should quit its whileses with south korea north korea stops its missile launches. north korea doesn't zone exercises every summer and but china has said nothing about north korea terminating its exercises. why is the focus on the u.s. and south korean exercises? we are talking with bruce bennett of the rand corporation about the joint military exercises taking place this week between the u.s. and south korea. -- host: give us an idea of what drills, whats -- are they testing out? guest: we're working with the basic concept of dealing with the north korean invasion of the south or other north korean provocations. train andrying to prepare people to coordinate and also, it is a test of the concepts they have laid out in planning. those are the things they are trying to do with the exercises and have enduring frack -- for decades. a call from chuck, you are on with bruce been, good morning. -- bruce bennett, good morning. caller: i have a question. given the high level of threats forth, wouldn't it be wise to postpone his military until the rhetoric owned down for a w

and north korea used close by north korea in july of 2016. we have to be clear when we are talking about, don't send public messages because we should send them in private, it is back to the you need to to tango. north korea is cutting off a lot of avenues. maybe that is the way to interpret the president's message, to not cross the line. we have to be careful describing it as a redline or the president painting himself in a corner. i think that is equally dangerous escalating rhetoric. we do not want a scenario where north korea feels like they must respond. we back to solutions here. what is congress's role in this situation particularly what you reference yesterday with the president? we have seen senator mccain critical of it and chuck schumer critical of it and others. what is congress's's role? ask thenk they will right questions about why we have the rhetoric and what is the strategy behind it. when we are talking about the policy, i know senators and congressmen have in asking the right questions about when the sanctions will be imple

except south korea. certainly they have been a real threat to south korea, japan, u.s. ships at sea. and a number of other entities in the region. but less of a pressing threat than many in the united states claimed north korea to be all along. that really has changed in the last couple of years and it's changed because of the rapid pace with which north korea has pursued both its nuclear weapons and its ballistic missile capabilities. and the very free hand that the leader kim jong-un seems to have with keeping those programs on a very, very rapid course that are really defying all expectations by u.s. intelligence agencies and others. >> and have we perhaps overstated china's either ability and/or willingness to rein in the north korean regime? >> you know, i think we're about to find out because china really does have a checkmate on north korea economically. so far they have been unwilling to use that because of the potential for it to negatively affect china. so china's equities here are real and the

. >>> north korea threaten is the u.s. territory of guam in response to two american bombers flying over the korean peninsula. >> it represents the greatest crisis undoubtedly since the cuban missile crisis. >> i think that -- u.s. officials have's s assessed nor korea has a miniature warhead. >> they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> what he was basically doing is threatening a you into clear war against north korea. >> it is important for our president not to be unpredictable. >> he does need to reinforce the message of deterrence. >> by using this kind of language we are playing right into kim jong-un's hands. >>> this is "new day." >>> good morning, everyone. welcome to your in the new day. bill weir joins me. we've already had a lot of breaking news. >> is it like this every morning? >> little bit. this seems to be a bit of a different category today but we're glad you are here. >>> we do start with breaking news at this hour. secretary of state rex tillerson makes this surprise visit to

to destroy north korea's program and north korea told me that my face. prepared for war with north korea that's according to a u.s. senator it comes amid rising tensions between washington. is admit missing a deadline to deport a man suspected of committing friday's deadly knife attack in.

discussing north korea. ok let me go back to beirut under one of the things i find quite terrifying is how koulis the mainstream media talks about the situation in the in the korean korean peninsula because you know what we've heard from paul and weighing is this would be a crowded catastrophic. event in and very destructive here i mean soul is what twenty miles away from the d.m.z. in of course in any kind of military assault north korea would be would be turned into a moonscape like they did during the americans did during the korean war i mean by the end of the person who they were there were no targets to hit but for aircraft by the end of the first year not the third year. how do you tell how do you explain this i mean that big callously talking about we've run out of time we do we have no more patience so we don't want to talk about resolutions here it sounds so exactly like they're going on a war footing there and how why do why would you expect the north koreans to defend themselves again not defendi

