Power. , the likes of which this world has never seen before. Charlie the president s remarks came soon after reports emerged north korea had developed a miniaturized nuclear warhead. The secretary of state Rex Tillerson attempted to calm fears of military confrontation with north korea following President Trumps comments. What the president is doing is sending a strong message to north korea in language that kim jong un will understand because he doesnt seem to understand diplomatic language. I think the president just wanted to be clear to the north korean regime that the u. S. Has unquestioned ability to defend itself and will defend itself and its allies. I think it was important that he deliver that message to avoid any miscalculation on their part. Charlie north korea said it is carefully examining a plan to strike the u. S. Territory of guam. In a written statement defense secretary said kim jong un should cease any consideration of actions that will lead to the end of the regime and destruction of its people. Ining me from washington, my guests, im pleased to have you both. First to washington and david. David, where are we and how close to some dramatic iscalculation . David the chance of miscalculation is real and constant. We are in the early stages of what id have to call nuclear brinksmanship. The president is directly threatening military action. H. R. Mcmaster, National Security adviser, has said the president regards the north Korean Nuclear missile threat on the United States as intolerable. I take him at his word. That means that he and secretary mat is and others are preparing military options. At the same time, in this period of brinksmanship, there is a very active diplomatic effort under way in which the United States is trying to convince china the danger of American Action is so great that china should in effect mediate negotiations reconvening if you will the sixparty talks that took place a decade ago to try to negotiate denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. It is a finesse game. To have the president use such red hot rhetoric in such a delicate moment, i think, astonished many observers, certainly me, and drew today comments much more measured from the secretary mattis and secretary tillerson trying to emotionally walk it back. I just dont think thats possible. The president uses language like that, people remember it. Charlie and you cannot walk it back. Its out there. It matches the language of kim jong un when he uses the same words, fire and walls and balls of fire raining down on you. Avid theyre almost cartoon counterimages. I think President Trump must believe that this is his secret weapon if you will, being seen as a risk taker, willing to do anything, that that is going to convince china to get involved. I think he this is the greatest test of his career, his presidency, i think may hinge on how he behaves. He seems to think that hes got it calibrated right and almost everybody else seems to disagree. Charlie he also had it miscalculated in terms of if he got, if he promised it would be less difficult on trade if they would do something on north korea, they didnt do it. And then he began to criticize them. David so the trade is part of the threat hes wielding to the chinese. You know, help us out or it will have terrible consequences. We might go to war against north korea. We might slap you with trade sanctions that would be devastating for your economy. I understand all of the pressure points. To do this all in public the way the president does and sometimes in 140character slices, that is the part thats hard to understand. These are the most delicate, subtle messages, and so much hinges on them. You just want to make sure theyre better calibrated than these seem to be. Charlie jamie, how do you see it . Jamie i think this is really concerning. The world has already factored in that the Supreme Leader of north korea is hostile. He has verbal excesses. He is unpredictable. Thats already factored in. The world has not factored in that the president of the United States will play that role. And so when President Trump says things like, we are going to bring this fire and fury greater than the world has ever seen, that means nuclear war. And so for the president of the United States to be threatening nuclear war in this kind of situation is extremely destablizing. A lot of this is drama. At the end of the day all of the countries have their interests. China is not interested in the conflict. North korea, theyd like to threaten but they know if they have an attack on the United States or any of our allies it could likely mean the end of their country. And thats not what they want. The United States knows if we have some kind of military action that, particularly seoul will be severely damaged and tens or hundreds of thousands of people will be killed. So a lot of this is drama. We have entered, injected into this very complex situation the unpredictability of the american president. I think that is what is changing this context. Charlie david, i talked to former vice chairman joint chiefs of staff this morning on cbs this morning and he suggested that the North