welcome to viewers here and around the world. i'm christiane amanpour and at the top of the news this week, nuclear secret. a report of a major advance in north korea's nuclear program. what new threat does it pose? and how will it impact the president's disarmament agenda and his push to get the senate to ratify his s.t.a.r.t. nuclear treaty. >> this is not about politics. it's about national security. this morning the nation's top military official, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen. plus, the escalating war in afghanistan. his views on night raids, relations with president karzai and deadlines for u.s. withdrawal. then hot zone.

as haiti reels from a cholera outbre outbreak. we ask what happened to the global pledge to rebuild the nation? and gm's new start. was the bailout good for america after all? analysis on our roundtable with george will, democratic strategist donna brazile, ed luce of "financial times" and former clinton labor secretary robert reich. plus, "the sunday funnies." >> the capitol hill christmas tree arrives this week and as soon as it gets to washington it will die in committee. did you know that? hello again and with reports of a new nuclear facility in north korea and new deadline with the war we have admiral

mike mullen. president obama returned late last night from the nato summit in lisbon where the united states and its allies are now talking about another deadline, the end of 2014 to hand over combat operations to afghan forces. to make that happen, american and nato forces are escalating the war right now so we start with a powerful report from miami boettcher in afghanistan. >> reporter: when this lieutenant courage saw this 10-year-old he was bleeding to death on the side of a road. >> his mom was yelling out that my son is dead. my son is dead. >> reporter: now he is recovering at a u.s. military hospital. the lives of the american officer and the afghan boy intersected on this stretch of highway in the province when a car bomber trying to kill lutski and his men. the other way civilian vehicles. they slowed down when the convoy

passed. so did a suicide bomber and inside his car he had 600 pounds of high explosives. the soldiers were not hurt but the explosion killed one child and injured three others including sadekela. his family is grateful to the americans for saving his life, a small but important victory in the war where not killing civilians is more important than killing the enemy. >> it buys us credit in the sense that there's a little more respect for us and there's a little more trust for us. >> reporter: america's top officers tell afghans that it's the taliban who are killing civilians. a message undermined by president karzai's claims that u.s. special operations night raids are killing innocent people. >> nine out of ten civilian casualties are caused by the taliban. >> reporter: at a district center in eastern afghanistan, not everyone is convinced by that argument. during a visit by the 101st airborne's deputy commander in afghanistan, steve townsend, a

village elder asserted that the americans were killing more afghans than the soviets did a quarter century ago. townsend pushed back hard. >> look in my eyes, you know i'm telling the truth. >> reporter: but as the word slides so do bombs and bullets. this is situated on the pakistan board enand it's often attacked. 18 insurgents died but soldiers know this, you can't kill your way out of afghanistan. >> they can reconstitute faster than we can. we're so close to pakistan, they just come right across the border. >> reporter: so rather than enemy body counts real success here is measured in ow quickly afghan feet can fill american-made boots. if the wars end, afghan soldiers will have to end it. >> we have to make a difference. coming here and just running around and killing the enemy and then leaving and looking back and saying i didn't make a difference, i didn't make a change will cause us to never leave. >> reporter: steve's son is the same age as this young boy, 10.

the colonel wants only one thing to come from his service here, confidence that his own son someday will not be fighting his father's war. for "this week," mike boettcher, abc news, forward operating base clark, afghanistan. >> and joining me now is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen. welcome to "this week." >> good morning. >> we will discuss, of course, afghanistan but let me get to the breaking news this morning, the report by "the new york times" of the discovery of a new nuclear facility in north korea. how much of a threat is that to the united states, to the world? >> well, this validates a long-standing concern we've had with respect to north korea and its enrichment of uranium. it also continues to validate a country that is led by a dictator who is constantly designing -- who constantly desires to destabilize the region. and he's done that again certainly with this capability,

as well and certainly the development of nuclear weapons, it is a huge concern for all of us, those in the region as well as those around the globe. >> how could this have happened in secret despite the sanctions that were put on, trapracticalls the sanctions were put on this was being built. >> well, he's defied sanctions. there are two actually u.n. security council sanctions he's defied and endefied what he said he'd do in 2005 because he said he clearly would comply and not do the -- generate this kind of capability yet he does. >> right, but what options then do you have if sanctions are the toughest measure and he's doing it, what's your answer to that. >> well, i think we have to continue to bring pressure on him specifically. those in the region in particular the six-party talk countries, russia, china, the united states, japan and south

