you can't just show up in a bob with a sleeping bag. we have to make sure that people are properly taken care of when they get there.0@@@@@@ what the --

the effort, which this summer is going to be very critical for >> which this summer is going to be very critical for the effort. and if we don't and just these next few weeks and months of ourselves and their and get set, we can't have success. so i wanted to tell you about that because i think it's one of the most important things i've ever seen in the defense world, transpiring very, very few weeks and months. and it is a tremendous tribute to the logisticians and the defense department today that we're able to do that. i had one more thing i was going to talk about, but i don't want to talk too long, which is logistics in the acquisition system. perhaps i can say something about him questions and answers and so forth. that's the logistics object that if there were no wars going on we would probably be discussing. what about logistics for the joint strike fighter, how can we stop spending so much, on sustainment of weapons systems?

also very important topic, but any interest of time i will pass on that. but i appreciate it, john, if you're still here, the opportunity to talk about acquisition, technology and logistics as it applies to the current fight. it's very different. i don't think many of my predecessors had that same circumstance, hasn't been traditional for html four focus on ongoing conflict as against the programs of record and the logistics system of record, but today's circumstance demanded secretary defends is very insistent on them and it is a privilege to be part of such a remarkable, remarkable performing logistics system. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you, doctor carter. many of you of course have been at it into before and, you know, of our normal procedure. you raise your hand and if you have a question that you would like to ask them we have staff with wireless microphones. i will identify you and you wait for the mic. and then stand up and say who you are and where you're from and proceed with their questions. so do we have any folks out there who have a question they would like to raise? let me start over here with the back one and then come back. but i went ipo, associate's tabouli contractors. my question is on the nato allies and coalition partners, how much of your business is supporting them with contractors and logistic support? i know we have hungarian units their and others'. i'm kind of when and how much of that is weighing on you. >> they in general are, there are three tiers of logistics.

there's the u.s. tough for the u.s. they are our nation by nation, the way they sustain themselves. we will let them come in our slipstream if it's convenient for them. they generally pay simply. then there is a nato effort per se. everybody tries to share, i'll give you an example. in the south all of our fuel we buy through the nato system. because the nato has been in the south for quite a while. they have got a good system set up, as you probably know we pay for it. i don't know how you got a, i don't care how you got here, that's your problem. i am buying by the gallon at the foggy. that's how we do. truck show up on these independent contractors and we test the fuel and accept the fuel. that system is run by isaf in the south. in the north we do it ourselves,

defense logistics agency task. down at bastion leathernecks, we and the brits work hand-in-hand, try to share our logistics, and you. and we do with all the other coalition partners as appropriate, whenever we possibly can. >> i think i saw question back here. >> mr. secretary, mike mitchell with lockheed martin. i would like to explore a language between the third and fourth topics. and this has a number of firms are developing unmanned helicopter capabilities that could fulfill niche resupply missions. it would take truck convoys off the road and in an area where as you said there is a limited road infrastructure in the first place, to get to areas where

there are none. so i'm interested in kind of where the departmental is thinking and if there's anyway to accelerate the capability for all the reasons cited. stark great, great question and absolutely right, to the extent you can keep people off the road, that's particularly cumbersome supply convoys in outlying areas. you reduced the ied threat. we are doing a lot more airdrop this season. a lot more airdrop than we were just a few months ago. so to an outline cop that, instead of driving trucks up there with her food and water and their supplies and so forth, you fly over. they're gps-controlled parachutes now. they can fly it right in. you can keep people off the roads. similarly, we are looking at several different versions of a man who rode we lived to do the same thing.

