth more than a billion dollars. The man who created a refiner and oil producer with such monopolistic power that the Supreme Court ordered it broken up into 34 accept ray companies all the way back in 1911. He gave away more than half a billion dollars to support various educational, scientific and religious causes. And in 1940, the sons created the Charitable Fund that today announced it will slash investments in Companies Involved in coal and oil sands. The rockefellers are joining a movement to divert from fossil fuels that has attracted 181 institutions and local governments. One of the great great granddaughters is a trustee and the chairman of the rockefeller fund. She marched in new york yesterday that attracted hundreds of thousands of people, and she said the funds moved to cut investments in fossil fuels is, quote, part of a natural progression. She joins me now. Pleasure to have you here. Thank you. Thank you so much. I was out of town yesterday, i came back just as all of this was ending, and i have seen a lot in new york and a lot of demonstrations and gatherings, but i had the sense that this was a Tipping Point in new york, that i had never seen this many people from all walks of life deciding were going to talk a standing about something, and i just said with naomi cline, i wonder whether there is a Tipping Point, where people feel like they can influence this. I think we have reached it. It is such a diversity of people working and coming together, and there are a lot of people who have been working on this issue for a long time. And im proud to say our family we embrace this irony, but we think that puts us maybe even under greater moral obligation, using that wealth through our philanthropic means, professional and personal means, any way we can in working to stop Climate Change. Exxon mobil is a descendant of the original companies. Obviously there are people in the family who own stock in that company. How do you reconcile that. We filed for the 2003, Shareholders Meeting filed a petition for them to be more forthcoming. We have also met a few times with the company, so the dialogue is happening. Were hoping to see faster change. Which is why we have gotten together now with there are 70 organizations that are part of this divest, invest movement. It is not massive compared to all of the Energy Investments out there, but we will do anything we can to encourage everyone who was was at that climate march can Work Together to move us toward the future. What do you think is it your great great great grandfather two greats. I am the fifth generation. What would he think . He would be looking at efficiency, which he always did. He was very forward looking, and very attentive to details, and i think he would be looking again at the true cost of the details. He was a deeply moral person, deeply religious and tithed his entire life. He would see this as part of the mission to preserve our environment for generations, the families have cared deeply about the environment, and he would say this was the smart thing to do. He was an innovator. A lot of the money to be made, which is important, we are a granthmaking foundation, and business as philanthropy, so we are certainly not willing to risk our endowment, so i think senior would be right in there with us. Until now it hasnt been obvious that your return can be as good or better in in alternative energy than it is in traditional energy. One of the best reasons to not divest from energy for the last couple of decades has been it really returns a lot of money. Uhhuh. How do you make up for that. Anybody who has a kid in college or a college kid will know most have had this discussion not to invest in fossil fuels, and the ones who have decided not so, have said we have a responsibility. I think this is why we have undertaken this very carefully. We have been looking at this for a long time, and reached out and found the smartest strongest partners we can, because we want to do this in a way that will encourage owes to join us, and if we lose money it undermines our own philanthropic purpose. The stands assets that they have right now, and when governments come to their senses and start to regulate this more just as you were talking with naomi earlier, that is going to divest these investments. Looking at the cost, and the increasing numbers of opportunities, solar and wind are already doing very, very well. So we are going through this very, very carefully, and were going to find those investments that are going to preserve our endowment and those investments that sustain our grant making. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Coming up the trillion dollars price tag for a new generation of Nuclear Weapons in america. Audiences are intelligent and they know that their needs are not being met by american tv news today. Entire media culture is driven by something thats very very fast. There has been a lack of fact based, in depth, serious journalism, and we fill that void. There is a huge opportunity for Al Jazeera America to change the way people look at news. We just dont parachute in on a story. Quickly talk to a couple of experts and leave. One producer may spend 3 or 4 months, digging into a single story. At al jazeera, there are resources to alow us as journalists to go in depth and produce the kind of films. The people that you dont see anywhere else on television. We intend to reach out to the people who arent being heard. We wanna see the people who are actually effected by the news of the day. Its Digging Deeper its asking that second, that third question, finding that person no one spoken to yet. You cant tell the