korea, we have to continue to do that. he is predictable in his unpredictability, if you will, because not too long ago he killed 46 south korean sailors. he has over time destable -- continued to destabilize this region and in fact, i also believe this has to do with succession plan for his son. >> if sanctions aren't working what will? >> the assumption certainly is that they continue to head in the direction of additional nuclear weapons. and they also are known to proliferate this technology, so there are very danger oous, ande has been someone who has not responded thus far to previous actions. he actually blows hot and cold. he moves in a direction for

awhile, then he reverts and i certainly would see him in his reversion mode at this particular point. >> why didn't u.s. intelligence discover this. >> i won't go into any -- >> isn't that alarming? >> i won't go into specific intelligence kinds of things today, christiane, but i would say that, you know, this is something we've been concerned about for a significant period of time. and also penetration of north koreans in terms of intelligence capabilities is very, very difficult. >> do you think china is the one to help you resolve this? >> i think china has -- >> will it? >> -- has an awful lot to do with it. we've been engaged with china for an extended period of time with respect to north korea. the president sent out a team to each of the capitals this weekend to re-engage and so that's where we are right now and i'm sure we will continue to do that and a great part of this, i think, will have to be

done through this. >> are you worried about north korea making more nuclear weapons right now with this facility? is that what it's showing? >> i've been worried about north korea and its potential nuclear capability for a long time. this certainly gives that potential real life, very visible life that we all ought to be very, very focused on. >> the president and the president of russia have signed the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. this week that has been sort of stopped, stopping and started in the senate by jon kyl. can i ask you, i'm basically going to wave around a veritable who's who of republican and democrat former seconds of state, of defense, all sorts of people who have been studying this for a long time and say that this has to be ratified. does it have to be ratified? is this necessary for u.s. national security? >> i think this is more than anything else it's a national security issue. i was involved extensively in the negotiations with my

counterpart in russia. we have for decades have had treaties with them to be able to verify aspects of the nuclear weapons capabilities that we both have and from a national security perspective this is absolutely critical. >> so when it comes to the military impact of this treaty, are you convinced that all the military issues have been dealt with and the united states would be no weaker or in no worse place if this was ratified? >> completely comfortable with where we are militarily. myself, the rest of the uniform leadership as well as the secretary of defense. >> and the intelligence agencies have signed off on all the verification procedures and measures, you're comfortable with that. >> absolutely. the verification regime that exists in this is in ways better than the one that existed in the past. some criticize that there are fewer inspections, the arsenal is much smaller than it used to be. we are close to one year without any ability to verify what's

going on in russia. >> you're comfortable with the amount of money that the president and the administration has pledged to modernize american nuclear arsenals. >> i have. i reviewed it -- i've reviewed it several times and it is very clear commitment to modernize the nuclear infrastructure in this country. >> so by a process of elimination, is the senate playing politics with american national security? >> well, you'd have to ask the senate. >> what do you think about that. >> well, certainly what i think is that there is a sense of urgency with respect to ratifying this treaty that needs to be both recognized. historically this has been bipartisan. this is a national security issue of great significance and the sooner we get it done, the better. >> in a lame duck session. >> as soon as possible. >> in a lame duck session. >> the potential is there for lame duck. >> and you would want that. >> that's the soonest possible time, absolutely. >> just so we're clear, why does one need russia's cooperation today? >> i've worked hard, not just in

this treaty with my counterpart in russia and i've seen it up and down our government over the course of the last couple of years and we've really taken significant steps, no better example than this weekend where president medvedev was actually in lisbon with all of nato supportive of a missile defense treaty -- i'm sorry missile defense capability in the future and a year or two ago that just not would have been possible. the russians have supported us in afghanistan, allowed us to transport some of our most significant equipment where they could have pushed back on that. they've also helped in other ways that wouldn't be widely known so the relationship is maturing, very specifically, and it's one that's helped us in iran so they've -- so there's been an awful lot tied into the improvement of this relationship. >> not ratifying it, does that harm american credibility, for instance? many of the senators who are saying no, let's not do it in this lame duck session are the

ones who say we need to make sure iran does not proliferate nuclear material. we need to make sure that north korea does not as we've just seen. how does this affect america's credibility when it comes to nonproliferation. >> i think president obama said coming out of this nato summit many of the leaders there spoke to him about the need to ratify this new s.t.a.r.t. treaty and certainly it's indicative of the commitment that many other countries have to us and the importance of getting it done. so i'm certainly concerned about how and in particular how we look and also this emerging relationship with russia and what it would mean to not do that and they've clearly sent signals already with respect to that which haven't been positive. >> what signals? >> just they've spoken to the need to get this done, the importance of it and whether or not it would be tied to this relationship given all that we've done in the course of the last couple of years. >> let's move on to afghanistan an area where you said they have been cooperating.

