Kristol: 'If It Takes 50,000 Troops' to Destroy ISIS, 'Do It'

The powerhouse roundtable discussed the terror attacks in Paris.
5:11 | 11/15/15

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:



Skip to this video now

Now Playing:


Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Kristol: 'If It Takes 50,000 Troops' to Destroy ISIS, 'Do It'
We're going to talk about that now with our roundtable. Thank you, Cecilia. Bill kristol, editor of "The weekly standard. Democratic strategist Stephanie cutter, supporter of Hillary Clinton. Robert Reich, professor at the university of California Berkeley, author of the new book, "Saving capitalism" and Ana Navarro, supporter of Jeb bush. Those attacks right in the middle of the campaign. How does it change it? On the republican side it out puts the question of who primary voters want as commander in chief front and center in a way it hasn't been so far. I don't know which way that cuts. Does it help a senator familiar with foreign policy which Marco Rubio is and Ted Cruz is as well or someone who can say I'm a tough executive and at least on foreign policy related things as a prosecutor, Chris Christie I think has a chance to make his case on that. I think it hurts trump and Carson honestly. I just think you want someone who has some government experience and some experience dealing with the military, dealing with the intelligence community as the next president. You're nodding your head. Well, I think that it does have a pretty big impact on the republican side because it does remind people that electing a president is putting a commander in chief in charge. And so far the republican race has been about personality and entertainment and celebrity, and these tough issues haven't been a big part of the discussion. To the extent they have, it's about meeting Putin in the green room. And I think now that discussion is going to change. Ana, what do you think? Do you agree with bill on the possibility this would hurt trump and Carson and does it put Jeb bush in a box having to deal with his brother's legacy one more time? Actually I don't. I think what it does, it highlights the fact that he's a governor who has experience dealing with crises and who's got leadership experience. Look, what I hope this does is I hope it serves as a wake-up call both for candidates and voters in the republican party. Let us focus on the important stuff. To the candidates I would say, folks, stop playing small ball. Stop this pettiness calling each other names, talking about each other's faces, whether we're killing -- tell me what you're going to do to defeat this threat, and to the voters I would say, folks, we're not electing an entertainer in chief. We're electing a commander in chief, and it's not if, it's when we face this crisis the the big room making the decisions? I think Ana is right, also, the public is going to pay more attention to the issue of temperament and I think this is where Donald Trump and perhaps a couple of the other republican candidates really suffer because you want somebody who is not just commander in chief material but somebody who is actually even-tempered who won't go off the rails. The other thing, George, is that we are beginning to see once again in the republican party the old debate over isolationism versus global reach. You interviewed Marco Rubio. The question was, troops on the ground, I mean, they are very bellicose, many of these republican candidates -- He didn't want to say he would put troops on the ground there. Well, that's the point. They don't want to talk about troops on the ground but talk about everything else. They want to bomb, they want to, you know, have a more aggressive policy, but they don't want to commit any troops on the ground. Is that a trap? It's a not trap. They should say, of course, we need -- look, Hillary Clinton said in the democratic debate last night Isis cannot be contained. It must be destroyed. I agree with that. I think most republicans agree with that. If Isis is to be destroyed America is going to have to be in the lead. You can do a lot more from the air. You are going to need troops on the ground and I think republican voters, I don't agree at all, I mean, yes, they're a little war weary and worried about another intervention in the middle east. At the end of the day the candidate who articulates a credible strategy will be stronger, not weaker on the republican side. And if I were advising republican campaign, call in general petraeus and Keane and general Kelly and say what is the real strategy. If it takes 50,000 troops cleaning out raqqah, the capital of the islamic state, do it. I just don't think that the American public is yet ready for more troops on the ground, bill. I mean, after what we have gone through over the last ten years, you know, everybody wants to protect the United States, of course, but when it comes to another major commitment of American troops, you're not going to get that kind of -- The real question about whether it would work, and I think if somebody came out and said, let's commit 50,000 troops, I think you would have a lot of commentary with generals and the national security community that that's not going to do it. And some of the recommendations that Marco Rubio laid out where the president is, it's largely this thing, we have to work with Sunnis. We have to build a coalition. We have to increase our presence, yes, but America has to be part of the solution helping to lead it but we can't be the only piece of that solution. I don't think any candidate should be naming a specific amount of people that should be on the ground right now but what they should be saying is we are going to listen to our generals. We're not going to get our military advice from the Sunday shows. Given all the respect that we may get. But, you know, I just think also on the democrats side I think it was flabbergasting for a lot of republicans to see the three leading democrat candidates debate for two hours and not be able to utter the phrase radical islamic terrorism. Call a spade a spade. You saw Marco Rubio respond to that. Also Stephanie cutter, that moment Hillary Clinton invokes 9/11 to bolster the -- I mean as rationale for supporting wall Street. Yeah, yeah. I don't think that was the finest moment of the debate, and think she's going to have to answer to that. You know, getting into a position of defending wall Street is a problem for her and what she simply should have said is, yes sh, Wall Street has given me money. Could you point to anything that I have done because of that money? I have the strongest Wall Street regulation plan. I have, you know, I was the first out there to control bonuses. I was in support of what we did in 2008. You know, it's not a quid pro quo. That's what she should have said. But the democrats, are they so crazy -- I mean, Bernie sanders says the operator -- says the operator -- what did he say? The operating business plan of Wall Street is fraud and greed. Couldn't secretary Clinton say, you know what, there are lots of decent people that work there. Tens of hundreds of thousands of them. Mr. Sanders -- you could -- don't have to defend the big banks -- You get the last word. I just think that you all underestimate the extent of Americans still, the anger toward Wall Street beginning with the bailout and the sense that nobody has been responsible. Nobody has been indicted. Nobody has gone to jail. I've been on a book tour and I've talked to red state America and they are apoplectic about what Wall Street has done. That's the last word.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"5:11","description":"The powerhouse roundtable discussed the terror attacks in Paris.","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/ThisWeek","id":"35218297","title":"Kristol: 'If It Takes 50,000 Troops' to Destroy ISIS, 'Do It'","url":"/ThisWeek/video/kristol-takes-50000-troops-destroy-isis-35218297"}