put a palette underneath, pick it up, flies over, flies to a base, drops it off, comes over and comes back. wonderful way of resupplying people without having anybody take any risk. at all. >> let's go to the front table here. you will bear with me. you have to raise your hand tied. there's a lot of nice light shining from behind you pick so i can see the light a lot better than i can see people. >> i want to ask about your comments on meeting the needs of the operational forces. you said that a big priority right now. a lot of people say that one way to do that is have more joint position, acquisition is not joint enough and you need to have more efficiencies to make it faster. can you talk about maybe your thoughts on how that could be done? and if anything is being done? >> well, it is a perennial seem

in our acquisition system that goes back now to goldwater-nichols, 30 years or so. as everybody in this audience knows, that in the main -- goldwater-nichols degree was that we shall fight jointly, but you're right that we still in the main, still acquire severally. so joint acquisition is always been a challenge and it's a challenge in the wars as well. and all the ways you might imagine, if there are inherent only joint capabilities, that is, things that everybody needs, like some of the counter ied enablers, all the services that are present there that have installation to their that have personnel there, need some of the d.o.d. equipment. and it makes sense for us to buy them in one lot. that's why we have organizations

like jieddo, the joint ied, and it buys equipment for all the services. we also have to have different services take the lead for equipment that go to other services. so when a juon comes in, joint urgent operational need, it means that an army unit need some air force support. and air force needs to resources that support, and they do. and so did a really remarkable degree, all four services are involved in afghanistan. my daughter said she was going to an event that the secretary of navy was going to be there, ray mabus. she knows i know may. so she said what she asked the secretary of in a. i said ask them how many needy people are in landlocked afghanistan. and it's amazing.

it's amazing what the navy is doing in afghanistan. we have had to do that. because we have to take whatever capability we can and apply it to afghanistan. so you're right, the contingency acquisition is even more to the any case of getting the system to be jointly that is the program of record. joint acquisition. >> dr. carter, we have a lot more questions, but i'm also mindful of the fact that we're approaching the time that we were going to release you. would you like to take one more? >> yes. >> all right. we have a microphone on the side here. let's take the guy in front table there. >> colin clark, "dod buzz." pratt whitney is talking about a pbl for the f1 35. exactly online? >> give me one day i'll. one day off.

[laughter] >> it's a logistics. >> come on. just one day. >> back in the middle. >> kevin green from ibm. dr. carter, you mentioned a large infusion of additional isr sensors and platforms. could you describe the departments intention to invest in the kinds of data management and analytics capabilities it will allow that increased amount of data to be formed into actionable streams of information? >> is a huge issue. it's one of those for want of a nail things. it's no point putting the effort in their if you don't have the ramp space, as i said, and then you have to go get the same it for the ramp space did you also have to get the analyst. you have to have the bandwidth. you have to have the processing

capability. you have to ask ourselves questions like the one you just asked, who actually needs this information. for one of those arrow stats that i described, that data doesn't have to go all over afghanistan. it doesn't have to go back to washington. it's needed by the people down under the balloon. and so that's a much simpler case. you have a fan, a few operators, a tether, the arrow stats. when it comes to something like a liberty ship, which is a complex, multisensor kind of intelligence, platform. they are in order to make use of that information, you know, you do need stateside, let's say support. so there's no point in introducing that aircraft and let you have the bandwidth to go

back to nsa and its various facilities back here so that data can rapidly be used. although we are building more, pushing forward into afghanistan, more analytical capabilities so that everything doesn't have to go halfway around the world. i will say one other thing about the capability that i think is very, very important. and that is the demand for intelligence analysis at levels as she launched the under below brigade. it is still the case that most of the and a little expertise is associated with a division and brigade level. and in this fight, which is so local, and so information intensive, and with soldiers who are used to having information, they are used to asking on

information. they have become the command post, and boy, it's not your company command post of 20 years ago. they are i'll at laptops that they're expecting that kind of information that they know how to be effective with that kind of information. and they need intelligence analysts who can tell them about this down, who can tell them about good guys as well as bad guys, because that's important to not only for the straight, it is do you know your situation will enough to do the counterinsurgency mission. and is still the case that, i know this is noted frequently and fighting against every day, that it's important to get those people down, out to the outpost and down to the echelons where analysis can really be useful and not just writing reports. at the higher echelon. so all of that is very important and is the backend of the isr

center front and, incredibly important expect dr. carter, we want to thank you very much. >> thank you all very much. appreciated. [applause] [inaudible conversations] spect the

