than the cool spring season of 2003, a lot of things might of been able the bay unwound -- to be unwound. we let the military strategy lag, it should have been the other way around. >> the timetable was so firmly in place. it did move a bit during the course of 2002. >> what you heard quite soon was that all of our contingency planning is based on doing iraq -- the month of january kept popping up. after the summer break of 2002, and i stress that this was contingency. . .

>> how much understanding was there between britain and the united states that this was an effective deadline? were the british able to say that it would help if you could ñibring it back to later? >> well, one single discussion was when tony blair came to washington in 2003 and he was seeking delay, because i think we were not militarily ready,

and he thought it was time for a second position, which at the time, it did not look unachievable. i remember a television program the night before saying on these two points, you have not won the argument yet. çóyou can say to the president,i need a delay and a council resolution. you have the americans to make a second attempt, and again they are impressed by the spanish prime minister, by bruce toney, -- berlusconi, by john howard. but it was not because they said we could not do this thing by the march timeframe, but strategically speaking, it did not matter whether it was in january or in march if you believe as i do that it should

have been wrapped into a coherent political and diplomatic strategy. >> and there was an awareness that the military buildup is taking place. >> that is what happened, and it goes back to what i said earlier. the resolution turned 1441 on its head, and it is time for proof of innocence, and we found ourselves in the intolerable position of having to prove his guilt by finding weapons of mass destruction before a military deadline, which proved

impossible. >> on this meeting january 31, you mentioned already the aftermath you came up with their. we have had discussions about worst-case with weapons of mass destruction that turned out to be rocky -- wrong, and we have the case of what would happen after the war. was there any concept of all of how awful it could be outside of everybody, what the aftermath to be? i think the worry at the time was that there would be some kind of humanitarian disaster, and the additional work was focused on dad, -- that, on

refugees and things like that. american and british troops would be quick wit defenses if there had been a strong fear that saddam could respond to these weapons. what just disappeared from the calculations was the understanding that after he was toppled, you were going to have to maintain law and order and guaranteed the continuity of services. otherwise, you would lose the iraqi population rapidly. but when the invasion happened, the u.s. army division there did not do that, we did not have any orders to do that.

there are witnesses coming before you there are better informed than i am. i retired at the end of february. >> the first point comes from what was just discussed, the timing decision for 2003. military momentum is clearly a major component of that brought timing decision, and we will hear from witnesses about that. they're ouof our military people who feel they could fight the war. is that your understanding?

>> it is my understanding. there would be a presidential election campaign. how much time could buy in all this? ñikarl rove, i said, how far is this put back. and he said into 2003, at the latest. he might have said january 2004. otherwise, the president would be accused of using the war to win an election."

two other points connected with the postwar planning. he said in effect that the british prime minister had exerted before and in the aftermath of the invasion, and raised questions as to whether have the british been more explicit, it would have been able to be more fortunate. the other is timing, and the influential effect of 2002 came in too late if you're looking at more detailed planning.

>> i cannot give a categorical answer. i do not believe it would have been impossible, but if we had our act together in september and october, we could have done it. i think, what would margaret thatcher have done? she would have insisted -- i think i may be hit with a thunderbolt, but i think she would have insisted on a political diplomatic strategy

and commanded the greatest clarity about what would happen. >> on the aftermath planning, is it right to supposed that the dwebaathification element was really a reaction in april to the breakdown in security rather than a precipitating cause? >> that is outside my time. i have a view, but -- [laughter] >> you were there in the run-up. so if you have a view, let's hear it. >> one was macarthur in japan, the other was what we did in germany.

i remember in january, clearly we're going to have to get rid of the top few henchman, d but, de -- but we cannot debaathify completely. >> that is important to hear. thank you. ok. moving back to something quite different, you said early this morning that in your view, the declared formal u.k. policy of containment was in effect over by spring or summer, and it was and remains the policy until at least 2002.

>> this in itself is a comment on the importance of the issue. i cannot really remember ever in 2002 going in to see the argument for containment. i think the switches may have lasted quite a long time, but i do not remember doing this. nowhere in the briefing dar remember sending back. >> there is an asymmetry in the situation. a foreign affairs advisor

relationship with the head of security council for different personalities and times. in the bush administration, the great administration did not lend itself to a natural bilateral relationship. so how is that managed? >> let me back up a bit. institutionally, if you have a powerful vice-president, it might be the most powerful vice- president ever. his institutional number was the deputy prime minister. it was not a balanced relationship. [laughter] it probably did not reap the

dividends that you institutionally may have expected. when he came to washington, the prime minister saw cheney on the first visit and most importantly he was at the camp david meeting in 2002. for the rest, i see the vice- president from time to time. the next layer down, particularly john hannah, people who were strong. that was the way we put our fix in and took power.

