This is a RUSH transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," September 4, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET!
O'REILLY: "Impact Segment" tonight, President Obama and Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt held a joint press conference today in Stockholm Syria dominated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BJERSTROM: Could you describe the dilemma to be a Nobel Peace Prize Winner and getting ready to attack Syria?
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: When I see 400 children subjected to gas, over 1,400 innocent civilians dying senselessly, in an environment in which you already have tens of thousands dying and we have the opportunity to take some action that is meaningful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: The President went on but did not directly address the reporter's question about the peace prize.
Joining us from Washington is Republican strategist Kate Obenshain and Democrat Kirsten Powers also a Fox News analyst. So should the President give back his peace prize Powers?
KIRSTEN POWERS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. He should have given it back a long time ago, actually. But you know for the drone war, for the escalating the war in Afghanistan. Having all these people die unnecessarily, plenty of civilians have been killed by his drone war, including children.
So, estimated 200 children are being killed by the drone war.
O'REILLY: Where did -- where did you get that fact? Where did you get the 200?
POWERS: The Bureau of -- Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
POWERS: Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Look it up, Bill.
O'REILLY: I will look it up. I'm interested to know how they got, how they source that out.
POWERS: Yes well there are -- I mean, there are lots of different people that do estimates on the number of people that are killed there. And I think that, you know, how many children would be enough for you? I don't know. Five? Would five be enough for you?
O'REILLY: Well look I mean a war is war and we're fighting war in Afghanistan.
POWERS: You know innocent -- right, ok.
O'REILLY: Wait, wait, Powers. Powers please. You know every war in the history of mankind has resulted in collateral damage and civilian casualties. You have to know that because that's the fact. But now we have.
POWERS: I don't -- first of all, I don't use the term collateral damage because they are human beings.
O'REILLY: Yes but that's what war is.
POWERS: So I try to discuss them as human. And I think that the war should actually be accomplishing something and I don't think that the drones were accomplishing anything.
O'REILLY: All right well that's -- that's a different point.
POWERS: But any I know you love the drone war. So I know you love the drone war --
O'REILLY: I don't love any war but I understand that it's degraded al Qaeda to the extent that they may not be able to kill you, Powers. And I want to see you live you know.
POWERS: It's created more terrorists -- no it's created more terrorist actually.
O'REILLY: All right that's your opinion.
POWERS: It's the opinion of many military leaders, many international experts.
O'REILLY: Oh yes, ok. So we don't -- we don't use drones against al Qaeda and we just let them build their power and sanctuaries that makes a lot of sense.
POWERS: But we don't create more terrorists.
O'REILLY: All right so you wouldn't go into Syria, right? You're not going in?
POWERS: I wouldn't now. I would have probably if he wanted to do this earlier on. I don't quite understand this idea that now suddenly yes, chemical weapons are terrible, but 100,000 people have been killed. So I don't understand why there is a moral imperative now but there wasn't a moral imperative a year ago.
O'REILLY: All right because it is gas based that's the imperative now. How do you see this, Kate?
KATE OBENSHAIN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I can't believe it but I think I agree with just about everything Kirsten just said except the part about the drone warfare. I think -- and that part is offending --
POWERS: Oh come on over, Kate.
OBENSHAIN: -- and the part about offending terrorists and we encourage them. So that part I recoil. But you know, I think -- I think right now there is just this mass confusion. You know, President Obama basically won the election saying he didn't believe in military intervention unless there was imminent threat to our national security. And now he is saying oh, except the red line of chemical warfare. He doesn't care if there is mass extermination of people by Assad through neighborhoods and villages and towns.
O'REILLY: So if you were president, if you were president Kate, then your -- your foreign policy would be to all the bad guys in the world. Yes you can use --
O'REILLY: -- you can use sarin gas and you can use biological warfare.
O'REILLY: You can go ahead and do that just don't threaten America. If you want to wipe out Poland that's ok but don't threaten the USA.
OBENSHAIN: No I'm talking about President Obama foreign policy --
O'REILLY: But I'm talking about you.
OBENSHAIN: Listen to me.
O'REILLY: I'm talking about you Kate Obenshain.
OBENSHAIN: Do you know what my foreign policy would have been.
OBENSHAIN: It would have been similar to Ronald Reagan's. You know what when he went in --
O'REILLY: Ronald Reagan would have got this guy Assad you know that.
OBENSHAIN: Listen to me he would --
POWERS: Ronald Reagan didn't do anything when chemical weapons were used against -- in Iraq.
OBENSHAIN: Wait a minute. May I finish my thought here? What Ronald Reagan would have done differently would have been to know what the consequences were going to be. Right now what you are talking about and what a lot of people are talking about is throwing out Assad and you know who is in control of seven out of nine of the factions that are against Assad right now is al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
O'REILLY: McCain says that's bull.
OBENSHAIN: You are asking -- it's not bull.
O'REILLY: How do you -- so, wait, wait. So you know more than McCain? You are better informed than McCain?
OBENSHAIN: McCain is not giving us the entire story. We know right now.
O'REILLY: So McCain is lying and trying to deceive us.
OBENSHAIN: That al Qaeda -- that al Qaeda forces have been trying for two decades to get chemical weapons so that they can hurt Americans so that they could hurt Israel.
O'REILLY: All right look you can say whatever you want to say and you can read it off the Internet and spit it out. But here is the key question Kate. Are you saying that --
OBENSHAIN: So everything McCain says is --
O'REILLY: -- are you saying that John McCain, number one, doesn't know what he's talking about because he denied everything you just said and number two he is trying to deceive the American people? Is that what you are saying?
OBENSHAIN: I am saying that he and others are under estimating the threat of the opponents to Assad. They are underestimating. They are just saying let's go in there and attack Assad and get him out of the way because of the chemical weapons, the chemical attacks are horrid.
O'REILLY: All right so what you are just saying in effect, what you're saying in effect is that you're smarter than McCain and you know more than he does.
OBENSHAIN: I am saying that he is under stating Bill intentionally to further his own objectives.
POWERS: Has John McCain never been wrong about anything, Bill?
O'REILLY: Everybody has been wrong about stuff. I mean spouting off about al Qaeda this, al Qaeda that.
OBENSHAIN: I'm not spouting off about something. It's known that al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood has deep ties.
O'REILLY: This is not -- this is not going out by any Intel at all. All right, I've got to stop although it's been just a pleasure to talk with both of you tonight.
Content and Programming Copyright 2012 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2012 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.