>> live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west," where recovered innovation and the future of technology. i'm emily chang. ahead this hour, i spoke with t-mobile's outspoken seo about the carrier's latest moves to stand out in the wireless aboutry -- outspoken ceo the carrier's latest moves to stand out in the wireless industry. ledger is also getting some attention for harsh words he had four rivals at&t and verizon. companies one day be able to print human body parts using 3-d printers?

it is an area of growing research with some companies looking into whether printers can make human organs for transplant. we will hear more about the efforts of one company that is already reducing living tissue. risingckberry shares are after the company reported a smaller loss per share and $23 million in net income in the first quarter. cost cutting and asset sales helped the smartphone maker, which is still dealing with revenue issues. i will speak with the ceo at the bottom of the hour. day,r lead story of the t-mobile ceo john ledger takes aim at rivals at&t and verizon with a new program called an carrier five point know. 5.0.carrier hip-hop duo macklemore and ryan lewis headlined.

the packed house also got to hear about t-mobile's free trial program where potential customers will get a free iphone five four week to try out the mobile network. t-mobile is also waiting data charges from music services like pandora and spotify. and it is setting up its own music streaming service. i spoke about all of it with t-mobile's ceo, john ledger. >> he announced the availability of wideband lt in 16 markets in the u.s. already, which gives you up to 150 megs of speed, that is a 90 minute hd video in in about 100, and 7 million people's locations in 15 markets. was the 6e found billion dollars in media spending that the industry is spending on maps, and a cacophony of crazy messages,

makes it hard to come through. what we found by listening to our customers is what they said to us is, hey, we love what you're doing, but we would love a chance to test drive. we are offering a program where we are offering something called the seven night stand and it is the ability to get the iphone 5 s from apple fully loaded and have the experience for week free of charge, no down payment, no cost. we believe that will change the way the industry purchases wildly. >> what you're doing is quite impressive. why don't the other carriers do this? contract ort is no anytime upgrade or international data roaming, people have artificial barriers in their mind about why it was done the other way. we talked to apple. and by the way, this is great.

apple, the awareness levels by --tomers that people will that t-mobile has the iphone is very low. this is a chance not only to test drive our network, but test drive the apple iphone five s -- apple iphone 5 s. it begs the question why it was not this way, but tomorrow it will be to the other guy, why don't you do this? >> apple does not usually partner. how did the partnership with apple come about? clicks one of the reasons that we are partnering is -- >> one of the reasons that we are partnering is it is a small update i provide to you. t-mobile is the fastest-growing wireless company that exist. obviously, apple would like to find a way to be a higher percentage of our business and get the word out. andave a very good strong evolving partnership with them for the >> amazon just relieved its new smartphones. at&t is the exclusive carrier. you have not been shy or -- shy,

as usual, about your thoughts. you said, "amazon does not know what they signed up for." tell us what you really think. back andd love to come talk about music freedom, but the observations for me are, i was really excited. i was expecting something big. oldi kind of saw an business model, two-year contract, exclusive with at&t, a home -- a phone that was as high as any device in the market. as a prime customer, i thought they would give me a phone, but they gave prime service to the other customers. i did see that the phone will allow you to point at things and it will tell you what you are seeing. for me, i usually know what i'm looking at, except late friday

night. and i'm not sure having my phone to me what i'm looking at is going to help. i don't know. great way, if it is a success, then i believe you will be able to buy it unlocked and t-mobile customers can have it. carrierger question is un five and six. >> let's talk about that. how much do you think this will entice customers to switch to t-mobile, or stay with t-mobile if they are thinking about switching? clicks here is what i know -- >> here is what i know. about 113 million people stream music on their devices. that is double in a year. on the traffic on this network has gone up sixfold in the last couple of years. it is a big deal. secondly, i know that the other carriers are just using this as an opportunity to gouge plans. they tell the customers what service to use, and then they charge for every single minute of listening.

