aircraft currently in use as well. .. hence those capabilities above what they would have been otherwise. section 231 provides regulations shall take effect to permit the development and application of requisite technology epa must face its standards not only on existing technology but in development technology as well.

and expedia should consider a fleet wide averageing program permitted spender section 231 which would allow the agency to achieve the greatest initial reduction at lowest cost. the agency should address operational and air traffic management practices which could provide emission reduction opportunities that low-cost. finally epa must require any aircraft that cannot meet the requisite final standard or cannot be retrofitted to achieve it to phase out and ultimately retire. it is critical epa credible that outdated aircraft from polluting our skies and contributing to climate change while more efficient designs are readily available. sierra club appreciates epa's efforts to move forward with greenhouse gas emissions for aircraft and we urge the agency to the epicenter strong force the epa must take the time necessary to develop appropriate and well considered final rule, time is of the essence. in december president obama and administration officials will travel to paris to negotiate an international climate court with

leaders from around the world. strong arguments to reduce greenhouse gases domestically and more effective our negotiating position will be. we strongly encourage epa to move swiftly ahead with these regulations to achieve the best outcomes. thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue and look forward to many comments on behalf of sierra club on this proposal in the near future. thank you. >> thank you for your comments and fox. before i go to the next group, is mr. valdez here? >> can we hear from kate deangelis, amanda base, and david baake.

>> thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important issue. i am kate deangelis, and a climate and energy campaigner. research has shown we must keep 80% of the world's fossil fuel reserves in the ground to have a good chance of avoiding the worst impact of climate destruction. as the world's largest historical eater the united states must shoulder the greatest share of the burden for emission reduction. in order to achieve the necessary emission reduction to avert catastrophic climate disruption united states must take significant strides to reduce carbon pollution from every sector of the economy including aircraft. the epa has taken action to reduce emissions from cars, trucks and power plants. now the epa needs to show the

same leadership and limit aircraft carbon dioxide emissions. globally airline operations produced 705 metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2013. to put that in perspective the global aviation admissions industry would rank seventh including countries from ranking after germany at total country emissions. this sector is too big to leave unregulated so the epa must take action to reduce carbon pollution from aviation. greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft are currently responsible for more and 3% of the total united states emissions. this may not seem significant but emissions from the asian is aviation sector, one of the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gases in the world, also the largest emissions force that is unregulated in the united states. without regulation, carbon pollution from this sector is expected to triple by 2015. regulation is especially important because of potentially disproportionate climate impact

of high-altitude aircraft emissions. went emissions are higher in the after, there's a greater impact than at ground level. the united states must take the lead in reducing the mission from aircraft accounting for a large proportion of the world's aviation remissions leave the united states's domestic flights account for 24% of the world's commercial aircraft carbon dioxide emissions and 35% of carbon dioxide emissions on international commercial flights. when the epa began analyzing mr. reduce carbon dioxide from aviation in 2008, it estimated greenhouse gas reduction available from engineering their frame changes alone at 13.3%. despite this, research shows 2012-2013 united states airlines could not make net fuel efficiency gains yet there are plenty of improvements that could be made as evidenced by the fact that there's a gap of 27% from the most police fuel-efficient domestic

airlines. this indicates the industry is implementing retrofits that are effectively reducing carbon dioxide emissions. epa regulations would force all airlines to adopt similar measures. the epa has legal authority under section 231 of the clean air act to address emissions from aircraft. this authority to act is brought. the clean air act requires the epa put forward emissions standards for solutions from any class or classes of aircraft engine deterrence to endanger public health. the only substantive restriction placed on this authority is any rules cannot significantly increase noise or hinder safety. that epa first set pollution standards for future existing engines in 1973 but the standards did not address carbon pollution. the understanding of the impact and urgency of climate change was minimal. since then the scientific evidence of the need to address pollution has become irrefutable. the epa must take this opportunity to the forward new

rules to take meaningful action to reduce global warming inducing emissions. the united states cannot wait for the international aviation organization to take action. so far we have only succeeded in delaying action and failed to set climate policies. icao before its stated in 2016 but they are likely to be incredibly weak and insufficient in part because they will not apply to use aircraft. the epa has legal authority and the mission reduction potential exists to meet greater reductions than ikeo is expected to mandate. this endangers public health within a month and three months of the, period. rather isn't focusing only on new aircraft engines, rules that epa puts forward should the existing aircraft and not limit coverage to justin jones but the

