Inside the timing of US airstrikes against ISIS in Syria

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," September 23, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ANDREA TANTAROS, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Andrea Tantaros, along with Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld. It's 5 o'clock in New York City and this is "The Five."

Last night, the U.S. military began air strikes against ISIS in Syria. This morning the president outlined his strategy before he headed to New York for U.N. meetings.


PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Last night on my orders, America's armed forces began strikes against ISIL targets in Syria. The overall effort will take time, there will be challenges ahead. But we're going to do what's necessary to take the fight to this terrorist group, for the security of the country and the region and for the entire world.


TANTAROS: He also noted a coalition of five Arab nations assisted in the strikes.


OBAMA: We were joined in this action by our friends and partners, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Bahrain and Qatar, America's proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with these nations on behalf of our common security. The strength of this coalition makes it clear to the world that this is not America's fight alone.


TANTAROS: One country that didn't take part was Turkey, our only NATO ally in the region, and what about Europe? Well on "Fox & Friends" this morning, former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair stressed the importance of forming a coalition to back the U.S.


TONY BLAIR, FMR U.K. PRIME MINISTER: It's very important that we support America at this time. It's absolutely the right thing to take the action against ISIS, I think there is a very strong feeling in Europe, too. The single biggest problems we have in security terms in the U.K. now are returning British fighters from Syria -- jihadist fighters. I think to believe, Britain will be -- will be there with the U.S. I mean, look, this is a big problem for us so we have got to help shoulder the responsibility.


TANTAROS: Well, with us to analyze Obama's comments today and preview his U.N. speech tomorrow is Chief White House Correspondent, Ed Henry, here with us at the table in New York. Ed.


TANTAROS: Great to be here with you.

HENRY: It's awesome.

TANTAROS: OK. So, timing of this -- very fascinating, you are on Fox and Friends this morning and you said that the president maybe waited until congress was out of town...

HENRY: Yeah. I don't think it was a dominant factor but I think it was not an accident that if he had launch the air strikes last Wednesday or Thursday when congress was still here, and by the way, have not passed the $500 million he wanted in terms of training and arming the rebels, there might have been a bunch more members of congress who ended up voting for that, who will say, wait a second, he's going for with the air strikes without our authorization. Now, he wants other thing. Maybe we'll hold it back and it have force them to actually stay and debate this. Instead of rushing home -- well, maybe for parties to campaign, which is what a lot would do. They didn't want to vote on this. They didn't want to deal with this hot potato.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Is that or -- and President Obama did send a letter to both houses -- both chambers in the house saying he has the right to do it under various legal authorities. But is it that, Ed, or is it playing the pining of the politics of it? So if he waits six weeks since we've known ISIS got Americans -- started beheading Americans, if he waits six weeks, that's six weeks closer to the November election. As you know, as we all know, when we are at war, presidential ratings go up...


HENRY: I don't think there's any evidence that they did this because of the midterm elections now. I think the biggest reason it appears they did it is because they believe, and we're going to have to press for evidence but they believe that this Khorosan terror group that nobody really heard over a week or two ago might be ready in planning and the final stages of terror attacks here in the U.S., that is a big deal. But they're going to have to present the evidence because it sort of runs counter to the narrative they were pushing for a while, that, you know, separately ISIS wasn't that big of a threat. And remember, it's only a few months ago, the president was talking about the, you know, post al-Qaeda, these affiliates, these offshoots of the JV squad, try to put on the Kobe Bryant uniform, all it turns out, we're now going to war to fight the JV squad. So they're not quite the JV squad.

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: Well, let's keep -- I mean, let's give credit or credits due here. For the first time you've got Arabs bombing Arabs and my feeling about NATO is that they wanted to be sure they have Arab countries in the air before they have NATO. So it wasn't all Europeans versus Arabs again.

HENRY: And if they're joined at the later stage.

BECKEL: And they will be joined at a later stage and I predict that Turkey will join them as well. But NATO is not going to sit back and not be involved in this, do you think?

HENRY: For now, they haven't done anything. I mean, I was in Wale for the NATO summit.

BECKEL: I mean, you said they're not doing it, they're working with it right now, working out of -- I mean European allies, I'm sorry.

HENRY: OK. So, let's separate. NATO as a body decided to stay out. Individual NATO nations like the United Kingdom for example, yes we should acknowledge or not totally sitting on side lines. David Cameron has made strong comments but in terms of action, he's provided intelligence, other support to the coalition but no air strikes. I mean, the British had a lot of warplanes, I think he was burned by the tact that they lost that vote in parliament a year or so ago, on bombing Assad not ISIS, but bombing in Syria, and Cameron might be a little worried.


BECKEL: There will be British planes in the air by next week, I predict.