pain point is, music freedom needs to be solved. we are providing our customers free streaming, unlimited music in the top six or seven services, and then more to follow. and we also work with rhapsody to create what is called un radio. to our unlimited customers who already get free streaming. it will be a very big deal. radio, un carrier, you are on a roll with the "un." what is next with the merger and you being in charge of a? >> last time we talked, it took you seven minutes to get to that question. today, i think you are down to about five. you need a little improvement for the >> i'm running out of time. but we are not going to comment on rumors or speculation.

been candid about the industry and the importance of this to the wireless consumer. willnk consolidation continue this momentum. >> t-mobile ceo do john legere words, but after that interview, take a listen to what he had to say to the crowd that came to the news unveil. clicks every time we do something, people do not tell me, hey, that is a great idea. they say, how were you able to do that? the assumption is, these high and mighty doo-wop list that are raping you for every penny you have, if they could -- doo-wop a list that are raping you for every penny you have, if they could do something nice for you, they would. the truth is, they hate you. but did he go too far? what do you think about those

comments? >> did he go too far? with the word rate, yes, that is a deeply unfunny word. there is something i like about what john legere is doing. he is driving down prices in the telecom industry, and it could not of happened to a nicer industry. one of the things that has happened since t-mobile decided they would compete, and they started driving their prices, you have seen average revenue per user dropped all over the industry. it drop for at&t, for sprint, and is finally starting to drop for verizon. that is having a really good effect. the problem is, there is another dog whistle in what he said. he said, the doo-wop lists --duopolists. that is code word for at&t and sprint. -- at&t and verizon. it is true that t-mobile and

sprint would like to merge. what he is saying is, we don't have a chance unless we merge. while he is being all crazy and wearing his pink t-shirt and talking about macklemore, what he is really talking about is we need to merge. we need to reduce competition to increase, addition. it is a questionable strategy. i'm not sure i buy it. "dear he just tweeted, at&t, verizon, and sprint, almost 2000 of your customers have signed up to cheat on you already." when i talk to t-mobile employees, they revere him. he has brought new energy to the company. whatusly, they like they're hearing. can he keep up the rhetoric if he's not the underdog anymore? know whether he can or not, but i don't and he's going to need to. the sec and the justice

department has made it clear they like having four major in the wireless market. that is not an accident. economist know that around three or four players, usually for, that is when the market is truly competitive. see companiesou competing on price. it is true of widgets and also wireless carriers. when there are only three -- when t-mobile and sprint together have the spectrum holdings that the two of them can have come out when they can buy enough spectrum to have as much as at&t and verizon do if that comes through, are they going to have to compete on price the way they did before? or will we see a stasis in the average revenue created per user ? will we see a continued burdening of unfair contract terms? toobile does not just want make the customer happy, but it wants to make money. a really good way to make money is to go to three players and leave prices where they are. but i asked him if he had any second thoughts -- >> i asked him if he had me second thoughts

about what he said last night. i have not heard yet from him about that. i will let you know if i do. coming up, we are waiting for president obama to speak about action in iraq. we will take you to the white house live. ♪

>> welcome back. i'm emily chang. twitter is pushing further into television, making a deal to buy a company that is working closely with twitter, snappy tv. it is working to distribute video across a number of platforms and technology already used widely by many twitter advertisers and media partners. the goldman sachs harvard university global education conference is underway. it brings together 600 leaders in education from the public and private sectors.

with companies like poor sarah, daphne, and annex already disrupting traditional education models, what will we -- what will be the next big thing in education? i spoke with george from the harvard and at asked him about what he is most excited about in education today. >> we are excited to be cohosting this with harvard. we have an extraordinary group of people. it is a unique conference as goldman sachs conferences go, in that it brings together companies, investors, academics, administrators, policymakers, government people. it is a unique group of folks. the recurrent theme from the discussions this morning is the possibility for technology disruption in this space, to increase the access, quality, and outcome of education throughout the world. it is a very exciting time in this market.

