or somewhere in the community what is the appeal to the thousands of westerners the fall prey to the appeal of which they are all aware of? . . the same ideology perhaps from certain countries in the middle east but coming from western europe and coming from america is civilized and cultured society and civilized might not be the right word but obviously you know what i mean are you looking at bad and is there a way for us to counter the social media saying this is what you're getting into which is a pretty

tough situation. >> that's a terrific question senator and isil's propaganda runs the gamut. you are absolutely right to point to some of these horrific videos including -- that sends a signal and attracted some element of isil's propaganda also includes a fair number of messaging examples in which they paint a fulfilling life in the caliphate that they project to individuals who may be disenfranchised, disadvantaged dissatisfied in their home environment. so the range of factors for people than that going to places like syria now ranges from ideological that you pointed to but also to the psychological catering to some sense of wanting to belong to something no matter how depraved that

group they would belong to is. and to others it's the sheer sense of adventure and a chance to throw your hat into the winning side is a part of the calculation. we have tried to disaggregate all the different factors in the messaging we are seeing so we can develop contra messaging strategies to go at it. the president convened this summit next week drawing and our european partners and many of her middle east and partners to get a better handle on this. unfortunately as we know the government is probably not the best platform to try to communicate with this set of factors who are potentially vulnerable to this propaganda in this recruitment and that something we deal with all the time. we try to find ways to stimulate this counter messaging without having the u.s. government hand in it. people who are attracted to this don't go to the government for

guidance on what to do. not the u.s. government and certainly not the governments in the middle east the statements from senior religious figures are useful but it's pop culture that's going to get in many cases the voices of pop-culture or voices relevant to these experiences is the reason people have a far more profound impact than anything we say. >> i think so to me. we need to take advantage of social media that they taken a shouldn't be government directed and coming from other areas of a culture reaching out to these people and letting them know exactly what they're getting into which is not the promise that is being made during recruitment. >> thank you senator coats. senator collins. >> thank you mr. chairman. director i want to follow up on the issue of the telecommunications company holding the data in two different ways. first of all there are hundreds in this country and by contrast

very few people, the number of people who have access to the database in this country has come out in recent months with strictly limited that they were well-trained to get more people have access to the database isn't that likely to raise additional privacy problems and questions? >> that i would have to understand how the architectures going to look and i would ask if i could take that for the record senator. >> a related question, would you be troubled if there is no requirement for the telecommunications companies to retain the data for a certain length of time? >> is obviously in the interest of the intelligence community to try to maintain the capability to access that data for as long

as period of time as we can. in terms of specific provisions to compel i can speak to that. i can only speak to the interest we have in maintaining that capability and to have that access. >> let me turn to the issue of homegrown terrorism and countering violent extremists. you said in your testimony today and i completely agree that we place a much greater recurring threat from lone wolf and loose networks of individuals and you talk about the number of attacks since last may and 10 of them were from violent islamic extremists. as you may have seen former defense intelligence agency director michael flynn recently commented that he could not

identify which agency or individual in the u.s. government is in charge of the fight against radical islam extremist. obviously dhs the fbi, dod to some extent, the department of state and ctc are all important players. who is in charge? >> i would argue senator that as with most elements of our counterterrorism efforts we are approaching on the whole government efforts about a single agency of responsibility. the effort against extremists in the united states we have a very tightknit community focus particularly among the justice department fbi in and ctc along with the deputy directors of those organizations. every other month at the

director or deputy director level synchronizing activities at the homegrown violent extremist phenomenon making sure we coordinate a partner with each other so when we go to community and i used them for my testimony as an example of a community we had gone to in the wake of the arrest there last year of three young somali american women we go arm in arm lockstep four of us working together hand-in-hand with the special agent in charge of the local fbi office u.s. attorney in the capital and elements in the city so we are speaking with one voice as the federal government. when we get there we are dealing with the widest array of community leaders and organizations because most of this homegrown violent extremist effort is going to be carried out by those communities. our role in many cases is to empower and provide information. one of the things we did in the experience of denver is provide

an awareness briefing that explains what senator was talking about the appeal of the narrative, the kinds of things that their kids might be saying on the internet if they were supervised were terrorists were not engaged with what their children were doing. i'm very comfortable comfortable we are working harmoniously together. could i make the case for one single agency given a lead role? i don't they get good right now. we had a bunch of discordant harmony i might make that case senator. could we do better? i'm not going to sign up to the idea that we couldn't do more better and looking to resources more robustly but i don't think the problem we face is a result of having a lead federal agent agent -- agency. >> from my perspective the problem is if no one is in charge it's very difficult for us to assess the effectiveness of a program to budget appropriately to hold people

accountable to assess whether what we are doing is making a difference. when we did the fort hood investigation and 2010, one of our major recommendations from a homeland security committee was that there needed to be a strategy that there needed to be a lead agency or person in charge. it's not that -- but we can't provide support if we can't assess them if there is the person who can calm and report to us. my concern is the national security council appears intent on trying to exercise the role of policy implementer rather than just policymakers. >> thank you senator. we are all trying to operate under the rubric of the president's homegrown strategy

for here in the homeland. we are looking at ways in keeping with your suggestion to try to come up with funding mechanisms across departmental lines and we can do what you described. some sense of the joint work without relying on department budgets and stovepipes. i will certainly make sure we get more information to you on that. >> thank you. >> mr. rasmussen lets talk about yemen. i understand our embassy there is closed and most of the people certainly from the state department and empathy are all out of the country and cars left with keys at the airport whatever took to get out of there. a few months ago yemen was a great example of how her efforts were working and how the plan was working. how do you think that changed so quickly and looking back what

you think you and others might have seen to give more warning then we got a back? >> the situation in yemen has been unstable politically and for a long period of time the yemeni government faced a problem of a foodie conflict emanating out of the northwestern part of yemen but that was not a new phenomenon and for many years the influence of a foodie community was largely contained to the northwest corner of yemen alongside the saudi border. that changed dramatically when the foodies moved out of that historical location they held and moved towards sadat and much as we saw dealing with the isil phenomenon the one thing that is difficult to assess from an intelligence perspective is the ability of a military

organization to actively confront another insurgency. director clapper and noah's talk about the challenge of the intelligence community faced in predicting whether the iraqi security forces would have melted away the way they did in the face of isil's advances last summer. i would say say on somewhat of a smaller scale something like that happening in yemen with president hoddy who faced a complicated political environment in managing his military and managing his security organization as the foodie advance towards senate took place they were unopposed in many cases. that's something we have got to find a better way to understand the willingness of fighters to fight. if you match a borders in battle and the resources available from various sides you would look at and say there's no way that would happen but obviously it did and has left us in a position now on relatively short