entire aircraft. gpa should use its authority to set emission standards for all classes of aircraft, in a way that is technology forcing to assure the greatest emission reduction possible. tp should follow the example it set for passenger and medium heavy-duty vehicles and establish fleet wide averages for new and existing aircraft including those in service. the standards must be sufficiently stringent to significantly reduce them for the entire united states aviation sector overtime. furthermore the epa should work with the federal aviation administration to develop complementary standards to promote the use of cotton jet fuel. thank you for taking time to consider my comments. >> good morning. my name is amanda base. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. i have documented aircraft

eating trails across the sky. i have taken hundreds of videos and thousands of photographs, many of the aircraft i have witnessed the katie spraying something into the atmosphere. uneasy with my observations on wanted to know exactly what was causing the aircraft to the trail that did not disagree. i reached out to local, state and federal government agencies for information and assistance. what i experienced was disillusioning to say the least. when i called the epa imus will be at a handle aircraft emissions. when i called the faa they told me to call but epa. i was shuttled from office to office with no agency ever accepting responsibility or accountability. my calls were not returned to the war were my concerns addressed. the advice i finally received from the epa was to hire a plane and do my own testing. this was especially disheartening since i had been

led to believe the environmental protection agency was the ultimate protector of the environment. additionally the epa advised me to contact the department of environmental quality for the state of virginia, not surprisingly they informed me they do not regulate mobile sources of the missions, don't go to airports and don't check what is being loaded on planes. as for my request for my yard to be tested for heavy metal, chemical or biological contamination i was told the va deq could not use the money to test for those materials. my complaint was in an area they had no authority to investigate, another did end. i reported naval station, naval air station military jets for dumping fuel over my neighborhood and spoke of the least 30 individuals at the base. i spoke with herod chamberlain, head of the environmental office that and she and a. he bluntly informed me the

military regulates itself. needless to say they continue to dump under fuel over residents living close to the base. for several years i electronically reported on airplane pollution using the in mind -- environmental violations form on epa's website, it was referred to me by a federal contractor working for the epa. i have always included my contact information and identified specific aircraft that can easily be traced. no one from the epa has investigated many of my formally filed complaints. since i became interested in the possible dangers of chemical spraying and the environment i have contacted the va pollution control board, national weather service oceanic and military bases, noaa, nasa, the department of defense, brookhaven national laboratory, the department of energy, department of homeland security, fear not, the health department,

department of travel, countless federal agents and operators, virginia beach police department and even the white house, all to know of pale. to date no one from any agency has investigated by complaints. i was told to talk to my local representatives. every agency i contacted responded to my report by telling me i was being -- seeing condensation from engine exhausts. engines exist water vapor but it quickly dissipates. what i was witnessing was persistent and long-lasting. how can anyone reasonably conclude that a particular aircraft he mission is merely a country without testing it? that is unscientific and irresponsible. contrails --chemtrails is the term for persistent aircraft emissions. there is a rising international concern about the existence of airtran chemicals by growing body of scientific evidence.

what is in the air we are breeding? one from california decided to have his hair tested for heavy metals at his own expense. high levels of strontium and barium were uncovered. i have a copy of his lab results that he voluntarily send to me. i will oppose this document on my face book page following this hearing. if this contamination comes from chemical spray, how can we know if local, state and federal agencies refuse to take ownership of the issue to provide testing and usable data and ultimately regulate, the whole burden of investigation cannot rest with the epa. it must be shared with other agencies in congress. however there must be clear lines of authority so the public is informed and protected. the stated purpose of this hearing is to consider the full range of pollution generated by aircraft. the desire for investigation

into chemical spraying has become a worldwide phenomenon. we are counting on you as the protectors of the environment to act. no more runaround for citizens deeply concerned about the health of the world and the individuals that inhabit it, thank you. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak today. my name is david baake. i am at fellow and attorney at the natural resources defense tel . it is the national nonprofit that represents 300 members nationwide. administrator mccarthy laid out a powerful case for acting on climate change. she said climate change is one of the most important issues we face as a country and as