education, and education technology companies have not become huge companies, especially by public company market cap. how do you see that goldman focus on education paying off? >> well, two things. first, there has been a sea change in the market as far as investor dollars in this market. if you look at the time from 2001-11, there was about $250 million a year invested in the market. in 2012-13, roughly $1 billion in each year invested. -- ae at about $2 billion rate of $2 billion for this year. it generates returns and create new companies for us. this market has already been quite important and active for us. we have done some 17 transactions in the last 18 months in this area. it has already been a pretty active space for us. >> you worked with some of the biggest and most powerful tech companies in the world, from

apple to facebook. could an education or education technology company ever become as big as facebook? >> if you look at that market opportunity, and thought about the opportunity statistic that i shared earlier, it seems like there is every prospect for the ability to create a very large market cap company in this space. just the sheer size of the opportunity in the market is larger than those companies you are referencing. i also believe those companies themselves will increasingly become interested in this market and there is a play for large companies like that in education over time. >> speaking of online education companies like audacity and corsair a, which are trying to replace traditional courses with online, do you see the potential for online education to replace traditional degrees, like a harvard degree for example?

nothe way to look at it is like a disruptor, but an expander. most people engaging courses --e available online through are not college students like you and i. they may be unable geographically to access the quality education they want. are moreocs expansive in their education access. one thing you have seen with harvard and others beginning to dip their toe in this area. >> i have to ask you about the buber,ment right now, which i know goldman is a part of, where do you see and what do you think about the word e"?uble" -- "bubbl

>> i have been in this market for 20 years and i've seen its ups and downs. i have never been more excited about the prospect for companies to create change and value in our society. to the extent there is some breakaway outcome in this space, in some ways it is not surprising, given the company impacts on the world around us. there will always be ups and downs in this market, but the fundamentals are so compelling in technology today. no wonder companies are creating this much value out there. but how do you see some of the turmoil happening in tech marketes and the public impacting private companies on the choice whether to go a book or to sell m&a activity? >> i think one of the things that characterizes the great companies that we get a chance to take public is that they are much more focused on their life as a public company as a

journey, as a process, and less singularly focused on the ipo as an event. it is really about the timing of taking the -- the company public, and what advantages can be gained by taking the company public. there's less focus on the market tone, which you know can change printer medically. what i see -- pretty dramatically. i see in the companies i deal with is more focus on creating value and less focus on what is going on in the market day today. >> george lee, goldman sachs cochairman of the global tech media and banking investment group. while we are waiting for president obama to speak, he is scheduled to speak on a rock and the options the u.s. may take to help iraq's government quiet this swelling insurgency in a come -- backcountry. we -- in that country. we will bring you his or mark's life. ♪ remarks live. ♪

>> welcome back. we are waiting for president obama to take a podium at the white house. andill be speaking on iraq, we will take you there live as soon as it happens. but first, we returned to our wiring the world series. parts are not just for cars or airplanes. you may someday find them in your body. medical research companies are investigating whether 3-d printers can construct human organs. company has already produced living tissue that it plans to sell to drug makers to test new products. house the -- how soon will doctors be able to perform transplants for kidney or liver? shannon, how far off is a? and how does it work echo -- how far off is it?

and how does it work? >> you take stem cells from blood and put them in a petri dish. and then you grow enough cells were you can put them in a printer cartridge, or the type of cartridge where they use to print out parts and let it print away. this goopy are from scaffolding that hold it all together. you could eventually produce a bladder, kidney, or liver. thisis all still theory at point. we are probably years away from someone actually being able to go to their doctor and get a replacement organ. but we are getting a lot closer than a couple of years ago when i first started looking into this. we actually have bladders that were artificially grown in labs and have been implanted in patients and tested and studied. we are moving closer. i know it sounds like sci-fi, but it will be reality in the next five years or so.

