U.S. Army Lt. Col. Burton Shields, commander of the 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry of Task Force Stryker, sits during a meeting, or shura, with village leaders in the Badula Qulp area, West of Lashkar Gah in Helmand province, southern Afghanistan, Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010. (AP)

Post your comments below

It’s Day 5 of the biggest allied offensive in Afghanistan since 2001 — some 15,000 U.S., NATO, and Afghan troops working to secure Marjah, a key opium-smuggling base in the Taliban’s heartland.

It’s being called the first big test of President Obama’s troop surge and General Stanley McChrystal’s counterinsurgency strategy. A strategy of holding fire to protect civilians, rolling in a local government to keep the Taliban out, building a nation.

And with the recent capture in Pakistan of the Taliban’s top military commander, there’s hope, justified or not, of turning the tide.

This hour, On Point: We’re looking at the Afghan surge as it plays out on the ground.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Jane Clayson, guest host

Tom Ashbrook is on vacation this week.

Guests:

Joining us from Kabul, Afghanistan, is Rod Nordland, foreign correspondent for The New York Times. He’s reported on civilian casualities in the Marjah offensive and on the UN’s refusal to participate in the military’s reconstruction efforts there.

From Monterey, Calif., we’re joined by Kalev Sepp, professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School and retired Army lieutenant colonel and special forces officer.  From 2007 to January 2009, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations Capabilities, helping to oversee global counterterrorism policy.

From Washington we’re joined by Peter Bergen, senior fellow at the New America Foundation, where he co-directs the Counterterrorism Strategy Initiative.  He’s editor of Foreign Policy magazine’s Af-Pak Channel blog and author of “The Osama Bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda’s Leader.”

Computer users are seen at the reception area of Google's China headquarters in Beijing on Jan. 18, 2010. (AP)

Post your comments below

News last week that two of the most powerful players in the Internet universe will team up to fight an onslaught of cyber invasions. Google and the NSA — the National Security Agency — will collaborate on cyber security.

Word of the alliance comes just weeks after Google accused China of hacking into its source code and the digital jewels of dozens of other American companies.

And at a time when top intelligence officials warn critical American infrastructure is “severely threatened” by cyber attack.

But what about privacy?

This hour, On Point: Google, the NSA and the age of cyber insecurity.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Ellen Nakashima, reporter for The Washington Post. She broke the story on the NSA partnership with Google.

Joining us from Vancouver is Fred Cate, director at the Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research at Indiana University, where he is also a professor of law at the Maurer School of Law.

Joining us from Washington is Paul Rosenzweig, former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security, from 2005 to 2009, where he worked on international data protection rules. He’s founder of Red Branch Law & Consulting.

Yemeni people walk near to Bab el-Yemen in the old part of San'a, Yemen, on Jan. 5, 2010. (AP)

Post your comments below

Yemen is the Arab world’s poorest country. It’s got two civil wars, a corrupt government, a major water shortage, guns all over, a surplus of Islamic militants — and it’s running out of oil.

And, oh yes, it’s a favorite retreat for Al Qaeda.

The Christmas Day would-be bomber says he got his training there. American missiles are falling there. And U.S. Special Forces are on the ground.

Is this the next American war zone? Is there a better way? This hour, On Point: an up-close look at what’s going on in Yemen.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Princeton, N.J., is Gregory Johnsen. A Yemen expert and Ph.D. scholar at Princeton University, he has travelled and researched extensively in Yemen, has advised the U.S. and British governments on that country, and has contributed to such publications as the Christian Science Monitor and West Point’s CTC Sentinel.

Joining us from Dubai is Riad Kahwaji, founder and general manager of the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, a think tank with clients that include governments in the region, the U.S. military and defense industry, as well as international oil firms and banks. He is also the Middle East Bureau Chief for Defense News and was Middle East Correspondent for Jane’s Defense Weekly from 1999 to 2001.