Koreans do not want to attack the United States. What this really is, in their mind, a kind of deterrent to being attacked because they generally believe the United States would like to come in and overthrow the regime or damage it in some other way. Do you believe that . Do most of the people in the National Security apparatus believe that . David well, i think judgments differ. Whether the North Koreans are doing this for selfprotection because they fear that kim jong un doesnt want to end up like gadhafi, giving up his Nuclear Weapons and then being deposed and killed soon after, or whether there is a more hostile intent is hard to know. There is a cult of militant selfreliance is really the foundation of the modern north korea that backs all this up. I just, like jamie, i think the danger of miscalculation, misreading north korea, is so large now. I spent a lot of today talking with people about what would be involved if, as our military commanders begin to think about military options. And it is an immensely complicated problem. Its not just the population of seoul would be in effect hostage to north Korean Missile strikes, by conventional missile strikes. There are, perhaps, a million, up to a million americans there. There are a million nonamerican foreigners there. You have a situation in which the troops would be rushing north as civilians flee south. Its just the most complicated and potentially catastrophic battle space. Secretary mattis said this would be the worst kind of battle field situation weve seen in the world since the world war ii. I think when mattis says that, you better take it seriously. Charlie let me just understand this. Have the American People at the pentagon and at the white house, the leadership of the National Security community, have they ruled out the idea that they can live with north korea having Nuclear Weapons . That they can contain them . David i think containment is not the order of the day. The president has essentially said, the situation in which north korea possesses these weapons is intolerable. Now, you can argue that weve already passed that threshold. That they have by the estimate the Washington Post cited yesterday they have between 50 and 60 Nuclear Weapons already. And theyve mastered the technology for miniaturizing them and putting them on top of missiles. So, in truth, we may be locking the barn door far too late. But i think this line is i dont think its a bluff. The problem is when a president says, and has his National Security adviser say, this is not acceptable to the United States, it is intolerable, then you are almost required to back it up. That is, again, part of the problem is this is so public. Were back in this red line territory that ended up being crippling for the obama presidency. Charlie you remember obama used to say the same thing about iraq i mean iran having Nuclear Weapons. It was unacceptable. We would never stand for that. David again, there is a diplomatic track. If the United States can bring enough pressure to bear, can get enough support from china and others to open these talks, the idea is that begins next month when the General Assembly convenes. That is a an extraordinarily positive development. The moment in which china steps up to its responsibilities and we have the possibility of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Its an absolutely desirable goal for everybody. So i dont want to rule out the idea that we can get there. The problem is, this has been so loud and clumsy that i think its obstructing the reasonable diplomatic goal that the administration has underneath all the rhetoric. Charlie jamie, you wrote a piece called 12 things for trump to know about north korea. What does he need to know about north korea . And the possibility of engaging china . Jamie there are a few really big things. The first is that north korea is developing Nuclear Weapons for very rational reasons. If north korean leaders wanted to get the level of security they get by having Nuclear Weapons by building a conventional army, they would spend hundreds of times more than their entire g. D. P. It is very rational by the North Koreans because they are focused on regime survival. So because of that, the only way the North Koreans are going to give up their Nuclear Weapons is if they come to believe that the cost of keeping Nuclear Weapons is greater than the cost of giving them up. China provides up to 90 of the trade with north korea goes through china. It provides the food to the north korean military, and the oil that keeps everything running. Without china, north korea will collapse. And china is in this very precarious situation. On one hand, north korea exists because of chinas intervention in the korean war. Mao stung died in that war. The existence of north korea is a buffer against the reunification of korea potentially allied with the United States, which china would fear. On the other hand, the costs to china are great and growing of north Korean Nuclear weapons because it strengthens americas presence in the western pacific, which china doesnt want. It strengthens americas relations with japan and south korea, justifies