We're back, it seems we're back to where we were in the 90s, where there is a pretty strong split between the interventionists and the non-interventionists in the Republican Party.

I'm curious your thoughts. You've seen this unfold over the past 40, 50 years.

Where is the party right now?

And what are the political risks for Donald Trump if he goes in or if he stays out?

So Joe, we're struggling in a, I'd say, a real national debate about where our national

interests are. And I must say, if somebody lived through the pre-Iraq period,

that was the kind of debate we needed back then.

We needed in 2003 to be talking about.

What was in our interests as a country?

Did this make sense?

What would happen after we invaded?

Wasn't enough of that.

Nika's dad was a big Nipvigna Bersynski was a rare example

of somebody was asking those questions. So the more debate that I'm hearing, the better.

I think one thing that's likely is that President Trump will learn in this debate, noisy,

sometimes fractious, who he trusts and who he doesn't.

He'll make up his mind better. He's often all over the map in terms of his views. One day,

says something next day, the next day. That's one reason I think the Iranians mistrust him in these

negotiations. They just aren't sure where he is. But over time, that'll shake out better.

It's a different group now in the situation room that it was initially. So I think that's

also good for a president to have this kind of shakedown cruise on a really big issue like this.

Final point that I'd like to make is we're all focused to a surprising extent on

...