HENRY: All right, we'll see if you're right.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Ed, some are deeply offended by the name Tomahawk being used for a weapon of death. Has the president met with activists to discuss this outrage, not to mention the effect these missiles have on the climate, which are devastating. Has that come up in any of these discussions at all? And I want you to be perfectly frank.

HENRY: In fairness to Tomahawks -- I know you hate the phrase in fairness. I'm going to try to get as many phrases as you hate as possible. But I think you mentioned climate change, it is kind of interesting because the president today, the big focus was supposed to be his speech about climate change. He still went forward with it. I got (inaudible) that much coverage. You've got China and India now participating in the climate change talks here, so sort of pointless without the (inaudible) and Senator Kerry many times has talked about climate change as being a huge national secure threat. Maybe, there's long term but I think this has woke on the White House up to the fact in the short term, this terror threat is a lot bigger than climate change.

GUTFELD: That actually that was just a joke question.

HENRY: I was trying to make chicken salad out of whatever the question was.


TANTAROS: He just insulted your question.

GUTFELD: I know.

HENRY: I know it wasn't a real question, but I was frying to actually run with something.

GUTFELD: This attack was anticipated well in advance and I'm wondering, you know, that ISIS was able to evacuate, they were able to spread out and hide their assets. I mean, in effect, when you go hunting, you don't, you know, set up a blow horn before you go hunting. Why is it had, I mean, a negative effect -- I mean, could we have been more efficient if perhaps President Obama had bombed as he was announcing his strategy.

HENRY: He could have. I mean, look, he did give ISIS at least two weeks, maybe longer, but just two weeks ago, he spoke to the nation, spoke to the world and said, I'm authorizing air strikes in Syria, we're going to be going in at a time of our choosing. But once you say that to the world, ISIS obviously knows it's coming, and it gives them time. I mean, Bret Baier was reporting earlier that we did take out a command in Command and Control Center, we're taking out infrastructure, but unfortunately, ISIS could, you know, build new infrastructure, build a new Command and Control Center. The key is going to be taking out some of their key leaders.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: And you said two weeks ago, the president said -- four weeks ago he said we don't have a strategy yet. Two weeks ago he warned them that this was coming. Two years ago, this same action could have taken place under the same legal authorities as now that they are describing. But 200,000 Syrian civilians have been killed. I mean, do they feel any responsibility for allowing a safe haven to grow, to the point that they get pushed that Sunni nations basically pushed the United States into finally doing something because we have credible evidence of an imminent threat on the homeland -- just last week, you asked Joshua Ernest about the question of credible evidence. They said, we have no credible evidence about a terror threat from ISIL. So maybe (inaudible), they don't want to give the Khorosans a head -- a heads up. But do they feel any sort of responsibility for saying, like three months ago, they wanted to repeal the authorization to use military force. Now they are actually using the authorization to use military force to take action without talking to the congress.

HENRY: He's kind of low voice crying out, but as a democrat, as Tim Kaine of Virginia, who gave another speech today saying, that the president wanted to repeal this authorization from the Bush era and is now using it to his advantage to say, well, we can go to war against -- you know, it's an authorization of military force against Al Qaeda, even though the administration has said this is not Al Qaeda, it's an Al Qaeda offshoot, it's an Al Qaeda affiliate, and, you know, Khorosan group didn't exist after 9/11.


PERINO: They're getting their orders from Al Qaeda.

BECKEL: You said that the Sunnis were pushing the United States, it was actually the reverse.

PERINO: I disagree, Bob, I will tell you that for the last 16 months, the Sunni nations have been begging the United States to do exactly...

BECKEL: The question is whether they were going to join the fight and get in the air.

PERINO: So the president basically does the same thing he could have done two years ago, but meanwhile, 200,000 Syrian civilians were killed.

BECKEL: I agree with you on that.

PERINO: A 130 Kurds have pushed from Syria into Turkey.

BECKEL: I hear that.

PERINO: You have more of a problem now because you have an imminent threat, because ISIL, meanwhile, they're like the worst fighting force we have ever seen, and then you have the Khorosan basically planning mincing airline attacks, this has all happened while Al Qaeda is on the run.


BECKEL: Do you know the significance of Arabs bombing Arabs?

PERINO: I'm all for it. Look -- and I was for the 38 coalition members, I joined President Bush and Tony Blair, that which were insulted by Secretary of State John Kerry in the 2004 election. I actually think that these Sunni nations were helping behind the scenes. We didn't make them come out and now they are forced to. Maybe that's a good thing and maybe Obama will be applauded, that's like the best thing that ever happened to the world. But I seriously doubt it, when you have all of this evidence that they were basically doing domestic politics while the Khorosan -- how do you that, were building their capacities as a safe haven in Syria.


