in france, i had two uncles in world war ii. my dad served in the navy on my wife's side, her brothers served in vietnam. i learned much from them. it is really the vietnam side that opened my eyes in the late 70s and early '80s because by that time the time i was old enough to absorb things as a young teenager, the family members on my side were well beyond their service. i don't remember my grandfather ever talking about world war i. i don't remember my uncle talking about world war ii until i started doing this work in the and then i would take him everywhere and give him talk. he would spend memorial day at the concert. he unfortunately passed away. this past october. as did my brother in law who was a combat that in vietnam. stayed in the army for 22 years. i learned so much from him and so much from my wife's two brothers. they've really got me thinking and so i got involved in the vietnam veterans groups in the 80s and in the chicago area supporting them. so, ten years later, i had an opportunity to audition for "forrest gump." i wanted to do that having veterans in my family and having been involved with the chicago area. so, luckily i got the part and that led me to an association with the disabled veterans as i said. that relationship goes back 20 years and then after september 11 when we were attacked, i just felt this is where i can employ my service to helping those that serve and those going out in response to those devastating attacks so i volunteered and started visiting the troops so this is decades old. it all came together four years ago when i created the foundation. now my objective here is to have this foundation to be here long after i'm gone serving and honoring the needs of the military and the veteran community. like i said, i don't think we can ever do enough for our freedom providers and this is a dangerous 21st century, and we are going to be facing a lot of challenges and the military will be called upon many times in the coming decades. >> the "washington post" recently ran a story headlined military tribute said baseball games. true honors or hollow gestures. how would you answer that question and also, talk about the change from after vietnam through today in the appreciation and recognition now received from what they once did. what has driven that change? >> i can't respond to the baseball game thing. i really don't know a lot about that. but, i think we learned some hard lessons from vietnam. and the general livingston stated in the military for 33 years. i know for my brother-in-law jack stayed for 22 years after vietnam it was a good place for him to be. but for my other brother-in-law who was a helicopter pilot, he got out after his tour, and it was very, very challenging for him to try to blend in and forget he wasn't a vietnam veteran, which at that time, so many had to do. so, it was a challenging time, and our nation treated the veterans in a shameful manner and it was a difficult time for our country and for the veterans. it was a hard time, very difficult time for the marines. but we learned i think the reason that you see over 40,000 military nonprofits today, and there are over 40,000 that have popped up in the last 14 years. and i think that one of the reasons is because people are aware of what happened in the late 60s and 70s when they were treated poorly. and like me, many of them wanted to dive in and prevent that from happening to the servicemembers in iraq and afghanistan. education as i was saying is such an incredible part of letting young people to understand why it's important to support this .1% of the population that serves in the military. it's a very small percentage of over 300 million people serving in uniform defending the country. and a lot of people if they don't have a personal connection like i do to somebody that is serving in the military, there's a disconnect. there is a serious disconnect between the average american citizen, and in its military. keeping the awareness up for the education of that's why i'm supporting the foundation museum. the museum project will act as a beacon of education for both service and selflessness and character is all about. we want our young people to understand something greater than themselves. that doesn't mean it always applies to war and the war fighter. the legacy of the metal of honor is about more than this. that is why the museum project and why i'm supporting and why i encourage you to go to the museum to learn more about it. we have a national world war ii museum. honoring service of our veterans. educating our young people as to what happened when freedom and tyranny were the only choices in the world grid i think this museum will be a great education people. >> we just have a few minutes left and when i ask you a question or two about hollywood i just have some housekeeping. the national press club is the leading organization journalist and we fight for a free rest worldwide. for more information visit the website at press.org. to donate to our nonprofit to two,t, visit the institute. the archbishop will discuss the hope francis -- pope francis's -- on june 20 and for the next two saturdays after that, the journalism institute will hold a series of training sessions on cybersecurity and on july 8 the washington capitals coach will address the national press club luncheon. i would now like to present our traditional national press club mug. [applause] >> those of course are very special and valuable gifts and you now have four of them so you are working on the set. in the time remaining i wanted to ask you mentioned you could use your celebrity status to promote causes and of course you keep working on that end of your career as well and you have a new series of coming. could you tell us a little bit about this new tv series that you are beginning? >> oh yeah, the day job. well csi new york went off the , air in february of 2013. so, since then, i have been pouring all of my energy into the military and the veteran support foundation, traveling around the country raising awareness and that sort of thing but i was approached by cbs about doing a pilot for a spinoff of the show criminal minds. so we shot the pilot and it was an episode of the series where they introduced a team of the international division and the fbi and the behavioral analysis unit and they picked us up so i'm going back to work july 27 we start shooting in california and we will explore the international division as i said so every week we will be in a different country chasing bad guys and trying to protect americans. [applause] >> and in preparation for this role you are doing some work out here as well. gary: yes. tomorrow i am going to the fbi and i will be getting some briefings, meeting with people doing research for the part and this will be my first time there. i am very much looking forward to it. one of the technical advisors has taken me there. he is an fbi guy who moonlights as a writer. >> please join me and giving a round of applause to the speaker today. [applause] >> i would also like to thank the staff including the journalism institute and broadcast center for organizing today's event. if you would like a copy of today's program or to learn more about the national press club, you can go to the website press.org and again i want to thank all of the service organizations that have joined us today for this practice and it's made it extra special. we at the national press club are grateful for all of the work that you do. thank you so much. we are adjourned. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its captio >> on "newsmakers," our guess is matt schlapp and toast by the presidential race including the role of moderate and the tea party and his thoughts on the field of republican. watch the interview on sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. here on c-span. >> three men and a womn to be part of the puerto rican gang. they opened fire on the house of representatives. five congressmen were hit. one of tennessee, one of alabama, one of maryland, and one of michigan or seriously injured. the god wilderness and their couples that -- gun wielders and their couples miss -- accomplices. >> the most violent act that occurred in the chamber. debates right after that. we cannot let this happen again. we have to wall the visitor's gallery with a bulletproof gas -- glass so it can never happen again. the members talked about it. they said, it is a bad idea. as the people's house and the people cannot be walled off from the floor. the capital building is a symbol and makes it a target. they mentioned the british burned the building and it was a bombing during world war i by a professor who was opposed to americans helping the allies. the shooting in 1954. what happened in 1971, a bomb setup opposed to the vietnam war. another bombing and the senate done by a group of and to capitol police shot and killed. there been those instances over time. the capital has remained a remarkably open building. >> senate emeritus historian on the history of the house and senate. its leaders, characters and permanent events sunday night on c-span's "q&a." >> house and senate leaders held a old medal ceremony earlier this year honoring the doolittle tokyo raiders for their service pretty the 80 man volunteer unit conducted the first air raids on japan. four months after the attack on pearl harbor. two of those volunteers are still alive today. you were here for one of them in a brief interview. this is 50 minutes. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the majority leader of the u.s. senate, mitch mcconnell. [applause] senator mcconnell: good afternoon everyone and welcome. normally, speaker boehner would preside over the ceremony. sadly, his mother passed away. he asked me to send his deepest regrets he is not here. pursuant to hr 1209, we will present a congressional gold-medal to the doolittle tokyo raiders. it is being presented to the raiders for their outstanding heroism during world war ii. after today's ceremony, it will make its way to the museum of the air force in dayton, ohio, where it will be permanently placed. the director of the museum is with us to receive the medal. thank him for being here. [applause] senator mcconnell: we thank you all for being here as well. i hope you enjoy today's remarks. thank you. >> ladies and gentlemen stand for the presentation of the colors by the armed forces colorguard. the singing of the national anthem and the retiring of the colors. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen please stay standing. >> let us pray. internal lord, god, the source of our hope and dreams, we think you for the doolittle tokyo raiders. a group of 80 patriots who bathe himself the country loved. we are grateful for the morale boost their exploits provided. a beleaguered nation, infusing america with the spirit of hope when it needed it most. lord, we ask your special blessings on the two surviving raiders, the retired with a net kernel -- lieutenant colonel and the staff sergeant. bless also and comfort the families of a third doolittle raider, the retired lieutenant colonel, who recently died. made inspiration we see from this congressional gold medal ceremony that celebrates the humble heroism of the doolittle tokyo raiders, motivate us to live more laudable lives. we pray in your great name, amen. >> amen. >> please be seated. ladies and gentlemen, u.s. representative from the 22nd district of texas. [applause] >> good afternoon here it i want to thank leaders of both parties for making this long overdue day happy. a special thanks on these endeavors. in my navy career, i have landed and taken off on military carriers many times. i want y'all to know what these heroes did in 1942. that was the first day they dropped off a carrier deck and saw the rough waters come up to meet them. they spotted the hornets 12 hours before the intended launch. america could not lose the hornets. the men were given a choice. they knew it would go down in a many -- in enemy territory. all 15 bombers took off. that still had never been touched by a foreign power in 1000 years. those 54 bombers did little damage to the japanese navies and armies. but the fear put into the japanese admirals made them want to have a fight with our navy in the pacific. we won that fight two months later at midway. after midway, america was going to win world war ii. that did not happen without the doolittle raid. this gold medal ensures we remember the heroes who saved our world from tyranny. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, u.s. state senator from ohio. [applause] >> thank you to legislative leaders. thank you. this has been a long time coming. four years since the doolittle tokyo raiders came to my office seeking recognition the raiders never fought for themselves. go back to spring 1942. americans were still reeling from pearl harbor. we had lost battle after battle in the pacific. too many americans allied forces seem to be in retreat across the globe. across the ocean in japan's arrogance, it reached new heights. japanese generals proclaimed that no one could launch an air attack against japan. japan had never lost a war in its history. in that spring, 80 americans and barked on a mission many thought in possible. the airman knew the dangers. they knew many of them would not come home. the reader showed america and the world that yes, japan could be invaded. yes, the u.s. and allied forces could win the war. after the war when they returned, when airmen returned, i talked little of their service. they went back to their lives in ohio, texas, illinois, louisiana , california. they blended into american life of the 1940's. when asked about the raid by the new york times, lieutenant colonel saylor said it was just a mission we did in the war. we did what we had to do. like my dad, the doolittle raiders came from a generation that spoke proudly of service to our country but rarely drew attention to their own courage. they sought no recognition but how they earned it. that is why i am honored play a role in the awarding of this metal today. to the raiders still living, also to the 78 no longer with us, thank you for what you did for this country. because of you we live in a free and grateful nation. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the united states army band. ♪ ♪ ♪ [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the majority whip of the united states house of representatives. the honorable steve scalise. [applause] >> good afternoon. proud to be here with you today, especially as someone who represents part of the city of new orleans where we host the national world war ii museum will be pay tribute to those brave men and women of the greatest generation that defended our freedoms during world war ii. almost 73 years ago today 80 brave airmen stepped forward and volunteer for a mission that they knew very well may be their last. these 80 men, the doolittle tokyo raiders, believed our freedoms and the defense of our nation, our american way of life, were worth risking their lives for. they believed that their selfless participation in this mission was simply, as they put it, doing their job. after japan's attack on pearl harbor, the american war effort was diminished. telegraphed a message to the rest of the world that america will not back down. that america will fight and win. today, as members of the house and senate leadership, but more importantly as americans, it is our privilege in recognition of bravery, and great service to our nation. god bless america. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the democratic leader of the united states house of representatives, the honorable nancy pelosi. >> senator brown, representative olson, thank you for giving us this opportunity. it is an honor to be here with all of you. lieutenant general john hudson thank you for your leadership. looking at the program, at all of these names listed here, what a heavy list of honor and courage. how wonderful that we are honoring them today. it is fitting that we come together today in emancipation hall. today marks the 100 and 50th best 150th anniversary of the death of president abraham lincoln. as we gather to pay tribute of the impossible bravery of the doolittle raiders, president lincoln's words ring true as ever. the world will little remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did. [applause] >> i take special pride because it was less than four months after pearl harbor come on april 2, 1942, that the u.s. won its steam out under san francisco bridge. planes never intended to take off from an aircraft carrier planes that could never land back on the carrier, on the hornet, once launched. their crews volunteered with a new nothing more than the mission's importance would be matched by its perils. the training had been compressed into a few months. at every chance to back out these 80 men kept stepping forward to see the raid through. hundreds of miles short of the launch point, 80 planes vaulted into the sky, racing toward the enemy homeland, placing their hopes in a successful crash landing on the chinese coast. reeling from the surprise attack on pearl harbor, our nation needed a reason to believe. the doolittle raid was just that. in a letter to captain ted lawson after the war, the commanding officer of the uss hornet during the mission road to americans currently facing reverses on every front it brought electric shock of hope. as general jimmy doolittle wrote years later, our country faced with the greatest adversity we had ever experienced have fought back. some were killed or executed. some were grievously wounded. some faced years of captivity. the doolittle raiders had pierced the invulnerability of the axis war machine. that given america a reason to believe victory was within reach. for all of those men who made it through the raid in one piece, the world was only the beginning. with many more dangerous missions ahead, more raiders would give their lives before the final victory was one. ever into danger it was. i want to say something to the families of our members of the air force. as i travel europe and north africa, we always visit the american cemeteries there. what is always remarkable to me is as we look across at all of the tombstones and how proud and brave they were and how proud we are of everyone, we have to usually go to the wall to see the names of those who were in the air force because that is the way it is. no remains. i know that is another gift that the families give us, not just the courage of their family members but to have -- not being able to come home but nonetheless to be recognized for evermore on those walls. it is not any surprise that when we go to those walls we escorted usually by the air force. everyone is in tears because of the freedom people have given us with their lives. with their entire being. i thank you, families of the air force for that history. it is not any surprise that when we go to those walls we escorted usually by the air force. everyone is in tears because of the freedom people have given us with their lives. with their entire being. i thank you, families of the air force for that history. those gifts to our country. [applause] >> after the raid, these men believed they had a job to do and they meant see it through, no matter how long or how hard it would be. seven decades later, we are still awed by the audacity of the raid and the men whose grit and bravery made it possible. your humbled by their humility. it will never dim the daring of their deeds. for their awakening of the indomitable spirit of our nation in the darkest hour of our need, we are proud to honor the doolittle raiders with the congressional gold medal, with thanks and respect. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the assistant democrat leader of the united states senate. the honorable dick durbin. >> good afternoon. think back for a moment. where were you on september 11 2001? we all have that memory. something you will never forget. 60 years before, there was another day just like that in american history. december 7, 1941. a message which electrified america, we had been attacked pearl harbor. brave men and women had died. war was declared just hours after in the hall of the u.s. house of representatives when president franklin delano roosevelt came and describes that day that would live in infamy. it was his job as commander-in-chief to rally the american people and our forces to win that war. he summoned winston churchill to come across the ocean in need in the white house. two weeks after pearl harbor franklin roosevelt sent the order to the military, attack japan. he knew he had to make the point that they were not invulnerable and he had to prove to the american people that we had the will to stand up and fight back against the odds. lucky for him, and lucky for america, 80 brave americans stepped forward to volunteer for this mission. some might have described it as a suicide mission. we are going to fly bombers off a carrier? we're not going to have fighter escorts? were going to have to give up our armament because of these 500 pound bombs we have to transport such a great distance? we're going to find ourselves out in the ocean. as congressman olson said earlier, spotted by the japanese. where going to have to ditch these planes after it's over. perhaps in russia, perhaps in the ocean. these 80 men stepped forward and said, we will do it. nelson mandela was asked about courage. he said courage is not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. these 80 men, the doolittle raiders, triumphed over fear. they went out on that mission and amazingly, 69 of them returned. i would like to recognize major griffith paul williams. a reader from my home state of illinois. major williams copilot did the 1525 bomber. a flight that almost did not happen. one of the engine the plane was not working. the cannot get it running. the told him that if they could not get that plane up and running they would have to push it overboard when the other bombers launched. that is when lieutenant colonel edward saylor, the engineer said we are in this mission to stay. he to the engine off the aircraft and rebuild it and put it on the plane. when they asked him, do you think is going to work, he said a line we can all relate to. there are not any parts left over. [laughter] >> the engine worked. the mission was successful. unfortunately, edward saylor passed away a few months ago. for he died, they asked him how it felt to be a hero and he said, there is no way you can call yourself a hero. as for someone else to say. today, the congress of the united states of america is calling edward saylor and the other 79 doolittle raiders just that, heroes. on behalf of freedom loving people in the united states and everywhere we say thank you for your service and a job well done. [applause] >> ladies and gentle man, the majority leader of the united states senate, the honorable mitch mcconnell. [applause] >> for decades, a group of survivors gathered annually to remember a mission that never should have succeeded. from silver chalices before them the aroma of strong elixir. in chairs beside them, reminders of what they worked on together to accomplish. in empty spaces near them, reminders of what they had since lost. at the end of each ceremony, rollcall. heroes saluted, fallen comrades remembered. with swills brandy, a toast to a fateful mission that helped change the course of war and with it, history. the success of their raid launched april 18, 1942 did seem improbable. jimmy doolittle's volunteers flew anyway. there were five extra crews and everyone wanted to go. one raider remembered one individual offered $1000 to anyone willing to give up their seat but there were no takers. 80 raiders took off that morning. just over a year ago at the u.s. museum of the national air force, three surviving raiders met to commemorate him. they were not alone. as their motorcade rolled forward, grateful crowds came into view. as their eyes turned upward, b-25's soared overhead. the gratitude of an entire nation for each of them to see. a few weeks later, when the raiders met to clink goblets one last time, it would've been easy to think of so many empty cups with sorrow, but i hope they remembered all that have been gained instead. morale for a nation, achieved through their bravery. freedom for millions, secured with victories of free people. bonds of enduring friendship strong as the brandy used to toast it. there is something else. the gratitude of a nation that has not forgotten. a nation that will not forget. lieutenant colonel dick cole and staff sergeant david thatcher saw it. these survivors will see another reminder when they present the metal we have bestowed today to the very same museum. today, we hope these veterans and the family of every raider veteran will see it here too. let me invite general hudson to join us on the stage. come on up. it is our high privilege on behalf of the american people to present the congressional gold medal, the highest civilian honor congress can bestow, in honor of the doolittle tokyo raiders. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the director of the national museum of the united states air force lieutenant general john hudson. united states air force, retired. [applause] >> leader mcconnell, leader pelosi, senator brown and representative olson, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the great honor today of accepting the congressional gold medal on behalf of our doolittle raiders in having the chance to say a few words on their behalf. the raiders led by jimmy doolittle were 100% volunteers. almost none of them knew the details of the mission. the two surviving raiders include attendance here today. they wanted to help out with the nation's war effort. they volunteered for what was described as a difficult and dangerous mission. the raiders will tell you they were within our army air forces and it was there teammates, the crew chiefs, weapon years, feel specials and more who help them train and prepare the airplanes for the missions. their innovation and ingenuity continues today in our nation's air force as it did in our army air forces. the raiders will tell you our nation's navy transported the raiders to launch point with a task force that included the uss hornet which held the b-25 bombers. that it was their navy teammates who helped them train and prepare for the mission. the raiders with tell you that north american aviation designed and built a robust platform that was capable of taking off from an aircraft carrier and delivering the blow which helped turn the strategic tide of world war ii. the doolittle raiders serve as a model of excellence. the joint team which accomplished that mission is an inspiration for all of today's military and all of america. the raiders with the support of our army navy and american industry, achieved the unimaginable. consistent with the wishes of our doolittle raiders, the national museum of the united states air force, located at patterson air force base at dayton, ohio placed their congressional medal on permanent display in our world war ii gallery. containing the 80 silver goblets, one for each raider donated by the city of tucson to the raiders in 1959. the medal will go on display this weekend. helping to form and educate the american public about the doolittle raid and our military heritage and secondly to inspire and motivate current and future generations of american youth toward greatness as exemplified by the raiders. more than one million visitors annually will visit the medal. in just a minute, you will hear a prerecorded statement from lieutenant colonel retired dick cole. jimmy doolittle's copilot on the mission at took place 70 years ago this coming saturday, 18 april. the first aircraft off the flight deck of the uss hornet. they had the shortest amount of takeoff space available. they did it and paved the path forward. dick cole turns 100 years young this september. he and sergeant david thatcher are the two surviving raiders of the 80 through the mission on 18 april, 1942. you can be assured that the doolittle raiders, those two that survived are extremely grateful for this prestigious honor the stowed upon the raiders by our united states congress. thank you very much. let's play the video. [video clip] >> my name is lieutenant richard cole. along with sergeant david m thatcher, we are today the only surviving doolittle tokyo raiders. we want to thank congress for an acting and presenting the congressional gold medal to the tokyo raiders this day, april the 15th, 2015. on behalf of our 78 fallen raiders, who we proudly served with on this famous raid, we are honored to accept this prestigious and most appreciated award. we have asked the museum to display our congressional gold medal in the doolittle exhibit as part of our history along with 80 silver goblets for all visitors to enjoy. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please be seated. ladies and gentlemen, the united states army band and chorus. ♪ ♪ ♪ [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the chaplain of the united states house of representatives, the reverend patrick conroy. >> let us pray. god of power, god of justice, it is because of the weakness and failures of our human nature that the terror of war so often plagues the human family. yet, it is during wartime that they greatness of human spirit is demonstrated. in 1942, our nation was reeling from a preemptive strike by japan upon the pacific fleet. japan no doubt feared what the united states might use that fleet for. it was a shocking blow. the 80 men who volunteered for virtual suicide mission did not strike a similar blow upon japan. little damage was done to the military force of that nation. the success of their mission rather was in the tremendous message of hope that we americans could respond to the dangers of powerful enemies, despite impossible odds. today, only two raiders remain. lieutenant colonel dick cole and staff sergeant david thatcher. may the breath of god uphold their noble stories. may it carry to other generations and even to other nations a message to inspire citizens everywhere to believe and act upon the truth, that there is no greater aspiration than to be willing to lay down one's life to save others. may those who made the ultimate sacrifice that day and thereafter rest in peace, along with those companions who joined them in eternity in the years since. bless all women and men in military service, their families and all those who put themselves in harms way for the safety of others. god bless america and grant us peace both in the present and with you forever, amen. >> ladies and gentlemen, remain at your seats for the departure of the official party. ♪ ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> tomorrow night the new york times and the executive editor talk about the times future in the digital age. about half of their subscriptions are solely digital content, a major shift for an organization that began offering digital-only subscriptions just four years ago. >> we are in a mode now of testing, learning, and assessing. if you don't have the courage to try new things and grow, you are going to fail. that is just the reality of the world we are in. and so i actually applaud what dean and his colleagues did, which is to increasingly say let's put the story out when the story is ready. there are some people will read it then, and other people will read it later in print, but it is not about the device. when i say device, i mean it as well. as you so eloquently stated some decades ago, we must be platform agnostic. go to where the people are. increasingly, that means mobile. >> let's put over here the debate over versus digital. journalism is better today than it ever was. there are many more tools. i grew up in new orleans reading afternoon newspapers, and i only had access to one newspaper. the same kid who grows up in new orleans in a working class family now has access to as many newspapers he can push a button for. he has access to video and access to the whole world. we should not get so caught up in the debate over form, and wish and i get so caught up in some of the romantic aspects of journalism, which, believe me, i grew up in, and this is better and it will be better tenures from now. >> the future of "the new york times" in the digital age with the executive editor. tomorrow night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> c-span gives the best access to congress. i've coverage of the u.s. house, congressional hearings, news conferences. bringing events that shape public policy. every morning, "washington journal" is live, including your comments by phone, facebook, and twitter. c-span, created by america's cable companies and brought to you as a service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> up next from "washington journal," national security threats and what the next global conflict could look like. with the supreme court coming to an end, a discussion on some of the cases in the rulings that were handed down by the justices. and cuba's public health ministers talks about efforts to prevent the spread of hiv and other diseases. host: joining us now, peter singer. thank you for joining us. is it fiction or nonfiction? guest: it is a snapshot, but it is based off of old research. is based off of old research. so it is a novel book, but with 400 and notes -- end notes documenting how every single trend, even some of the statements in it, are drawn from the real world. host: and this is basically between conflict between the u.s. and china? guest: it looks that what might happens if this bring cold war -- brewing cold war happened. what would happen if it ever turned hot. it is a lot like clancy's "red storm rising." not a single character, but rather the different settings with a conflict might play out. so, what with the work look like on land, in the air, in c -- sea. if there was a conflict, it would also play out in certain locales never thought about before. in cyberspace host: and space. host:the pentagon -- in cyberspace. host: -- guest: it allows you to play with the what if's and the what-ifs might be the conflict of if the conflict started, how might it play out? what-ifs -- where do geopolitics take us? china, for example, has built more warships and 2012 than any other nation. 201320 14, 2015. so what does it look like in the 20 20's deco you might be surprised -- 2020's? it is resonating and it has been exciting. we have gotten support from science fiction fans, thriller fans, but i have also been able to meet with the 600 naval officers to go into the pentagon and have these private sessions about, you know, what are some of the lessons you have drawn? host: how do you get access to the pentagon? guest: i work at a think tank in d.c. called new america. and i also do consulting for the pentagon on various issues. that actually reflects the research in the book. as an example, we met with the various real-world people who might fight in such a conflict from the unexpected folks like u.s. navy destroyer captains fighter pilot, to chinese generals to the unexpected. going back excellent to the last guest, what might some prominent billionaires do if there was a war? silicon valley, anonymous hackers. so you have those contact point, but also, earlier versions of the book circulated among some senior leaders. so they reached out and invited me to come meet. and then there is a little bit of word-of-mouth. it has been utterly exciting. host: if you want to ask our guest questions about his book, his findings, the potential war with u.s. and china, you can call the phone lines. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 745-8002 for independents. one of the things i read in one of the interviews you did, you said this, for the "american conservative," after the berlin wall falls, and i'd be a between great estates is off the table it is not even thought of. conflict doesn't go away, but it is not about the big boys anymore. but now the risks of a big war between the great states is back on the table. guest: when we think about the risk of the great powers going to war, the two world wars that happened that killed tens of millions of people, the cold war that fortunately never turned hot, but the fear of it shipped everything from geopolitics to sports. the berlin wall falls and reaffirm like this is in our historic rearview mirror. or maybe in science fiction, it is way out in the future. and you can see this and everything from our politics, particularly after 9/11 and in iraq and afghanistan, where conflict doesn't go away. there is no -- unfortunately, peace does not break out in the world. and what was fascinating is a couple of years ago, even the "new york times" wrote that war had gone out of style. basically that we don't have to concern ourselves with these big wars anymore. historically, we are wrong when we make those kind of predictions. we are almost on the 100 year anniversary of everybody proclaiming that when world war i happened. we see the tensions were the u.s. and china are engaged in an arms race. both of them has released strategies that basically identify the other as a major challenge. the released just yesterday said for the first time in decades the risk of war is low but in his own words, growing. to nato and russia, russia has identified nato as its number one national security threat. their phrasing, not mine. jump to the fiction side, tom clancy was writing books like "red storm rising." it is not inevitable, although notably chinese regime newspapers a couple weeks ago used the phrasing, war is inevitable. their quote, not mine, if the u.s. doesn't change the policies in the pacific. something that was once unthinkable is thinkable again. so in the book, or retire and do is play with that. how would it play out? what would be the issues? and hopefully along the way we can do something called a useful fiction. by envisioning this, we can identify some of the errors. and also maybe avoid the scenario from happening. to your earlier question, i think that is why military folks are particularly resonating that it is not just realistic because they helped with, you know, helpdesk it right, but also realistic and sort of the issues that they see with certain weapons or technologies right now. host: there is a story today, talking about the island in the china to that they are building a strips on it. guest: originally, they said it was for things like, you know, they were going to put lights on them so people could avoid if they were sailing. lo and behold, they started sprouting everything from airfields to missile batteries. yeah. host: -- and issues about ownership and flexing muscles and things we saw over the last years or so. guest: and it points to how our vision -- and this relates back to the fiction in the space, and when i say fiction, it also applies to the pentagon said where we helped organize wargames for what might be the technologies and scenarios of the future. but the point is that we imagined -- often we talk about china today in a way that doesn't reflect today's reality. communist china. well, communist china, so to speak, produced more than 300 billionaires in the last few years. communist china, we think of it as having a certain defense strategy that it is had for the last roughly 50 years. it now has an outward looking strategy. thinner defense stack them and talked about how they need to defend themselves, not just within their borders, but also again, and their own words everywhere from the south china sea to the arctic to outer space. to the chinese stock market, rights now, is seeing this back and forth of prices going up for defense stocks, that is not how we talk about communist china. let alone, what does this look like in the 2020 past? -- 2020's? the war college has had china is on pace to have more than 100 warships than us by the end of 2020. not just quantity size, but they will match us in quality. what does that world look like? what does a war look like? and then, of course, china's editors are very different. successful, global looking, and highly confident that just in terms of its military, but also in terms of the nationalism. a scary thing for me is that -- relating back to your question about the child -- south tennessee is that when we see pulling in china, basically finds majorities digging in, locking our position is the way to go. or another poll, 74% of chinese said they would win a war with the u.s. that attitude -- look, we have similar kinds of attitudes here. when both sides think it war would work out for them, it makes a war more likely. host: the book is "ghost fleet: a novel of the next world war." here to talk about the book, his findings, and the ideas behind it, especially the plant in real situations -- play out in real situations. rick in ohio, you are up first. caller: thanks for taking my call. my second book, i did the same thing you did. i created a character and then -- and reality to fiction. and i took the exact opposite view of what you are taking. we are the aggressors. we are the modern-day not to germany. and what you have to realize is that the last five wars in this country -- you have the largest military base in the world in texas. they control clear channel radio. guest: i to get the color isn't from texas. [laughter] the issue here, first on the character side. for us, we were meeting with the folks. when you meet with folks, the reason is to add flash in terms of getting it -- flesh in terms of getting it right. you meet with a jet fighter pilot. one of the scenes in the book was what would a dogfight look like? we haven't seen two great powers fight in the air. so what would that be like now with fifth-generation jets? but also unmanned systems. so we met with, for example, the u.s. navy and u.s. air force fighter pilot. and the scene reflects everything from what moves they might pull if they had a chinese j-31 on their tail, but also how might they feel about the fact that there might be a drone flying alongside them in the air ? that sense is reflected in the book. that sounds excite fiction. well, that is the u.s. air force's plan for the future. and, oh, by the way, it is also china's. so when you are meeting with the people, you are trying to get the issues of the facts -- the facts right, but also their emotions. to the issue -- i am not even going to go into the comparison of, you know, we had, what was it called, not to germany -- nazi germany, i am not going to go into that. when i think about how a war might start, first of all people think it is not real. they might be accidental. two warships scraping paint over some brief that no one can find on a nautical chart. or they can be deliberate. a deliberate choice to be order geopolitics. other times, it might be a mix in the middle where you're in this situation where you think will never happen -- go back to spring of 1914 before the archduke ferdinand is killed and everybody thinks piece is going to last for 100 years. then you have this crisis. within a month, there is a logic of all the great powers thinking that they should join a war. one of the fun things a fiction is i am not going to spoil the plot of how the war starts other than to say that in the real world, wars start in many numbers of ways. and even in ways that people believe is unthinkable. and then there is a logic to it later on. host: from virginia, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to ask peter about another avenue to this future conflict that he talks about. this involves the proliferation of advanced dual use technologies and nano science, euro science, -- neuoro science might morph into new wmds. and might equip states that don't have these technologies or the ability to be aggressive, and therefore, leave room for miscalculation and accidental war as well as deliberate offenses. guest: great question. thank your for it. one of the things in the book as it is looking at the scenario, the plots, so to speak, of a great power war between the u.s. and china. but that is also a way of just illustrating all of these use -- huge changes that loom for us in technology and whatnot. even if that war, which hopefully will never come to pass, even if it doesn't mean that the technologies won't play out in other scenarios, one of the things we did as when around and you might say cataloging, gathering all of the different technologies that are out there. one of the things -- we had a role, nothing powered by teenage wizard hormones or packs. everything has to be real. it has to be at r&d stage. so we are putting everything -- we have a lot of fun going to consumer electronic tradeshows and seeing what was being displayed their that might be used, might be commonplace five or so years from now. the technologies, some of them are very explicitly military in nature. an example would be electromagnetic rail gun, which is, for 800 years, guns have shot using gunpowder, using chemistry. we know how the system that is actually being tested out just up if you miles from here. it uses magnetism to sling a bullet. and it allows the bullet to travel over 100 miles. it is this amazing change, huge change. then you have other technologies that, as you put it, they are dual use. a good illustration of this would be what we see looming with the first generation of google glass. it was cool, people -- some people liked it, but the point is, that technology, that model we are going to see the 2.0, 3.0 version of it. we are seeing it applied in everything for people using it for skydiving to firefighters using them to israel's defense forces recently worked on one, the infantry. it will also change. it is not just going to be looking through glasses into something projected on the screen it is going to be projected back in your eyeballs. that changes the way you experience the technology, the way you see the world. it affects your perceptions. it is a cool mix of a lot of things at play out of science fiction. it is coming both to war and to all of us. another good illustration of this is something that is going to be dual use in 3-d printing technologies, which is remarkable in lots of different ways. and it may be a solution both to our dependence on foreign manufacturers. one of the riddles in the real world of how this is different from the past cold war, we are not dependent -- in the last cold war, we didn't depend on the soviet union for spare parts. so what is the workaround that? 3-d printing is interesting in both its printing terms, but also its military terms. just a couple weeks ago, a couple of u.s. navy folks on a destroyer 3-d printed their own joan. that is 20 -- drone. that is 2015. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. one message of how wars start that you didn't mention is false flag attack. which happen and have been around for so long. guest: don't spoiler alert. caller: what is that? guest: i said don't be a spoiler alert. go ahead. i am just having fun. you've had it exactly right. there are a lot of different ways. go on. caller: ok. well there is a correlation here, unfortunately. you have a false flag attack and then in 2012, there was the smith act. because every didn't, which kept our government at bay, as far as using propaganda on the soil of the united states. so i would like to bring up a stunning fact here, and that's the relationship between the passing of this new act in 2012 and the number of mass shootings that happened. let's talk a little bit about soft power and how we are using it to basically sway public opinion. thank you. host: we will let our guest response. guest: there are a couple things. one is the issue of propaganda and communications. both private communications, we would describe it as a strategic cap -- communications. one of the things playing out in the real world as the main ablation -- is the manipulation of that. russia has very skillfully deployed this in ukraine. but it is a new style where you are not just controlling certain channels of communication, but you are also, you know, they've got what they call higher control armies. people that go out on websites and cometary, making statements on twitter and the like. it is interesting. there are two different ways to play with this in the book that, again, reflects reality. one is i am going to spoiler alert my own self year. one is of an opening scene of a young man that is essentially takes out his cell phone and tapes what is one of the first the opening battle of the war. and he pops it up online. and it means that the war is playing out online before the president even those we are at war. that sound science fiction. that sounds crazy. but then the real world, made it to get bin laden, the most secretive special operations raid in the last 20 years, you know we have the picture of the president in the situation room watching the video coming back from the navy seals. the reality is it is simultaneous to this, a pakistani i.t. consultant live tweeted the raid. so everyone else in the world could watch the progress of the red simultaneous to the secret. or to go back to the ukraine example, you could track online people talking about russia's moves in crimea before even nato had responded. so that is the world we are in. this observation and the like. but then you have the flipside of it, which is what happens when we truly have a war that and -- involves a broader populace, not just the military. what would that mobilization look like? and not just how people would be involved on the economic side, but also what would be the ways we try to motivate them? one of the fun things we did for the book was tied to explore what with the propaganda look like of this. and we worked with a group of artists and advertisers to create a series of essentially world war iii propaganda posters that echo back to the world war ii style propaganda. you can find them online. on the website. but what is interesting to me is not just the what if also the art created by them is like all art, a statement on certain trends. the posters, for example, you go back to world war ii and it was things like loose lips sink ships. don't talk about upcoming navy ships. well, now, it is what things -- what people might say online. one of the posters, for example plays with the idea of having conversations indoors so the drones can't monitor it. it is playing with a what if, but it wasn't -- host: peter singer is our guest. author of "ghost fleet," or to talk about not only the findings in his book, the future threats against china or from china, and taking your questions on it. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 745-8002 for independents. after trade with the pacific nations, we hear about the obama administration's tilt to asia. is this all about hannah, these efforts? guest: i think there is a recognition that the pacific has become crucial not only to our economy and trade. and what you are seeing in this back-and-forth is reflecting essentially america trying to lock in a certain style of trading order before they see the trend lines changing. you can also see this with the creation of certain banks and the like. underneath it is geopolitics where the story of asia, at least compared to other regions in the last 40 years, like the middle east, it has been a positive story. you have not seen major wars break out. you have seen an enormous amount of economic growth. that, though, has created a trend that might turn dark. the rise of china is one of the most positive powerful stories of human progress in the last 20 years. you have not thousand, not millions, but hundreds of millions of people being lifted out of poverty. but it also potentially sets the stage for an arms race. again, china is not the only one. most of its neighbors are. so the worries are that asia might be, you no caps on not just a new economic success story, but might also be a new battleground. and that, again, raises the kind of questions that we in the u.s., whether it is in the white house or the pentagon or the congress, really haven't dealt with for a couple of decades. we haven't exercised the sort of strategic thinking muscles on how to think about a competition on multiple levels? how to think about a competition that is not about today's poll but something that plays out over years? how to think about a competition of what we want to go to war? whether it be iraq or syria or whatever, it is about how to keep your war from breaking out? and these are challenges that require a sophistication, but also in attention to detail. and i think what played out recently with the opm is a great illustration of how not to approach this. host: the hacking of opm. guest: we had an agency that holds information that is critical. sensitive information, not just about people in the military people in government, but it touches, at least by recent reports, four to 18 million americans. yet the software that was being used in certain parts of the system date back to 1960. and then also, they had outsourced some of the key operations to a subcontractor in china. so, it points to a seriousness about cyber security that is not -- we talk a very good game on cyber security. now have to think about it as a long-term issue. host: what you are saying before, a viewer from twitter asked this, do have any can -- concerned that you're well-positioned readers will take this book too seriously? guest: [laughter] i will put it this way. the opening scene of the book is of a u.s. navy surveillance plane being ordered away by a chinese officer over radio. we wrote that scene 18 months ago. it happened in reality about four weeks ago. it didn't happen in reality because someone read the book and decided, both those in the u.s. and chinese military, well, we wanted to create the scene. it happened because we put our finger on certain trends that are out there. and the other part of this book is it is a work of fiction, not prediction in terms of the overall scenario, and certainly not a prediction that we want to come true. if people are listening to it and if they are pulling lessons, it is lessons and how do we avoid the mistakes that could set us up for this? what would be an epic fail in both deterrence and diplomacy? hopefully the utility of it is that it turns out to be just but can the book that people read, you know, this upcoming weekend at the beach and it never happens. rather than it is something later on and we go, they got it right. host: new york, michael, go ahead. caller: i wanted to start off by saying about national security threats based in the u.s. one is about to miss identifying threats because if you cannot identify a threat, you don't put the proper resources and time and waste time. but i also want to point out a report that was released from the new american foundation last week about conservative, white supremacist terrorists, extremism versus islam extremist s and that when you are looking right, you miss the threats to the left. if we are looking so much, or heavily, at islam extremism and terrorism instead of also including in addition to that also looking at the white supremacists as well as the conservatives, the antigovernment extremism and terrorism who have it are terrorizing fellow americans burning churches and it will -- the oklahoma city bombing -- that you don't properly identify threats because it is white and they look like you or because the