A Transportation Security Administration officer views a full-body scan during a demonstration at the TSA Systems Integration Facility in Arlington, Va., on Dec. 30, 2009. (AP)

Post your comments below

The Christmas Day terror attempt on a flight to Detroit has thrown airport security and explosive underwear into the headlines.

It has also thrown a spotlight again on the technology for full-body scans — and the question of whether they should be the norm. Routine.

These aren’t x-rays, but scans that look at the body beneath the clothes. Proponents say it’s foolish not to look — and say Christmas Day was naked proof of that.

Critics say it’s a virtual strip search and an offense to dignity and privacy that is not worth it.

This hour, On Point: privacy, air security, and the call for full-body scans.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us first from Baltimore is Benet Wilson, online managing editor for Aviation Week, where she’s reporting on airline security.

Joining us from Reno, Nevada, is Douglas Laird. He was director of security for Northwest Airlines from 1989 to 1995, and previously served 22 years in the U.S. Secret Service. He is currently president of Laird & Associates, an aviation security consulting firm.

From Washington we’re joined by Michael German, a 16-year veteran of the FBI, where he was a special agent in domestic terrorism and covert operations. He is now policy counsel on national security for the American Civil Liberties Union, a senior fellow at GlobalSecurity.org, and adjunct professor for Law Enforcement and Terrorism at the National Defense University.

Also from Washington we’re joined by James Carafano, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies. He is a 25-year veteran of the Army, where he rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel.

And from Napa, Calif., we’re joined by Kate Hanni, founder of Flyersrights.org, a consumer advocacy group she started in 2006 to represent airline passengers.

A Secret Service agent stands near Air Force One awaiting the return of President Barack Obama in Jacksonville, Fla., Monday, Oct. 26, 2009. (AP)

Post your comments below

It could have been a “night of horror” at the White House, Mississippi Democrat Bennie Thompson said yesterday.

Instead, the now famous/infamous couple, the Salahis, just waltzed in uninvited, hobnobbed with the President of the United States, threw arms around the Vice President, and sauntered into the spotlight.

The aftermath of the White House party crashers’ state dinner debut has thrown a harsh spotlight on the Secret Service and security around Barack Obama.

This hour, On Point: the Salahi saga, and who’s protecting the president.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Roxanne Roberts, Style writer for The Washington Post and co-author, with Amy Argetsinger, of the Post’s Reliable Source column. She has been closely following the White House state dinner security breach since she broke the story, after recognizing the couple at the state dinner and attempting to notify White House staffers.

Also from Washington, we’re joined by Ronald Kessler, author of “In the President’s Secret Service: Behind the Scenes with Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents they Protect.” He’s chief Washington correspondent for the news and commentary blog Newsmax.com. He attended yesterday’s House Homeland Security Committee hearing that addressed the White House security breach.

A Revolutionary Guard missile, the Shahab-3, claimed to be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and reaching Europe, Israel and U.S. forces in the Middle East, is displayed in Tehran on Sept. 23, 2008. Behind it is a picture of the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, (AP)

Post your comments below

The tangled intrigue over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and advances is a world where fact can be as strange and bewildering as fiction.

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius looks at it both ways. As fact, in his job following intelligence and foreign affairs for the Post. As fiction, in his second life as a writer of near-to-life spy thrillers.

In his latest, Ignatius imagines a full-lather American plunge toward war with Iran as intelligence operatives battle over whether Tehran is really on the brink of going nuclear, as in nuclear arms.

This hour, On Point: David Ignatius goes close to life in “The Increment.”

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guest:

David Ignatius is a columnist and associate editor at The Washington Post. He has covered the Middle East and the CIA for more than 25 years. His new novel, his seventh, is “The Increment.” His 2007 novel, “Body of Lies,” was made into a movie staring Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe.

Read the first chapter of “The Increment” (pdf).