notice over the past few months the security situation has deteriorated far more rapidly than we expected and particularly because we could not assure the safety and security of our officers there the decision was made to leave. >> i don't want to get into any kind of ongoing discussion with you about the specifics of how i see these things now that we have got an example in the isil or isis where there is a j.d. and a nation-state 90 days later or yemen which is a great example of our successful foreign policy and six months later it appears to be a total disaster trade i think is it fair to say that the intelligence community has to reevaluate how those insurgencies may match up against the ability to face

them? >> i think that is fair senator. >> another question i have, i noticed the information the president sent up to the congress to look at yesterday the focus was against isil or associated persons or forces. how would you define the second part of that? is that another terrorist group who is somehow binding? is that al-nusra or some of these al qaeda groups that don't appear to be in line with isil? how would you define associated persons or forces? ..

would that be right? there are certainly terrorist groups that have not associated at this point with isil they have reach out to affiliated relationships and endorsement like relationships with groups outside iraq and syria and north africa and algeria. and including in i believe yemen as well. i am out of time. thank you chairman. senator langford? i need to ask new page ten of the written report. you use add statement here iran will remain the foremost state sponsor of terrorism. and a couple of notes on that i want additional details on that when you talk about iran being the foremost state sponsored terrorism. how many countries are then gauged in and terrorist groups. are then gauged in

sponsoring? sponsoring? iranian sponsorship in the association with particularly lebanese will give or provides a global reach to that organization. i could not give you direct answer as to how many countries but i

and where we can identify through intelligence those individuals developing an approach using every tool that we have whether it is designation by the treasury department, other law enforcement and intelligence action and any tool that we have to try to shut down that financing pipeline. that is the area where it is a constant constant struggle because these organizations are part of he have st to fund raise and i would be happy to talk in closed session about the work the community is doing in that area is there a sense for iran as the state sponsored terrorism? is that on the decline? is it consistent? is it continuing to increase? have we noticed a significant change in iran in their behavior ? i would describe that as

consistent in stud steady. over time. and we are particularly mindful of their support for militant groups in places like iraq where the front line activity where shia militant groups that have connectes to iran could be potentially threatening to our personnel on the ground in iraq. okay. i will ask about another country. in the location, yemen will issue yeah has fallen into total chaos. with no functioning government anymore and every time they form a government it will collapse within months. and are border line as vice chairman mentioned earlier. civil war at this point. terrorist groups seem to enjoy an evacuate assume. what do we see is on the rise in libya and what is our statistic thinks as far as a terrorism organization spreads there? you are right senator. if i had to identify one of the greatest areas of merging concern with respect

to counterterrorism, it would be libya. we were already facing the chaotic political environment there, in which the resident in north african based terrorist groups that we have talked about the before aqm of the al-qaeda al sharia were active and potentially threatening in libya and a potential ability to threaten the u.s. interests across north africa. what changed more receiptly. and made the environment more difficult is that isis has look today also take advantage of the chaos of libya and hes tab lish afoot hold there as well. we are still looking to try to assess whether that capability will manifest itself next turnal operations outside of the region of north africa or if the intent is simply to give themselves a capability to attack western interests in places like cairo. tunis or morocco. that would by itself would

be a significant sufficient concern to warrant our attention we are obviously mind full of what they will try to to do expand into europe as well. threaten interests there. okay. a final question. if iran stopped supporting terrorism what affect would that have on the region? and on our terrorist operations? operations? well, if iran got out of the business of providing state sponsor ship to terrorist organizations it would obviously lower our potential level of concern about the capabilities of some of the groups that we worry about. i don't necessarily know it would look like an on off switch though. some cases, they are relationships and capabilities that have developed over decades and decades. so i don't know that it would all be unraveled and unspooled by just flipping a switch obviously there is not a switch that we have access to but there is a lot of connection there's. >> understand, thank you sir. senator rubio.

thank you mr. rasmussen. to take on senator lankford. there is multiple reports in the media that daa libya has emerged as a central and growing hub for isis is. that not right? . >> think that is right yes, sir and and in addition linked to many of the groups now in benghazi, and essence in an open source report that isis is the predominant report of benghazi. that is correct. there is also been an open source report that can isis was behind a terrorist attack in a hotel in tripoli that killed an american citizen into yes. and in addition there was an open source reporting this week that isis. ice commander was killed in afghanistan. yes. so there is now an isis presence as well in afghanistan and open source reports of terrorist training camps that were set up in portions of afghanistan that is correct. we have seen in recent months. that isis isil has look today expand their reach

into a number of different places in the word. have you highlighted two of the microsoft resent in afghanistan and libya. also egypt where it has happened. and the libya front darna is not a port city. a perfect and there is no al-assad bombing them there. or airstrikes my concern is that it is becoming one of their most important hubbs it. is uncontested. they have access to shipments and foreign fighters to take in. i think that is an area of growing emergence that i am surprised there is not more discussion about. because of how serious of a threat it will pose including to sinai. that would be a great spot of which to launch attacks into the sinai or get ice ill groups involved in sinai? that is right again the egyptian based terrorist group that recently affiliate with the isis. we worry about the threat posed to the western interests to egypt. and the tourists. american businesses and also our troop presence. that would be a mistake in your opinion to simply focus

the fight against isis as being syria and iraq this group is increasing their footprint and presence in multiple stages including afghanistan throughout north africa. and particularly libya. that is correct and they have expanded their reach and i want to ask you about guantanamo bay and prior to president obama's executive order to determine the disposition of guantanamo bay detainees 101 former detainees would be confirm today have reengaged inner is terror. and then the latest report that we got in july 2014. it state that had 2009 to july 2014 88 did he table he's would transe for out of gitmo. out of the 88 transe forked out. six were return today terror activity and an additional one was suspected. so by my calculation that means 107 of the 620 total detainees would be transferred from guilt know have reengaged in terror. another 77 are suspect of the doing so. in addition the 107. so can you tell us since july of 2014 when the report came out how many have returned? and in our estimation to