stories of the people if you dont get their voices out there, and Al Jazeera America is doing just that. President obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 in large part for his commitment to rid the world of nuclear arms. And he came out of the gate strong. But to get a deal through congress, he had to agree to spend billions to renovate many of the countrys Nuclear Weapons sites. And now the cost of maintaining the weapons is skyrocketing. The price tag is 350 billion over the next decade, with longterm estimates reaching more than a trillion dollars. Daryle says these costs are simply not sustainable. What are the options, daryle . Well, the administration right now is approaching some key decisions on how and whether and at what cost to modernize our Cold War Nuclear stockpile. The president can and we think should make some choices now to revise those earlier plans that you outlined your described that could cost the taxpayer over 350 billion over the next decade. There are ways that he could decide to scale back the schedules and the number and even cancel some systems that are redundant Going Forward in the future. Hell need congressional support and theres not a lot of time to do this as many of the decisions are coming do on now and why to modernize the systems. These are not new systems. These are is this Maintenance Systems . Thats a lot of the cost. The budget estimate basically consists of about 100 billion in spending to replace the socalled triadd Nuclear Delivery systems. It includes the cost of refurbishing about five types of nuke bar war heads at a cost of 60 billion, as well as the cost of maintaining the infrastructure, the command and control systems for the u. S. Nuclear weapons arsenal, which even after the cuts with russia is still very high, about 1,500 Nuclear Weapons on each side. A year ago, i would have said this conversation had some traction, but now that we have tensions ratcheting up with russia, is this a good time to be thinking about cutting costs . Both countries could and should reduce further. President obama last year said that the United States could after a detailed evaluation, cut our strategic arsenal by onethird further, so far russia has today in nyet, but the option is still open. Both the russia and u. S. Are still dealing with an enormous amount of Nuclear Overkill that they both need to and can afford to reduce. Was this money that was not budgeted for . Im assuming if you have Nuclear Weapons, one assumes the cost of keeping them up to date. How did we get in a situation like this . Well, we have been paying this bill year after year after year, the Nuclear Arsenal has cost us about 30 to 35 billion a year on an annual basis for the last decade or so. What is happening is the cold war systems are aging. The Defense Systems are k look at the costs of research and development of new bombers, new submarines, no must missiles and those costs are going to quadruple in the next 10 to 15 years if they are built. And this comes at the same time as the congressional budget sequestration law came into effect a couple of years ago. This is a perfect storm of competing Defense Budget priorities and the reduces availability of funds due to congresss effort to reduce spending across the board. The socalled sequester. Daryle good to talk to you. The Ebola Outbreak could become an economic catastrophe too. Im going to talk to the president of the world bank about preventing this coming up. Plus how the fight against isil could be going on right outside of your doorstep. Primetime news. Welcome to Al Jazeera America. Stories that impact the world, affect the nation and touch your life. Im back. Im not going anywhere this time. Only on Al Jazeera America. Renewed fighting in syrias civil war is causing a new refugee crisis for turkey. Some 130,000 syrian kurds have pored into turkey since friday. They fled their homes as Islamic State of iraq and levant advanced on a town a few miles from the turkish border. More than a million syrians have already fled into turkey. Now pressure is mounting on turkey to step up efforts to take on isil, but turkey was said to be resisting that, because it feared for the safety of 46 turkish hostages captured in june. Those hostages were freed over the weekend. Turkey is hesitant to lend support because of their close eyes to kurdish guerrillas in turkey. The Obama Administration has reminded us of a disturbing fact that some americans are fighting for isil, and today many returned home. Lisa stark has the latest on this. Lisa, are officials thinking of these returned fighters as a threat to america . As you say for the first time today they have acknowledged there are some fighters who have come back to the United States. Previously the administration indicated there were about 100 americans who had gone over to join isil. And they have indicated that they are very concerned that they could return here and perhaps mount some kind of attack in the u. S. What we were told today is that the fbi is monitoring the folks who have returned, and keeping an eye on them. So apparently they feel at least some confidence that they know who some of these folks are. We dont know how many have returned. We do know that new york representative tim bishop recently indicated that about 40 americans, foreign fighters have come back, but the administration would not confirm that number today. And there is no action necessarily to be taken against them, because we dont have a law that says what they did was wrong if they are not fighting right . Theres some confu confuse confusion about that. The state department has indicated they believe