BECKEL: I think this will go downing as the most historical move, to put the Arab planes in the area.

GUTFELD: It's a historical move, but it's not a huge move.

PERINO: What if it doesn't work? And Bob, what about this? So you've been - - we're going to attack ISIS, then we're going to attack the Khorosans. What is it over arching philosophy? What is President Obama going to say tomorrow to the United Nations, like is this a war on terror or is it a war kind of like...


PERINO: It's not semantics, that's actually a philosophy.

BECKEL: Well, it's -- they will be, in my view, there will be no ISIS that will be able to fight by the elections.

TANTAROS: It isn't just launching air strikes without going to congress first. He did not ask congress for this authority to do this. He also passed inversion rules to executive FIAT and he's going to the U.N. to talk about climate change, via executive FIAT, three things circumventing congress. Dana, mentioned George W. Bush read, who had coalition of 38 members who went to the U.N., who want to congress and not a peep from anyone in congress about circumventing on something that is undefined.


PERINO: He is calling it an illegal war. I mean, I'm all for the strikes. Go for it, like bomb the heck out of them. But just admit that they are using the same philosophy that they have denigrated for the past eight years.

GUTFELD: It's the same thing though in the media, I was watching this morning at the gym, networks we're applauding the unity of the parties, how -- almost all speaking as one voice in America and they dismissed dissent. I don't remember this kind of thoughtfulness under Bush, back end dissent during the Iraq war was just patriotic, now it's just mean.


BECKEL: The democrats are really not just kin. There are a lot of democrats that are opposed to this because they're circumventing congress.

HENRY: By the way, Assad today said OK, I'm all for going after ISIS, but meanwhile, he had a big fighter jet flying in the Israeli airspace, not getting a lot of attention because if what's going on with U.S. air strikes. The Israelis actually shot one of the Syrian warplanes down. So there's a lot else going on in the region that's not getting a lot of attention.

BOLLING: You know what your first question is next time you've got Josh Ernest up on the air?

GUTFELD: Eric Bolling...


BOLLING: But how come you for weeks, the administration said that ISIS is - - there's no credible threat to the homeland, ISIS or whatever, basically saying we have time, there's been no credible threat. Putting off these actual air strikes until now, and then he -- they come out and say, well, now, it was not of was credible, it was imminent, it was about to happen, it was planned.


BOLLING: Bob, for six weeks they said there's no credible threat to the homeland, we have time. Well take care of the...

PERINO: Well, maybe they were trying to get...

BOLLING: Are you trying to tell me that Josh Ernest and other administration officials haven't said there is, quote, no credible threat to the homeland? We have been reporting on that comment.

BECKEL: ISIS does not pose a credible threat to the homeland, a lot of us believe that, but...

BOLLING: But Bob, they just said they bombed Khorosan because they have...


BECKEL: Just something for God's sake. So, just say so that they got the...

BOLLING: ISIS is credible and Khorosan -- have you ever heard of Khorosan, have you ever heard of this group?


BOLLING: No, neither has anybody else.

BECKEL: I want you to just once say something positive.

BOLLING: I like what he did.

BECKEL: OK, good. Thank you.

BOLLING: More air strikes.

TANTAROS: Did you ever invite somebody to your dinner table and your family and their guests and you kind of feel like you have had a comfortable moment with them. Ed, welcome to The Five.

HENRY: I feel left out.

TANTAROS: By the way, can I ask you about Yemen. Coming up, now that we're finally seeing Obama's military strategy in action, the question becomes will it actually work. Four Star General Jack Keane will be here. Oh, another guest to this fun dinner.


PERINO: Last night, President Obama launched the first wave of air strikes against ISIS militants in Syria, and the Pentagon has already warning that this is only the beginning.


REAR ADM JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: Well, it's not our policy to discuss future operations. I can tell you that last night's strikes were only the beginning. For this reason, there may be some tactics, techniques and procedures that we just won't be able to address here today, to preserve options that we may want available to us in the future.


PERINO: But will the air strikes work? Joining us now to analyze the president's military strategy is Fox News Military Analyst, Four Star General Jack Keane. We're really honored to have you here because you know a little bit more than we do and then we can opine about what do you say. Let me just ask that question. Do think that we have the strategy and the capability to accomplish the mission as this has been laid out by the president?