terror? we are just on the cusp of the next couple of weeks to provide the next reiterated version of the report received in july. in the numbers will be out. very. very short. > and as it stands one of six of those returned. i want to say though we do not have the report finalized, what i would expect is that the trend line. the proportion left side be roughly in line with what we reported in july as well. as it stands right now. before the report comes out it. looks like it is approximately close to one out of six individuals released from guantanamo bay have rent gauged in terrorism. maybe more as a net figure that is correct but the population released since 2009. that number is a lower number and okay. . >> lastly on the question of iran. i want to return back to kind of the threat that senator lankford is pursuing. iran uses an approximately relationship with had he's

bowl and those militias indebted and controlled by them as well. do we have any evidence that you can discuss here of iran trying to set up similar type groups in places like kuwait, saudi arabia bahrain, jordan? would i have to address that in a closed session senator and okay. thank you. we would be happy to provide that we are. i would not wait, we will provide that through the committee staff thank you senator rubio. if somebody stops out the story. they know you are a director of nctc. they say mr. director what do they do? why should i care? what would your answer be? i would tell that person that nctc strives every day to be a center of gravity for the nation's counterterrorism efforts. not the center of graphity. to say that would be a

disservice to up the partner that's do the counterterrorism work as well. but the center of graph that the will provide information, and analysis strategic planning and sput of national counterterrorism efforts. would i ask that they have had a large number of officers that come to work every day to assess and analyze and provide information aimed at defeating our terrorist adversaries that is what i would say. why should i care? you should care because as we talk about the in the opening statements. in your opening statement, the threat environment we face right now, is the most multifeatsed diverse and dynamic threat ever face and may manifest itself in communities all over this country this. is not simply a threat that manifests itself in far-flung places all over the world. kinds of low-level potentially small scale attacks that i talked about from ice ill inspired or other terrorist group

inspired individuals are the kinds of attacks that may literally happen in any of our other states. in part this is because you have said to me when we first met. you know. i believe america needs to know what we will do. and the intelligence community cannot be this black hole. for forever and i want to thank you for what your organization has done for all of the many employees because when you hear the intelligence community described this is not nctc first but everybody who is in the intelligence community as a customer of yours they look to the analytical proed that your folks produce. we look to the analytical prodded that you produce from the standpoint of being policymakers. they look at it from a standpoint of actionable information. i this i that have you some of the most talented folks working for that you you possibly could, and i do want to reiterate something.

if for some reason you feel that there are constraints that will not allow to you build out your workforce, to the degree that we have authorized and to the degree that i think that we have both agreed you need, i hope that will you share that with the vice chairman and myself to help to try to remediate that. i will do that. again i am grateful to both you mr. chairman and the vice chairman for the sustained support of the workforce over time i this that i one of the biggest contributionses congress could make towards to that end would be to not put us into the position where we are dealing with the second west relation and environment going into the future that impacts all federal agencies in the budget and about ability to on rachlt our organization in particular where we were so reliant on the detailed personnel from other organizations -- that budget approach as a ripple affect. it will reduce the ability of at organizationes to do

the hiring. and developing of the personnel that we will need to fill our rank so it end up having a double whammy affect on the organization like nctc whether there is an uncertain budget environment that affects partners the way that it does i thank you mr. collector. i will turn to the vice chairman. if there was a follow up question to ask. i would like to put the paper in the record if i might. since senator rubio mentioned the recidivism rate of former gitmo detainees. and i would like to put the problem is -- really that as whether it is bush or obama, people learned more. the rates changed dramatically prejanuary of 09, the rate was 101 532. of and that is 19%. now since the obama

administration, it is six out of 88. that is 6.2%. so will you have to look at it in versions of time and i would like to put this paper in the record if i may. so everybody can see it. i have one other question to ask the director. director, days before the public release or of our report on cia detention and interrogation, we received an intelligence assessment predicting violence throughout the world. and significant damage to the united states relationships nctc sister fated in that . do you believe that it provided to be correct? i could speak to the threat portion of that and i would say that it was the part of the most direct purchase on

4 and i can't say that i can disaggregate that level of violence and terrorism we have seen and issued aggregate that level from what we may have seen otherwise. because as you know, the turmoil railing that part of the parts of the world not that part of the world but those parts of the world. middle east south africa, asia. there is a number of factors going in to creating the difficult threat environment that we face some the assessment that we made at the time. as a community. was that this would increase or add to the threat picture in the places i don't know. looking backwards right now that we could say aha. that did by ex-percent, we are also i think clear in saying that there is a parts of the impact that we would not know until we would have the ben fist time to see how it would play out. in different locations all over the world and oh boy. i disagree with you about

you that is what makes this arena i guess. the fact in my mine was a threat assessment that was not correct. thank you very much mr. chairman. thank you vice chairman senator thank you chairman. i will go back to where i was when i ran out of time earlier, on just trying to in my mind figure out where the aumf that is was proposed and how it would relate to the various terror groups. i think that the further language on the associated persons or forces says means individuals and organization that's are fighting for on behalf of or alongside of isil or closely related successor entity. and hostilities against the united states or coalition partners can you list the terrorist groups that cannot

be associated with ice ill. and you mentioned too earlier and terrorist groups that we have seen in latin america. too i don't believe that definition of a force and al-qaeda affiliated groups operating in southeast asia for example there are examples from the top of the head. but this if we just take that definition does that mean that ice ill and the associated groups are the only people that we have authorized the president to go and do whatever is necessary within the restrictions of that or does the 2001 aumf give the

president authority to go after other terrorist groups? i would have to get you answer on that sir. i am not confident that i know enough about the design of the amf and authorization of force. you surely by counterterrorism know all about the 2001 . what authorization that will give us that will allow us to carry out associated forces. could you refresh me on this? no, that is the one. that is right it also said the future terrorism against united states in that 2000. that is the within that we let stand and eliminate that 2002 on iraq specific and add this one two it. so i guess what i am think thinking is what we really

add by adding this complicated definition of terrorists that associate with isil is. isil covered under the 2001 aumf i believe not you believe not so how are we engaging with isil now in syria? let me provide you with an answer sir. i want to be precise and correct when what i provide you and do you have a follow-up on the question? yes and i assume that we might be able to pursue isil or isis in iraq through the 2002. if the 2001. my point mr. chairman is if the 2001 is broad enough to cover isil now. i do not know what we would aed to it when we add another authorization and leave that on the books. there is a closely related

associate when we will begin to define this and the groups. coral quaid is generally not at one time and various renamed and affiliated groups have sprung up everywhere from the philippines to all over the world. and i will be vin rested in how we define and why we would specifically begin to define individual groups as opposed to what and how broad the 2001 authorization was which is i gets beginning of that question so thank you. i look forward to your response on that thank you. i think that it gets more confusing when in the same agree graphic battle space that it would be a 2001 amf to provide us with at course on. and next door. in the same agree graphical