>> i have got a couple of remarks after a close. but before i do that, are there any particular point to would like to in? >> my mind is slightly mushy at the moment. i want to remind people there is a matter on the whole witnessed question of unilateral is an versus multilateralism. there is more of a continuing here with previous administrations before george

w. then they may have been willing to admit. there is a lot of continuity. they are very, very different, clinton and bush, but i think it would be wrong to see the bush administration simply as an unusual and a typical aberration. it is not like that. >> that brings this question to a close. just to say we will of course be pursuing that to assume there is a documentary said rival, we will have still being added. that concludes the first of our sessions on the dimension, and tomorrow, if we pursue the same

thank, it will be on the united states and the interrelated united nations aspects. with that, i think everybody who has -- thank everybody who has spent time here this morning and our witnesses. thank you. c-span3 c-span2 [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> embedded in afghanistan, a freelance journalist observing how the u.s. uses a unmanned vehicles for drones. >> there are two units. one handles the north, one handles the south. the south is the bigger and this year of the two. i would guess 100 predator drone. they look like giant model airplanes, about the size of a small compact car.

the reapers look about the same, but they are about twice as big. in their noses, they carry a bunch of different sensors, radar, cameras, things like that. the exact number depends on what your carrying and where you are flying, but it is not impossible for one of these of woolworth's -- one of these orbits to soak up vast amounts of data. he can think of the drones as manned aircraft, if the man is sitting on the ground, talking to ground troops and air controllers. they actually use a chat program, like instant messenger, to do a lot of the communications.

the drones are fairly precise as far as these things go. they do not carry large weapons. it is a far cry from a be-one bomber dropping a 2,000 pound bomb. the predator is about a quarter of the size of the reaper. we can find a use in bosnia, and it is very efficient for what it does. instead of carrying bombs, it can carry missiles. weight is fuel, and fuel is time. it performs some kind of

strategic level mission, looking for big bad guys. the payload is a little smaller. >> drone units in afghanistan did not handle the attacks. drone operations are bifurcated. most drone operators, the guys that steer them, sit in these trailers. most of them are in las vegas. they work at aircraft spaces in nevada. the guys in afghanistan launch and recover drones and are responsible for small area operations, usually about air bases.

these contractors are constantly looking drones from the air strip, and they pass them off to the guys in las vegas. they fly around a return to drown -- around and return at the control of the drone of two guys in canada are -- to guys in kandahar. they look for any activity. they took a plane and they took the pilot out of the cockpit and put the satellite dish in. the pilot will always control the aircraft. we did that because a regular person could not just sit up there in a small cramped space.

no big need for a footprint. flexibility allows you to do that. >> they have video cameras and tv cameras and also have radar taking these snapshots. what you do is in the morning tape one snapshot. later you take one other, and you compare them. it d.c. a corner that looks disturb like somebody was chopping the ground up, he might have spotted a roadside bomb that they have. when you are not looking. but if you have the snapshot and

compare them, you can spot where it has been buried. so that is what they do, visiting the area. so this is a rebirth. >> same design, they just scaled it up. they were able to just put a larger telescope with better optics.

if you need to respond to contact on the ground, about to underdogs. there is a sensor package under with radar waves. we are certainly trying to keep roads clear. >> he was embedded at can our airports base in southern afghanistan in october. to find other programs, check out our website at c-span.org. go to the search box in the

upper right-hand corner. >> president and first lady obama marked the holiday season and discussed sacrifices made by american troops overseas. they are followed by duncan hunter of california, with the republican response. he also talks about american troops and republican priorities. this is about 10 minutes. >> >> as we gather to celebrate the holidays, we want to take a moment to send greetings from our family. >> this is our first christmas in the white house, and we are so grateful for this extraordinary experience. not far from here in the blue room is the official white house christmas tree, and 18 foot tall douglas fir from west