>> fascinating. shannon pettypiece, our bloomberg news health reporter. a story we will continue to follow. thank you. we will have the president speaking at the white house live when that happens. ♪

>> you are watching "bloomberg west" where we focus on the future of technology and business. i'm emily chang. first-quarter earnings for blackberry show that the cost-cutting efforts are starting to pay off. however blackberry still has major challenges on the sales side with revenue falling 69% in the first -- in the first quarter to $966 million. me to talk about their turnaround efforts is blackberry

ceo john thain. actually, we will have to hold the phone for a moment. i have to get over to new york to where president obama is about to speak at the white house. mark halperin in new york right now. >> good afternoon. hear frome to president obama in the briefing room, expecting to hear his statement about u.s. efforts in iraq. our colleague at the white house point out this is unusual. barack obama got elected in part talking about getting out of iraq. >> i think the scene down there is a little surreal, especially for those who have covered president bush and both of those administrations. got so farsaid, he publicly on the promise of getting out of this country. and now on the tail end of his administration, and being forced by events on the ground to get ready to commit some degree of

force to the events spiraling out of control. with whiteident met house leaders and briefed them. he's is meeting with the full national security team exploring military and security options. there is clearly not happiness in the white house with the current leadership in the iraqi government. here isnd gentlemen, the president. >> i just met with my national security team to discuss the situation in iraq. we have been meeting regularly to review the situation. the terrorist organization that operates in iraq and syria made advances inside iraq. as i said last week, it poses a threat to the iraqi people, to the region, and to u.s. interests. i wanted to give you an update on how we are responding.

first, we are working to secure our embassy and personnel inside iraq. as president, i have no greater priority than the safety of our men and women serving overseas. i have taken some steps to relocate some of our embassy personnel. and we've sent reinforcements to better secure our facilities. second, at my direction we have significantly increased our intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets to have a better picture of what is taking place inside iraq. this will give us a greater understanding of what they are doing, where it is located, and how we might secure efforts to counter this threat. third, the united states will continue to increase support to iraqi security forces. we are prepared to create joint operations centers in baghdad and northern iraq to share intelligence and coordinate planning to confront the terrorist threat of isil. we are prepared to work with congress to provide additional

equipment. we have had advisors in iraq through our embassy and we are prepared to send a small number of additional american military advisers, up to 300, to assess how we can best train, advise, and support the iraqi security forces going forward. american forces will not be returning to combat in iraq. but we will help the rockies if they take the fight to terrorists -- the iraqis if they take the fight to terrorists that threaten their safety in the region. fourth, we have positioned additional military assets in the region. because of our increased intelligence resources, we are developing more information about potential targets associated with isil. and going forward, we will be prepared to take targeted and precise military action if and when we determined the situation on the ground requires it. but if we do, i will consult closely with congress and

leaders in iraq and the region. though,o emphasize, that the best and most effective response to a threat like isil will ultimately involve partnerships where local forces like iraqis take the lead. willly, the united states lead a diplomatic effort to work with iraqi leaders and the countries in the region to support stability in iraq. at my direction, secretary kerry weekend for the middle east, where he will be able to consult with our allies and partners. and just as all of iraq's neighbors must respect iraq's territorial integrity, all of iraq's neighbors have a vital interest in ensuring that this does not send into civil war or become a safe haven for terrorists. descend into civil war or become a safe haven for terrorists. above all, they need to work

together for iraq's future. shia, sunni, kurds, all of them must have confidence that they can advance to the political process rather than violence. they need to build consensus across iraq's different communities. now that the results of the recent election has been certified -- have been certified, a new parliament should convene as soon as possible. it will give the government an opportunity to convene a genuine dialogue that were present the interests of all iraqis. it is not the place for the red states to choose iraq's leaders. it is clear that -- for the united states to choose iraq's leaders. it is clear that only the government there can truly bring the iraqi people together and help them through this crisis. meanwhile, the united states will not pursue military options atpursue one sect in iraq the expense of another. there is no military solution inside iraq, certainly not one that is led by the united