area. that they would go after isil senator king. we are glad that you can join us thank you, i appreciate that a markup in the arms services come itemy. and there is dispatch hopefully i will not confuse this discussion further it. is important to talk about the umf and the term associated for forces will not appear anywhere in it x that is a gloss upon gloss that the 2011 aumf. and they would use an appropriate force again the nation's organizations or persons. he determined planned authorized committed or aided those for september 11th and harbored the organizations of persons in order to prevent a future act of enter national terrorism. that was used very very broadly. that is one of the concerns and um. i think that the president has realized that to stretch

it into attacking an organization that didn't even exist in 2001 operating in a country that was at least partially stable in 2001 is quite the stretch. i think that is why we have a new authorization that was brought forward to cover the isil situation. so that is a matter for the more than foreign relations committee. and 2001 has been stretched very far i am frankly one who is glad to see that the president has brought forward a new authorization count or terrorism. we think of killing people. and striking and intercepting the communications and drones. all of that type of thing. and yet with we are learn that can what we have part what have we have had to do is intervene before people will get radicalized and yet. when you raise that, the fbi says that we are not social workers and the county

sheriffs say that we are not social workers and if it is not going to be law enforcement that does that type on social media for example. who will do it and do you see it as part of the counterterrorism mission. certainly and especially most particularly here in the home is part of the counterterrorism mission and they do embrace the mission even if some of the individual maze have said exactly what you said senator king. earlier in the discussion we talked about some of the work that the nctc is doing along with the fbi and homeland security and justice department to try to do exactly what you just described. the effort would be to enable and empower local communities to carry out this type of intervention in their own communities and to enable them to do that in away that does not scream law enforcement context because you know that can

have a chilling affect on the type of immunity teen gaugement and community dialogue that would help you to get at the underlining cause that's would lead to violent extremism so. the role that we have take friend the federal government is circumdescribe and aimed to providing communities with the tools to do this type of work and information so that they will understand how terrorists is using social media to go after their children and their communities to let the parents and teachers and schools and other authority figures to understand what is coming at them and what would be necessary to prevent a foreign fighter from developing. what we are doing in this area is useful and important and thus far it is not scalable on the size to have the impa account that we want across the country the president's countering violent extremism summit during the part of next week the three pilot cities

language and boston will report to the group on efforts in that area. they are important cities that the federal government has been working closely with to try to do this kind of work. but they are 3 cities and the purpose of the pilot would be to demonstrate whether it could be done on a scale that would have impact far beyond just those three cities and you are could not occurring that this type of effort would be apart of the overall counter terror strategy? absolutely. and in particular, it is apart of the counter isil strategy. both at home. abroad because as you well know senator most of the foreign fighter population that we are worried about, will emanate from the countries other than the united states so we will need to help other countries to be more effective at this and also we will need to learn from them. and in many cases some of the european partners are doing tremendous work on a community level to try to

counter the work and the spread of the violent extremism in their communities that will be one of the other side bars that next week's summit is to get the lessons learned out of partners on that. and i understand that they have develop add program for dealing with this problem in prisons that is where radicalization will take place that is true and the example that brought home just how dangerous and radicalizing an environment prisons can be i know that the department of justice has engaged on that issue in the bureau of prisones to make sure that we have that identified and where possible under control here. but i will have to get you more details on that. thank you. thank you mr. chairman and thank you. thank you for your willingness to spend one hour and with john mccain and come to this hearing. i am a patriot you will be rewarded in heaven. you will assure you director. thank you so much for being here today. sharing your insight with us. please carry become to your

employees how grateful that we are for the great work that the employees from nctc do. thank you so much for having me the hearing is adjourned.

if members would take their seats we are going to begin this hearing and i will ask all members to take their seats at this time. this morning the committee will ten our focus on the growing threat of isis and of course the hearing will take only added significance as yesterday the president

requested that the congress formally back military action against this jihadist organization. an organization that has beheaded americans and has sold and raped thousands of women in syria. this is not a new threat for the members of the committee one year ago this committee took testimony from one of the few administration officials and sounding the isis alarm that was ambassador brett who told us that the group's mission was clear. and he said that they wanted today carve out a zone of governing territory to run from bag today to syria to lebanon and at that point in time. we were seeing a situation where isis was just beginning to expand into towns in syria. and members of the committee on both sides of the aisle called for airstrikes

against isis so they could not begin that process of expansion. unfortunately, we went month after month after month, and town after town. to isis to air syria and across iraq. over the past 12 months and through the dozen hearings we have seen the isis threats only grow. and now we have three american hostages dead including kayla mueller not only killed but isis has beheaded two japanese hostages and emulated a downed jordanian pilot for the world to see. and this again is on top of what they have done in terms of raping as i said. by now tens and thousands of women across syria and other minorities. killing husbands, raping the wives and the daughters. this group occupies a vast territory and holds an estimated 2 billion in as

outs assets. i do not think that there was a terrorist organization that was more well funded than this terror group. has use add internet to recruit foreign fighters at an unprecedent the rate. 20,000 from 9 0 countries are now making up the ranks of isis. according to the intelligence estimates thain includes 34 hundred from the west. and 150 americans on the ground fighting for isis today. over the past year the committee has pressed the administration to intensify and to accelerate their response some pieces are being put together but too slowly of a 60-member coalition and 8 5% are from u.s. fighter jets this air campaign isn't pimping the enemy as it should. it is not intense enough all of us are glad to see iraq

prime minister malachy go but with respect to reports of shiite mishl as wreaking havoc the jury is still out on the government's ability to feel competent and inclusive security force there. the training and equipment of iraqi fors also will continue to lag and we are not likely to see the 12 iraqi brig as that wren have iinged several months they are more supportive of the national force and the question is will they be in it for the long hall? after 6 months of fight, the committee is deeply concerned to receive reports that the kurdish peshmerga were out judge and running out of ammunition on the front lines and unarmed and equipped by the united states this has to change. last father. training and equipment for syrian opposition forces is

still not up and running and al-assad is looking for comfortable by the day. this has left the key allies in the region distraught and questioning the administration's strategy and as so many here do. despite these problems. kurdish forces on the ground and concentrated air support from the coalition fors in the air helped to take back 6,000 fighters there kill. isis fighters and the kurds have shown tremendous bravery. they deserve more and timely delivered aide to the cause of fighting isis. jordan's tragedy is galvanizing the coalition getting jordan to step up its role in the air campaign and to commit thousands of troops to the border area with iraq is a show of force. last week the committee met with the retired general john allen the state department's lead to counter

isis. and problemed our support for jordan to get the equipment they need in this fight. the uae also has recommitted fighter planes to jordan it is arab forces and voice that's have to be central in this fight they need to see and to feel american leadership i am pleased that the president request that had congress act on the authorization of use of military force against isis. and now he will need to make a case to the american people and the committee as we will work to examine this proposal in-depth it will not be easy. but comforted by the ranking members will be unite today see the bipartisan backing behind a proposal to ensure that the commander in chief have the authority needed to decisively defeat the enemy.