Former Vice President Dick Cheney appearing on the CBS News show "Face the Nation" on Sunday, May 10, 2009. (CBS/AP)

Post your comments below

Former Vice President Dick Cheney was the most bunkered leader of the George W. Bush era.

Now, out of office, he’s the most public. In attack mode. Going after the Obama administration on national security. Aggressively defending coercive interrogation. Insisting it wasn’t torture. Suggesting that if it was, it was necessary.

He told Face the Nation’s Bob Schieffer this past Sunday: “If I don’t speak out, then where do we find ourselves? Then the critics have free run, and there isn’t anybody there on the other side, to tell the truth.” You can almost hear the former vice president saying, “The truth? You can’t handle the truth!”

As Republicans work to find a post-Bush/Cheney public image, and Obama works to make a new way, Cheney’s out there fighting for his legacy and his view of the world.

This hour, On Point: Dick Cheney, out of office and on the warpath.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

From Washington we’re joined by Bart Gellman, diplomatic and Pentagon correspondent for The Washington Post. He is author of “Angler: The Dick Cheney Vice Presidency.”

Joining us from New York is Jane Mayer, staff writer for The New Yorker, where she writes on politics and the war on terror. She is author of “The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals.”

And from Great Falls, Va., we’re joined by Mona Charen. She’s a nationally syndicated columnist and author of “Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First” and “Do-Gooders: How Liberals Harm Those They Claim to Help — and the Rest of Us.”

A Pakistani paramilitary soldier with a rocket launcher stands guard as local residents gather close to the site of suicide bombing on the outskirts of Peshawar, Pakistan, on Tuesday, May 5, 2009. (AP)

Post your comments below

The presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan are sitting down with Barack Obama today at the White House. One with a country in desperate trouble. One with a country in desperate trouble — plus nuclear weapons.

Pakistan is a significant nuclear power, with maybe a hundred very real nuclear bombs. It also has a Taliban insurgency on the march only 60 miles from its capitol, a military of uncertain capacity and uncertain loyalty, and a hovering Al Qaeda that all assume would love to have its own nukes for terror.

This hour, On Point: Pakistan’s frightening instability, and Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

What do you see coming from Pakistan? If the country blows up, what about its bombs? Do you fear they will be everywhere? Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

 Joining us from Islamabad is Mosharraf Zaidi, columnist for Pakistan’s biggest English-language newspaper, The News, and for the Egyptian paper al-Shorouk. His work also appears in the Far Eastern Economic Review.

Joining us from Washington is David Sanger, chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times. He reported earlier this week on increasing U.S. concerns over Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

In our studio we’re joined by Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, former director of intelligence and counterintelligence at the U.S. Department of Energy, where he tracked Al Qaeda’s efforts to obtain nuclear arms. Before that he spent 23 years at the CIA, where he was a senior officer sent to Pakistan to determine whether nuclear technology had been passed to Osama bin Laden. He is currently senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard’s Kennedy School.

Mowatt-Larssen contributes to an online discussion, “Pakistan’s Nuclear Scenarios, U.S. Solutions,” at NYTimes.com.

And from Washington we’re joined by Stephen Cohen, senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. His books include “Four Crises and a Peace Process: American Engagement in South Asia” and “The Idea of Pakistan.”

More links:

As Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari heads to the White House today, The New York Times reports this morning on his efforts to reassure Washington about his government’s stability and its campaign to repel the Taliban.

In an opinion piece in yesterday’s Washington Post titled “Pakistan’s Critical Hour,” Pakistani journalist (and past On Point guest) Ahmed Rashid writes: “Pakistan is on the brink of chaos, and Congress is in a critical position: U.S. lawmakers can hasten that fateful process, halt it or even help turn things around.”

Photo: csaveanu/flickr

Post your comments below

OK, the April Fool’s computer virus didn’t strike, didn’t rise up with its “botnet” and take over the world. But maybe it didn’t have to.