National Missile defense, could lead to a Nuclear Arms Race in the region. It justifies Japanese Military normalization. All of these things and the Missile Defense shields. All of these things are not in chinas interest. So if the United States wants to have an irrational policy, we should continue making theas kinds of claims that we cant back up a declaring red lines that are pushed through in minutes. If you want to have a real policy we have to think strategically about what are all the levers that we have to influence china to take a tronger line on north korea. Unfortunately, undermined our pressure on china particularly but not exclusively by withdrawing from the Trans Pacific partnership and is seen as an entirely unreliable partner by our adversaries and allies alike. It is a very complicated situation, but americas behavior is making it even worse. Charlie who is of any divisions within the white house in the National Security establishment, david . David i think that there was some concern, consternation even, after the president s statement yesterday, fire and fury statement. This is something that has preoccupied senior officials for many weeks really since the beginning of the administration theyve been thinking about it. I think people werent ready for that particular verbal grenade to be thrown. Theyve been trying to walk it ack as we discussed earlier. Charlie i just would note speaking to jamies good point about the larger context of the Korean Peninsula and north koreas paranoia, he think one good thing about the diplomatic effort that tillerson, secretary tillerson has led is that it has tried to speak to chinese and north korean concerns about where this would end up. The chinese are terming the statement made last week in which he said the United States doesnt seek to overthrow the regime and north korea doesnt seek to go north of the 38th parallel, doesnt seek this or that, the chinese are calling it the four nos and they regard that as the United States acceptance of the basic chinese requirements of in terms of the future status of the peninsula. Its very interesting tillerson was willing to say that so specifically, that the chinese welcomed it, celebrated it. They think that theyve gotten basically the key u. S. Statements about the issues jamie was talking about. Diplomacy that actually moves toward real reassurance, you know, the specifics of how this would look, what the future would be like, how you deal with the issue of unification, for example, i think if this got serious, those would immediately become the key issues. And the first step is the chinese ability, chinese willingness and ability to convene a new set of talks soon because this crisis just cant bubble along, i dont think, the way it is for indefinitely. Charlie david, thank you so much for joining us this evening. David thank you, charlie. Charlie jamie, good to have you. Jamie. Thank you. Charlie well be right back. Stay with us. Charlie readership of the Washington Post and New York Times has skyrocketed since the 2016 election and primary campaign. Their resurgence comes in spite of President Trumps criticism of the media giants. In february he called the news media in a tweet the enemy of the American People. But continuously from the continuous leaks from the administration have offered a life line to newsrooms competing for inside knowledge about the goingson at the white house. Joining us from chicago is james warren the chief media writer for vanity fair magazine. His latest piece asks is the New York Times vs. The Washington Post vs. Trump the last great newspaper war . Im pleased to have him on this program. Welcome. Great to see you. James my pleasure. Charlie and coming from a lifetime of great reporting. I mean that. Why do you call this the last newspaper war . James well, because most towns youve got, youve gn from maybe three, four, five, six papers 70 or 80 years ago to one. Youve got a few major cities which may have more than one but one is clearly far more advantaged than the other. Since competition is by and arge long gone when it comes to major newspapers, we have two left in chicago, but even folks at the suntimes would know it is not a terribly fair battle and one is by far the more dominant. It is because of that that one so rarely sees equals competing as fiercely as these two papers o just about eight, nine, 10 years ago if they werent left for dead were certainly early obituaries being written by folks talking about change in the media. Here you have these two guys on equal footing with work forces that are almost at historic highs in each case, the New York Post and the New York Times. Here they are doing work as good and as prolific as they ever have. Charlie does it go back to the competition between the post under ben bradley and the New York Times under Abe Rosenthal during the watergate series . Mes you know, id say, yes, that after that confrontation you had dramatic changes in one case leading to the dramatic sale of the paper by the grant family. That sense of being equals had really dissipated by about 10 years ago and, particularly, at the post there was almost a sort of funeral