so joining us later. i would like to now recognize the ranking member mr. sherman of california for his opening state. i thank our witnesses for being with us as well. thank you. i think that i am a second ranking member mr. chairman. i view this as the first hearing on the president's request for the authorization to use military force. i hope that we focus on that request as the main duty east committee and that we have not only hearings but that we will move to the mark upand perhaps prior to moving to the markup. we will move to a discussion. where members can take five minutes to explain what they would like to see in an ultimate resolution. we are all aware of the evil of isis isis almost asks to us take military action against them if they had a

madison avenue marketing firm, and tried to say what can we do to provoke americans, this is exactly what they would do. what is interest something that the smit alliance. what i would argue is at least an equal danger has done everything possible to avoid america taking military action whether they will bargain in good faith in again eve a i have not seen it yet but going to geneva will hit american concerns. and of course they were quite successful in avoiding syria in the united states. and ultimately willing to give up most of their chemical weapons to do so of course america calls out for the immediate destruction of isis. we will see again in the hearings to achieve that goal that it would be

difficult perhaps impossible and certainly involved a tremendous american casualties we can work for the destruction and push thing in the right direction to a diego. without enormous american casualties we are certain to incur incredible american casualties and i am not sure that the middle east will ever be what we want it to be. with mr. chairman we had hearings on iran and i think that the shiite alliance led by iran and including many of the forces in baghdad including iraq and al-assad. his hizbollah. is more dangerous and more deadly than isis they have killed far more americans starting with beirut and marines in the 19 80s and carried on operations on

every continent, they will more capable of killing americans in the homeland than isis. they have killed far more people in the middle east al-assad alone has killed 200,000 if we are going to focus on destroying isis. we should not just focus on that. we will need to ask what comes next? who will fill the physical space. ideological space and cyberspace? al-qaeda is well positioned to fill the ideological space. they are an organization that is older and they may also learn social media to a level of isis and to the physical space, we will see the shia alliance from tehran to southern lebanon that would be emboldened by the destruction of isis.

believe it or not i don't have alonger statement. i did not think i expect mr. ngle to be here i can see no one. and yield back to the chair. thank you mr. chairman, we will go back to a minute to middle east and north africa. thank you so much mr. chairman. we are deeply sat ended by kayla's appalling murder by isil terrorists. she made it her mission to care about humanity in the region that seems to no longer value human life and our prayers go out to her familiarly. the brutality of isis knows no bounds and the cancer is throughout the region. the president has finally given us a draft of uamf so

i look forward to the robust debate on the committee. and no matter what happens with the aum fvment solving a problem of isis cannot happen without addressing problems of al-assad. iran. and a partnership that will ensure that syria will continue to be a terrorist breeding ground for troops like isil. and the big part of the administration strategy would be to train equip programs to seek to enhance the latest by syrian leaders and the program has not started yet. fighters will be trained and we are not engage the al-assad regime just isil. and i worry that this policy is not going to be victorious. thank you mr. chairman. thank you. we will go to ranking member of the terrorism you is

commit sneechlt thank you mr. chairman the death of kayla mueller marks the hand of those terrorists. though it is true. she would have gone onto enact great change that courage and empathy would encouraging those more counted and prayers are with her lost ones at this time along with kayla. we have lost james foldy. so the love. and peter case i can and allies overseas and and kenji goto. all of these people died tragically and continued to well developed strategy with the support of our trusted

partners with an enter national coal sxigs use of military force these are the metrics that i expected to be debated and continually reviewed and never forgotten it. is critical and we will consider this matter as the most serious of the decisions that all of us will make as a congress thank you mr. chairman with that i yield back now to the chairman of nonproliferation. thank you there. is not a comprehensive strategy to defeat isis. the training and the equipment of the moderate rebels has not start and it will not be enough to make a difference. rebels will probably end up fighting a saud and not isis. the airstrikes have taken a toll. nobody plaintiffs they will have defeat this had group in the local population and the effort to soon zahnies

and iraq against isis has not shown a significant progress. and kurdishes have a record of against isis. they will not cut and run we have refused to give adequate weapons to fight against isis and we are more concerned about baghdad and turkey. what they think more than about helping the kurds. and last year as intelligence authorization bill required a strategy to debate to gift president the power to go to war against isis it would be nice if we knew what the strategy was to win that war what is the plan? i will yield back. i will go to mr. deutsch later whether he joins the committee for the opening statement and this morning we are joined by the distinguished group of experts. ambassador james jeff reechlt a visiting fellow in the washington institute of

near east policy. has been in iraq turkey. and to albania dr. rick brennan is the senior political scientist. from the ran corporation. and prior to joining ranked. he served as a senior advise for the u.s. military in iraq for five years. and the studies for the new and american security previously she served in as the staff the national security council. a professional staff member on the senate as well. we will welcome them all and without objection witnesses will have a full prepared statement as part of the record they have have days to submit questions and staple and materials for the record. ambassador jeffrey if we can start with you and ask to you summarize your remarks in five minutes.