Just days before, a crack team of computer sleuths in Canada unveiled a global computer spying network, apparently run out of China, called “GhostNet.”

It’s a spying operation that has reached into more than a thousand key computers around the world, rifling through high-security files, even turning on computers’ cameras and microphones to watch and listen from halfway round the world.

This hour, On Point: The team who cracked the “GhostNet.”

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Toronto is Ron Deibert, director of the Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto, and the co-lead investigator on the team that exposed “GhostNet.” (Read their report here.) He also teaches political science and is co-founder and a principal investigator of the Information Warfare Monitor.

Joining us from Washington, D.C., is Rafal Rohozinski, co-lead investigator, with Ron Diebert, on the team that exposed “GhostNet,” and a founder and principal investigator of the Information Warfare Monitor. He is also a principal at The SecDev Group, a private think tank and consultancy with clients in “countries and regions at risk from violence and insecurity.” Its clients have included the U.S. Department of Defense.

Also from Washington, we’re joined by Siobhan Gorman, intelligence correspondent for The Wall Street Journal.

U.S. soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division patrol in the outskirts of Bagram north of Kabul, Afghanistan, on Sunday, March 8, 2009. President Barack Obama has ordered 17,000 more troops to Afghanistan to bolster the 38,000 American forces already in the country. (AP)

Post your comments below

He took charge as commander-in-chief on January 20. But as of last Friday, Afghanistan is well and truly President Obama’s war. With Pakistan sewn right in.

The new president is sending 4,000 military trainers to Afghanistan, on top of the 17,000 additional combat troops headed there. With the 38,000 U.S. troops already in the country, that will be the highest number since the war began. Plus new billions for Pakistan.

All to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Queda,” he says. Will it work? The pressure is on.

This hour, On Point: Weighing the Obama plan for Afghanistan.

You can join the conversation. Are you with the president on this war? On the “Af-Pak” challenge? Do we have a choice?

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Kabul is Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson, Afghanistan bureau chief for National Public Radio.

Joining us from Washington, D.C., is Christopher Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the CATO Institute and author of the new book “The Power Problem: How American Military Dominance Makes Us Less Safe, Less Prosperous, and Less Free” and 2004’s “Exiting Iraq: How the U.S. Must End the Occupation and Renew the War against Al Qaeda.”

And from Gig Harbor, Washington, is Thomas Donnelly, defense and security policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institut and author, with Frederick Kagan, of “Ground Truth: The Future of U.S. Land Power.” He was policy group director and staff member for the House Armed Services Committee and was deputy executive director of the Project for the New American Century from 1999 to 2002.

A sign shows US President Barack Obama during a protest against job cuts and high interest rates outside the central bank in Sao Paulo on Jan. 21, 2009. Brazil's Labor Ministry says the country lost 654,000 jobs in December as the international financial crisis slammed Latin America's largest economy. (AP)

President Barack Obama got his first economic intelligence briefing last week from new CIA chief Leon Panetta. And in the midst of all the talk about global crisis fueling global unrest, Latin America got a special mention.

Eastern Europe has had violent protests. Ukraine is on the global watch list. But Panetta told reporters he has been warned of economic instability in Latin America, and he named names: Argentina, Venezuela, Ecuador. Is he right?

This hour, On Point: We’ll look at how the global economic meltdown is hitting Latin America.

You can join the conversation. Have you been following the crisis internationally? What are you hearing from friends and family to the south?

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Fairfax, Virginia, is Joby Warrick, intelligence reporter for The Washington Post. He has been covering the security risks related to the global economic downturn, and reported last week on the president’s first economic intelligence briefing.

Joining us from Bogota, Colombia, is Ricardo Avila, editor-in-chief of Portafolio, a daily financial paper published in Colombia. He was chief of staff for the Organization of American States in Washington from 1996 to 2000 and served as Colombia’s deputy foreign affairs minister in 1992.