they've just said they are going to offer more roots through their territory for material for nato and u.s. forces in afghanistan. in nato summit in lisbon, talking now about a 2014 deadline for transferring combat responsibilities to the afghan forces. i've also heard is that an absolute date. >> yes, it is. >> absolute. >> yes, it is one everybody signed up to. >> all combat operations will be handed over to afghans at the end of 2014. >> i would describe it much like what we just went through in iraq where clearly they have the lead for their own security. we are then in some capacity in a training advising and assist mode which we would expect to be for some time but in terms of combat operations they would have the lead. >> so you see post-2014 just like we see in iraq today? >> as best we can tell, absolutely. >> any more? >> any more? >> troop, operations, i mean i ask you because right now how many areas have even been

transferred to afghan control? >> well, one of the thing that is happened in lisbon was the commitment to start the transfer in the spring and that will be based on conditions on the ground and recommendation from general petraeus literally district by district. so it's a significant commitment to start that this spring. again, it really is a situation where the afghans then lead specifically in terms of their own security and we think that's absolutely critical and that they'll be capable of starting to be able to do that this spring. >> well, your own officers say in fact even in the least combative areas of afghanistan that it could take something like 18 months to 24 months to complete a transfer to afghan lead in terms of security. can they really, do you believe, take over security within four years. >> i do believe as best we understand things right now that that's very much a reachable goal. there's a lot to do between now and then clearly. very dangerous place, very tough fight we're in right now.

we certainly understand that but that's a goal actually that president karzai set out there and that all nato allies, actually all countries who are providing forces because there are some 20 other countries doing that, have signed up to and we think it's reachable. >> in order to do that it looks like the situation on the ground is shifting. in other words, that there is a huge spike in raids, whether it be drones in the pakistan area, whether it be trying to kill as many taliban as possible on the ground in afghanistan. is that what's happening now. >> we knew this year would be a particularly difficult year because of all the added troops that we put in among other things. and it has been. and i would expect next year to be a very difficult year, as well. that said, the security situation has started to change. it has started to get better. we've sacrificed greatly tragic losses, far too many always, but we've also succeeded in starting to reverse the momentum. i think general petraeus calls

it we've arrested -- >> you say it's not irreversi e irreversible. >> it isn't irreversible and still fragile. that's where we are in this fight. >> so given that fact as you put it, what is the relationship with president karzai which seems to be basically all over the place on any given day. what does he say now about night raid. >> well, he's -- i think obviously most recently he's spoken to his concerns about that. the piece that you ran earlier speaks to a huge issue, which is the issue of civilian casualties but it also speaks to a point that was -- is oftentimes not clearly articulated, which is the taliban are killing about nine or ten times more civilians than our forces are. and we are making extraordinary efforts to make sure that doesn't happen. we recognize president karzai's concern with respect to night raids and some of the other concerns that he has and we are doing all we can. there has to be a balance here very specifically. >> let me move quickly to yemen.

al qaeda brazenly puts out a statement yesterday or today saying this is our tactic, bombs that cost $4,000 plus, a raid against multibillions of security in counterterrorism. are they going to succeed with one of these cargo plane bombs. >> there is an awful lot of effort to make sure they don't. >> doesn't that worry you. >> you bet it does and give credit to a lot of people at this point in time they haven't been able to pull something like this off because it's a very serious threat and i believe what they are saying. they've grown. it's dangerous and it's a place where need to focus. >> don't ask, don't tell, something that's hugely important right now. there are draft reporters come to you. some 70% of the military say it will either have a beneficial or nonexistent effect. do you think it needs to be voted on in this lame duck session. >> well, i won't speak to what the draft report says.

we'll have this report done here and to secretary gates in the next couple of weeks by december 1st and i won't make any comments on where i think we need to go until that report is done. >> do you support it though repealing don't ask, don't tell? >> from my personal perspective, absolutely. >> because. >> because i think it belies us as an institution. we value integrity as an institution. >> you mean forcing them to lie about -- >> and then asking individuals to come in and lie about who they are every day goes counter to who we are as an institution. >> apart from the integrity issue many of your allies whether it be england or canada or france or australia, the israeli army, they have openly gay service members in their military with no adverse effects. >> certainly. i've seen that and that is very much a part of this review and we'll incorporate that into the review and recommendations which go up the chain? so were you angry with the new marine commandant when he cast his own doubts over this and criticized it.