GEN JACK KEANE (RET), FMR ARMY VICE CHIEF OF STAFF: The answer to that is no. The -- look, this is the beginning of a long journey, what took place here is a good thing, particularly as, Bob, was pointing out, this is to the fact of the matter is, these are Sunni based countries attacking a Sunni based terror organization, that has never happened before. They all have radical Islamic movements inside their country and that is significant that, they're doing this -- normally they want to tamp down that movement. Now, this is an air campaign, this is the beginning of it in Syria, it will take some time to get the kind of overall results we want from it. And as you have heard many times, while the air campaign will be decisive in terms of degrading ISIS, it's not going to be able to be defeated and destroyed, that will take an effective ground campaign and the problem we have with that ground campaign is that we have a weak hand in Syria, in the free Syrian army, and we have a weak hand in Iraq as well, with the Iraqis, Peshmerga and also Sunni tribes. They have never put that together before and the Iraqi army has collapsed in the face of this enemy. And later, as just this week, they lost 300 fighters in Anbar Province, the Iraqi army. So what the military has been trying to do is strengthen what we can in Iraq as well as in Syria. The president is going to arm and equip and train the free Syrian army, we have got a long way to go with that organization, and in Iraq, we have not been able to strengthen it to the degree we want.

BECKEL: General, let me ask you a question about that. That -- they spent in the Iraqi war $200 some million training the Iraqi Military, after the decision was made to break it apart when they first got in. That was just a horrible decision. But they did put together a military, they were supposed to be trained, we spent hundreds of millions of dollars to do it, and now a lot of them are taking their guns and dropping them and running. Now, what does that say about how well our strategy was in the Iraq War?

KEANE: Well, there's actually reason for that, first of all, we want them to keep our trainers to assist and in growth and development there, and they were all pulled out in 2011, that's number one. But number two is, is that as we pretty well recognize, Maliki was undermining his political opponents, but he also dramatically replaced the proven combat leaders that were victorious during the surge with people that were politically aligned with them. They were not effective military leaders, Bob. And as a result to that, by the time ISIS actually attacked, some of these units were only at 50 percent strength. You can't fight without cohesion and people trusting one another. And these cronings (ph) and hacks that he put in there, they were some of the first people to leave the battlefield.

BECKEL: How did Maliki get in to power, I wonder. Was he -- we supported both, did we not?

KEANE: Well, the first time around he was duly elected. The second time around, actually Alawi had one the election by, you know, by one or two votes. But instead backing Alawi, we de facto back Maliki and so to the Iranians, (inaudible) to be sure, and here we have Maliki for another four years, huge geo political mistake on our part to fill in something like that to happen.

PERINO: Andrea.

TANTAROS: General Keane, I'm with you, I don't have a lot of confidence in the free Syrian army. And I don't believe it, a year from now when they're finally training and they can stand up against the threat against ISIS, I think by then it will be too late. Why isn't there more talk and, perhaps, we've missed the opportunity, because you mentioned that we can't in Syria with Assad. Why isn't there more talk to work with Assad? I know we drew the red line and didn't enforce it, but he's a brutal guy and I get it, he murdered a lot of people. But he shows no real appetite for power outside of that region. And his army has actually protected Christians, so why not try and cut some kind of deal with Assad? I mean if we're launching this brutal air strike, the only way, as you point out, to gain some of that territory back is if the Kurds or Assad's army, the Syrian army, take that back. Is that a possibility at all?

KEANE: Well, I think you have a moral imperative. I mean, this is a brutal dictator that's killed 192,000 of his people.

TANTAROS: So was Stalin, though.

KEANE: He used a systematic...

TANTAROS: We've partner with Stalin, as well.

KEANE: ...he does barrel bombing. He's got -- there's over 6 million people displaced, the amount of human suffering that's taken place in Syria is very quite extraordinary. And we haven't really come to grips with the humanitarian crisis, that's there. I could not fathom us supporting or working with Assad towards any common objective at all. And what we need to do is -- look, the free Syrian army's got north of 50,000. The 5,000 was being talk about doesn't represent them, it represents an opportunity to train some people. They also have a huge opportunity with the 3 million people that are in refugee camps to recruit people out of there and get them into this fight. The fact of the matter is, the free Syrian army early on by another name, had the momentum and was pushing against Assad. And it looked like Assad -- remember he was going to be toppled. What happened? Russia and Iran saw that and they were all in.

BECKEL: And the Obama Administration did not do their job on taking care of the refugees. I mean they have dropped the ball on that, completely, as far as I'm concerned. Do you think that's right, do you think that the Obama administration allowed -- didn't allow it, but I mean they didn't do enough to deal with it?

KEANE: Well, there are a number of things we could have in establishing some from free zones where people could have migrated to and be protected in those zones. Those decision and recommendation were taken of to...

PERINO: Try to get...

KEANE: ...early on.

PERINO: Eric and Greg in here before we got to go.