And from Toronto is John Price, managing director for business intelligence at Kroll Associates. Based in Miami, he has been watching Latin American markets and economies for 16 years.

Army Military Police escort a detainee to his cell in Camp X-Ray at Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Jan. 11, 2002. (AP)

Post your comments below

It was seven years ago this month that the first prisoners arrived at Guantanamo Bay.

The images are seared in the mind of the world, from the earliest days of George W. Bush’s war on terror. Hooded prisoners, black goggles, orange jump suits, in chains, in chain-link cages at Guantanamo.

The White House called them the “worst of the worst.” And some were. But most, apparently, were not. Hundreds have been released. Human rights and torture accusations swirled.

Today, word is coming from Barack Obama’s administration that the detention camp at Guantanamo — “Gitmo” — will be closed, shut down, along with a shadowy global network of CIA secret prisons. Also to be ended: the interrogation methods that brought charges of torture.

Gitmo became a symbol of American rage. Closing it is complicated. This hour, On Point: Shutting down Guantanamo.

You can join the conversation. Is this a weight off your shoulders? A step toward getting right with the world? With the law? Is it a danger? A worry? Share your thoughts.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

From Charlottesville, Virginia, we’re joined by Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor and legal analyst for Slate.

And from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, we’re joined by Carol Rosenberg, reporter for the Miami Herald covering Guantanamo and Camp X-Ray. She reports today on Obama’s move to close Guantanamo.

From Washington, we’re joined by Major David Frakt, Air Force Reserves judge advocate and defense counsel in the Pentagon’s Office of Military Commissions. He is representing Guantanamo detainees Mohamed Jawad and Ali al Bahlul. He is also Director of the Criminal Law Practice Center and professor of law at Western State University.

Joining us from New York is Matthew Waxman, professor of law at Columbia University. He held several positions in the Bush administration, including deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, special assistant to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, director for contingency planning & international justice at the National Security Council, and principal deputy director of policy planning at the State Department.

Adm. William J. Fallon in February 2007. (AP)

Post your comments below

Four-star Admiral William J. Fallon had a brilliant Navy career and a mouth, it was said, that could peel paint off the walls.

He flew fighter missions over Vietnam, rose to head of the Pacific Command, then was named by George W. Bush Combatant Commander of U.S. Central Command — Centcom — the U.S. military’s top commander in the white-hot region from Egypt to Pakistan.

He oversaw the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and abruptly retired after Esquire magazine called him the last man standing between Washington and war with Iran.

This hour, On Point: The admiral who spoke his mind.

You can join the conversation. What’s your question for the fighter-pilot admiral who once ran your country’s wars? What’s your question for William Fallon today on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Gaza? On “smart power”? On Al Qaeda?

-Tom Ashbrook

Guest:

Adm. William J. (“Fox”) Fallon, retired four-star Navy admiral, Commander of CENTCOM from March 2007 to March 2008, Commander of PACOM (Pacific Command) from Feb 2005 to March 2007, and currently a Robert E. Wilhelm fellow at MIT’s Center for International Studies.

More links:

“The Man Between War and Peace,” the Esquire profile by Thomas P.M. Barnett that caused so much controversy.

Slate’s Fred Kaplan, writing in March 2008,  looked at the context surrounding Fallon’s departure.

A Pakistani worker buffs a logo of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission fixed on a model of Chagai Mountain, the site of Pakistan's nuclear tests, on May 24, 2005 in preparation to mark the seventh anniversary of Pakistan's first nuclear test. (AP)

Post your comments below

Once upon a time, the atomic bomb — with all its terrible destructive power — was in one place, in one set of hands. American hands.

And then it spread: to the USSR, Britain, France, China, Israel, South Africa, India, Pakistan. And that nuclear daisy chain, of course, is not a closed book.

The story of the spies and lies and politics that spread the bomb is little told, and utterly fascinating. Now, an American bomb maker and a nuclear spook are telling it — and warning of where the chain could still go.