they can pull the passports of these folks. Last week a director was asked will you stop them at the border or let them in and follow them to gather intelligence, and the fbi director said this is going to be decided on a case by case basis, and in this case at least they have decided it behooves them to keep an eye on them. Lisa thank you so much. Last month a 33yearold man died while fighting for isil in syria. And a woman from st. Paul used a stolen passport to travel to syria. These facts and others are in a piece written by reporter mike cronen about the debate over how to best stop isil recruitment. Mike cronen joins me now from minneapolis. Mike, this is remarkable. The fbi says that about 100 americans have left the country to fight with isil, and as many as 15 of them are from the twin citys area. Any idea as to why . Well, there are 120,000 muslims in minnesota according to one of the nonprofits that is a muslim nonprofit, and it seems that this would be a natural place for isil to recruit, if they were looking for disacted muslims. What are authorities doing in response to this . Well, the authorities that include the fbi, the u. S. Attorneys office, homeland security, and white house officials all told me in the past few weeks that they have been working with the community here for months if not years to strengthen the education outreach, to make sure that they have good relationships with the Muslim Community here in the twin cities, and they give each other pointers on how to communicate with each other. For example, the Law Enforcement agencies will explain what could happen to their friends or their nephews or nieces or children if they were to leave the country and go fight for isil, and on the other hand the Muslim Community members will share with the authorities how best to approach people in the community effective. Is there any sense of where these people are getting recruited and what the narrative is . Is isil recruiting them . Or do they go through thirdparties . Does it happen at mosques . What do we know about this . The two sources of recruitment that people have told me here, one is the internet itself, that youll have a vulnerable or susceptible individual who is watching isil or other Islamic Terror Group videos, and the narrative that they hear is going fight for something larger than yourself. Go join the jihad, and they feel that that is something that in the past americans who joined the spanish civil war for example, in the 1930s felt, that it was something that was noble and exciting. These people, the authorities and the Muslim Leaders here say do not understand what they are getting into. And the second part about this is at least one emom who i spoke with believe it is not just an internet phenomenon, that there has to be people on the ground doing the same thing. Remarkable. It would be interesting to know whether it is them or a thirdparty saying this is something you should get involved . This thank you for joining us. A bit of relief today for two african countries affected by ebola. The World Health Organization says it is pretty much contained in two countries. Until now Officials Say more than 2800 people have died and more than 5800 have been sickened as Health Workers scramble to contain the disease, the United Nations says it will now cost a billion dollars to fight ebola, thats a dramatic jump from the estimate last month of 100 million. Mary snow has more. Reporter in sierra leone, a threeday lockdown is the latest attempt to prevent more deaths and human suffering from the spread of ebola. It was six months ago when the disease was first identified in guinea. It spread to liberia, and sierra leone. And these three small countries in west africa have commanded the worlds attention. The u. N. Says the cost just to contain the outbreak will top 1 billion. And its due in large part to care. You are encountering completely broken healthcare systems. You know, devastated by decades of civil conflict. Reporter as ebola spreads, so too does fear. And the world bank is warning of the economic costs of ebola, hurting Industries Like transportation that has disrupted whether its by air or by sea. And the fear could also mean workers not showing up for work. It puts a sigma of a very deadly disease on a few countries in particular, but obviously these stigma can extend beyond the boundaries of those relatively small countries. Reporter past exdepices like sars show how quickly fear can spread and take an economic toll. In 2003 earliest mates put the cost at 11 billion. A decade later it is estimated that the outbreak cost more than 40 billion. One industry that was hurt, airlines. Reuters report that air lines lost 7 billion alone. And because the economy is a global one. Economists warn just as disease can spread quickly, so too can fear. Its now another fact or of ebola countries are trying to contain. Mary snow, al jazeera. World Bank President dr. Jim junk kim warned that the ebola Economic Impact could drain billions of dollars from african economies. The world bank recently approved a 105 million grant to finance underway. I caught up with dr. Kim earlier today. He just returned from australia where ebola economics took center stage. I asked dr. Kim if he thought the virus could be contained . The one of the things that the g20 does is to try to help prepare for the major shocks, the major down side risks in the Global Economy. And ebola right now looks like a major risk for three countries, but this could spread if we dont get on top of it, but in general pandemic diseases in general were not as prepared as we should be. What we found is that almost