>> he had made his position clear in testimony. what concerned me about his most recent comment, it came at a time where we had the draft report in hand, and we had all agreed that we would speak to this privately until we completed the report and made our recommendations up the chain. >> and if it does not get voted on in the lame duck session is there any chance it will come up in any reasonable time period afterwards. >> well, it is very hard to predict what's going to happen. >> do you think -- >> from a legislative perspective. the other piece that is out there that is real is the courts are very active on this and my concern is that at some point in time the courts could change this law and in that not give us the right amount of time to implement it. i think it's much better done if it's going to get done, it's much better done through legislature than out of the courts. >> admiral mullen, thank you very much indeed for joining us. the roundtable is next with

george will, robert reich, donna brazile and ed luce from "financial times." also later a report from haiti on the cholera outbreak. has the country been abandoned again? breathe in, breathe out. as volatile as markets have been lately, having the security of a strong financial partner certainly lets you breathe easier. for more than 140 years, pacific life has helped millions of americans build a secure financial future wouldn't it be nice to take a deep breath and relax? ask a financial professional about pacific life. the power to help you succeed.

logistics makes the world work better. ♪ when it's planes in the sky ♪ ♪ for a chain of supply, that's logistics ♪ ♪ when the parts for the line ♪ ♪ come precisely on time ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ a continuous link, that is always in sync ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ carbon footprint reduced, bottom line gets a boost ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ with new ways to compete ♪ there'll be cheers on wall street, that's logistics ♪

♪ when technology knows ♪ right where everything goes, that's logistics ♪ ♪ bells will ring, ring a ding ♪ ♪ ring a ding, ring a ding, that's logistics ♪ ♪ there will be no more stress ♪ ♪ cause you've called ups, that's logistics ♪ first is live video chat on the go. so you can be face-to-face

even when you can't be. whether you're on 4g, 3g... and of course wi-fi. first lets you stream live video to the web. in 3...2... 1. what will you do first with evo, the first 4g phone? only from sprint. the now network. deaf, hard-of-hearing and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com. my kids say i speak a different language. but i love math and math and science develop new ideas. we've used hydrogen in our plants for decades. the old hydrogen units were very large. recently, we've been able to reduce that. then our scientists said "what if we could make it small enough to produce and use hydrogen right on board a car, as part of a hydrogen system." this could significantly reduce emissions and increase fuel economy by as much as 80%.

coming up next, the roundtable and "the sunday funnies." coming up next, th roundtable and "the sunday funnies." when i saw all the jobs disappearing, i knew i needed to find a better way to support my daughter. at age forty, greg flowers went back to school. i got a job as a computer applications engineer. but now some in washington want regulations restricting access to career colleges and universities,

denying opportunity to millions of people like greg, letting government decide who can go to college. it's my education, my job, it should be my choice. don't let washington get in the way.

whoa. >> yeah. pull. dang it. >> missed it. >> bristol the pistol you fired a few blanks during the week but tonight all guns blazing. >> if you ran for president, could you beat barack obama? >> i believe so. >> she's always underestimated, so, you know, i think -- i think i shouldn't say anymore. >> there you go. >> a big week for sarah palin. one of the topics for our

roundtable with george will, robert reich, author of "aftershock: the next economy and america's future." gmic strategist donna brazile and ed luce of the "financial times" and want to start with our interview with admiral mike mullen and clearly we'll get to sarah palin. what do you think? admiral mullen could barely be constrained? >> i thought it was interesting. he was very, very tempted -- you could almost read his mind -- to say that, look, jon kyl is taking direction from mitch mcconnell who says explicitly that the next two years are going to be about making sure that barack obama is not a two-term president and, therefore, this is all politics and therefore the republicans are putting politics above national security. >> i mean, on an issue like this, they can't do that, can they? i mean really he tipped off the military, the intelligence, the financial, all the questions that they had have been resolved. >> i think jon kyl, i take at

his word and respect him very much. first of all he says it's nonsense as john -- joe biden keeps saying, it is to ratify this in a lame duck session. that means if we didn't have a lame duck session, which we shouldn't do ever, we -- >> it's to ratify it right now. as soon as possible. >> six weeks from now, oh, please in -- >> they want to re-open it. >> jon kyl is bargaining for the modernization of our nuclear force. >> it's about money. >> it's about the modernization of our force. can i give you will's law of arms control. it is impossible until it is unimportant. this is unimportant so it's going to get done. who lies awake worrying about the size, not the security, but the size of the russian nuclear arsenal. no one. >> you're partly right because the size is not the main issue. it's the verification which is a huge issue and vitally american credibility. here we have this story from