This hour, On Point: The secret history of nuclear proliferation, and the threat today.

You can join the conversation. Do you know how the nuclear powers actually got their bombs? China? France? Israel? And where does this go next?

-Tom Ashbrook

Guest:

We’re joined from Santa Monica, Calif., by Thomas Reed, and from Los Alamos, New Mexico, by Danny Stillman, co-authors of “The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and Its Proliferation.” Stillman was former director of intelligence at Los Alamos. Reed was a young nuclear weapons designer at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the late 1950s. Recruited there at age 26 by Edward Teller, he designed two thermonuclear bombs. He went on to serve as Secretary of the Air Force under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and as special assistant to President Ronald Reagan for National Security Policy. His previous book is “At the Abyss: An Insider’s History of the Cold War.”

More links:

“World at Risk,” the report of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism, chaired by former senators Bob Graham and Jim Talent, was released in December. It found that “it is likely that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013.”

Global Zero, an international initiative launched in December “by 100 political, military, business, faith and civic leaders from across political lines,” is developing a plan for “the phased elimination of nuclear weapons.”

The National Security Agency's Threat Operations Center in Fort Meade, Md. (AP)

Post your comments below

In the Bruce Willis thriller “Live Free or Die Hard,” fiendish computer hackers throw the United States into a wild tailspin of fire and flood and national gridlock.

You don’t have to go to the movies to assess this threat. Every hour of every day, global gangs and thinly-veiled government probes are poring through digital America — through corporate secrets and the Pentagon, Obama and McCain campaign files, White House e-mail, front-line American military bases.

A big new report says it has to be stopped. But can it be?

This hour, On Point: Cyber insecurity, out of control.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Siobhan Gorman, intelligence correspondent for The Wall Street Journal. Her article in this morning’s paper, “New Cyber Security Push Is Urged,” looks at the recommendations of a report released today by the Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency.

From Norwich, Vermont, we’re joined by Scott Borg, director and chief economist at the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a non-profit research institute that investigates strategic and economic consequences of possible cyber-attacks. He’s a member of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency, which is set to release a new report today urging President-elect Obama to deal head-on with issues of cyber insecurity.

From Washington, D.C., we’re joined by Julie Ryan, associate professor of engineering management, systems engineering, and information secuirty management at George Washington University. She’s been closely following the issues around our cyber security for years.

Joining us from Monterey, Calif., is John Arquilla, professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. He specializes in unconventional warfare and terrorism and is the author of “Worst Enemy: The Reluctant Transformation of the American Military” (2008) and “Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy” (2002).

Defense Secretary Robert Gates speaks as Vice President-elect Joe Biden, far left, President-elect Barack Obama, and Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton listen at a news conference in Chicago, Dec. 1, 2008. (AP)

Post your comments below

Barack Obama keeps rolling out the heavyweights in Chicago. Last week, on the economy. This week, on national security, defense, diplomacy.

Yesterday, the president-elect officially named Hillary Clinton his pick for secretary of state; President Bush’s defense secretary, Robert Gates, as his defense secretary; big Jim Jones, Marine general, former NATO chief, and John McCain friend, as national security adviser; and more.

Big characters. Rivals. A-Team players. Not exactly anti-war. So what’s the bottom line? The “change”?

This hour, On Point: Reading Obama’s national security team.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is David Ignatius, columnist for The Washington Post. His latest piece is “Obama’s All-Star Roster.” He is also co-moderator of PostGlobal, an online forum on international affairs at washingtonpost.com, and author of many books, including the novel “Body of Lies.”

From New York, we’re joined by Katrina vanden Heuvel, publisher and editor of The Nation, where she writes the Editor’s Cut blog. Her latest entry is “Robert Gates: Wrong Man for the Job.”

And from Monterey, California, we’re joined by John Arquilla, professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School , specializing in unconventional warfare and terrorism. He’s the author of, most recently, “Worst Enemy: The Reluctant Transformation of the American Military.”