sense. You had a talent drain. You had buyouts. Ultimately, you had Donald Graham painfully looking to sell amid what seemed to be a very bleak situation. Harkens back to that but is certainly not a clear continuum. Charlie you also have two great editors. James marty barren has probably gotten a little more publicity partly because of his boston globe days and the movie which won an Academy Award focusing on their investigation of the Roman Catholic church and the boston archdiocese. But the editor of the times is one of the best of his generation. Two different guys personality wise. Strikingly similar professionally. Very tough. Very high standards. And attempting to raise the bar of expectations at the same time theyre dealing with a digital revolution that has caused havoc with their Business Models. And then comes this amazing story. And they made the decision to commit significant resources to over this so far astonishing presidency. Charlie will one or the other win this or will they simply be n a long struggle . James a great question. One of the things at the end of the vanity fair piece i personally struggled with. I think it is a classic on one level newspaper war but is also one in which both could win but also both could lose. So to that extent, its not like your traditional newspaper and the ultimate factors have to do with a number of things, the coming of the president of the United States who so actively tries to devalue and delegitimize the press, i think those tie into questions of whether or not a younger generation, and ive got two kids, one 13, two boys, a and 8, and will they pay decent sum of money for a digital news product . That is relevant because the original great revenue stream of these newspapers was the print product. That is now declining to such an extent that at least privately, surely, there are discussions in both places about a world in which there is no print revenue at all. And then the question ultimately, charlie, becomes whether or not they can come up with a Digital Business model that will support these two terrific, large, talented newsrooms of reporters and editors. Charlie sometimes competition is really good, isnt it . James it is fabulous. Dean made the point, i think to me, may have been one of many comments ive seen him make, but that one of the most under analyzed youve got lots of academics and thoughtful folks ho come on the program all the time. But one of the least examined issues in American Media is the value of competition. One is seeing that play out now as opposed to most regions of the country. It doesnt just go for newspapers but also local television, local radio, too. And that lack of creative and economic tension i think has led to a lethargy on both the business and editorial sides of too many Media Outlets and, ultimately, does disservice to consumers and can probably make a case it does a disservice to democracy. Charlie two questions about donald trump, the president. Has his attack on the media damaged the media at all . James yes. I think significantly. I think this attempt by trump and steve bannon and others to devalue, even delegitimize us, has had a real impact. It has raised questions about traditional norms, tried and true norms of fairness and balance and of standards. Its brought a new term fake news into the lexicon. Its part and parcel of what one might call a friend of mine who is a Corporate Governance expert today she coined a phrase aggressions haw greck ams law of misinformation. We all know about greshams law of bad money, no pun intended, here the notion is that bad media can trump good media. And one of the most revealing pieces of research that ive seen at least in the last year was pew research which in the winter of last year, 2016, asked democrats and republicans whether they bought into the notion of the media having a watch dog role in this country. Interestingly enough it was a pretty similar response, somewhere in the mid 70s. 75 , 76 both democrats and republicans, one year later, just one year later, that percentage on the republican side has plummeted from the mid 70s into the 40s. On the democratic side, charlie, its gone up just a little bit. But yes. Make no mistake. The trump attack has had i think really negative consequences. Charlie and what has it done to truth, the idea of truth . James yeah, well, its raised questions and made it difficult for a lot of people to differentiate between, again, good media and bad media. To differentiate between the story that is, you know, the cbs news or the bloomberg or the Chicago Tribune or the Washington Post story that has an array of good, solid, onfirmed sources on one hand and the stories that dont have that. I think it has really truly mud idiosyncrasy the waters. I think it has really, truly, muddied the waters and is part of an over all politization in our culture. If that is your point of view, you know, here is a story that five or six people spent six and then ng up with you can simply pass it off as that is just the times personal view. I think there are real consequences to how folks value truth. Charlie sometimes in war people finally get tired of