virginia decorated with hundreds of ornaments designed by people and children all across the country, each one a reminder of the traditions we cherish as americans and the blessings we are thankful for this holiday season. >> that is right. we have parents without a job who have struggled to put things on the christmas tree, families and neighbors who have seen homes for clothes, and folks wondering what the new year will bring. but there is still so much to celebrate this christmas. a message of peace and brotherhood continuing to inspire more than two dozen years after jesus' birth, the love of family and friends. the bonds of communities. men and women who are far from home, risking their lives to protect hours. soldiers, sailors, airmen,

marines, and coast guard men, i have no greater honor than serving as your commander in chief. i have been altered by your eagerness to serve at the naval academy at west point. i have been energized by your dedication. we have been moved by your determination. wounded warriors in walter reed and bethesda are fighting to recover. and i have been profoundly affected by patriots who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom. after years of local tours of duty, as we carry on our mission in iraq and afghanistan, your readiness to make that same sacrifice is an inspiration to us and every single american. >> as first lady, one of my

privileges is keeping the house altogether, juggling play dates and soccer games, doing everything they can even at the try to hide their own fears and worries. i have met kids, a grandparent and residents and relative stepping in to care for wounded warriors, trying to carry on after losing the person they love most in the world. and through it all, these people still find the time and energy to serve their communities, as well. running the pta, raising money to help those less fortunate than they are, and more. even these families can use a hand during the holidays. if you live near a military base, you can reach out to your

workplaces, schools, and churches. there are so many ways to help. even buy green over a home cooked meal. even if you do not know a family nearby, your family can help by donating or volunteering at organization supporting military families. >> you can also reach out directly to forces around the world. kids can make a card that will bring a smile. adults can send a care package or a prepaid card making key to work a little easier. even if it as a simple as saying thank you. there are more ways to help pat www.whitehouse.gov. for all of those spending the holidays for way from home, whether at a base, iraq, were afghanistan, know that you are

in our thoughts and prayers. know that we're doing everything in our power to make sure you can succeed in your missions and come home safe your families. >> merry christmas, everybody. >> i am duncan hunter, and i will present 52nd congressional district of california and around san diego. i hope we all of our purse to the men and women of the armed forces. many will spend the holidays away from home on the frontlines of iraq and afghanistan and around the world. i understand the sacrifices they are making. shortly after the terror attacks of september 11, 2001, i quit my job and joined the marine corps. prior to coming to congress, was deployed to wars on three occasions, twice in iraq, once in afghanistan. i had an opportunity to visit

with our troops, and i know we all wish everyone could be home for the holidays, but this is not a time for sadness or regret. we are proud to be americans. we want to pass on to our children the blessings of our liberty that we inherited from our forefathers, and because nothing matters more to less than protecting our homes and families. our hope is that as a result of this determination and sacrifice, we never again will see our cities and citizens under attack. i hope we also take a moment this year to reflect on those suffering here at home. for too many families, this will be a difficult christmas. one in 10 americans are unemployed. nearly 6 million citizens have been looking for work for more than six months, the most on record. all year long, republicans have offered common-sense solutions to put money into the pockets of hard-working families and help small businesses create new jobs. we have also had a plan to lower

health care premiums by 10% and a strategy to create more american jobs. the strained budgets and clean up the environment. just as important, these solutions to not raise taxes, grow government, or add to the skyrocketing debt burden being placed on our kids and grandkids. after all of the promises and spending of washington this year, out of work families are right to be asking where are the jobs. republicans believe our top priority coming to the economy should be simple. do no harm. so let's resolve in the new year to end misguided efforts creating new laws to cost more jobs, whether it is cap and trade, government health care takeover, cards checked, or more tax increases. working together but can make the next holiday season brighter for more americans. thank you, happy holidays, and god bless america and.

>> coming upper, the executive director of the fcc broadband initiative gives an update on plans to expand service in the u.s.. also on america and the courts, some excerpts from our documentary of the supreme court, home to the highest court. also, where marks from former u.s. solicitor general and attorney maureen mahoney. tomorrow on "washington journal," foreign-policy with the "washington times" and "cq weekly." after, a look at obama's first year. that is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> now available, abraham

lincoln -- great american historians on our 16th president. a great read for any history buff. it is a unique contemporary perspective on lincoln, from journalists and writers from lincoln's early years to the flight at the white house and his relevance today. in hard cover and your favorite bookseller, and now in digital audio to listen to any time, available where downloads are sold. learn more apps c- span.org/lincolnbook. >> this week, an update on efforts by the federal communications commission to develop a plan to expand broadband in the united states. our guest is blair levin, leading up the initiative at the fcc.