>> i know what the challenge is, and we're in a unique position to go to war. what we need is policymakers in washington to develop a roadmap so we can get it done. >> something about energy policy that you would like to talk about on your blog? at the new c-span via library you can search it, watch it, clip it and share it over

160,000 hours of video. from yesterday or 10 years ago, every c-span program since 1987. the c-span video library, cable's latest gift to america. >> next supreme court justice stephen breyer on using foreign law when interpreting the u.s. constitution. johns hopkins university school of advanced international studies hosted this discussion in washington. it's an hour and 20 minutes. >> i think we have already let justice breyer know how interested we are in what he has to say. so good afternoon. i have jessica i'm bored and i am the dean and it is my great pleasure to welcome you students, faculty, alumni and

friends to the 2010 lecture on international affairs with the honorable united states supreme court justice stephen breyer. a four i justice breyer, who i know really and no need to know and production. i want to give a very brief history of the rostov electricity. it was established in 1990 by dorothy rostov, in honor of her late husband chose. he was the president and chief executive officer of the transocean import company. and it pays special tribute to his life and abiding interest in international affairs. perhaps most importantly, he was a graduate of johns hopkins university. and unflagging supporter and his wife could not join us tonight but i would like to recognize his son, and his wife heather and their daughter terri and her

husband john david. who are in our audience, as well as some of their family and friends. welcome and thank you. [applause] >> justice breyer is here to share his views on the court and foreign law. the twin realities of globalization and 9/11 have tested our own nations but within our country and throughout its history, the question to what extent will we be influenced by others has proven to be polarizing in ways unknown to most nations in the international system. large continental states are important to i than states have the luxury of this detachment. even as the facts of technology and commerce, terrorism and strategic warfare have promoted the underlying reality. within the supreme court, the

same cultural battles may be playing out. should for law be used to interpret the u.s. constitution? and if so, how? this is something of the topic i suspect justice breyer will explore in his remarks. president clinton nominated justice breyer for the supreme court. he was confirmed by the senate, and on august 3, 1994, he was born into office. it was the culmination of an illustrious career, even up to that point. justice breyer was born and raised in northern california, where he attended a well-known public high school in san francisco. it was an abort an experienced. he said, quote, it's true that there were lots of people who were still excluded from opportunities. not for the rest of us, there was a sense of possibility that we had never seen before, or since. you had a great mixing of classrooms that anyone could go. you had a mix of families,

firemen, policemen, doctors and lawyers. they all felt an obligation to be part of the community, and to contribute to the community, unquote. i think most observers would agree that these twin ideas of opportunity and open communities have been proven in during for justice breyer throughout his life and work. after graduating from stanford in 1959, justice breyer study philosophy and economics at oxford on a marshall scholarship. he went on to graduate from harvard law school in 1964, and after earning that degree, clerked for justice arthur goldberg on the court. justice breyer work for a brief stint as an attorney in the antitrust division of the justice department, and was later then recruited to teach at harvard law school, where he is and i'm sure you will see tonight, the most extraordinary teacher. in 1974, senator ted kennedy maintained to be special counsel to the senate judiciary

committee, where he soon became the committee's chief counsel. when we go back in time president jimmy carter appointed stephen breyer to the u.s. court of appeals for the first circuit where he then became the chief judge in 1990. and he also served as a member of the u.s. judicial conference and influential sentencing commission. justice breyer is known not only for his opinions, as a call supreme court justices read an explanation from their decisions, he is also celebrated for his broader scholarship and teaching. from his book, active liberty, we know that the justice believes that law should be interpreted through the lenses of language, history, tradition, precedent, purpose and consequences. above all, that interpretation and enables democracy. he was a serious objective of the framers, the people of the framers, the people that purchase but in the political process, and that people don't