war. Will the country ever get tired of donald trump or will he still be such an object of fascination that readers and viewers cant get enough . James my wife and i were thinking the other night about all these Terrific Television shows that weve become last four over the or five years. And we just realized in some instances we had stopped watching. Your focus shifts. Something happens. The intensity of your interest is diminished. An hat has been seen as advantageous to the media trump bump will most afin tiffly decline. There is some anecdotal evidence now, even a little survey evidence, that it is. But i just dont think this intensity of interest can be maintained. Its like the morning tweets. You get up now and for breakfast there is a 6 15 a. M. Eastern series of harsh, the edia tweets from president. At one time a few months ago this seemed astonishing and shocking. Now one goes, hum. Hes at it again. I think that could be a problem for particularly the post and times who have done such a stellar job and committed so many resources to the cover that there would be a sort of, certain sort of repetitive finality to it all, that, again, decreases the intensity of ones feelings. Charlie heres what you write. The most troubling question is not whether the times or the post or other news outlets can continue to perform to a superior standard. It is whether trump and people like him have so degraded basic notions of fact and authority that truth no longer matters. Charlie yeah. I think one is seeing some of that. Ou know, one can look at views on the right that the post nd the times are these ideologically dogmatic media organisms. To that extent, to the extent to which he has successfully ade the post and the failing New York Times epithets it raises questions of what happens beyond that sync with what i still think are raley fundamental questions at the Business Models both places. Right now they are very different, one is a publicly traded company, the times on its amazingly fifth generation of family leadership. As we know now the post is privately held by perhaps the, one of the most brilliant entrepreneurs of his generation, jeff bezos. And the economics on their side for the moment are rather different. But there are real questions to be raised about what happens when that print product i get the New York Times delivered to my north side chicago home seven days a week. It costs me about a thousand bucks. Thats a lot of money. What happens when i say that is a little too much money. Im just as well for maybe 150 bucks, read it online. That is a dramatic loss in revenue. And then throw in, you know, the 800pound gorillas in the media universe facebook and google which are now taking somewhere north, charlie, i think, of 70 of the advertising pie. So whether youre boston or san antonio or portland, maine, or chicago, its the same story. That the significant amount of revenue that just naturally gravitated primarily to the local newspaper, also maybe to a tv station, radio station, is now going to facebook and google. And i dont think thats going to be reversed. Charlie its a great story. Vanity fair in the September Issue with Angelina Jolie on the cover. James warrens story about the New York Times and the Washington Post competition. James thank you. Charlie to get the best journalism possible. Thank you. James my pleasure. Charlie well be right back. Stay with us. Charlie the battle to retake the iraqi city of mosul was characterized by fierce, urban combat. Iraqi Coalition Forces battled block by block in a series of deadly encounters that took a tremendous toll on the city and citizens. It is estimated 400,000 people were killed during the ninemonth offensive. Joining me now is Ivor Prickett who documented the battle of moss ule as a photographer for the New York Times. Righting about the experience he says the toll of the battle from mosul on nearly every front, human lives, property, and iraqi heritage is only now starting to come into focus. As the last searches in the old city wrap up the almost unfathomable task of rebuilding city and somehow coming to grips with all that has happened here stretches out ahead into the unknown. I am pleased to have Ivor Prickett at this table for the first time. Welcome. Ivor thank you very much. A real honor to be here. Charlie thank you. Let me go back to your quote. Hat you just said. Tell me the impact of being there in terms of what youve seen, feel, worry about. Ivor yeah. I mean, people have described it as the worst urban combat since vietnam. And i dont have experience dating back that far, but it ertainly was the most brutal combative ever witnessed. Not just from a personal point of view but, you know, the effects it had on the city, on there and the itself. Even if you werent witnessing the fighting first hand what you saw was, after the fact, was pretty hard to comprehend the immense fire power being used in such a densely packed city. Charlie you have said, at least to me, it is very important not only to cover the battle but to cover the impact of the battle on the lives around the battle. Ivor exactly. Exactly. If anything, that is more what im interested