could you give us a status update on the report? >> sure. we have been doing status updates all along. september we laid out for the fcc kind of what we thought the state of broadband was in the united states. in november, we laid out the most significant problems. a couple of weeks ago, we laid out how to address those problems. now we are in a situation where we are busy trying to ride up our best view. we have had 30 workshops, a number of public notices were we ask orrin questions, and we are now in the process of taking

that information income -- in, trying to make recommendations, putting our country in the right path towards a healthy broadbent ecosystem over the next 10 years. >> what is the most important thing in developing this broadband the plan? >> a number of things. first, we have to make sure we connect all americans. second, we have to make sure there is a plan for having broadband be affordable. we have to have a plan to make sure that broadband is used to solve public problems, like reforming health care, saving energy, improving education and job-training. what is most important to me is that we find a way to make the congressional mandate.

>> cost estimates, expanded to the majority of americans. can you narrow down what you think the cost is right now? >> one of the things we did in september is gave preliminary cost estimates. what does it mean to build out a system to what percentage of americans at what speed question marks if we think broadband, we want to make sure 90% of americans receive a speech read -- speed of 10 megabits. it is not clear to me many private investment dollars will be needed to achieve that goal. if you want 100% of americans achieving 100 megabits, the order of magnitude is an incremental investment of about three and $50 billion, and there

is a lot of variation. do you want to go to 25 megabits? i think that view is that the market ought to drive those decisions almost everywhere, but also it is very clear there is some percentage of americans, between 5% and 10%, who are not going to receive but we think of as a minimum level of acceptable broadband, and that is where the government has to step in. that is where we look to something like a universal service to solve that problem, but part of the problem of solving the problem is that the current universal service system is broken. we have to simultaneously fix it as it is and transition it to support a broad band for the majority, and it is akin to changing the engine of the jet plane while it is in flight. but we are trying to figure out to do that.

>> it would be what speed? >> we will be discussing it with the commissioners. i think that as we talked about at the september meeting, there are a number of use cases where people generally speaking, the market today is about three megabits. the average american needs that speed to do the kinds of things most americans do. we want to have universal mechanism produce the minimum that gets us to about where we are.

high-definition video, things like that, i am not sure that is what we need, but we want to be able to do what the functions are in terms of cost, so if you move up, where do you cost a lot more money? i think it is somewhere in the order of where people are going today over the next five or 10 years. we are setting the economics, and i might not note, a lot of people say we ought to have a really big goals. when you look at the countries that have said they are doing that, what they are actually doing are things like 100 megabits, but in terms of the universe was asian goal --

universalization cole, is magnitude and that one, too, three category. >> he thought we should have 50 megabits in about five years. what do you think about that? do you think that is achievable? >> those numbers are parameters. i think his letters said actual speed instead of advertised speed. if you have it the actual, it is harder. i think it is a worthy goal. what we want to point out to decision makers like the congressman is that that is great. if you think we have a path for doing it, here is the path, but if it requires congress or the fcc to act in a certain way, it

is so. i think it is very worthy to stretch goals and see what we can do to get theire. but again, broadband is primarily a function of private endeavor. the big news will be the investment made by the cable industry upgrading their networks. that will give speeds 50 actual at peak times. peak in terms of speed, they probably can get there. the question is whether a goal like that requires a fiber upgrade, and that depends on whether people like at&t and some others decided response to cable to operate networks. -- upgrade networks. >> you have talked about

broadband plans being market- driven. i want to read criticisms from public-interest groups and get you were response. -- your response. there was no discussion of open telecommunications networks for competitors, no discussion of structural separation of carriers in wholesale and retail components. these are factors that the harvard center told the sec in a study a mere few months ago were the reasons that other countries have surpassed ours. something has to be done about the duopoly of cable and telephone companies that control virtually every broadband market in america. >> let me say that i have a respect for both public knowledge and the free press. i find the criticism not very productive. as to the ideas of unbundling and separation, the study did a

fantastic job of pointing out things going on throughout the world. but i think that we asked them to do that. but there are cases where things in some countries are not that germane to where we are going. the courts throughout bundling. we are not terribly interested in moving towards things that will just frees capital investment. that one does not strike me as that productive. i have not heard that from anyone in congress or the commission or in the record, people asking for structural