participate in the country can work. so it is a great honor, when we can parpa discussion of for law and the court, please join me in welcoming me the supreme court justice stephen breyer. [applause] >> thank you. that was a very, very nice introduction. i mean, you realize the point of that introduction is to get you interested and what i'm going to say. so i think it's only fair to point out that once a review at the l.a. times didn't get a hold of a book i wrote. in fact, don't ask me what the l.a. times was redoing it. but this was the review. he said in a house in wonderla wonderland, alice emerges from a pool of tears i think with the dormouse, and they are sitting on a rock and the dormouse start to talk about anger. what are you reading that, says

alice? well we are wet and this is the driest thing i know. [laughter] >> he says this is before breyer wrote his book. [laughter] >> so let's dampen our expectations. it's very nice here, for me, to be inside. it's terrific. and i associate your founders can i associate them in part from talk about that. they were always these great diplomats who set the agenda for the next 100 years. they were always walking in the woods. workday? and why are we here today? it is people outside that they pull the curtains are you can't see the woods where we really ought to be walking. but there we are. those people also set an agenda, and it is extraordinary, 50 years at least and probably longer, and that agenda had big words attached, democracy and peace and freedom, and that was going to be calm and prosperity. and that was going to work

through cooperation. and who are we? we are in a sense, we could say foot soldiers, but that is too militant an image. we are the professional people. that's judges, too. we are the professional. who were in part designed to carry out that vision. maybe not all of you are. but very few presidents of countries on the on the phone. and want to know what to do. why do i see very few? because i would like one, but not even one as. so we are professionals. and the question is what do we have to do in that? how do we further this image that they tied together through treaties, which is under pressure, but is a good image, cooperation, in many different ways. true, what professionals will do. what i'm going to do in the next 20 minutes or so is to try to give you a picture of what i as

a professional judge have to do with this enterprise. and when i say i, i'm not speaking personally. i mean our court. and i think i can best do that and show you how that evolved over time, if i classified the kinds of questions we have into three kinds of questions. and the first is going to be really exciting question, that produced terrific political argument and are terribly, in my opinion, i'm important. the category number two, so that will be big. category two is going to be very boring questions. that are terribly important. though they cause almost no palooka controversy. they provide amazing challenges. and then i'd have to say a word about smaller category of important technical questions, which if i get to explain it you

will be asleep but they are important. let's go to this first category. you already probably know what it is. should the supreme court of the united states, or should other judges, look at what other for the court to do when they decide major questions of constitutional law? that's a great question. i knew that that was going to be politically interesting. we had one of these meetings, sometimes they have and are french made in order to get everyone to work together well and everybody leaves in a half. [laughter] >> but this was one of these meetings with professors and members of congress can and i was there, and the subject came up. a member of congress can a conservative number, he said well, he said, my goodness, this document, this is an american constitution. so why in heavens name do you refer to cases, he says, the

supreme court competed make it personal, he said the supreme court is referring the decisions made by foreign courts when they're interpreting this document. why are they doing that? it's an american document. so i said, thinking i had the answers. i the way, and i said well i guess you mean me. i have done that quite a lot that he said yes, perhaps a do. i said the reason i do that is the following. i said, you know, we live in a world ever more interested in democracy, more and more countries have independent judiciaries, more and more countries have constitutions or similar documents that protect basic liberty. and there are problems that arise throughout the world that are more and more similar. so if i see something written by a man or a woman who has a job like mine, in some of the country, and who is interpreting a document somewhat like mine, and who in fact has a problem in

front of the court, someone like mine, why can't i read it? see what they have done. i might learn something. see, that's really no. notice my tone of voice. no one can object to that. fabless. but what he says fine, really, just to refer to in your opinion. okay. so i should know when to quit. then i say, well, there's more to it than that i said if i'm really honest with you, some of those countries are struggling to maintain democracy, independent judiciaries, that help in this respect. and they often refer to it. so if i write in my decision something that points out that i ready case of theirs, it in if i didn't agree with it or not, they know their cases are being read and they can go to their sl