in as a photographer when im working in these kind of situations is the toll that war has on the people caught up in it, both the soldiers, themselves, and the civilians. But its really, you know, the human toll of war that im drawn to as a photographer and that i try and talk about when im doing these kind of assignments. Charlie they are the most graphic photographs, too, photographs of pain, loss, suffering. Ivor yes. Charlie people being reduced to, you know, helplessness. Ivor yes. Charlie take a look at this. This is the first photograph from mosul that well show you. Tell me about this photograph. There it is right there. Children are the innocents. Ivor yes, yes. Three taken about weeks ago, four weeks ago now at this point. Toward the very end of the fight to retake mosul, which took place in the old City District on the western side of the city. And i was there embedded with some of iraqs elite Counterterrorism Special forces. Near the front line of ongoing clashes that were probably less than 200 meters, 300 meters away from where we were. The black uniforms are the Counterterrorism Forces who were trained by American Special forces, were set up after the invasion of iraq in 2003 to combat, you know, the insurgencies that started after that. And have led the fight against isis in mosul, to be honest. And so i was with them as i said near the front line in the old city and this man was brought in. I didnt see him coming across the front line myself but they brought him in to where i was with one of the commanders. And he crossed the front line holding this boy who was no more than 2 or 3 years old. And he didnt know anything about the child. His story was he just picked him up on the way as he was fleeing. Isis held territory. And, you know, the problem was at the time isis werent letting anyone flee their area. This was always their policy, eir way of operating, to literally assassinate anyone who tried to leave their area of control. So immediately the soldiers didnt really believe him that he had managed to flee the area that easily and presumed he had use as ed up child to a human shield. The fact that he didnt know anything about this boy would suggest that was true. So they took the child from him, took him away and probably interrogated him and i dont know what happened to him, but the child, you know, was then left with the soldiers and they didnt really know what to do because they had no idea who he was. He didnt speak. He was too young probably to speak but he was also traumatized from what he had been through. So they really didnt know what to do. You know, this all happened very quickly. But on the spot the commander who i was with said, you know, he was going to adopt the child and brought one of his men forward who he knew hadnt been able to have children himself with his wife and said, this is your son and gave him the boy. And this is what i witnessed. This was just after they washed him and washed his clothes and he finally relaxed. Charlie is the picture of the man holding the child . Ivor this isnt the man who received the child. The guy is actually behind him. The officer who adopted the boy is behind him. Charlie those kind of stories are also part of war, too. Ivor yes, yes. Charlie the acts of humanity. Ivor yes. This is what were, you know, we feel so privileged to see when were there as reporters, as photographers. You know, youre seeing people stripped down to their most open its really powerful. You know, its hard to not, you know, want to be there and see these things happening. Charlie what was it about you as a young boy in ireland that made you want to be a photographer . Ivor well, i came to photography quite late, probably, in my late teens when i was Still Deciding what i wanted to do with my life. You know, what i wanted to study at university. But i was always interested in art. And, you know, wanted to do something creative. But i was also interested in the outdoors and was quite adventurous so i think thats where it started. And then, yeah. I went to university and studied documentary photography. There is an amazing degree in the u. K. And wales at the university of newport. And didnt look back, really. Just found my passion. Charlie one thing led to another. Ivor yeah, yeah. I had no choice in the matter. Yeah. Charlie lets move to the second photograph. Well talk more about your life, as well. Describe this photograph to me. Ivor so, yeah. This was around the same kind of time, toward the, you know, toward the end of the fight for mosul in the old city. Charlie is this man alive . Ivor he is. He is very alive. And he is being pulled from a basement of a destroyed building moments before having surrendered himself, he is an isis fighter. An isis militant who is originally from mosul. He is 36 years old. He surrendered himself over the course of, you know, 24 hours or so of negotiating with the soldiers. And hes injured and he said he wants to, you know, he wants to surrender and hes not going to put up a fight. And i was there at the moment they pulled him out. It was one of the most surreal things ive witnessed throughout the eight or nine months i was covering