north korea has produced a nuclear war head small enough to fit on its missiles. we already know the country's military has missiles that can fly. thousands of miles. ahead, we'll look at how real the threat is to all of us. plus, an average of nearly 100 americans die each day from opioids. today president trump facing the crisis head on, taking part in a briefing about how to stop an epidemic that is taking far too many lives. that's coming up. ♪ ♪ i'm jon scott in for shepard smith. we begin with breaking news on north korea's nuclear program. "the washington post reports dictator kim jong un and his regime have successfully developed a miniaturized nuclear war head that can fit inside its missiles. the post citing a confidential assessment from u.s. intelligence officials. they say it shows north korea has crossed, quote: a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power. it's not just u.s. officials saying. this japan's defense ministry also reports it's possible north k

six months later, north korea with the backing ofstalin, invaded south korea. there are a lot of people who thought that speech indicated weakness and the korean war was laun launched. soi so i would suggest as we consider language -- >> young the president is projecting strength? not weakness? >> yes, you have to project strength. president kennedy, i think, realized himself he had made a mistake. >> and yet john -- so you're saying the president today is projecting strength. let me just play again what john mccain just said in a radio interview. he, obviously, sees this completely different than you do, jeffrey. let me put it in his words. >> i take exception to the president's comments, because you got to be sure that you can do what you say you're going to do. in other words, the old walk softly, but carry a big stick. >> gloria, the implication from john mccain is clearly the president is walking way too loudly. >> well, i would just suggest that i'm sure that the president is consulting with secretary mattis and secretary tillerson. secretary mattis in pa

or ugh into north korea. we can that is one way influence the north korea people n the ground, getting outside information in there. the reason it influences them is because that information shows are getting and it is incorrect and wrong. host: can the u.s. government a larger role in doing that or are these outside groups talking about sort of the best way to do that right now? uest: i think the way that the united states government can help is by providing some some of the groups doing that work. rights act, up, again, for renewal this year, i think can provide good way for set aside grant money for the organizations doing good work. more calls, gus, line for republicans, go ahead. yes, good morning, thank you for c-span, i really appreciate the show so much. i'm just wondering how this guy power.sibly stay in he sounds like he's a totally nut job, if you will. his people d practically starve to death, hey don't have enough food and i really like the idea of the adio broadcasts, you know, if shine and ligh

luxury items in north korea. elements of pop culture in from elsewhere, what is the situation, how important or relevant, given that the kim regime doesn't seem to place the economic well being of its people as a top priority, how relevant is it north koreans understand what is going on around them and what role their country is playing in this conflict? >> in the long run i think it is more than relevant. i think it is the key to the puzzle. first of all i completely agree with your assessment. we're dealing with a nuclear power. we tried to prevent that. we failed. that is reality. that is not going to change. that is situation in some respects resembles challenge we face in the cold war, albeit, much smaller, less scary scale. it's a problem we have to manage through a combination of diplomacy, deterrents and pressure through sanctions. but as important as all of those elements of that strategy are to preventing this thing from getting out of hand and protecting ourselves and our allies that is not how we're g

north korea has not made an aggressive move toward south korea at the moment. but if it did do that, the united states has a mutual defense agreement with south korea. does that mean the united states would be compelled to have a military response? >> in a lot of ways, ali, i think that's academic. it seems to me from administration, if north korea were threatened the united states would, the united states and the armed forces korea would respond very quickly. and that seems to be clear from the president's tweets. and a lot of ways, in my understanding, i have to go back and look at the actual, you know, military to military status of forces agreement, is that if south korea -- if there is a military engage that time takes place, general in charge in south korea, that's general brooks head of armed forces korea, he would take control and have command and control of all the south korean assets as well. so the 28, 29,000 american troops, in addition, to the entire south korean army and it has to be said, there's a great deal of coordination between the south kor

fight with north korea. korea but talk to the united -- the north koreans, my understanding is they want to not talk to south korea but talk to the united states directly. if these talks were to happen, that this came up in this conversation, what is the end point? be about andey what would be on the table? again, my understanding is that the north koreans their ultimate , goal is for the united states not to be on the korean parents a lot, that they be accepted as a country. or if there is some kind of unification that there be two systems for the korean peninsula and i'm interested in hearing are these complete nonstarters? , is there any gray area, or area where these things can be talked about ? >> i think they are nonstarters, notwithstanding former white house advisor steve bannon's abrasive one north korean position which is we might pull our troops out of south korea if they clampdown the missile program. i think that would be a nonstarter. i think, one country two systems would be a nonstarter. virt