independent of the number of cases its the aversion behavior. The closing of the ports. People not showing up for work, its thatting kind of behavior that has had the biggest Economic Impact before, sars, h1n1. That it wasnt the lives lost, which was a tragedy, it was the behavior that accompanied it that lead to the economic shock. So first of all we have to think about the people suffering. But its very powerful if we can say and not only is it just the right thing to do, but if you care about the stability of the Global Economy well prepare better next time and jump on this one so it doesnt jump further. If we do nothing if we dont speed up our response, 550,000 cases is possible. So we have pulled in all of the stops. What the u. S. Did was fantastic. They are going to be focused on building hospital beds and getting highquality care in place, but we need to get out into the rural areas. And this is a especially a good place to talk about it, because it was with president clinton that we built those kind of rural based healthcare systems. It was president clinton who said to just, i believe in this model of getting Great Health Care out to everybody. So whenever these things threaten, we worry about how our response is. Our response is not right. Are we Getting Better . Now you understand the intricacies and nuances of responses to epidemics and pandemics. Are we better than we were with sars and other threats . There are things that are better. We have better possibility for fund raising and real treatments. But the thing that is not better is a coordinated global response. We need to find a way of getting everything in place so the next time it happens and ebola is a slowmoving virus, you have to have direct contact with bodily fluids, others like pandemic flu this will be much much more quickly moving. Right now we have to focus on the immediate response, but we have to think about things like why dont we have a fund that can disperse billions of dollars very quickly and then have that paid back over time by the rich countries, instead of waiting for people to make donations. Were looking at every different possibility. The other piece we have to get in place is these countries did not have the systems that would predict and prevent the spread of these illnesses. From a humanitarian perspective and also the perspective of just protecting everything in the world, we have to build these systems. We have those systems for instance in the United States. Youthabsolutely. The spread of a disease like this can be contained . With very simple measures. There was a case of ebola in the United States. But just by using what we call universal precautions, we literally now in every hospital in the world, better in developed countries, we assume that somebody has ebola unless proven otherwise. So that patient in the u. S. Was treated, did fine, left the hospital. They did make the diagnosis of ebola eventually, but in any first world hospital these things can be managed. And we can do that in even poor villages in liberia, sierra leone, and guinea. I dont think we had that aspiration early enough, but we have got it now. How do you sit with bank ministers and convince them that the economy of these three countries when we talk about the Economic Impact for ebola what is the case for that . For these three countries they have already lost over 300 million. And thats a huge burden for these three relatively small countries. But again, its the aversion behavior that causes the impact. If it spreads to 15, 20 countries, spreads beyond the borders of africa, were talking about billions and billions in impact. And i think the finance ministers understand that. 73 countries have come together, more than a thousand companies havement call together with an agreement to say we want to put a price on carbon. We all get that Carbon Emissions are generally bad, some still dont, but what is the influence and impact of deciding we would like to put a price on it . The first of all, governments and the private sector for the most part have had these conversations separately. And we put together a leadership council, and were going to drive forward a very tough, a very specific conversation, about what can we do potentially by the committee of the parties, where everyone has agreed that well have an agreement on climate. The reality is that carbon in the air has a price. We just havent put a price on it. For example, in china, right, 1. 2 Million People died last year as a result of pollution. And the pollution is of course related to the way we put carbon in the air. And if you go to some of these small island states that are at risk of disappearing, they will tell you it has a very clear cost. They are going to lose their country. And the increasing frequency of extreme weather events. So these costs are real, we just havent put a price on it. You know, thats been pretty clear. The science has been clear. The economics have been clear. But we had just sort of inability to move forward politically, we have the first step and we think the next steps will be coming soon. Obviously there will be a carbon. Absolutely. Are you agnostic as to how it. Were agnostic about it. The point is, we have never had this conversation across the public and private sector in a way that people are watching and holding each other accountable. This is a great change. And well talk more about it as time goes by. Countries have agreed now for five years in a row that we will have an agreement in paris. So if this is a part of it, my goodness, the great exciting thing is if we have it, everyone will be thinking how can we grow and at the same