states. there is an urgent need for an inclusive political process, a more capable iraqi security force, and a counterterrorism effort to deny groups like isil a safe haven. in closing, recent days have reminded us of the deep scars left by america's wars in iraq. of manyside the death american patriots, many veterans also carry wounds. there have been intense emotions in the past and we have seen some of those debates resurface. what is clear from the last decade is the need for the united states to ask hard questions before we take action abroad. particularly with military actions. the most important question we should all be asking is that we have to keep front and center the issue that i keep front and center, that is, what is in the

national security interest of the united states of america? as commander-in-chief, that is what i stay focused on. as americans, that is what all of us should be focused on. and going forward, will continue to consult closely with congress and we will keep the american people informed. we will main -- remain vigilant and do everything in our power to protect the security of the united states and the safety of the american people. with akamai will take some questions. i will start with -- with that, i will take some questions. . will start with colleen but do you have any confidence in prime minister melekeok this point -- prime minister maliki at this point? jobs i said, it is not our to choose iraq's leaders. part of what our patriots fought for during many years in iraq was the right and the opportunity for iraqis to determine their own destiny and choose their own leaders.

but i don't ping there is any least,that right now, at -- i don't think there is any secret that right now, at least, there are deep divisions between sunni, shia, and kurd leaders. divisions those deep continue or worsen, it will be very hard for an iraqi central government to elect an aero -- an iraqi military to deal with the crisis. we have consulted with prime minister maliki and have said that to him privately, and we said it publicly. whether he is premised her or -- prime minister or any other leader who aspires to lead the country, it has to be an agenda in which sunni, shia, and kurd all feel they have the opportunity to advance their interests through the political process. and we have seen over the last two years, actually dating back 2008 and 2009, but worse over

, a sensetwo years among sunnis that their interests were not being served, the legislation that had been promised around, for example, and de-application -- de-bath had been installed and the government has not reached out to some of the tribes and been able to bring them into a process that gives ofm a sense that being part a unity government or a single nationstate is there. that has to be worked through. part of the reason we saw better iraqi security forces with larger numbers not being able to hold contested territory against isil.

that lackbly reflects of a sense of commitment on the part of sunni communities to work with baghdad. that has to be fixed if we are going to get through this crisis. jim. >> americans are looking at the position you are making today as a preview of coming attractions. younumber of the geysers are to send in may just be the -- of advisors you are sending in a just be the beginning of boots on the ground down the road. are you concerned? guardalways have to against mission creep. let me repeat what i've said in the past. american combat troops are not going to be fighting in iraq again. we do not have the ability to

simply put -- simply solve this problem by sending in tens of andsands of troops committing the kinds of blood and treasure that has already been expended in iraq. ultimate, this will have to be solved by the iraqis. it is in our national security interest not to see an all-out civil war inside iraq, not just for humanitarian reasons, but because that ultimately can be destabilizing throughout the region. and in addition to having strong allies there that we are committed to protecting, obviously there are issues like energy. and the global energy market continues to be important. we also have an interest in making sure we don't have a safe haven that continues to grow for isil and other extremist jihadist groups, who could use

that as a basis of operations for planning and targeting our personnel and ourselves overseas, and eventually the homeland. if they accumulate more money, if they accumulate more ammunition, more military capability, larger numbers, that poses great dangers not just to allies of ours like jordan, which is very close by, but also poses a grave danger potentially to europe come and ultimately the united states. we have already seen it inside of syria. groups like isil, that right now are fighting with other extremist groups, or the assad regime that was nonresponsive to .he sunni majority there that has attracted more jihadist, or would be jihadists,