and north korea going on. happened, is this that an indication there is nothing behind the scenes going on at the moment? >> it is possible, but i don't think so. it was close, you would not know about it. i think it is likely, but i korea access an integrated actor. missile launches is the way various release compete against each other. there is no breakthrough that anyone can see, so threatening japan along the way is in the context of the current exercises at the time when people are worried about america striking north korea. i don't see any reason why these two things can't be happening at the same time. >> we often talk about nuclear programs as threats, but they also act as great deterrence. in a way, north korea is basically saying if you attack us, we will go full throttle. when it comes to conventional weapons, south korea is a chess piece easily taken by north korea, but what i don't understand is why retaliate with japan? is this trying to draw in the u.s. to come in closer to take it out? >> i thi

and north korea intensifies. north korea threatens to hit jim mathis warns this could end in the destruction of its people. this after trump vowed to hit north korea with "fire and fury." we then look at how attorney general jeff sessions is using the justice department to roll back decades of progress. on civilil r rights,s, voting r, rights and reform. >>s s a whole, i i think, has bn unfairly maligned and blamed for an acceptable of a few bad actors. speak with the head of the civil rights division at the department of justice in the obama administration until january. all that and more, coming up. ♪ amy: welcome to democracy now, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy y goodman. the trump administration sent mixed messages wednesday over the possibility of nuclear war with north korea, as secretary of state rex tillerson sought to defuse tensions, while defense secretary james mattis threatened a nuclear attack. on wednesday, mattis warned north korea not to take any action that could result in

and north korea. this is about two great friends, to great alliances, and it is in the breadbasket of the world, four of the five biggest economies in the world are centered out there and in one part of the discussion even have we posture what might happen in terms of preparation the first response from someone was the financial markets are going south immediately, and we all talk about that. we know that it's, in outbreak there would have a huge economic, financial impact globally. but to hear somebody say it as part of it, yes, we would expect and have a plan for this was a little bit jarring and probably a little bit more real given what's going on as recently as today with another test. >> you actually ended up taking a harder half of the question. >> well, i mean -- >> thank you. before we offer the audience a chance to weigh in, i want to ask about something i don't think you did address, and that is the significance of u.s. forward military presence in the western pacific. i want to get a japan

the main benefactor of north korea. they have interest in keeping north korea from collapsing. these provocations will certainly unite south korea, japan, and the u.s. everyone still wants talks, but they are also stepping up their defense capabilities. south korea, moon had a meeting saying we need to invest more in our own defense to make sure that we are safe from these provocations that are happening more frequently. yvonne: thank you. tom sure we will come back you to monitor the developments coming out of japan and north korea. .et's take a look at the open read across the board when it comes to equity. we have red across the board. 2% for u.s. 10 year yields, treasury yields. that may not be too far fetched. still looking at a second day of losses in seoul. 1%. 5/10 of given the risk of the environment, we are seeing the yen catch a bit. a little bit weaker than what we saw initially with the early when it dropped. we are still seeing it below that 109 level. note, there is continuing pressure. we are seeing new york crude switching places here. take a look at what is go

, it harms north korea certainly economically. north korea's economy is not exactly flourishing right now, as you know. i mean this is a regime, this is an economy, that is already on the brink. but you are convinced that cutting them off economically from the rather robust trade agreement they still do have with china would be sufficient, would actually turn the tide. >> it would make a difference. because those who are right around kim, those sort of wealthier members of the north korean society, that very small percentage of the population in pyongyang, they would feel it. and that's what we need to do. we need to put a squeeze on those few people who can have any effect on kim jong-un. >> quickly before you go, we have 30 seconds left. but your fellow democratic congressmen have proposed this language that with a bar the president frgetting congression approval for first use of a nuclear weapon. would you support that? this is power that any u.s. power has had since 1946. >> it is power that a u.s. president has but congress h

when we have south korea, north korea, and the u.s. all talking about preemption or preventive attack and others saying we will preempt your preemption, we could stumble across a red line by miscalculation. so if the talk about preventive attack or preemptive attack and this kind of rhetoric of never seen before, is that beyond hiroshima and nagasaki? all of that gets thrown into a very volatile mix of each side trying to determine what the other's intentions or likely actions are. north korea, if they feel they are about to attack, may feel they need to lash out first. >> bruce and phil, gentlemen, thank you both so, so much. >>> coming up here, we have -- we'll talk to a top senator, get his reaction to president trump's threats, warnings to new york. >>> also ahead, more on our other breaking news, the raid on the home of a former trump campaign chairman, paul manafort. stay here. hi..and i know that we have phonaccident forgiveness.gent, so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight- four weeks without the car. okay, yup. goo