people didn't think that is the threat. that is about arrogant, which in my view, america severs from partially -- we think we can take on this country, this thread, this terrorist organization, so let's go and take them on. my first example of that is operation iraqi freedom that we think we can take on this country and the threat and it turned out we never should have went there. host: ok, michael, you put a lot out there for our guest. guest: thanks, michael. one, as you laid out misidentifying threat. one of the challenges we see in d.c. politics, but also definitely on the media side, as we focus on the narrative that for whatever reason gets the most clicks, gets the most headlines. we can see this, for example, in cyber terrorism. or cyber terrorism is a term that has been repeated all over the place and covered in many different areas, yet the reality is that you know, squirrels have taken out more power grids in the time that hackers have. squirrels have taken out trading on wall street on three separate occasions. hackers have not done at once. now, there are real risks of cyber terrorism, but we need to weigh it in context. we are having this right now on the shark attacks. off of north carolina. where the reality is when you look at the raw numbers cows killed way more americans last year than sharks. i believe the data point is that cows killed 22 americans last year. sharks, zero. another example would be sand castles have heard more americans last you than sharks. but sharks are sexy. that is what we have shark week. ok. having fun on c-span this morning. what it points to there was a recent report that the colleagues -- some collects dead were all they did was just gather the data and put it online of the number of americans in the last 10 years have been killed by attacks related to extremism, in terms of al qaeda isis, however you want to frame it, that number and the number who have been killed by groups that are linked with, again, however you want to frame it, white supremacist whatever. they just put the numbers out there. no judgment. just said, here are the numbers. and it is twice as high for the extreme right-wing, white supremacists etc. groups as the other. we can see a really interesting illustration of this in d.c. yesterday, where international this worry about a shooting at the navy yard that fortunately turned out to be a false alarm. but it was fascinating to compare how quickly people linked it to their worries about isis, rather than a worry about that it was a mentally ill shooter that was actually, you know, it was a mentally ill shooter who actually did the shooting at the navy yard in 2013. or a worry about a charleston style shooting again, and natural thing that happened. but for whatever reason, we are often drawn towards these other narratives, rather than the things that have actually happened. and that is an interesting parallel of risk. to your other point about our overconfidence and arrogance yet, it can definitely set you up for a fall. i think what we had to worry about as a nation is that we have certain assumptions from our military planning to our sense of self as a nation. one would be when it comes to technology that, for the last 70 years, we have always been a generation ahead of the other side. it is not always meant -- has not always meant that we had an easy way, but it is a capability that we have a side that another would want. we are not going to have that edge moving forward. both because of widescale hacking. that cyber terrorism that has been playing out over the last two years, but i.t. theft of everything from oil they designed to jet fighter design. and it is also how there are so many amazing remarkable things on the civilian marketplace that better than what the pentagon can get. you also have a broader geostrategic question. one of the quotes in the book is actually from the classic chinese military singer. essentially, he, you know literally thousands of years ago said, you can either fight a long war, or you can be strong as a nation. you can't do both. and that is very interesting when you parallel that to certain things that are played out. host: from georgia, maurice's next. good morning. caller: i'm holding my copy of the "art of war" literally in my hand as i talk to you. i got halfway through your book and i got lazy and put it down. forgive me hopefully i will pick it up sometime in the future finish it. but i what it to circle back around to the issue of threat. and i wanted to concentrate specifically on the threat of corporate threats because you talked about these points earlier, specifically how we are so interconnected with china. as an example, when they put a man in space a few years ago much of the technology they used came from america. many of the laptops and electronics that we import back from china, whether they have spyware on them or not, which oftentimes they do, we outsourced that ability to china to build those products. so we don't have to do that, but we do that anyway. so if this war is to start, this hypothetical war, and hopefully our get into the book sometime in the future, but what about the issue of asymmetric threats? specifically coming from the money class, the billionaire class and how they would start this because as we all know, or is a racket -- and it is been profitable for the wealthy. so those of the point i want to talk about more than anything. i wrote down some other things, but i know you have other people calling, so this is such a guy topic and i like it. guest: [laughter] thanks. and hopefully you'll give the new book a try next a get to the end. so, a number of issues you touched on their that are really interesting, both in terms of the context of the what-if of the story, but also in the real world. one is that the big question -- would we ever go to war with the nation that is a trading partner? and we used to characters in the book to have that argument -- two characters in the book to have that argument. no, we to bend -- depend too much on the way they depend too much on us. no, we have too much debt. one character makes that point and the other response back well, look at what happened before world war i and world war ii. the great powers in those situations, they were each other's greatest trading partners. grandson germany. japan and the u.s. it is often something that not -- does not prevent you from going to war. but then you have the interesting questions, as you laid out within the context of whether it is the technology or your dependencies. so, we have seen a massive amount of i.t. theft identified by the u.s. government back to chinese sources. a good illustration of that would be the a 35 program -- f-35 program, something that we spend over $1 trillion on. my colleague, michael reiter, he was a reporter for the ""wall street journal," and back in 2009, he broke the story of how the jet fighter program had been hacked by china. the consequences of that we have seen in the real world already where the j-31, the chinese jet fighter, they basically look like twins. and so it is very interesting to be in an arms race with someone where you are helping to pay for the research and development for the other side. what we do in the book, though is goa: -- go ok, let's play that forward. what does it mean to go into battle with systems with microchips made by the other side? it is a real-world issue. one last thing that can to the corporate side that i find fascinating, a difference between the echoes in the book back to world war ii is that different with world war ii, our economy is different. it is not detroit that is the center of it. it is places like silicon valley. so what would silicon valley do in a work? as you laid out, what would a billionaire do in a war? what is that mentality they would bring to bear. but you also have companies that are now multinational. one of the other locales in the book is that arkansas, the home of walmart and they are representative of companies now that are multinational in nature. they may have been founded in the u.s., but they have locations everywhere and their owners, so to speak, are multinational. how do they navigate this? the what-if's in the book, but we saw play out recently in this note in a fair where we saw different companies -- in the snowden affair where we saw different companies identify. so, again, to your original question, the fiction side gives you the what if to play with these very real questions that were already seen played out not necessarily in a world war, but playing out and also to other issues. that is why i think people on the military side in the pentagon are really resonating because they are starting to navigate or going, how do i think about this? one last illustration of this -- it is not just businesses it is also, for example, activist groups. what will might they play in this war? they are unlikely to our line with one of -- to a line with one of the powers -- to align with one of the powers, what it is also unlikely that they will sit it out. so what might they do? that what if is something i know from talking with people in other parts of government, they have not thought about that what if. the book helps identify what potential conflict. host: tyrone in long