some of them from europe. and over time, that can create a cadre of terrorists that could harm us. we have humanitarian interest in preventing lead shed. we have strategic interests in stability in the region will stop we have counterterrorism interests. bloodshed.nting we have strategic interests in stability in the region. we have counterterrorism interests. will be done through the reconnaissance and surveillance that we've already done, coupled with some of our best people on the ground doing assessments of exactly what the situation is, starting by the way with the firm in or around baghdad and making sure that is not overrun. -- with the perimeter around baghdad and making sure that is

not overrun. but that does not foreshadow a larger commitment of troops to actually fight in iraq. that would not be effective in meeting the core interest that we have. >> do you wish you had left residual force in iraq to address this? >> keep in mind, that was not a decision made by me. it was a decision made by the iraqi government. we offered a modest residual force to help continue to train and advise iraqi security forces. core requirement, which would require any situation where we have u.s. troops overseas, that they are provided immunity. that if, for example, they end up acting in self-defense, or they are attacked and find ,hemselves in a tough situation that they are not somehow hauled

before a foreign court. requirement that we have for u.s. troop presence anywhere. the iraqi government, and prime minister maliki declined to provide us that immunity. i think it is important, though, to recognize that despite the toision, we have continued provide them with very intensive advice and support, and have continued over this process of the last five years not only to offer them our assistance militarily but we've also continue to urge the kind of come -- lyrical compromises -- the kind of political compromises we think are openly necessary in order for them to have a multifunctional sectarian democracy inside the country. juliett.

the question on syria a moment ago, the united states has been supplying weaponry to the opposition. does the expansion of the syrian war into iraq change her mind about the kind of weapons and -- change your mind about the kind of weapons and training your supplying ech? and can you elaborate on what you are doing now that you were not doing before? >> that assessment about the dangers that were happening in serious have existed since the very beginning -- in syria have existed since the very beginning of the civil war. the question was never whether we thought this was a serious problem. -- question has always been is there a capacity of moderate ground to on the absorb and counteract extremist that might have been pouring in, as well as assad regime

supported by iran and russia that outmanned them and was ruthless? we have consistently provided that opposition with support. oftentimes, the challenge is, if you have former farmers, or pharmacists who now opposition against a battle hardened regime with support from external actors that have a lot at stake, how can -- how quickly can you get them trained? how quickly can you mobilize them? that continues to be a challenge. and even before the situation that we saw with isil going into , we had already tried to

maximize what we could do by supporting an opposition that can not only counteract the brutality of assad, but also make sure that in the minds of don't think that their only alternative is either mr. assad or extremist groups like isil. >> [inaudible] i think the key to both syria and iraq is going to be a combination of what happens , working withntry moderate syrian opposition, and working with inoperable -- an iraqi government that is inclusive, and with us laying out a more effective counterterrorism platform that gives all the countries in the all of theets

countries in the region pulling in the same direction. i alluded to it in my last speech, and i talked about it today with respect to the counterterrorism partnership fund. effort in a long-term this region in which we have to build and partner with countries that are committed to our , and that our values immediateime, we have problems with terrorist organizations that may be advancing. rather than try to play whack a terroristver these organizations may pop up, we have to build effective partnerships and make sure they have capacity. some of these that have been totally soberly -- have been solely devoted to afghanistan

last decade, we have to make a shift into the middle east and north africa. you look at it, -- country like yemen, a very impoverished country, and one that has its own sectarian or ethnic divisions. there we do have a committed partner in the president and his government. and we have to develop their capacities without putting large numbers of u.s. troops on the ground. tothe same time, we have have enough counterterrorism capabilities to go after folks that might be trying to hit our embassy, or might be trying to export terrorism into europe or the u.s. can create at how we more of those models is going to be part of the solution in dealing with both syria and iraq