BOLLING: OK. General, you said in order to destroy ISIS we need an effective ground campaign. General, I'm going to go out limb (ph) and say, there are a lot of people who calling for an effective ground campaign, they're also calling for arming the free Syrian army, a lot of those fighters have come over to ISIS, so we don't really know who we're arming. Do we really want to put more American troops into that fight? Is there ever a chance to beat these guys? Won't they just turn into Khorasan or the next iteration of Al Qaeda? Why don't want to put U.S. -- more American lives?

KEANE: Well, I don't think so. Look, the CIA has vetted this organization for some time now. And there were doubts about this early on. They were characterized as being unreliable and not trustworthy and if we gave them arms, they're going to wind up in the hands of other people. But over time, that is not the case, I have some confidence in the CIA's judgment and the Department of Defense's judgment about this organization. Look, it's not perfect, come on. But at the end of the day, we do believe we can arm them, we do believe they will fight. They have had some success against ISIS, they're the only organization that has taken these guys on. And the fact of the matter is -- look, there's plenty of risk here, they have got to deal with ISIS, and at some point they have to deal with Assad. And -- hopefully, we'll get some kind of as diplomatic solution out of it. The problem in Iraq is serious, because we've got to push ISIS out of Iraq, and to the only way you're going to do that is with an effective ground force.

BOLLING: Iraqi or American?

KEANE: Well, what the military would like to do is strengthen the hands of the Iraqi army, the Peshmerga, by getting advisors down there, forward the controllers. Also, get some J-sack direct action in there, taken ISIS leaders now, that is combat. And I think in my own mind, apache helicopters, AC130 gun ships to help them, and then have in your back pocket, combat brigades to go into Iraq if this thing fails. Because -- ask yourself, the president says we're going to destroy this force and we're going to defeat ISIS. If the counter offensive in Iraq fails and it gets stalled, what is the -- what are we go to do to regain the initiative? At that point we're out of options except other ground combat brigades.

PERINO: OK. Greg, do you have lightning fast question to ask?

GUTFELD: I was just going to ask same question as Ed Henry, why the hell do we give these people a heads up? This is the one thing that I don't understand, is why the president didn't start bombing the moment he got in that podium. What was -- that must have been a mistake, right, a calculated -- uncalculated error?

KEANE: Well, I certainly -- when I left Megyn Kelly that night, I was going home in the car, I thought we missed an opportunity not to bomb tonight. I do believe that al-Baghdadi -- by the way, he's confident and his got a very good team around him. They're much better than the old Al Qaeda in Iraq is. But I believe one of his planning assumptions, watching the fact that the administration did not execute air strikes when a chemical redline was crossed in Syria a year ago. I think he believed that he could put all of the support infrastructure in Syria, establish a bonafide sanctuary, and we would not conduct the air strikes. He miscalculated, he's going to a pay a price for that.

PERINO: All right. Well, we ended all right. Ahead on The Five, President Obama announces plans for another war, but this one isn't against Islamic extremism. We're going to tell you what that is, next.


GUTFELD: At the U.N. today, the president announced he was ordering fed agencies to consider climate change in all international development programs. I wonder if he said, "There's one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other? That is the urgent and growing threat of a changing climate"?


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There's one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other. And that is the urgent and growing threat of a changing climate.


GUTFELD; I think we can all breathe easier. Well, just the rich who hate coal but still use it.

Right now around the world, 4 million people without options like coal are dying from burning dung among other crud. Completely ban coal and you can triple that number.

So why do upscale libs with access to modern energy wish to deny it from others? It's like the climate creeps from the march. I think we live in a grotesque era of we have everything we want all the time right now.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We live in a grotesque era of where we have everything we want all the time right now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think having less is actually very freeing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think we just have way too much stuff, and we use energy like it's never going to run out. And it will run out eventually.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Turn everything off.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everyone turn everything off?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Turn everything off.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But I really need my cell phone.



GUTFELD: Yes, stuff is evil after you've already benefitted from it. Rachel Carson did the same thing with a DDT ban, where there was no malaria it didn't matter. But where the bugs with malaria lived, kids died.

Still, the press frets that war is not the legacy President Obama wanted. He wanted to be the earth god who reversed the tides. Who cares? Our security trumps the president's pain over letting Yoko Ono down.

The climate has gotten hotter, definitely, but it's the climate of terror, and it's something we can definitely reverse. Our president must admit that the imminent threat isn't Celsius but psychopaths.

War may not be your choice, but this isn't college anymore. You don't choose the major; the major chooses you.

Andrea, the one thing I notice is that there are no poor people in this fight. Do you notice?


GUTFELD: They're not -- this is not a concern. All they want is to have coal and a warm -- a warm house and a roof over their head. But it's always these guys with $200 glasses at marches telling you how to live.

