the one big danger that has not been mentioned is that of pakistan. we talk about iran getting the bomb. pakistan already has the bomb, and who can be 100% sure the fundamentalists in that country have not infiltrated the army, maybe the units guarding the nuclear stores. the prospect of an al a.l. -- al qaeda type group getting ahold of a number nuclear weapon is scary. >> that cheery note to start q & a. given the shortage of time, those who have a question, you can state in 15 seconds or less, i'll give you your first opportunities. then those that have 30 second questions, then up to those who have minute questions and those who have a four-hour statement, we'll see if we can get to that. okay. 15 seconds. this gentleman here. >> does iran get the nuclear bomb, do you believe they would use it against israel -- >> i'm not aware of any leaders announcing they would use nuclear weapons against israel. everything i have seen abouted the leadership they're quite pragmatic. billionaires squabbling for power. when they were involved in a bloody war with

pakistan, we haven't heard much about them lately either. pakistan is a country with a nuclear arsenal of more than 100 million nuclear weapons. we know some of these groups like al qaeda would like to get their hands on some of those nuclear weapons and there has been some concern about their arsenal. i am not in the circles where they are talking about these things but i know there has been tremendous amount of concern in the last thing we want to see is have al qaeda or anyone else get their hands on a nuclear weapon. stuff but id this think the al qaeda or offshoot thatem or affiliate, threat is growing. i talked about al qaeda in the arabian peninsula in yemen. gained prominence, i would say that they were the most dangerous group we faced. i mentioned some other plots -- the underwear plot, the printer cartridges, they have the best maker -- bomb maker. we have out. -- we havenisia howled urea, libya, tunisia. and they were responsible for what happened in benghazi. we heard about them in the terrible kidnapping of these young schoolgi

whether it's in pakistan -- we'll take direct action even as we develop long-term solutions that empower part nerts on the ground. with respect to legal matters, i wouldn't want to prejudge an action we haven't taken. i would say that the actions taken in iraq are consistent with the president's onstitutional authority. the actions we took in syria because we were trying to save mericans were imminent danger. i think any additional actions we take we'll consult with congress. >> the things you have drawn about iraq is you were invited in. you mentioned syria -- [inaudible] >> hypothetically that action hasn't been taken. to take the example of what we d. you don't need to be invited in if you're trying to rescue your people from imminent danger. that's the basis we took to try to rescue our hostages. we have a legal justification for any action we take. we would consult with congress. this is again a problem that we have to deal with as a nation. and so whether it's our ongoing operations in iraq or additional steps that may need to be taken against isil, we would carry those out in very

pakistan, india, china, russia have it. what is going to happen with the regime? ali said helsinki, human rights. how realistic is it that we have free and fair elections in iran? if you have a democratic government then you can negotiate because democracies do not go to war with each other and talks. >> ali, want to respond? >> thank you. mr. ambassador your country has , gone through very harsh his circle times, just like ours. -- historical times, just like ours. you have experienced even greater harshness then our country has in many ways. most unfortunately, many of the intellectuals in my country draw the wrong lessons from what happened in central and eastern europe. many of them still live in a world of utopia. those who are in power right now, they believe the establishment and continuation of an islamist ideological regime in power. some parts of the opposition are misleading them in deceiving them so that there would be some kind of communist utopia at the end of the rainbow where iranians can find peace and prosperity. this is very unfortunate. ideolog

a spy, it can be harder to recover from that and work safely in pakistan again. in afghanistan, that has not been the case. i think they call this evil -- the evil "new york times," they called me a spy in gauged in espionage. the reaction as far as we can tell has mostly been scorn. it is like on social media, it is split between crazies on either side. that is probably a good sign. i will probably work there safely again. look, i would love to go back. after six years there, to be missing this kind of final event drives you nuts. but we will see what happens. i will take the candidates at their word now. >> any regrets about the articles? >> no, not at all, not one bit. it is a bit of a bummer to be thrown out of the country for a story that ran on page a7, but it happens. matthew, we are very grateful for you taking the time. you could well be resting at home with your family, but you chose to, down here. we're very appreciative. we have a tradition where we honor guests, distinguished guests, the traditional national press club mug. i believe president karzai

but they are now out shining al qaeda because they are doing better than al qaeda for example in pakistan. we are now beginning to see, at least per press reports that the qaeda in the islamic and on the arabian peinnocence la are thinking of moving their filiation from al qaeda core to isil. i also think that what we know about baghdad is he's good and an ambitious man and he will try to absorb all of al qaeda. as he does this, i think he will be affected by the al qaeda that is why people who i know il isimes are saying is i focused on the region, let's not push them too hard because we do not want them to turn attention to the united states. i think the history is they will get to the united states at some point and you want to try, and i would argue to hit with them and deal with them early because they stronger -- the stronger, the more entrenched and more when itt it will be finally turn on the united states. >> can you talk about the threat the united states? there is a sense it is over there, not here. do you think the threat is here and now? isn't coming what may consolidate them

remember the period, the crisis we were in, worse than the great depression but revealing threats in pakistan and other places. we didn't have osama bin laden yet. we took some steps. the caller is also right that any president understand the threat. the real debate is how you respond to them. a strategic debate, much of our debate tends to be tactical when we get into the weeds in syria and other places. the general thrust of it where we agree is u.s. leadership is essentials. we provide a backbone. look at the kurds and what they are doing. when we send a signal that we are going to be engaged with the debate is how much you calibrate that, how much you try to get others to pull their weight and how much we leave ourselves and one lesson when you take a step back from both the jewish bush and obama administration eras is getting that calibration right because we don't want to bear excessive costs as we did. our military was worn down by deployments. our budget was destroyed in essence in the previous decade so my hope is in the next phase as obama tries to rebound as they talk about it, bri