and south korea strike first against north korea china will take action. and the global times newspaper said if north korea launched missiles first, this is a china-controlled newspaper, china would remain neutral which is different than what you just said. are you confident that china is playing ball and on the u.s. side here? >> i think if indeed they launch first and china remains neutral they have a big problem. they will cease to exist after a few minutes of that war and this is dangerous territory. there's no question about it. >> i want to play more of the threat that the president issued to north korea, one of the threats he issued just this afternoon. here he is. >> this man will not get away with what he's doing, believe me. and if he utters one threat in the form of an overt threat which, by the way, he has been uttering for years and his family has been uttering for years or if he does anything with respect to guam or any place else that's an american territory or an american ally he will truly regret it and he will regret it fast. >> north kor

, china, and south korea? thank you. guest: an electromagnetic pulse is something people worry about. if you detonate a nuclear weapon city, atmosphere above a it will create a strong little magnetic shockwave -- a strong electromagnetic shock went back and burnout electronics. in certain conditions, it can cover a large area. some estimates i have seen say large parts of the united states. one thing we do not know is how much hardening has been done against it. consumer electronics would be burnt out. my understanding is the pulse from a nuclear weapon like this the timelinve would be too short. if you are trying to do it over north korea, you would not be able to control the area it covered. havoc on wreak north korea's neighbors. host: he talked about china and north korea responding. of the newl board york times says the president is speaking to china when he made the fire and fury common. how could china and russia stop this from escalating? what side with a be on? onst: -- what side with baby on?what sid

but north korea isn't syria. so you can't follow that same game plan with a north korea. you can't just, you know, strike an airstrip even with a nonnuclear weapon and then just see how it goes, right? you can't do that. >> fire and fury, right, is not a policy. i mean, again, this is the issue. what does that mean? you'll see. we'll see. >> it's a threat. >> right. how else can you take it? but then you have mattis and tillerson saying there's no change in the region. >> it could be nonnuclear, but does that matter? why would dow that? >> this is the problem with trump. even if he doesn't mean, nuclear, even if that was not his intent, reasonable people could think that. >> he did say very few countries have seen. >> like the world has never seen. >> yeah. >> but it only matters specifically, yes, i get china and i get this could be a great provocation to china to say as you said, we want stability more than anything else, so we will do "x" which they haven't done. that would be an amazing conclusion. it matters what north korea thinks. here's their statement. and their

north korea hates them. what the north koreans might have been referring to and it could have been a number of things, one of them is these upcoming exercises which they view as the prelude to war. that's why you're starting to get much more of this rhetoric out of north korea over the last week or so. they're anticipating these exercises. >> is there an implement threat to the united states right now, jim? or is this all saber rattling? >> well, let's look what we learned today with the u.s. intelligence community's assessment about north korea's capability of putting a miniaturized nuclear device on top of a missile. cnn reported, "washington post" first reported that the u.s. intelligence community has assessed that north korea is at least manufacturing, making, producing miniaturized weapons to be put on top of warheads. it's not a consensus view. in the u.s. intelligence community, two, it is not believed that capability is the yet tested or deployed but it's another step along the way to do exactly tha

nuclear. >> north korea has passed a significant milestone. >> what north korea's latest advancement in their nuclear program means for the safety of the united states.