TANTAROS: It's very true. And this should be, in fairness, the Golden age of climate research. It really should. But the politicians are trying to shut it down, because it might interfere with their political goals.

I mean, Gore has always admitted over and over that there may be mistakes in the climate models. Right? But instead of saying, "Let's keep researching it to get more information, they say that the science is settled.

The other day, though, Obama, one of his chief climate experts came out in The Wall Street Journal this weekend and said it's not, which they didn't want to acknowledge at all.

But I do think we should have all the answers.

To your point, isn't it the height of hubris to think that you can pass a tax and change the temperature?


TANTAROS: I mean, really, it is -- it is very bizarre. And you think about the promises they made with Obamacare. We gave them one-third of the economy. Imagine giving them 100 percent when they're saying, "Just trust us; the science is settled."


TANTAROS: It would be lunacy.

GUTFELD: Yes. Eric, by demonizing coal and limiting pipelines and fracking, President Obama, in a way, is hurting us in the fight against terror because he's putting us at the mercy of these madmen who run the energy.

BOLLING: We need to become self-sufficient, and we can do it. Look, you know I'm pro-oil. It's 20 years in that business. It's the best source. It's the most economical source. It's the cheapest source of energy. It will keep us on top globally.

But I'm not -- no one is saying push away from renewables completely. We're simply saying it can't be a government mandate; it can't be subsidized by the government. When it becomes economically viable source of energy -- wind, solar, hydro -- then all for it, but in the meantime let's stay on top. Let's win, and let our private companies dictate when wind, solar and hydro are economical.

GUTFELD: Dana, is this climate summit going to go anywhere, since the people that were supposed to be there aren't there?

PERINO: Like China?


PERINO: So global climate change requires a global solution.


PERINO: President Obama says that we should haven't to take the lead everywhere. So I think it would be better if he said, "Europe, you take the lead on climate. I'm going to take the lead on terror." I think that would be a fair trade.


PERINO: And then we would actually deal with the most immediate problem at hand.

GUTFELD: Yes. Bob, isn't fossil fuels the ultimate renewable energy? It's renewed once. It used to be a dinosaur. Now it's fuel. How is that not renewable?

BECKEL: I'm going to yield my time back, simply say that I think it's going to define this century much more than terrorism.

GUTFELD: Well...

BOLLING: Oh, wait. Is it global warming or climate change? Which one?

BECKEL: Climate change.

TANTAROS: Climate change.

GUTFELD: Up next, could a puppy help people stop drinking and driving? Budweiser thinks so, and they've got a new ad to prove it ahead on "The Five."


BOLLING: All right, welcome back to "The Five." Time for -- well, the fastest six minutes in news today. Three exceptional stories, seven energetic minutes, one enthusiastic host.

First up, controversy seems to follow Miss America 2015 around. Apparently while a sorority sister at Hofstra University last year, Kira Kazantsev planned -- I'm sorry, penned an e-mail to the pledges that promised an evening of name calling, berating pledges for their personal flaws and generally making the recruits' lives a, quote, "living hell." She denied the hazing allegations and addressed the e-mail that got her kicked out of the sorority this way.


KIRA KAZANTSEV, MISS AMERICA 2015: Under the broad definition of hazing, yes, I was involved with some of those activities while I was at Hofstra, and I was hazed. And I was kind of brought up through the organization thinking that that's appropriate behavior.

In the e-mail, I made a joke. And that was taken out of context.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What was the joke that you made in that e-mail?

KAZANTSEV: That we would make the evening scary for the pledges.


BOLLING: We're going to start with you. First of all, it's around. You were an Alpha Phi. Right?

PERINO: I was. And she was an Alpha Phi, so of course, Eric, I cannot break the bounds of sisterhood.

This is so stupid. I mean, if you read the e-mail and you get the details, she was saying, a night of, what, late-night crafts. It's ridiculous. And this angry website that tried to out her, it's a bunch of angry chicks that just hate on really attractive women. They should find something else better to do. To me, this is a total nothing burger.


GUTFELD: We -- this is the era of the flash mob witch hunt. So rather than confront real evil, none of these people in these blogs write about anything but this. They choose temporary targets and to expose and condemn. Then they move on.

By the way, it turns out she did have a real talent. She should have been -- for her talent portion she should have been spanking somebody with a hair brush.

BOLLING: I wasn't opposed to that.


PERINO: We did...

BOLLING: This one or the next one?

PERINO: I would just say this never happens on the speech team.

BOLLING: That's the truth.

Were you a sorority sister?

PERINO: No, we didn't have sororities there.

BECKEL: I get in a lot of trouble commenting on people who win things, so I'm going to just pass.