north korea today, how does america stand up and say, you guys can't proliferate if we're mott going to do this, how can we lead. >> very, very difficult. russia, of course, is a part of the six-party group with north korea and therefore its cooperation is also important there. as it is on afghanistan, ass it on iran. these broader implications for failing to ratify s.t.a.r.t. here go across the world. russia's cooperation is something obama has worked on very successfully, very patiently, along with hillary clinton for two years now and this puts it in jeopardy. one other point though about mitch mcconnell's pledge to make obama a one-term president. clearly that's going to be the strategy of the republicans. question is are they going to do it intelligently or unintelligently and i think senator kyl, his comments and his stance indicate it could well be the latter. >> senator kyl a year ago after returning from geneva called upon the senate to quickly ratify this treaty. now, what is happening in one

year. >> clearly the republicans have redoubled their efforts to block anything president obama would like to see passed. they want to defy him a victory. this is political malpractice and senator kyl said that himself so it might be -- george is probably correct. it might be about money. to get more money. the president has promised $4 billion more but in all -- >> in addition to 80 -- >> that's right. in all of the hearings. senator kyl and no wone else expressed objections and this is one of those moments where they can succeed in blocking the president. >> there were 21 separate hearings and briefings. i mean this is not something that's been put suddenly on the agenda. and for kyl to say right now we just don't have time or this is -- there's not enough money i think defies logic. >> again, as admiral mullen said it's not just a nice treaty with a foreign country, it is about russia's cooperation on all the

issues that the united states needs, whether it's afghanistan, iran and all the rest of it. plus, i don't know what you think but some are saying this could give rise to the hard-liners in russia again who just do not want to -- who just don't want to deal with the united states. >> oh, absolutely. i think it's a dream -- if you -- picked two countries that would like to see a failure of ratification it would be north korea and iran. and i think that -- if that argument doesn't work with the republicans, that sort of basic elemental national security argument doesn't work nothing is. there's a greater hatred of obama than a love of american national security. >> let's switch right back to here and economic security. gm today this week had success, initial public offering. bailout worked saving gm worked? >> well, it worked, christiane, to the extent that, indeed, gm is now worth $50 billion if you believe the stock market. and before in the old gm was worth $25 billion.

but what happened during the bailout? actually it was a -- it was not so much a bailout as it was a reorganization under bankruptcy and they got rid of $80 billion of debt. they got rid of thousands of jobs, divisions that were not functioning. wall streeters came in and reorganized gm. why do we suppose the exact same thing would not have happened under chapter 11 bankruptcy, reorganization. it's not clear that the $50 billion of taxpayer money was necessary. >> of course, they'll get it back unless the share price goes to $55 and they sell 500 million shares of the stock. don't believe a word gm says. remember that last april their ceo in an op-ed piece in "wall street journal" and echoing in television commercials said gm has paid back the bailout in full. it paid back a tiny sliver of it and paid it back with government funds from another account. so do not listen to gm. >> don't listen to a word gm

says? >> i find that difficult to disagree with. i would however say just in defense of the treasury's handling of this ipo that there is not an ipo in the world that -- not a privatization in the world that isn't controversial, hasn't been criticized for being underpriced or overpriced or misallocated and in this case clearly they'll have to see an increase in the share price to get the taxpayer money fully back? we saved a critical part of the base and that's good news during this thanksgiving week. >> and, indeed warren buffett knows a bit about business, has written an op-ed this last week to uncle sam thank you from your grateful nephew warren for actually saving the economy. do you give the administration any credit for that. >> yes, certainly. and the economy would be much worse were it not for everything the administration has done but, again, it's hard to prove a negative. it's very, very difficult right now. we look at the degree of anger and upset still there in the

american economy, on main street, "the washington post" ran a survey not long ago showing that 53% of homeowners, 53% are worried about paying their mortgage. now, this may be a good economy for wall street. it may be a good economy for the ipos. may be a good economy for the people in the top 1% whose assets are in financial instruments but this is not a good economy yet for most people. >> the economy is showing still slow signs of coming back. the job numbers keep getting incrementally better but not enough to affect the 9.6%. was it -- is it actually going to help? >> the gm ipo. >> and the measures as warren buffett said that helped keep the economy from -- >> they're out there. nothing more than other than what ben bernanke and the fed is doing will be available in this political climate and whether it will be enough to help, i think there are grounds for deep