thank you sir thank you mr. sherman and members of the committee. it is very important to note what we are doing today as you said, considering an authorization for the use of military force it is fitting and just that they would untake the grave decisions as this. i am proud to be here today to provide whatever help that i can. will the me start with isis. they have received a lot of help from the three or four of you have spoke end isis is a unique threat for reason that's have you laid out i will not repeat them again. we have not seen anything like this before particularly the hold on territory. and conventional capabilities of those in the region. secondly, isis is a threat and a unique sense it is coming an a time of even more disruption in the middle east and reflects

longer term trends and dangers in the region a system with the legit region populations and reege nails language movements it will require those to free themselves of isis and of the thinking that is behind it. as mr. sherman discussed a few minutes ago. they will have to do this we can't reach into the social structures of that part of the world. we tried it. it did not work very well we can't expect for them to do that much. they are engaged in the conflicts and the struggles within their own societies. and thus the president's goal to degrade and eventually to destroy isis with america taking the lead

is the correct mission. the campaign improblem is the basically sound. and the campaign has had considerable success of late from the push back and containment to others and the further success in the near future would actually be quite possible still this campaign could begin a major ground offensive operation. it has not done that yet. and questions will remain open as representative ross said. we have a lot of questions about syria and what we have learned from vietnam is that you cannot defeat an group that has a refuge and neighboring country. will you have to do something about syria. and you can't do anything about syria without having a better policy towards al-assad. >> we don't know whose boots on the ground will actually dig the guys out of places

like fallujah and mosul or what the day after will look like these are very tough questions. in some we should not assume that time is on our side. given an extraordinary threat. i urge the administration to move faster take more ricks and apply more resources. if our commanders on the ground want it. and that is the question they should have the weapons systems that they need if they need observers on the ground and advisories teams out with local forces. they should get that. despite the higher risks and costs. likewise if diplomats will need more active top level u.s. pressure on partners and players including iran we should follow their advice. and in considering this authorization, i urge the congress to give the administration maximum flexibility in timing and the use of forces as one

that has spend time in iraq. and vietnam. have i been against long-term insurgency campaigns. very tried them repeatedly. they have not worked. and if necessary to meet the president's very valid mission of defeating isis. we should not rule out the operations like u.s. ground action to liberate najaf and fallujah in 2004. as i mope it will not come to that, such a step could become necessary. the thing to avoid above all sells to put the limitations on actions to lead to us containing not defeating and destroying isis that will be seen as a victory against the us west and the interest national order and it will stimulate the support throughout the world for this all of youring organization. thank you so much. . >> thank you ambassador. doctor? chairman royce. and ranking members of the

committee. thank you for inviting me to talk about this growing threat of isis my argument is in four key points. the key threat that we would face today is not from isis. al-qaeda or another group or genocide. but a radical islamist ideology to give the groups pause and for this we will need a grand strategy to apply to all means of u.s. national power to address it to understand the scale of the uaffssee t nee f d and

according to one military he is machlt it has cost 50% of the u.s. casualties in iraq in the eight years that we were there. my is he point is that it is more than just a terrorist

group. but a revolutionary insurgent organization that seeks to establish new social political, sxek economic order without regard to internationally sanctioned state boundaries and a rapid success in iraq and syria has caused an explosion of volunteers from all over the world that have a journey to fight in places like syria. iraq. somalia. libya. afghanistan and pakistan. by 2012 wet years of experience fighting u.s. and iraqi military forces and two years experience fighting military and iranian proxy mill issue as isis is an experienced and hardened military force in january 2014, isis used a growing alienation of iraq as the tunit to seize control of fallujah located just 50 miles west of baghdad following this early success, isis began an infiltration of iraq to set the stage.

and by 2014. it was a control of the approximately 35,000 square miles of iraq and syria a landmass that is approximately the size of the state of indiana. and had begun to establish structures of governance and now calls itself the islamic state. and contributing to the failure of the iraqi military in 2014. and many of these were known in advance. one key factor was malachy's he have st to consolidate and control the eye rncy military and security forces to replace officers with those that were loyal to him and then the corruption to those political military establishments. also it is important to highlight that from 20099 to 2011. of that the iraq military had significant short falls and virtually all areas that would be needed to conduct complex military operations without direct u.s. military

assistance if it was a reason that general lloyd austin and mullen recommended the residual force in iraq between 14,000. 20,000 the fourth point is that the administration's response to isis was a necessary first step to blunlt assault. however in my professional opinion, as a career army infantry officer and military plan near spent five years in iraq between 2006 and 2011. that the senior advise for the u.s. military our current efforts are insufficient to enable iraq to regain control of the territory and key cities of will fallujah to critical and mouz mosul. will both in iraq and syria and to what they are doing would required to achieve success. and first. develop the more robust advisory using conventional sources and the for that's

we have there. they are now insufficient due to rapidly giving isis time to develop second enhantz size and the scope of the control mission. and third to operations forces with attached tactical error and other coalition ground forces out to the level to enable them to assist in the conduct of the enhanlsd air campaign. and finally to deploy the special operations forces to conduct targeted counterterrorism missions in iraq and syria in conclusion, there is an understandable reluctance to once again put american ground forces in iraq and if the threat to the region and to the united states is as grafshgs using the wording and amf and proposed amf this. is a mission that would be undertaken as ambassador jeffries said we will not have constraints, we will have to be used as ground forces if we will have

success. thank you dr. brennan thank you chairman royce key member of the he is teamed committee. thank you for the having this hearing and inviting me to testify i would like to discuss three key questions that americans are asking today about the amf and threat that isis will pose. the questions are simple and come down to what why and how? what is isis they are asking though isis has roots in al-qaeda offshoot in both brutality and in the battlefield successes. it will represent a new type of threat many have been articulated by the come itemy. and the savagery of the core of the ideology.

>>

>> after 14 years of the u.s. military engagement americans have a right to a strong, clear and convincing answer to this question. why should our resources be deployed in this fight? the best dancer we're trying to move destroy isis' under very three specific objectives to prevent attacks against united states and our direct interest abroad, to control populated areas to recruit foreign fighters and to protect the sovereignty of u.s. partners against tyson is. the third question is the most complicated. how to read defeat isis? how to read degrade this threat enough of what i just

enumerated? it will necessarily entail coercive and on course of tools. the use of military power is just one tool to be integrated with the status of others of multilateral and bilateral diplomacy. perhaps the degree of success is the administration's ability to mobilize a is a ticket coalition. there are participating in the air strikes a and responding to the humanitarian catastrophe. the use of military force is necessary but not sufficient the draft language in my view was carefully tailored strategy. and also the evidence of

what is looking so far. we have seen evidence to make significant progress to degrade i says with a combination of air strikes by the coalition with local forces on the ground. we have eliminated nearly 6,000 isis' fighters in iraq and syria and we have decreased momentum most support the. three main military partners are the erech security forces the kurdish writer -- fighters in the syrian opposition forces.