we will continue the conversation on the latest from north korea and the threats from north korea and u.s. reaction. we are joined by patrick cronin, with the center for a new american security, the asia-pacific security program's senior director. joining us from yonsei university in seoul, south korea, associate professor john delury, associate professor in chinese studies. thank you for being with us this morning. professor guillory -- professor delury, i will start with you. i asked dana williams how things are in guam. what is the mood in seoul in general? hello, thank you for having me. it is interesting to hear that report from guam. there are some similarities in south korea. if you showed up, you would not sign in thetect any united states or globally. there is so much attention now to north korea pay the fact that office, wellin my within artillery range -- we are in the northern part of seoul. it has been some a quiet on campus, but there are no drills. we are not being told how to duck and cover. at this point, there is certainly no outward sign. when you talk people, there

well north korea has always been reckless and their program cations against south korea so it's easy to imagine they might conduct some kind of a provocation which would lead into a military conflict even a small military conflict but small military conflict would very quickly get out of the hands of the leaders in the countries and escalate into a major military conflict if we had another conventional war with north korea it's one that they would surely you'd lose and as they lost that war as they saw the regime about to collapse then they might use the nuclear weapons and some sort of a desperate. hell mary so to speak the other way we get into a nuclear war as if our threats were so bellicose and if the north korea believed they were about to launch a preemptive attack on them and destroy their regime then if they believe that they might actually use their nuclear weapons as a way of. having that off so they're two different ways to get into words both cases i would think they would be as a result of miscalculation that as a result of blundering into a nuclear war or not as a resu

because it would destroy north korea's program north korea told me that. the united states is preparing for war with north korea that's according to what comes amid rising tensions between washington and pyongyang.

to rule all of korea. that will start a chain of events that we will be involved, the japanese, and certainly the chinese will have a say in what goes on. >> trish: we cannot let it get to that state, right? we reenacted sanctions, russia, china. signing up for that one, although we have not seen the chinese follow through before and their ability to really work on those sanctions with north korea. how are we allowing it to get to the point where they could hit l.a. or new york? can we do something in between? >> there's a lot we can do, but america is a administration, which failed to deal with this over the course of decades and they failed for a number of reasons. dismissing north korea, but also we have seen presidents put the integration of china in the international system above disarming north korea. and because of that, it the north koreans have been able to make a lot of progress as he pleased the chinese and keep them happy. this is been a mistake, i think historic importance. we are at a point w

and north korea reaching a concerning new >>> north korea threatening the u.s. territory of guam in response to two american bombers flying over the korean peninsula. >> it represents the greatest crisis since the cuban missile cris crisis. >> u.s. intelligence officials have assessed that north korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead. >> they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> what he was basically doing is threatening a nuclear war against north korea. >> it's important for our president not to be unpredictab unpredictable. >> by using this kind of language we're playing into kim jong-un's hands. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> this is "new day," wednesday, august 9, 6:00. chris has the day off. bill we're with us. >> seismic day. >> north korea is threatening to attack the u.s. territory of guam, home to andersen air force base in response to u.s. bombers flying over the korean peninsula on monday. this after president trump's extraordinary warning to pyongyang that any threat to the u.s. w

the connection is right now unclear, but we have seen north korea makes rats ahead of the us— south korea military drills which are not due to conclude until thursday. there has beena conclude until thursday. there has been a toning down of rhetoric in washington. the us secretary of state commended north korea for exercising restraint. 0n the sunday shows, he continued to stick to his diplomatic line, saying he would continue peaceful pressure. president trump, on the other hand, is taking a tougher line on north korea. he has said that the scaling back of missile launchers. we have not actually seen statements come out from the president or the secretary of state, but we have seen that the japanese president has asked the un to stay in and ramp up pressure. thank you both very much. the catastrophic flooding in texas is expected to get much worse — with officials warning they expect nearly half—a—million people to seek assistance. with waters still rising, helicopters and hundreds of specialist vehicles have been deployed in the rescue effort. an emergency has also been declared i

states and south korea did in north korea. this is debatable. one point that needs to be mentioned is that who is ultimately responsible for the start of the korean war? this is something that in china this is still not taught, but there is absolutely incontro veritable evidence that the korean war started because kim il-sung and stalin sat down and had conversations and planned it, and if you want further evidence, i strongly suggest that you look at the woodrow wilson center, one of my former students by is in the audience, james person, one of the leading experts in the country on international documentation about the korean war, and i think the evidence of this, how the war started in the first place, and who bears ultimate cholesterollal cuppability is very clear. >> i -- very briefly. from the little i know, greg is completely correct that the south koreans don't think it's a big new deal. they're kind of used to that. for 70 years. i'm not sure it's true for japan. i'm not sure it's true for guam. and so we need to go b