BOLLING: OK, let's do this one. Next up, my pal Rush Limbaugh has a call screener he affectionately calls Snerdley. His real name is James Golden. He's worked for Rush for 26 years, and he packs quite an opinion punch of his own. Here's Snerdley on liberalism and its damaging effect on the black community, and Al "Not So Sharp" Sharpton.


JAMES "SNERDLEY" GOLDEN, CALL SCREENER FOR RUSH LIMBAUGH: But isn't it a shame that, for most black people, the good old days were the days when things were segregated legally in this country?

What liberalism has done to the black communities -- it's not a monolithic community -- is horrific. Al Sharpton and the rest of that bunch should be ashamed of themselves for what they have let, how they've let the issue of black life degenerate into a political opportunism issue.


BOLLING: All right. Quick thoughts. Bob, you don't agree with that?

BECKEL: That opening line, if that's what he said, which was they're better off back there in the days of segregation, is to me -- and anything else he said after that is absurd.

BOLLING: OK. Go, Dana.

PERINO: I think that I am not as qualified to talk about black America as he is, OK, so there's that. But I do think that a focus on safety and crime, that's got to be the No. 1 thing. Jobs is second and then education.

There's studies that are coming out about education, the disparities between white communities and black communities. Still, it's just not good enough in America. We have to improve that.

BOLLING: Saying blacks are better off under segregation is never an argument winner, because you end up tarring all your other points. You may have valid points, but you don't persuade anybody by saying that.

Maybe he meant that the last 40 decades of government programs have hurt blacks and created dependency instead of opportunity. He should have just said that. But saying -- but saying that, you just -- that's not how you persuade people.

BOLLING: Let's also point out that he did call on al Sharpton and the ilk for not being helpful to the black community.

TANTAROS: And those statements are true. And I agree with Greg. When you open that way, you kind of lose me after that.

Although he is right about policies that have to do with education, taking away charter schools from poor and minority schools. That's a progressive thought. And to Dana's point, the crime point about taking away stop and frisk, disproportionately hurts blacks.

BOLLING: Let's just point out we're not sure. We're not sure he said that blacks were better off under segregation. He said some people think they may be better off.

GUTFELD: Yes, but that's a weasely way of saying it.

BOLLING: Finally, get the Kleenex out, folks. If you have a dog or if you have a heart, you'll need them...

GUTFELD: A dog heart.

BOLLING: ... with this extremely effective Bud ad.


MUSIC: I'll be right here for you when you come home

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll see you later, buddy.

GRAPHIC: For some, the waiting never ended. But we can change that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, I'm sorry. I decided I shouldn't drive home last night. I stayed at Dave's.

GRAPHIC: Make a plan to make it home. Your friends are counting on you.


BOLLING: Message loud and clear, don't drink and drive, Dana.

PERINO: Or don't go out at all, just stay home with your dog like I do. BOLLING: Absolutely.

GUTFELD: Well, this is disgusting to me. I mean, I'm for all kinds of marriage, but with a guy and a dog, this is gross.

And by the way, how stupid is that dog to think that you can get drunk from Budweiser. Idiot dog, dumb dog.


TANTAROS: I think the world would be a better place if we all acted more like dogs and showed the love and the loyalty, don't you?

GUTFELD: No. You don't want that.


BOLLING: Bob, I was tearing up, thinking that the dog was waiting for a military member to come back. But instead, it was a drunk driver, who some people don't come back from. Effective ad for you?

BECKEL: Absolutely. I wish more people would do that. It was a very effective ad, I'm glad bud did it.

Although I agree with Greg, I could drink two case of that and I wouldn't get drunk.

BOLLING: Look at that, we did it. Coming up, Bob's been warning us about an October surprise. So is military action in the Middle East a big surprise? Surprised whom. That discussion next.


BECKEL: This is the fastest one minute in television. One host -- I mean, it's got topic and one very sexy post.

OK. I talked about the October surprise. We're beginning to see it. I suggested there's going to be a lot more. But Eric, you want -- we have no time. What's the grade? Give the president a grade from "F" to "A."

BOLLING: I'll give him an "A" for what he's doing, but I've giving you an "F" for taking credit for something we were just talking about. Four weeks is an October surprise.

BECKEL: All right.

PERINO: I want to know how -- I want to know, like, did the White House pass out classified information to Democratic surrogates so that you could make it on the Drudge report saying there was an October surprise?

BECKEL: I don't know.

PERINO: Did that happen?

BECKEL: Nobody predicted Arabs were going to be in the air.

BOLLING: I mean, I think you and I both said we'd like to see Turkey. He'd like to see Saudi Arabia, and we'd like to see Iran involved.

BECKEL: The answer is no. Nobody -- nobody leaked any classified information -- Greg.