mosul, because, you know, all this time the iraqi guys we were with, the iraqi forces we were with were fighting this dark force and isis are this dark force that we know very little about. And, you know, the only glimpse you ever got of them was usually after they were killed and you would move through an area and we would see their dead bodies. I never saw, until this moment, an actual selfconfessed isis fighter still alive. And so it was a very, you know, very powerful moment for everyone involved because these guys the same, very rarely found them alive. Yet he was very alive. Had been injured a couple days before. And it was strange because you know, you would expect to feel just pure hate and animosity toward charlie but . Ivor i couldnt help but feel kind of sorry for him because he was such, you know, he was so far gone. He was such a sorry sight at that point, emaciated, injured, begging for help. Charlie water. Ivor water. To be taken to a doctor. And it was a strange feeling for me, you know, while i was photographing, to feel sorry for someone who i know. Charlie committed such things. Ivor he personally probably did, as well. Charlie right. Ok. Next picture . Ivor the last couple of weeks of the fighting and for mosul in the old city was some of the most brutal and, in fact, happened toward the end, behind closed doors. There was a media black out. We werent given access. We werent allowed to embed with the troops who wed been spending months with all through the conflict. I mean, there was no official reason given, of course, its an active war zone. They can block access if they want. You have to abide by it. But it was strange, because they they announced the city had been liberated, yet all of these operations were still going on. Thats when i was there and i was trying to find out what was going on. D i think really the black out was in place because they had to do some very difficult things, you know, in those final weeks. They, i think charlie didnt want anybody to witness what they were doing . Ivor didnt want anybody to witness what they felt they had to do which was either catch or kill anyone who was still left n this area of the old city. And they did it with everything they had and then moved through and searched for anyone who was still alive and i think you were very lucky to get out of there alive in those last couple of weeks. So that picture, the bodies, was the aftermath of that kind of fight in the last week. I didnt see what happened. I dont know exactly what happened to those guys. Some of them had their hands tied behind their backs. So it appeared theyd been executed rather than killed in battle the way they were congregated in such a tight space. Up to 10 bodies. It all pointed to the fact that they had probably been executed. There were a lot of reports of that going on at the time but it was, of course, impossible to witness it happening. So, you know, this is the closest i got to really uncovering anything like that. It is still circumspect at this point. I think, you know, a lot of that was going on. Charlie ok. Next picture is maybe several months earlier. Ivor yes. In may in western mosul, the as they got closer to old city and the civilians were trying to flee an area that had just been kind of liberated and i being fought for, and witnessed them as they were trying to cross this junction. It was still in line of sight of an isis sniper and had, so earlier, like 10 minutes before i took this picture, the group had tried to cross and the sniper had fired over their heads and split the group in two, half running forward and half running back. This was the group who had run back. Who were crossing 10 minutes later after a truck had driven across the junction and created some kicked up some dust and then they were able to run under the cover of the dust. So it was a very tense moment where, you know, i was afraid, they were afraid they were going to be shot, but luckily charlie the feeling you could be dead in a moment. Ivor yeah. This is what mosul was like all the way through for civilians who were caught between the two opposing forces. Charlie it certainly wasnt easy being there when isis was in charge. Ivor no, no. Toward the end it was a very difficult situation. Charlie what happened toward the end . Ivor well, you know, the block charlie killing people who tried to escape. Ivor yeah and mosul had been under siege eight or nine months so anyone still trapped in that part of the city on the western side was under siege, you know, food had gotten very difficult. Water. Medical services. Isis were, you know, increasingly desperate. So, yeah, increasingly brutal. Charlie i know youve been asked many times. What does war like this do to you . Does it become just a job . Does it affect your psyche . Does it affect . Linger within your consciousness . Ivor i think it can become just a job and you can become very mechanical about it. And it can affect you deeply. Charlie sometimes that is the only way to survive. Ivor yes, yeah. In some ways. Both of those things are coping mechanisms. Charlie but i hear you saying something different. Ivor yeah, well, i dont im at pains to