. but in order for us to do that, we actually still need to have actual government on the ground that we can partner with. we have some -- and that we have some confidence that they will pull -- pursue political objectives on the ground. the dialogue on the ground helped to give people a sense that there is a legitimate political outlet for the grievances they may have. seeoing back to where you prime minister al-maliki playing a role up to this point, you said there is a need for a more inclusive government. is he a unifier? how much clout does the united states ultimately have with any of the leaders in iraq at this point, really? >> we still provide them significant assistance. i think they recognize that unlike some other players in the region, we don't have

territorial ambitions. we are not looking to control their assets or their energy. we want to make sure that we are vindicating the enormous effort and sacrifice that was made by our troops in giving them an opportunity to build a stable, inclusive society that can prosper and deliver for the basic needs and aspirations of the iraqi people. and at the same time, they are a sovereign country. they have their own politics. and what we have tried to do is to give them our best advice about how they can solve their --itical problems now the and now that they are in crisis, we are indicating to them that

there is not going to be a simple military solution to this issue. the variousseeing groups inside iraq simply go to their respective corners, then it is almost certain that baghdad and the central government will not be able to control huge chunks of their own country. the only way they can do that is if there are credible sunni leaders, both at the national whol and the local level have confidence that a shia kurds, thatat the all of those groups are committed to a fair and just government for the country. right now, that does not exist. there is too much suspicion and mistrust. is, an election

took place in which despite all business trust -- all this mistrust, all of this frustration, and we still have millions of iraqis trapped in some dangers circumstances, but those elections happen and you had a constitutional process to advance the government formation. the one bit of encouraging news we have seen inside iraq is that all the parties have said they continue to be committed to choosing a leadership and the government through the existing constitutional order. ist you are seeing, i think, at the prospect of civil war heightened, many iraqi leaders saying, let's not plunge into

the abyss. let's see if we can resolve this lyrically. but you do not have a lot of time. and you have a group like isil that is doing everything he can to send the country back into chaos. one of the messages we have two primemr. maliki -- to minister maliki, but also the speaker of the house and the other leadership in iraq is, get going on this government formation. it will make it a lot easier for them to shape a military strategy. it will also make it possible for us to partner more effectively than we can currently. but given the prime minister's track record, -- >> given the prime minister's track record, is he a unifier? can he play that role? i think the test is before him, and other iraqi leaders as we speak. right now, they can make a

series of decisions. regardless of what has happened in the past, right now is a rockt where the fate of a hangs in the back -- of iraq hangs in the balance. and the test for all of them is going to be whether they can overcome the mistrust, the deep sectarian divisions, and in some cases just political opportunism , and say this is bigger than anyone of us and we've got to make sure we do what is right for the iraqi people. that is a challenge. it is not something the u.s. can do for them. the u.s. something armed forces can do for them. .e can provide them the space we can provide them the tools. but ultimately, they will have to make those decisions. in the meantime, my job is to make sure that american personnel there is safe, that we are consulting with the iraqi arerity forces, and that we

getting a better assessment of what is on the ground. and that we are recognizing the dangers of isil over the long term and developing the kind of comprehensive counterterrorism strategies that we will need to deal with this issue. and that is going to involve some short-term responses to make sure that isil is not obtaining capacity to endanger life -- or, or ally our allies and partners. but what we need is a long-term strategy, because part of what we have seen with isil is a broader trend that i talked .bout at west point rather than a single network, a discrete network of terrorists.

this fluid combination of hardened terrorists, disaffected local leadership, and where there are vacuums, they are theing them and creating potential for serious danger for all concerned. >> any word on what you are willing to do to work with them? iran? ith >> our view is that iran can play a constructive role. it is helping to send the message to the iraqi government that we are sending, which is a rock only hold together if it is inclusive, and that the interests of sunni, shia, and kurd are all respected. on -- ifoming solely

iran is coming solely as an armed force on behalf of shia, if it is framed in that fashion, then that probably worsens the situation and the prospect for government formation that would actually be >> what is your sense of that right now? >> just as iraq half leaders have to make decisions, iran has heard from us. we have indicated it's important to avoid steps that might that kind of sectarian splits that might lead to civil war. the one thing that has to be emphasized as we have deep differences with a ran across the board on a whole host of issues. obviously, what has