and north korea. was not mentioned by the critics tonight is that the president and nikki haley succeeded on saturday in bringing together a coalition to unanimously slap a new on north korea. the administration is still working diplomatic channels but it had not yet come close to stopping the threat on north korea. sean. >> sean: ed henry ed henry. it joining us now from the pentagon, lucas tomlinson. lucas, was the latest there? >> sean, the explosive report largely echoes what a top u.s. air force officer said said back in 2015, it's never shown that they could take a warhead and have it successfully reenter earth. in the last month, north korea has demonstrated to intercontinental ballistic missile test. each one now putting the united states in range. the first, it went 1700 miles into space and flew for 39 m@n.@%@-the second on july 2, 2300 miles into space and was in the air for 45 minutes. the longest a farthest missile test. seven times higher into space and the orbit of nasa's international

the unification of korea is what would be next in line and there are a lot of folks in south korea that would like to see that happen. it would be very difficult and expensive but better than trying to replace one bad regime with another. there are some options but again, china is the key. the commitment of americans to be tough and make sure we can defend any missile strike on ourselves as well as our allies would again make the marketability of these north korean missiles, the sale price would be much lower. >> jon: h.r. mcmaster, the president's national security advisor has said that a nuclear arms north korea would be intolerable to this president. it appears that they have all the goods. we know they have the icbms, they have miniaturize the warheads to make it possible. having said it is intolerable, what does the president do, what does a national security advisor say now? >> the last three presidents have said it was intolerable, both political parties have set it but yet we are here at the brink now, frankly, i think it is too late to just be -- the political speak we have, we

-south korea and north korea relations. thanks so much for joining us. first off, let's get to some of the news. on monday, you have got this meeting between the top general and the president of south korea. what do you think they need to say or do during this really contentious time? >> good morning. i think that is a very timely meeting to take place in korea. under the circumstances, i think all of the country's concerns, including the united states and south korea, should base our policies on the recognition that there is an extremely tense situation on the peninsula, probably the most dangerous one in recent years. betty: absolutely. people talking about a possible military conflict or even nuclear war. do you think we are anywhere close to that? >> i hope not. know, a war breaks out not because it is intended, but a lot of times just because of an escalation. we should be really paying attention to this situation and take every caution. shery: the last time we spoke was about a decade ago in seoul. since then, so many things have happened with nort

north korea has chosen the path it now finds itself on. that, at a minimum, will lead to further suffering for its own people, and at most, could prove to be status traffic for the whole world. -- past traffic for the whole world. it does not have to be this way. north korea should forgo the path of provocation, forgo the path of further escalation. there is no reason why the people of north korea cannot share the normal, prosperous life of their neighbors. the world would welcome, not threaten them. so in this chamber, let us once again call on north korea to halt and reverse its nuclear and missile development programs. let us once again call on them to prioritize well-being of there andle over legal and destabilizing military program. north korea's security and well-being do not depend on nuclear weapons. they do not depend on far-reaching missiles. they do not depend on a myth of self-sufficient defiance of the wider world. to live in constant tension with the world cannot be in the interests of north korea's regime, let alone its peop

in connection with north korea, with regard to north korea, what conditions must be met for you to decide that you can start the dialogue? today'sion, at conference, to china, who has influence over north korea, you have addressed measures that need to be taken and there was this.ent on however, until now, with regard to china, they have not sufficiently apply the kind of pressure the united states and japan are seeking. -- theorts magi bat efforts made by japan on the united states, what is it lacking that china is not fully mobilized, place? july, concernsin that north korea changes its course. and if it refrains from imitating and provocative -- intimidating and provocative action, if it is ready to come back to serious dialogue. these are measures -- these measures to be taken are important, first and foremost. there's no sense to dialogue for the sick about -- for the sake of dialogue between japan and the united states or japan and the r.o.k.. the international committee will continue to apply its maximum pressure to north korea in a think there is a necessity in doing so. 90% of tr

there's a reason north korea has not invaded south korea. they fear overwhelming response from the united states. do you agree with that? >> no. and that sounds like something that would come out of someone involved with negotiating nuclear weapons and sanctions connected to the obama administration. there's a new sheriff in town in washington, d.c. there's a new approach to how we're going to deal with this particular issue in north korea, in iran and elsewhere. and, no, we should not just accept kim jong-un, even though the other side may want to just accept defeat right now. kim jong-un, as far as we know, still doesn't have the ability for that nuclear warhead to survive reentry from the upper atmosphere. we are going to responsibly work all of our options to make sure kim jong-un does not have that ability. no matter what the obama administration officials want to advise the trump administration to accept defeat, losing is not an option, and it's bad advice. i would encourage the trump administration to reject it in kind. >> sandra: con