skementicism. i think we're looking at a japan-style system of low growth or the threat of it. one thing about the gm ipo, counterfactor wall. if gm had gone bankrupt and large portions had been closed down we could have lost several hundred thousand jobs, exaggerated million might be too high. the administration's communications effort on this has been absolutely abysmal. it's quite extraordinary to me how they haven't put this forward more forcefully and how the public still doesn't see just how different a kind of bailout this was than the wall street bailouts which remain deservedly unpopular. >> let me play what warren buffett told us about taxes. it will come up in this session of congress, the bush era taxes which either have to be extended or not. this is what he said about it. >> i think that people at the high end, people like myself should be paying a lot more in taxes. we have it better than we've ever had it. >> they say you have to keep those tax cuts even on the very

wealthy because that is what energizes business and capitalism. >> the rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and it will all trickle down to the rest of you. that has not worked the last ten years and i hope the american public is catching on. >> so what do you think is going to happen? where will the compromise be? what is the tax situation going to look like. >> i think we can all come together on raising warren buffett's taxes. >> he wants to. >> of course, all billionaires say marginal importance -- >> 1098 in seattle by the -- >> you're asking in the aftermath of november 2nd will the fellows come in and raise taxes? no and by the way, on one of the tax -- the favorite new taxes of the wonk class is a value added tax. last year they voted on it, 83-13 to disapprove of value added tax. >> you know, even in this town

that seems enoured to hip project kra si for them to say we must have a tax break and extend them for the top earners but at the same type we don't have enough money because the deficit extend the unemployment insurance for working americans who have been out of work in record numbers, long-term unemployed gets some sort of an award for hypocrisy. this is absurd on its face. >> i want to raise the issue of sarah palin. she's had a big week as we've been saying. let's play what she told barbara walters which will air on barbara walters' thanksgiving special. >> i'm looking at the lay of the land now and trying to figure that out. if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family if it's a good thing. >> well, that was about whether she was going to run for president and she was subsequently asked by barbara if you ran against barack obama,

could you win. she said i think i might be able to. is she going to run. >> any time you have to say you have to check with your family that's always in my judgment a euphemism i'm running. she has a lot of commercial activity yet to sell before she actually tosses her gloves in the ring. she has a book to promote. she has a tv show. i'm sure george is going to stay up tonight to watch it, george. >> george? >> i'll pass. >> she has fox news, so she has -- unlike the other candidates that have to go out there and build up their name i.d., sarah palin has a strong name identification. but once she decides to run for president -- for the presidency, all things are off the table. all of this celebrity. she has to begin to put together policy papers. she has to put together an organization and while it might look good, might look good to think about it, it's very tough to run for president of the united states. >> do you think she will. >> no, well, no, i don't think she will partly because the very

people that decide our elections, the independent voters have made up their mind about her and it's a negative judgment they've made. after the 2008 campaign she had two things she had to do. she had to go home to alaska and study and she had to govern alaska well. instead she quit halfway through her first term and shows up in the audience of "dancing with the stars" and other distinctly nonpresidential venues. >> where her daughter is participating. >> where her daughter is participating. >> a mother's support. >> pardon. >> pore's support. >> stirring family values but not good training to be president. >> how does the world look at a sarah palin run in 2012? >> with deep horror, i think but also some amusement. i think there's a group out there that this is the best scenario for barack obama. >> the midterms were characterized by the rise and power of the safe party. sarah palin is a big backer, the godmother, the supporter. she made quite a lot of inroad,

many of her candidate, the majority actually won. why is this so strange that she might run? >> you know, christiane, i want to support your and i think it's actually more than simply raising the question here. sarah palin is not only a realistic candidate right now but given the degree of anger in the electorate anti-establishment anger, populist anger she is the only candidate to come along who actually embodies that anger. this is not the ebullience of ronald reagan but those who feel screwed by the establishment and she is i think -- look, i'm not going to make any predictions but i think she does not have a negligible chance. >> i think she should run to upset the republican establishment and run to show the country that, yes, in an era where men still dominate that women can still run. of course, i disagree with her policy positions but i hope she

would shock the washington republican sustainment and go out there, build a counterorganization and put together some realistic issues she can present to the american people. i don't think she'll have an easy time beating president obama but an interesting year. >> if you look at her book itinerary iowa and south carolina feature very promine prominently so certainly going to be an overlap there if she wants to run. >> last topic, tsa, quick point, the anger here talking about anger. 80% of the american people say they would go through the full body x-ray. >> i hate to be facetious but i'd be quite flattered if someone wanted to see me naked. >> i've been through the full body x-rays. it's the intimacy of new touching procedures that rattled my cage. the man said don't mess with my junk. don't up my jewels. don't -- yeah, it's very personal. but i don't mind a full body scan. just don't show my pictures