a limited use reflects this strategy that prioritizes the roles of the partners on the ground in the vacuum left behind. though ltd. tailored approach to the war-weary public and the muslim world in the heart of the middle east to reduce the threat it poses it does not require that type of approach. with one element of the strategy to use it wisely in the way it is most effective. this one element is insufficient in a sustainable and long-term manner. even speaking with the proper use of force over a larger political strategy with the work that would be

necessary per our look forward to your questions about this military objective. to diminish the a peal of the i.c.e. is ideology. >> ambassador, you raise the question who will dig them mount? this committee raised the issue before we should have used their power while they were on the desert to decimate the force but it was not done at that time. saw as of this morning the forces had surrounded isis on three sides. into the greatest problem right now is south of mosul

where the city triads are slowly gaining control. so looking at the authorization of jurisdiction from the white house to provide the flexibility to conduct ground combat operations with limited circumstances. with special operations forces to take military action against the leadershileadershi p. sova to enable kinetics strikes to call them in and i guess there is about 3,000 special forces involved right now. with other forms of the fisa and assistance i want to get to the question because i am

concerned about the situation occurred to we have had numerous meetings in which they have called repeatedly for a anti-tank weapons, artillery long-ran ge mortar, and that has not been done. as they saw around mosul what kind of leadership would be given and what types of air strikes? with the spotters on the ground maybe we can open with that. >> it is to separate questions. carving the kurds is the important issue in there are two elements. with what they need and the

political ramifications. so one of the problems is keeping iraq together. the administration's position makes sense to give these weapons through the iraqi government. regis have to try harder. it is easy for a defensive weapons that is for counterinsurgency. even with the night vision goggles it could be used against isis' also in a conflict and would focus on

better equipment to make sure they have the ammunition to move around the battlefield. i am not sure that is such a good idea is assuming they can hold the ground now with a difficult to attack from kerr cup last week but taking will still there are various opinions on that. part of losel was kurdish was that element to the population and they may be willing to fight. i am not so sure they're willing to take heavy casualties. >> a are taking them now. they are taking against artillery with no artillery to match.

:the 25 that we sent got through so the weaponry is not getting through to the kurds in double sides of the ideal, the fighting will be done and by jordanians by the sunni tribes and by arab and kurdish troops on the ground. if we're not giving them the assistance they need this allows isis not to be rolled back we need them decisively rollback. in with those coalition and ground forces to help them on the ground. would you elaborate? >> thank you.

my view is a tortuous system the organization's, we have got to put u.s. forces with them. is a perfect mission of the special forces and would put it eight teams down at the battalion level to plan intelligence and help them organize and allow them to bring in the type of air support that is necessary. the problem you had going into cities there is a reluctance to use air support because of the potential for collateral damage. and is extremely difficult. >> you have 3,000 special forces now. and they're calling in air strikes right now prepared.

and they need to be deployed >> than to be engaged with all military. something much greater than we have right now. >>. >> and thank you for your testimony that hearing today takes place in the wake of president day of the sending his request to the congress yesterday. squarely in the jurisdiction of this committee and with colleagues on both sides to review the proposal to defeat isis in the days and weeks ahead.

with the humanitarian situation with hundreds of thousands of iraqis as well as the spillover effect we work to cut off the funding stream to be kidnapped for ransom and i am working so that the group cannot steal the country's heritage to pay for the weapons of terror. in moving with the battlefield waiting to take their place the coalition is pushing back preached with eyes as propaganda. and they are seeing reversals that the chairman spoke about.

in the chairman's lots? isis has been driven out of areas upset that we are looking at serious opposition although it is of long long long overdue. and when questions arise so we can bring the uae back into the effort that is why jordan has doubled down on its commitment after the horrific murder of the captain's. we're not out of the woods but i would start by talking about the a you msf -- aumf

proposal of of life to hear from more witnesses. should it be limited to a certain geographic area? shouldn't limit u.s. combat troops on the ground? should reconsider a sunset clause? ambassador jeffrey? >> i would urge the committee to give as much latitude as possible i am concerned about the three years beginning administration as the next administration comes into office and they're getting people confirmed they hr june to think about a resolution of the overall strategy will be. if there is a time limit i would urge a broader one in iowa a bit concerned about

the offensive ground to to be interpreted no ground operations with deifies three teams that the doctor has talked about are very feasible and a normal procedure with such campaigns that have been used many times before. of the commanders on the ground the them, they should. i would not rule out the ground troops to take territory of that is necessary to defeat isis. i will rollout long-term american presence. it does not work. >> don't the people worry that there might be a loving troops pouring lager period of time?

stick is of bad idea to have been grounded trooper presents almost anywhere in the middle east and traditionally we have not done that before since 2003 and it is of great will to keep back to. advisory teams comair power but you don't want to keep a large ground presence. >> the other point i would like to make is that limiting the president to govern during ground operations and sent the signal battle the two friends but enemies pick if

this is the great threat to u.s. national security i believe congress should authorize the president to do what is necessary. we do not know where it will evolve in six months. to have the flexibility of commanders on the ground as someone who has bad with troops on the ground that the lawyers will be wrestling with this every day. and that is a mistake to keep this in the aumf. >> overall the aumf reflects the strategy with a preliminary way. the most important clauses

is as my colleagues have mentioned so much is changing. with how extensive the ground forces may to be with geography put into years or three years we have to evaluate. as the most important limitation and it demands that congress will require. with that geographical scope for those against a the affiliate's and associates. >> thank you, mr. chairman chairman.

it is a large part of a strategy to see evidence of success. that the administration to fight with the modern fighters if it does get up and running what should the mission be? and who would coordinate that strategy? is set united states or coalition partners? can they fight simultaneously? that also we cannot defeat isil over the long term without a more forceful policy to the side -- assad regime.

and how does this impact our fight against isil? do you suspect we're not going after assad because we're not negotiating? and when iran violates iraqi airspace with the prime minister will the coalition in turn a blind eye because it is not convenient? >>. >> first of all, i agree that we need to do much more to explain how serious threats into the equation the campaign is correct because we are engaged and syria is say a longer-term question but that doesn't mean you cannot answer questions. most of them that assad

contributed to a recreation and as my colleague said we're dealing not just with one extreme islamic violent movement but a whole series and one is on the side of the every in the establishment it is the country and a cause and the poster boy has done a great deal to do drive iraq did to this unity. too encouraging members of the shia coalition to disagree that it is not holding together very well. still simultaneously and so

it doesn't do more against iran and i hope that is not the case. end that has to rest on its own merits whatever they may be a. and our policy to provide security in this region has to be moved forward without consideration. >>. >> wade to approach this issue with the regional strategy. as the announcer said we have a lot of hmu'ers in the region that are threatened by what is taking place. look at the expansion of what iran has done recently