and north korea. just a short time ago, rex tillerson saying quote, americans should sleep well at night. his comments just a day after president trump threatened fire and fury against the rogue nation. north korea countered making it's own threats to attack guam. home to 6,000 u.s. troops and 160,000 residents considered u.s. citizens. what are the options for the u.s. military in a situation like this one? joining me now, retired general barry mccaffrey. good to see you. we can start with the premise that all of know that any military option is not a good one. having said that. when you heard the president say fire and fury, did you consider it a threat of military action and when a president says words like that, what are our armed forces doing, if anything, to position themselves in the case they get called on? >> well, obviously very unhelpful comment by the president, you notice that tillerson and governor haley have made very moderate, sensible comments, they did organize a security counsel in

into south korea. when you consider the hit to korean goods such as korean-made impact ontotal net the south korean economy is 30 basis points. dril-quip, -- real quick , nikki haley is speaking right now. let us listen in. >> for her statement. and now gives the floor to the representative of japan. >> thank you, mr. president. japan welcomes the swift adoption of the presidential statement strongly condemning the most recent ballistic missile launch by north korea, which flew over japan. and also demanding north korea seize allly such action. this sends a strong and clear message to north korea that the international community will not accept its behavior. we urge north korea to respond to this call by the international community. japan will continue to work very closely with council members and all other member states to reach a comprehensive solution to the problems related to north korea. thank you, mr. president. ofi think the representative representative of japan, and i now give the floor to th

no one out north koreas north korea. he can say whatever he wants, but north korea will make him pay. >> let's bring bill in for a second. it's important to note, because i have heard from some people, while all this coverage is scary, it's ramping things up and some have said it reminds them of before the iraq war, all the warmongering going on. it's important to note that actually i haven't met anybody who has said that the united states should bomb north korea or that this is a good idea or will really show them. in fact, where you are in south korea, the new president who was lel elected in may has taken a different view. he feels that while they need the missile defense system now and south korea is always on high alert, that there is still a negotiating avenue ahead of us. >> reporter: absolutely right, there was a statement from president moon's office this morning. calling on north korea once again to stop its provocations. but every time they say that, they add that the door to dialogue is still open e. and pres

tonight north korea put on notice. defense secretary james mattis warning the regime away from any attack on the u.s. the dprk should cease any consideration of actions, mattis said in a statement, that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. the comments appeared to be part of a delicate walk-back of president trump, surprisingly belic belicose and the north on tuesday. >> they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> reporter: overnight rex tillerson fought to calm fears as he went to asia. >> nothing i've seen suggests the situation has changed in the last 24 hours. i think america should sleep well at night. i have no concerns about this particular rhetoric of the last few days. >> reporter: this morning the president put an even finer point on his fire and fury comments, touting u.s. capabilities on twitter. my first order as president was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. it is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before. in fact, trump h

south korea. i think the chinese don't actually believe that the administration would go that far or the north koreans would go that far. so they're trying to nudge both sides towards the center. what i've been advocating, i don't mind the president's rhetoric, and a little madman here, it can be effective. if it's wedded to -- it seems to me a diplomatic overture. which is to say we're ready, if you'll give up your nuclear program and your missile program, we're ready to make peace with you, open an embassy and end the korean war. i would put a clear offer on the table. they won't accept it early on, but it would certainly give us the moral high ground, the ability to hold south korea, china, russia, and all of asia behind us. because ultimately, we may find that the only solution is simply long-term deterrence and squeezing north korea until something happens. >> it does seem like this is such a change from decades of administration policy, which has been to not have one on one direct confrontat

and north korea where north korea has its weapons lined up. again, they can attack the region at any time if they want to. they know they would face incredible repercussions. that's the only thing that would be holding them back. but given the heightened tension on the peninsula, heightened security concerns, we are hearing calls from the president of south korea for the country to up its defense capabilities and capacity, similar sentiments echoed by lawmakers in japan. officials here are trying to lower the tension in the region. they haven't responded directly about the incendiary comments made by president trump, pointing the finger at pyongyang, calling for calm there and said north korea created the problem here. alisyn. >>> if u.s. intelligence assessments are accurate, north korea is on a fast track to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power. the reclusive regime has purportedly produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that could fit inside a missile capable of hitting the u.s. mainland. cnn's barbara starr has more on their advancing cap