without paying me. >> i think the problem here is that there's been so much time since the christmas bomber that people don't remember -- americans are willing to sacrifice privacy if they can connect it up with a specific incident where national security is compromised and i think christmas bomber was last christmas. >> you'll continue this in the green room where the roundtable with continue at abcnews.com/thisweek where you can also find our fact checks in connection with politifact. haiti and the virulent strain of cholera that's just arrived here in the united states. in the past few weeks it's killed more than 1,100 people in haiti and hospitalized 17,000. haitians hold their general election next sunday but on the streets this week, violent demonstrations were directed against united nations troops who are suspected of bringing the disease to the country. it's been almost a year since the world pledged to rebuild haiti after that devastating earthquake. and that has not happened. here's abc's matt gutman

reporting from port-au-prince, the capital. >> reporter: they are dying in the streets here. these sanitation crews treat the bodies and truck them to the morgue which has already reached capacity. the government's failure to deal with the outbreak and rumors that the united nations spread the contagion fueled riots all week. violence the u.n. alleges is political. >> there have been demonstrations which stopped us doing our work for cholera victims and those on the political side say they know these are demonstrations that were planned. they weren't spontaneous. >> reporter: this is election season, traditionally a period of unrest. in the meantime, supplies to treat the living are chronically short. >> this stuff here, it's cheap and life is not. if you look around here today, these people would all be dead if it weren't for this. >> reporter: not getting enough of it. >> and i'm getting enough. >> reporter: dr. tom wood has been treating cholera for decades. this is one of the worst outbreaks he's seen.

>> god help us. >> reporter: he weeps for all this misery and for the fact that there need not be so much of it. sean penn runs a relief organization here. americans have donated over a billion dollars for this cause. just a fraction of it has been used. where is it? what's the holdup. >> there's the american people need to know the fraction that's being used is in the administration of the overhead of those organizations that are -- have been tasked with administering that money. >> reporter: the clinton/bush haiti fund has received over $50 million in donations. it has spent only a fraction of it here. american aid groups quietly blame haiti's inability to absorb the aid. apparently because of the scale of the damage here, but also because of the government's ineptitude but there's also corruption. supplies out at the port where this mountain of containers grows. aid groups blame customs officials. just want to get a couple of answers about how things work, how merchandise moves out of the port and how you release it.

held up the release of trucks and equipment for months, medicine for days. these people don't have one or two or three days, they will die. >> they will die without this. >> reporter: this world health organization warehouse is haiti's central pharmacy. there's probably enough medication to treat everybody in the country who has cholera. getting it to them is much more difficult. >> the u.n. says, go through this paperwork sign that piece of paperwork go see that government official and in the meantime, people die. >> reporter: epidemiologists are telling us they'll continue to die. hundreds of thousands are expected to become infected over the coming weeks and months. matt gutman, abc news, port-au-prince, haiti. >> and joining me this morning is abc's chief health director dr. richard besser and he was recently in haiti. so dr. besser, thanks for joining us this morning. i think first and foremost, how big a threat of spread is this cholera outbreak, both to the

united states and the surrounding region? >> well, one of the critical things to know about cholera is that 75% of those -- of the people who are infected will have absolutely no symptoms. so they're able to take the bacteria and bring it to another country. in a country like the united states where there's clean water and adequate sanitation, the likelihood of spread is very, very remote unless it's introduced into a migrant camp or place that didn't have adequate water. the caribbean is a different story and it's likely there will be cases introduced to the caribbean, whether or not they spread, whether or not they set up shop like they have done in haiti will depend on the quality of water and sanitation this those countries. >> and in terms of trying to get it under control in haiti, we saw in the report that basic, you know, say line solution or rehydration and water is not getting to the people as fast as possible. how and what do they need? >> well, you know, cholera is one of the most rewarding diseases to treat. if you get to someone early in the disease you give them oral

rehydration or i.v. fluids they will recover. one dose of antibiotic will kill the bacteria. if you don't get those critical fluids to people quickly, they can die in less than a day. i was in bangladesh last week and was watching how they treat it in the cholera hospital there. and it was like a machine. they had this down to a science. in haiti the numbers coming out are very, very alarming. ten times the number of people who should be dying from cholera are dying from it. that's a good sign that people are not getting treated quickly enough. that the solutions are not getting to people in time to save those lives. >> and in terms of the billions of dollars that have been pledged to haiti, not all of them have got there, but can actually something happen to improve this situation without a real infrastructure improvement, without development? >> well, you know, the long-term solution is infrastructure. it is providing water treatment plants and repairing those plants that were broken but if you look at haiti before the earthquake, the numbers there