branch, new jersey. you are next. caller: i am glad i got to listen a little longer because when i was first listening to you, i was all amped up. but my view is, i don't understand why you humans are always claiming the plot how to stay out of war. i think the best way of how to stay out of work is to not plan for a war. how do you say -- like people always say to me, a place of peace. you can't pray for peace, you have to be peaceful. so to write a book about what a future war looks like, you can't say you not plotting for war when you say that. that is how humans are in general. -- [indiscernible] all these was have been planned plotted, and unavoidable because humans are humans. now that we are aware that we need to start planning and plotting to do the opposite because no matter from china russia, no matter what country it is, humans are humans. and they all want to be peaceful in general. it is the profit makers that make everything moreful. that is just my view. guest: i think you can take your comments and link it back to the real world, but also the science fiction side. so the real world is, look, this is a production that is fiction, but grounded in reality. and the reality is in the context of today moving forward we see great powers at tension. the reality is that tension is there and it will likely continue. and notably, this also applies to one of the earlier callers about technology and how it can be dual use. think all the way back to the first stole two drones today -- stove to jones today. -- drones today. drugs have been used to carry out drones strikes on, you know, people and places around the world. over 80 different nations have applied drones to their military. drones will also be used this weekend to film people having fun at the beach or fireworks or whatever. i hope it changes in the future. this, though, gets the science fiction side. if you look at a lot of the fun that science fiction, when we get to this realm of it being peace on earth like "star trek," it is always after world war iii. kind of a disturbing thought. but the other more important thing is the utility -- the utility of science fiction is not just laying out certain pathways, but warning of certain things so you can avoid them. a great illustration of this again, almost -- a little over 100 years old is conan doyle the creator of sherlock holmes also back in 1914 what a book called "danger." he is warning of something. what he was warning about is the risk of a great power war. and most importantly that this new science fiction technology called submarines, going back to jules burns -- jewels vern's -- and they could actually help another side defeats great britain. what is interesting the admiralty went public to mock arthur conan doyle of this absurd ideal. particularly that they could carry out a blockade. and the republic making fun of them a couple months later world war i really does start. and in the opening of the war, a single german u-boat sinks three british battleships in a single day. it rewrites the way we think about technology and war. and then of course you get a summary blockade of great britain that almost strangles it. so you go back and go wow maybe they ought to have listened to arthur conan doyle. i remember meeting with -- she was both -- dr. our last caller -- back to our last caller -- i was talking with her about the utility of science fiction. this was her description that good science fiction doesn't just tell you how to build the atomic bomb, it's as if you build the bomb, you host: might get dr. strangelove. from bill -- you might get dr. strangelove. host: from bill in scottsdale arizona. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. so, i wanted to ask, if you read sort of the more hawkish voices in the u.s. i our community, -- i.r. community sort of the driving logic of conflict in the 21st century between the u.s. and china is a short of structuralist argument that the u.s. is the only regional hegemony in the world. we have been that way in the western hemisphere. and that as china grows, it can reach that same level of regional hegemony, but in the pacific. of course, there was an incident of power that quite nearly did that, imperial japan around 1938 until 1945. but it seems to me that if you look at sort of the security situation in the asia-pacific today, china is just not anywhere near in that same position. you have 30,000 u.s. troops and you are ok. 50,000 in japan. in the philippines, lots of u.s. , you know, military cooperation and exchange of exercises and tech. in southeast asia, you have china facing territorial disputes with india, russia, and other states that it neighbors. so it seems to me, you know, that that fear of china becoming a regional power at a level of parity with the u.s., where they will be so dominant in the neighborhood that they will get so-called freedom to roam, it just seems that with the level of balloting currently in play against china, that that isn't so much a concern. host: we will have to leave it there. thank you, sir. guest: he raises a number of issues that connect to this. again, what is fascinating about this topic to me is that it gives you the opportunity to write a fun summer beach read, but also pull back and have a connection to these bigger debates of everything from geopolitics to international relations theory. so some of the things he touches on their other debates over, for example, realism and great powers at war. for example, if you look at history, out of the 15 times that a great power has risen since 1500, 11 times, just over 70% of the time, it has gone to war with the existing great power. if i said to you, we are going to make a bet and 70% of the time x happens, would you want to put a dollar on it? other people will say, no, that may have been the history, you realists, but the 21st century is different. and then they will go in a different direction. they will say, oh, it is because of the interdependence of trade. and we talked about that previously, how that can mean you can go to work, or it can prove to be a false hope. other people will say, they didn't have this thing called nuclear weapons. and that is why the cold war stay cold. and it would do so today. one of the things i would push back against that is that, first, both sides had plans to go to work, not just nuclear, but conventional. for the u.s., it was air-land battle that would see take battles on what was then west germany. that was much of the plot for clancy's "red storm rising." now that we can open up the records of the cold war, we have been able to find out that there were so many scary near misses of what we almost went to war. sometimes in places that made sense like the cuban missile crisis, and other times, there was an incident in 1983 where we almost went to nuclear war on in -- an utter miscalculation. one last thing that was raised was this issue of alliance structures. again, there are alliances that we have in the world, but that is a key advantage for us relative to any other nation out there. but on the other hand, our vision of these alliances is very different than the reality today and where they might be 10, 15 years from now. so a good illustration of this would be, yes, we have troops in korea, we have different relationships with south korea and japan, but polling in south korea shows that they identify japan as a greater threat than china. or what does it look like in the world when korea unifies? we have seen high tension in europe right now. nato as its -- at its highest point of alert because of what if -- what russia is doing there. it's when you look at defense spending, only five nato members have even met the minimal target of defense spending. their overall defense spending has exley gone down in the last couple of years. the point in all of this is become look at these trends, you can look at these technologies, and place it in pathways for. there are multiple futures that might happen. in "ghost fleet" what we do is basically try and run with that and explore one if. what are the consequences of that? and hopefully

Related Keywords

Vietnam , Republic Of , Arkansas , United States , Be In An , Sichuan , China , Louisiana , Alabama , California , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , South China Sea , Brunei General , Brunei , Ukraine , Arizona , New Orleans , India , Hollywood , Cuba , South Korea , Chicago , Illinois , New York , Japan , Tokyo , Philippines , Germany , Dayton , Ohio , North Carolina , Texas , Afghanistan , Puerto Rico , Virginia , Georgia , Michigan , Pakistan , United Kingdom , Iraq , Tennessee , New Jersey , Israel , Maryland , France , Pearl Harbor , Berlin , Americans , America , West Germany , Puerto Rican , Chinese , Pakistani , Britain , Iraqi , Soviet , German , British , Japanese , American , Cuban , Winston Churchill , Tom Clancy , Dick Durbin , Steve Scalise , Nancy Pelosi , Dick Cole , Michael Reiter , Patrick Conroy , Sherlock Holmes , Al Qaeda Isis , Abraham Lincoln , Jimmy Doolittle , David Thatcher , Edward Saylor , Franklin Delano Roosevelt , John Hudson , Ted Lawson , Mitch Mcconnell , Nelson Mandela , Arthur Conan Doyle , Griffith Paul Williams , Forrest Gump , Conan Doyle , Franklin Roosevelt , Richard Cole ,