well, north korea responded as north korea does, through its state media, kcna. as you said, it state that the u.s. would suffer shameful defeat and final doom if it pursues extreme military sanctions and pressure. here in seoul, south korea's national security adviser spoke to his counterpart, h.r. mcmaster. they spoke about working closely together, as they do. obviously south korea, one of the united states' closest allies. at a time like this, south korea definitely needs the u.s. reiterating really the closeness and need for transparency in working together to try and ease tensions here on the korean peninsula. also we've learned that u.s. defense secretary jim mattis, when he was asked about the united states' readiness and what action may be taken, military or not, he responded by saying, "i don't tell the enemy in advance what i'm going to do. our readiness -- we are ready." as for the joint chiefs, chairman general joseph dunnford, he's on a scheduled trip to the region, going through hawaii, south korea, japan, as well as china, where of course north ko

and north korea trading n threats. north korea saying it's looking into possibilities for striking the u.s. territory of guam. as we mentioned earlier, senator john mccain reacted to the president's comments this afternoon. here's more of what he said. >> i think that the ruler in pyongyang is not crazy, but he certainly is ready to go to the brink. the great leaders that i've seen, they don't threaten unless they are ready to act. and i'm not sure that president trump is ready to act. >> i want to bring back our military panel now. general hurtling, if you're south korea or japan tonight, what steps are you taking in this potential escalation? >> there is an air defense umbrella over both japan and south korea right now, anderson, that would prevent any kind of ballistic missiles, for the most part, getting in. that's not 100% insurance, that's sort of hike what goesli goes on during israel. they can get most of them, but every once in a while one falls through. going back to what secretary mattis and general clapper

envoy to north korea. his name is joseph yun, and several of his counterparts, both the north korean ambassador to the united nations, and also some top officials in the north korean foreign ministry. now, originally, these talks started in may. they were really about the release of u.s. hostages in north korea, and you remember otto warmbier, the young man who was ultimately released by north korea and died back here in the united states, it was about trying to release them, but the hope was that these talks, these talks about releasing americans in north korea would also lead to some kind of fuller dialogue. they did address the issue of poor relations between the u.s. and south korea. so, ambassador yun has met with his counterparts. he met with them in may, in oslo and in june in new york, and he's been, you know, they called this, and you might have heard this kind of diplomatic term before, the new york channel. it's been a long-established channel between the state department and the north korean --

on how to deal with north korea, and also the fact that south korea, and also the fact that south korea has to decide on a military option if that appears to be the case. but at the same time you have us president trump talking about the military options being locked and loaded about fire and fury — do these kind of comments undermine yours, does it send a mixed signal to pyongyang? you have mentioned the korean peninsular without the consent of south korea — you can't... no military option can be available. south korea's president moon asked bya south korea's president moon asked by a journalist, who was making the point that north korea doesn't seem to be responding to the offer of talks from president moon on what is his plan for that. north korea has made it clear it is very angry at the latest un sanctions. the president saying, whether he asked if he had plans to resume dialogue, he said he would wait for conditions to be right and send an emissary then, but he made the point that, as far as the us and he was concerned, north korea was approaching a red line. by introducing st

a response to the president's warning to north korea and north korea's threat to guam. after months of stocks coasting to records, investors are showing some signs of caution. for example, gold, a typical safe haven, rising more than 1% to a two-month high. and wall street's fear gauge is up 21% this week. the vix index had previously been a historically low level. the u.s. dollar, once a safe bet in the global economy, down 8% this year. >>> remember that incident where united airlines forcibly dragged a passenger off a flight? the fallout from all of that is causing big changes industrywide. passengers being bumped from flights was at a record low last quarter. the 12 largest airlines bumped only 44 out of every million passengers. that's the lowest rate in 23 years of data. airlines typically oversell seats to make up for passengers who don't show up for flights. however, since the united airlines debacle, they've changed policies to make sure people give up seats voluntarily. >>> after google's crisis and the memo suggesting women are not biologically fit for tech r