time take carbon out of the air. We know its possible. The incentives are just not there. Thats Jim Young Kim the president of the world bank. Coming up winter waries in ukraine. Will the cold months ahead give russia more power over the rest. Stay with us. Sts live. Even with the peace deal in place in ukraine, western leaders are keeping a wary eye on russia. So far russian president Vladimir Putin continues to keep the west off balance. I spoke with ian bremer. He is the president and founder of eurasia group. He says russia may feel more emboldened because in todays World Economic interests with trumping global security. The unfortunately timing of this, with the downing of mh17, yould havent had european coordination if it hadnt been for that. But then, of course, just tragedy in the netherlands and the german uproar, it bought you a few more weeks, but today who is talking about mh 17, the families, but aside from that, not that many people. And it hasnt gotten cold yet in europe. When it does russia has a history of manipulating gas. Yeah, one of the reasons the russians feel like they dont want to or need to formally invade, is because they full well understand their economic leverage goes up over the next few months, and that will squeeze the ukrainians and the europeans as well to try to bring this tsolution. I dont think we have talked about nato as much as we have in the last down couple of weeks. Nato seems strangely relevant all of a sudden. You have put forward a thesis in the past that these groups dont matter as much as they used to. Do you still hold to that . Absolutely. I think what we do not have is u. S. Global leadership. What we have is a coalition of the willing. We see this to the response on isil, and the relative nonresponse to ukraine. We have told the russians if you do this were going to get angry. We told them at the nato summit, all right. You got us, but if you touch a nato ally, then our hair will go on fire. You heard us talk about article 5 which says if a nato nation is attacked you have to treat it as if you were attacked. Yes. Do you think if russia thinks if they put a toe into a nato country that nato will put planes in the air . The question is how you define a toe. They say we are going to back these guys up. Two days later we see smoke grenades, radio jamming and the russians going across the border into estonia, and on ducting an estonian intelligence agent. The only question is why it took them two days. But the point is russia clearly didnt feel that article 5 was going to stop them. If there were tanks going across the border, i have no doubt the americans would respond. Thats very different than the plausible or implausible deny ability. The russians keep saying you are going to punish us . Were going to show you what your red lines are worth. My view would be the proper lesson to take from syria is not that next time you do a red line, make sure you stand up to it, think about whether its an appropriate red line to set. Does that mean that red lines drawn by the west in coming weeks, months and years are less relevant than they used to be . No, i dont believe that. I think there is going to be much more scrutiny of whether a red line is the real red line. And nato where america is paying 75 of the budget, a nato where you have countries like spain and italy that their economies are under massive duress, they absolutely dont want to be a part of this, i think this russian ukraine crisis highlights the divisions in nato, as much as it highlights the division between some groups like baltic and poland. All right. Compromising for Climate Change, ill tell you why todays attempts to shut down wall street were a waste of time, cleaner planet. Clear the largest Climate Change rally in history, wall street protests and a collection of world and Business Leaders to rival any we have ever seen all here in new york and all part of the solution for reversing the worst effects of Climate Change before its too late. First as always, you the people. Maybe you werent at the rally, but more than 400,000 people were, sending a clear message to leaders take action to change the future, and that may be a turning point in human history, a compromise between business and government leaders is the only way to prevent the worst effects of Climate Change from taking hold. As i speak with leaders from around the world this week, i can assure you that message is not lost on those being counted on to seize the moment and bring change. As secretary of state john kerry noted in his opening remarks, the window for preventing the worst climate damage from taking hold is extremely small. Luckily inmotivation has its own rewards. Theres gold in them there alternative energy hills. There is always money to be made looking at what is coming next. The smart money knows that environmental regulations are going to stiffen in america and around the world. Take it from rockefeller, the legendary family that made a fortune in oil. Herr message was simple, they plan to cut investment in fossil fuels because its quote part of a natural progression. Ask yourself this question, why cant the bottom line for the Green Movement be about, well, green. Thats our show for today. Im ali velshi. Thank you for joining us. [ explosion ] u. S. Missiles and air strikes hit and kill i. S. I. L. Fighters in syria for the first time. Hello from doha. Extended coverage of the strikes on i. S. I. L. In syria. The tomahawk cruise missiles have been used in the attacks. We are going to hear from a former u. S. General about the use of those. And syrias government informed that i. S. I. L. s target would be hit