not end up like that. Not turn into a robot who doesnt have, you know, emotion deeply now, isnt ncerned by what hes seen or photographing. I never want to end up like that. I think as soon as i, you know, as i am, if i do end up like that i should probably give up my job. Because you really can only take meaningful pictures in these kind of situations if you had empathy, if you had compassion for everyone. You know, like i said, not just the people who you think are on your side. You have to be you have to be open to understanding everyones situation. How ie no matter, i mean, criminal or how ivor yeah. How little you might agree with , ethical politics behavior, you know, particularly as a photographer. Youve got to remain open. Otherwise, youre going to miss things. Youre not going to tell the whole story. Charlie speaking of that, where does the instinct come from . Is it your eye looking for something that you think is the most powerful statement of anything around you . At is it that you, as your mind sort of experiences everything that your vision enables you to see and your brain enables you to see, is there something you look for . Or does it just present itself and you know its worthy . Ivor thats a good question. I think, you know, with every story that youre covering, youve got to be informed. Youve got to be aware of what youre trying to say and what is going on at that time. And so youre looking you are looking for certain things. You are looking for certain things that will fit into that. Like i said, you cant be too set in your ways, you cant make up your mind before you go out there. Youve got to remain very open as a photographer. And just see what you see and be ready to photograph it when it happens. Charlie where is home . Ivor im based in the region, living and working in the region for eight or nine years now. Charlie so youll go back to the region . Ivor ill go back. Charlie will you be in raqqa . Ivor think that is probably the next logical step for many people like myself who have been working in the region over the last couple years and following this story of the fight against isis. Charlie from the beginning of isis. Nobody believed that isis, you know, will simply go away. Ivor no. This is the problem. I think thats the next move for a lot of us. Charlie next one . Ivor very sad. Charlie sad just looking at it. Like somebody is saying, why . Why . Ivor yeah. Really, really tough. Tough scene to witness. Charlie do you know whats happened to her . Ivor we were nearby. There was an aid distribution going on near this womans house. They had a little market, actually, that was set up on the street outside their house. Isis fired a mortar, probably targeting the aid distribution but it landed in the street outside her house where the market was and killed her son. So this is the charlie that is a cry. Ivor this is blood and her sons head scarf on the steps after hes been taken away, and she is i walked in to see whats happening and shes shes u know, not explaining. I think she was saying, my sons dead. Why did this happen . And, yeah. It was really was really angry. You know, what can i say . I had nothing there was nothing i could really say to her but she let me take her picture. Charlie i assume this is the plight of refugees in mosul . Ivor yes. This is an image of people fleeing syria crossing into iraq and the last image is people crossing the straits from turkey to greece. Charlie do you find, and pardon the question, do you find in some way either through humanity or through courage or through some of their acts that surround war beauty . Some act of courage, some act of humanity, some act of selflessness . Ivor hum. Charlie some sense of reflecting what is purest about Human Emotion . Ivor yes, yeah. You do see those moments. You know, mixed in with all of the violence and the tragedy. Charlie all the blood, all the death. Ivor thats what were probably drawn to. Is seeing people at both their worst and their best. And, you know, i really do feel utter l i privileged to be able o do that, you know, as a job. And why i keep going back to these situations and wanting to cover these situations because, yeah. You do. You see moments of beauty and people doing things that you could never imagine. Charlie acts of sheer ivor bravery, kindness. Selflessness. Charlie right. Is this a phone . Or a little internet machine . [ phone ringing ] hi mom. It makes you wonder. Shouldnt we get our phones and internet from the same company . Thats why Xfinity Mobile comes with your internet. You get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. [ laughing ] so all you pay for is data. See how much you can save. Choose by the gig or unlimited. Call or go to xfinitymobile. Com introducing Xfinity Mobile. A new kind of network designed to save you money. Betty President Trump turned up sayingt on north korea, perhaps his fire and fury message was not tough enough. Yvonne the rising uncertainty winner,uced an unlikely the yen, the winner of 30 currencies. Betty snapchat plunging an extended trade as growth fell short. Competition from facebook is taking its toll. Yvonne the rise of the detail etail