GUTFELD: Saying that there is an October surprise is like reading a horoscope. The information is so generic that it cannot be false. Like you may be going on a trip next month. You might meet something interesting. Of course, because that's what happens in life.

PERINO: You might eat Chinese food.

GUTFELD: That's a constant, sadly.

BECKEL: What do you think?

TANTAROS: I think that the White House probably didn't have that big of a heads up on this one. It sounds to me like the Department of Defense figured that the president gave them the authority to do it. So I'm not sure why they were saying big October surprise. I actually don't think this is the October surprise.

What is surprising, though, is that we bombed instead of ISIS , the Khorasan group. It sounds like a sponsor of an NPR show, right? Twenty- five years of providing low interest loans. Who the heck is that?

BECKEL: There will be more specifics to get through on Greg's argument about what will happen.

BOLLING: Isn't the definition of October surprise, it would be surprising enough that it might actually change an election?

BECKEL: I think it might save one or two, that's a -- OK, "One More Thing" is up next.


TANTAROS: It's time now for "One More Thing." I'll kick it off. So you've heard of Tinder and all these mash sites. Well, now there's a new one called Cuddlr. And it allows you to cuddle with people.

And my frequent co-host on "Outnumbered" at noon, Kennedy decided to Time Square to ask people if they would use the Cuddlr app.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I don't really want to cuddle with strangers.


KENNEDY (on camera): You don't want to cuddle.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't need to cuddle.

KENNEDY: You want to cuddle? You want to cuddle?

There's a new app called Cuddlr where people find each other and just cuddle. Do you want to cuddle?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, not really.

Eventually she did find somebody to cuddle with. Yes. And it was really fun. Yes, we used the Cuddlr app. It was very good.

Anyway, you can catch Kennedy at 9 p.m. on "THE INDEPENDENTS" on FOX Business. And she'll be previewing that man on the street. It will be very funny. This evening. There we are cuddling all over the FOX News Channel.

Awe, friends.

BOLLING: What time is...

TANTAROS: Nine o'clock.

Greg, you're up.

It's time for...


GUTFELD: Greg's Sports Corner.


GUTFELD: You know I love my sports. Take a look at the Mighty my football players. They've just finished winning a game. Their parents decided to do something good for them and they made a banner for them.

But they made the banner out of vinyl. And you can't break through vinyl, can you? Look at these poor kids, running head first into that, injuring themselves, probably permanently. They're probably all in the hospital. It's a terrible thing.

Actually, no. The good news is they did win their home game, 24-0. Good for the Mighty My Football Team.

The bad news is, all the parents are in jail for abuse. Yes, I pressed charges, no, I didn't. I'm kidding. I'm going to shut up now. Or maybe I won't.


BOLLING: OK. So this went out to a bunch of Democrats. Check it out. It's a -- it's an effort, watch. There's the first full screen: "Stand with Sandra. Stop Rush Limbaugh."

But when you click through to it, watch what happens. Go to the next screen, guys. It's the "Stop Rush Limbaugh petition that they want people to sign up for. But look who's sponsoring it right there, the DCCC. So what that means is Sandra Fluke, and the Democrat Party are ganging up, are hooking up to fundraise by attacking Rush, a business -- tax-paying businessman more for the Democrats are waging war on the free market and free speech.

BECKEL: You find that unusual?

TANTAROS: It's their best fundraiser.

BECKEL: Raise more money off of Rush than just about anybody.

GUTFELD: It's terrible.

TANTAROS: Becks, hit it. For those of you wrote are dog lovers, you know I'm a suspect of not being one. But in 1952, Richard Nixon was in serious trouble because his wife got a cloth coat or something. Anyway, he went on national television to get himself out of trouble as vice president. And here it was.


RICHARD NIXON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We did get something, a gift after the election. It was a little cocker spaniel dog. And our little girl Trisha, the 6-year-old, named it Checkers. And I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we're going to keep him.


BECKEL: There you go, Dick. If you'd just kept your hands off of Watergate, you'd have been a lot better off.

GUTFELD: He ate the dog.

TANTAROS: You like dogs. Don't say you don't like dogs. There's something wrong with people who don't like dogs. Good warning sign: run from people who don't like them -- Dana.

PERINO: All right. You might have missed it today, because there's all the news about what's happening over in the Middle East. But there's an important op-ed. If you care about the economy, growth and you care about the Republican Party and reaching out in a broader audience about economic growth, Mike Lee and Marco Rubio, two senators on the Republican side. They had an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal today -- you can find it on our Facebook page -- are talking about pro family, pro-growth. You can find it in our Facebook basically trying to address the feeling of working hard but never getting ahead and policies that they would put in place to do that. So I just recommend that, because we didn't have time to talk about it.

Content and Programming Copyright 2014 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2014 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.