recently, to have a large number of shiite militia maybe five or 10,000 to look at the success lot has been done by the militia inside iraq. you have yemen and then the creation of the shia presence threatening all allies in the region. and then they see iran as a primary threat. and then to move on from there but i said sandarac cast to be the first

priority. >> by a matter of time. >> there ranking member of the subcommittee. >> now i am the ranking member. >> congratulations on and your promotion. [laughter] >>. >> to be a lesser threat that ground troops necessary to take territory will be necessary to hold territory. the al iraqi army, we saw what they did a transfer of weaponry to a terrorist organization the iraqi government is the shi'ite

militia with the ethnic cleansing so i don't see who we have to take in the areas. but to vote to laugh american soldiers in a bloody hand-to-hand combat role. with the aumf we have with the president sent over with the 2001 aumf and defect and publishes data and reaffirm said. so unlamented with what tactics or ground forces authorizing in afghanistan

is one of did thousand it to be deployed on the ground next decade and a limited geography. so it is hard to say he doesn't have enough authority end has to the time the issue if there is the three year aumf after two years if we pass something else while they have soldiers in the field wondering if congress will pass the bill. but economics is the richest terrorist organization in history. huge quantity of iraqi currency.

some of that currency exchanges. end they wear extremely popular with governments that he would describe baghdad. are any of you qualified if iraq can do a currency exchange with the billions of dollars of iraqi currency ? >> moving on to another question i think it is of a good idea. and after you reflect on a to have a written response to the congress rand question would be helpful.

>> and i will yield to any member who says i have a good idea. [laughter] >> it doesn't happen all the time. is enrolled or to zero and three regarded those areas that they could not abide argentina agreed to to ship to the ocean but yet i am told that the reports indicate that the iraqi government is paying the civil servants in those zero and isis takes as much as those as they want precocious that continue?

>> that is a tough question and though the embassy is focused on that. and we did that from time to time. a la the second and tertiary impact on people. the reason the iraqi government continues these payments is first of all, with the legal obligations of the government. >> but they feel necessary to pay the teachers. >> is not consider the legal government of france and it

is important but it gets to use a questions who will do though liberating? much of it is by the sunii population for the tribes they need to feel a loyalty. >> every penny that goes to the i.c.e. is controlled areas is scooped up. but in addition to provide free electricity to the i.c.e. is serious. in world war ii retook it seriously we bombed the facilities in france and then there was taken by iraq the forces.

i yield back. >> rigo to the chairman from new jersey. >> thank you choose the three panelists for their extraordinary service to provide the benefit of your insight and recommendations. you say you did not take up campaign is appropriate. how do think president obama finds that? that did your testimony that the stress of the operation in soweto career with the containment mission to lead to a new i.c.e. this threat but dead you say tavis not on our side and the

administration has to move faster and then to meet the criteria to go faster. cpac the administration moved baghdad has led to a tragedy. and then i am surprised how rapidly he responded in and then have put together a coalition but my problem is more of what will happen next? and obamacare has laid this

out with the interview today out in the "state of the union" speech and is very dear is about the use of military force without a lot of allies sometimes than there is necessary but there are times i am concerned we're not moving fast enough >> with i says leadership and other interest, how do they live dash but what is happening appear? >> had with those restrictions instead encourages the enemy.

and died j.b. dishes right now with russia and in china and members of the committee we have to take this in the context of the extraordinary variety of challenges of china or russia or a al qaeda elements and isis itself. they're all watching us. i.c.e. is probably would respond the most and i am concerned across-the-board. >> i have repeatedly asked a desert date boko haram as a terrorist organization of the date we have another hearing as they're getting

ready to mark up the bill that the administration announced nevertheless. in my opinion we don't trade to secure that operation of the of military. i saw how the fire bombs already church is. your thoughts on the parallels? as well as trading up battalions like boko haram. >> i go back to the responses i made earlier. that you have to find allies if they are willing to fight i don't know that much about vetting them but it gives them weapons. in iraq is a bit more complicated but so those who

are fighting them deserve support from domesticate the -- the same kind that this is a regionwide to struggle. in a did you are today's storage to declare boko haram a terrorist organization. >> thank you for your testimony and leadership. >> thank you mr. chairman. the at these hearings deciding what is the best thing to you do and trying to utilize understanding what to play sid 2001 and

sometimes talk about patients we didn't have any. to think it is a quick hit. with shot in an all happens in a few days later as many members of this committee thought once they get in there they would raise a flag that we bring our values and everything would be different. but now we still have troops on the ground even more than anybody else. ends those to get back out

there. in there the ones that are threatened. to help in the strategic interest but those that are in immediate danger, we need tear back out. really is a naturalized. i think we should ban the president was very clear. if we find there is somebody over there that the organization that our allies cannot get to them, with that limited number of the aumf they can go after them. and i do think clearly saying what they did tuesday a jordanian pilot, that is and he is long.

we have to make sure is out there to legitimize the ideology. maybe they're just asking. they would love to have people on the ground. but that is a recruitment. because it is them against us. otherwise if we start to use legitimizes their ideology the recruitment is that i happen to agree that we have to do everything in a multilateral basis. so i did agree that from a

bad singer jeffrey what was wrong with the testimony? >> i agree. but getting back to lose strategic patients if that means not make the mistakes that means not only this administration but no casualty your risk of casualties but assuming that people in the region not only have more at stake but that they could carry a big part of the burden that and see anything in the history history, the chairman and talked about during 85% of the strikes. look that libya libya, bosnia, echoes of though, you will find in we

can complain but that is not how we maintain international security. where we run into trouble has been when we thought we could do regime change. we will but to the athletic anyone is suggesting that. we are suggesting that at least we would consider if the military commander or diplomats the did a more aggressive policy of diplomatic action. >> i will stop you there. >> just tura clarify my opening statement and in and asking for aggressive use of force the what has already been reduced. by in the 25th year but

that the military operations in iraq is quite remarkable still talking about the american forces. the first is still make americans parts of the story. you're not taking of a back seat will be to want the presence to create the insurgency against the american power. that was clear in the 2002 situation. the importance to be a sustainable but the iraqi government and security forces the to be professional and less penetrable to the outside doctors. that is the only way to sustain their protect iraq and a sovereign countries over the long term. we have had problems with

that sunii region and it's connectivity with central baghdad. this is the third time that has happened. so in these two represent and that is part good teacher in the with ever arab allies. >> now regards the chairman of the subcommittee on europe a year and asia. >> this is said discussion about which direction and we should go rand we appreciate your vice. dr. brennan, agree with your basic assessment that we're not just talking