More links:

The New York Times’ David Sanger writes about Obama’s national security team and a “sweeping shift in foreign policy.”

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page considers Obama’s choice of Hillary Clinton for secretary of state.

David Corn at Congressional Quarterly weighs the importance of Obama’s pick of retired General James Jones as national security adviser.

Susan Page at USA Today explores Hillary Clinton’s future challenges running the State Department.

Former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. (AP File)

Post your comments below

General Brent Scowcroft was national security adviser to two Republican presidents, and is best friends with one of them, George H.W. Bush.

But he’s been a stern critic of American foreign policy in the era of crusading neoconservatism and Bush the younger. Scowcroft firmly opposed the Iraq War. He’s been sharply critical of McCain-Palin talk of arming up Georgia, or war with Russia.

He’s backing John McCain. But McCain or Obama, he wants a whole new American way in the world, and says we need it fast.

This hour, On Point: A conversation with Brent Scowcroft on America at a hinge point in history.

You can join the conversation. What’s your question for one of the deans of Washington’s foreign policy “realist” camp? In a time of economic crisis and setback, what new attitude do you think America needs in the world?

-Tom Ashbrook

Guest:

Joining us first from Washington is Maura Reynolds, staff writer for the Los Angeles Times. She’s covering the negotiations in Washington over the $700 billion Wall Street bailout package.

Joining us from Washington is Gen. Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser under Presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush and president of the consulting firm The Scowcroft Group. He was chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. In August of 2002, he famously wrote a stern essay in The Wall Street Journal warning the Bush White House not to go to war with Iraq. His new book, with Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser under President Jimmy Carter, and Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, is “America and the World: Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy.” You can read an excerpt here.

More links:

“At a Glittering Georgetown Dinner, a Pitch for Bipartisanship” — Congressional Quarterly’s Jeff Stein describes the recent book party in Georgetown for Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and quotes Scowcroft:

Scowcroft lamented “the disintegration of bipartisanship,” which he said began with Vietnam and Watergate, and from which “we’ve never really recovered.”

“My fear,” he added, annoyed by at all the smack-down talk about Iran and Russia, “is that this is a wonderful country full of ignorant people who are susceptible to demagoguery.”

The Baltimore City Fire Department Hazmat team during a simulated terrorist attack training exercise in Baltimore, July 13, 2002. (AP Photo/Alex Dorgan-Ross)

Post your comments below

When government biodefense scientist Bruce Ivins took his own life last week, the 2001 anthrax case took another stunning turn. The FBI say it’s ready to reveal its evidence against Ivins this week. The case may close. Or it may not.

But behind all the drama is an intense debate over whether the U.S. — after seven years and more than $50 billion spent — is any better prepared for a bioterror attack. Critics say the U.S. remains far too vulnerable. Others say progress has been real, if slow — and that the threat is devilishly complex.

This hour, On Point: the anthrax investigation, and the biodefense debate.

You can join the conversation. Have you followed the anthrax case? What lessons should we draw from the new revelations? Are you confident that the U.S. government is prepared for another attack? Tell us what you think.

-Jane Clayson, guest host

* * *

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Siobhan Gorman, intelligence and homeland security correspondent for The Wall Street Journal. Her piece in yesterday’s paper looked at the persistence of the bioterrorism threat.

From Minneapolis, we’re joined by Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. He sits on the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity. From 2001 to 2005, he was advisor to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Joining us from Annapolis, Maryland, is Tara O’Toole. She’s CEO and director of the Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and a professor of medicine and public health at the University of Pittsburgh. From 1993 to 1997, she served as Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment Safety and Health.

And with us from Washington is Alan Pearson, director of the Biological and Chemical Weapons Control Program at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. In recent years, he’s worked at the Department of Homeland Security to streamline and refine the bioterror spending.