were really not good at all. only 12% of the population had piped water into their house that was clean. only 17% of the population used adequate sanitation. so this earthquake did not hit a situation where you had a country with viable public health infrastructure that needed to be repaired. it hit a country that was really at bottom level, a country that did not have infrastructure to begin with and the critical thing for haiti is can they build a public health infrastructure that works? in the meantime, it's going down to the basics. it's providing water storage containers and home chlorination with tablets or dilute bleach. that can provide safe drinking water but it takes a lot to sustain that effort. >> dr. besser, thanks indeed for joining us this morning and we'll keep watching it. thank you. and next week we have a special program for you. they are economic titans, innovators and risk takers. now giving their billions back. next sunday my exclusive interviews with bill and melinda

gate, ted turner and warren buffett in a rare sunday morning appearance. >> i just think the idea of die nast tick wealth is kind of crazy. >> what motivates them to give up so much. >> it is scary because everybody is always afraid that they're going to go broke. >> what they predict for the future of the united states. >> the question for us is are we educating people well? >> and their solutions to the current economic challenges. does there need to be a sense of sacrifice in the united states? buffett, gates and turner. they're giving pledge. a special "this week" next sunday. and this sunday still more to come with "in memoriam" and "the sunday funnies" up next. [ wind howling ] [ technician ] are you busy? management just sent over these new technical manuals.

they need you to translate them into portuguese. by tomorrow. [ male announcer ] ducati knows it's better for xerox to manage their global publications. so they can focus on building amazing bikes. with xerox, you're ready for real business. is a powerful force. set it in motion... and it goes out into the world like fuel for the economy. one opportunity leading to another... and another. we all have a hand in it. because opportunity can start anywhere, and go everywhere. let's keep it moving. ♪

but i wasn't winning any ribbons managing my diabetes. it was so complicated. there was a lot of information out there. but it was frustrating trying to get the answers i needed. then my company partnered with unitedhealthcare. they provided onsite screenings, healthy cooking tips. that's a recipe i'm keeping. ( announcer ) turning complex data into easy tools. we're 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. now "in memoriam."

>> the ship was a general quarters for more than 24 hours with men fighting the fires. some men had to jump into the sea and were picked up by destroyers and helicopters. >> we remember all of those who died in war this week and the pentagon released the names of 18 service members killed in afghanistan.

we'll be right back. understand. that while you may come from the same family... you know, son, you should take up something more strenuous. you have different needs and desires. - i'm reading a book. - what's a book? so we tailor plans for individuals, featuring a range of integrated solutions. - you at your usual restaurant? - son: maybe. see you tomorrow. - stairs? - elevator. to see how our multi-faceted approach... can benefit your multi-generational wealth, look ahead with us at northerntrust.com. princess of the powerpoint. your core competency... is competency. and you rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle. and go. you can even take a full-size or above.

and still pay the mid-size price. i'm getting an upgrade. [ male announcer ] indeed, business pro. indeed. go national. go like a pro.

and now "the sunday funnies." >> well, a scene from an upcoming episode of "sarah palin's alaska." watch this. >> oh. >> obama pointed out that his dog beau is a portuguese water dog. yeah, that's a good way to make friends. you know who is just like you people, my dog. >> from l.a.x., look at the restrictions. >> for some travelers thanksgiving will be their first taste of this. new measures some call intrusive, others ineffective. is this really the best possible security? >> and we'll be right back with the picture this week. low cost investing doesn't just mean a low price. it means getting everything you need to invest for yourself, not by yourself. it means choosing from stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and every etf sold. plus 5-star service

and research designed to increase your intelligence, not insult it. so you can wave good riddance to some high-priced joker churning out cookie cutter portfolios. price is one thing. value is another. don't confuse the two. e-trade. investing unleashed. e-trade. announcer: this is a baby. a baby generating data in a neo-natal ward. every heart beat, every breath, every anomaly... from over a thousand pieces of unique information per second.

helping doctors find new ways to detect life threatening infections up to 24 hours sooner. on a smarter planet... analyze the data and you can predict what will happen faster. so you can do what they're doing in toronto... and build a smarter hospital. let's build a smarter planet. finally, our picture this week. a month ago we told you about veteran "the new york times" war photographer jao silver badly wounded after stepping on a land mine. we learned that he lost both his legs and is recovering at the walter reed medical center here in washington. friends and his family have set up a website to sell his prints, a lifetime of his work which they hope will contribute to his recovery. go to abcnews.com/thisweek to link to his website. that is our program for this week. we hope you have a great thanksgiving and we will see you

next sunday with our special report.