citizens of the world's. it affects everything we know and love. our kids, our communities, our ability to earn a decent living. impact our health, safety, livelihood. one thing is crystal clear. acting on this challenge is a moral responsibility. administrator mccarthy is right. united states has a moral obligation to rein in dangerous climate change with the epa has shown tremendous and admirable leadership going after emissions from cars, trucks and power plants and we need to see the epa exercise the same leadership when it comes to regulating aircraft. airplanes are the largest unregulated sources greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector. they are responsible for 11% of transportation sector emissions, 3% of total u.s. emissions and of 0.5% of total global emissions and these emissions are skyrocketing. we expect -- epa expects 50%

increase from 2015 to 2035. in light of these fact is indisputable that aircraft emissions contribute -- to endanger public health or welfare and the meaning of section 231 and epa should adopt a finding, thereafter epa must take bold action to reduce these dangerous emissions. united states under president obama has agreed to reduce emissions from 26% to 20% between 2005, and 2025. we must make good on this commitment to the joy is our moral responsibility. but as the world resources institute has shown, we cannot do so without taking meaningful action to reduce aircraft emissions. i include a citation in my written comments but w r i has predicted we would need to

reduce aircraft emissions by 2% to meet that target. given the air and sea of the climate crisis epa should propose standards that go far beyond the options currently being considered. we would welcome meaningful international standards and encourage epa to continue pushing iko for greater stringency and in particular to encourage coverage of aircraft as others urged epa to do today but given that iko has about the technology following standard and ruled out the possibility of regulating existing aircraft is clear that the united states cannot deliver on our commitments if we rubber-stamp the kate deangelis standards. epa can and must do more. fortunately the clean air act provides clear authority to rein in aviation elations.

as epa recognized in 2008 in advance notice of rulemaking unregulated greenhouse gases under the clean air act section 238 of the clean air act authorizes a system that applies to new and existing aircraft. drawing this authority eta should propose an average system that is stringent to stabilize u.s. aviation emissions by 2020 consistent with industry commitment and reduce them thereafter. we know this can be done. in 2010 at the request of then senator kerry epa develops a scenario for stabilize aircraft emissions at approximately 250 million metric tons per year, approving the white efficiency by 2.2% to 2015 to twenty-third wikipedia gpa noted airlines at improve their fuel efficiency by 2% to 3% per year can't conclude similar improvements would be achievable between 2013 and

2013, to improve operations and new aircraft technology including flow technology, lighter air frame and when body design as possible contributors to such reduction. week of the epa should use this study as a baseline in setting its proposed domestic standards. finally epa should consider the opportunity to retrofit existing aircraft. industry leaders have already taken significant steps with cost-effective, save retrofits. the key example of wing let's --winglets which reduce drag 3.5 to 4% on trips over 1,000 nautical miles. alaska airlines, an industry

leader, recently introduced s m scimitar winglets. and they reduced emissions by an additional almost 2% per flight which brings you to 6% total reduction. since this technology is here, technically feasible and cost-effective epa should be required across the entire fleet. epa joy also work with the faa to develop complementary standards to promote use of fluorocarbons jet fuel, reducing life-saving emissions compared to conventional fuels. industry leaders are already using these tools on a commercial scale. for example alaska airlines has been using low carbon biofuel on regularly scheduled flights since 2011. united recently invested $30 million in a project transform traction to jet fuel which could fly enough low

carbon fuel at a competitive cost. his work of industry leaders epa should develop an ambitious but achievable low carbon fuel standard to complement 231 emission standard. in conclusion ph adopt proposed finding as expeditiously as possible, the science is indisputable. next, epa should continue pushing iko for greater stringency in production of aircraft that it should also prepared to propose standards that go far beyond the options the organization is considering. specifically epa should propose feet wide averaging system consistently stringent to stabilize u.s. aviation remissions, 2005 levels by 2020, and reduce some significantly thereafter. epa should consider retrofit options including the possibility of requiring airlines to use winglets on their entire fleet and develop a

low carbon fuel standard. thank you for the opportunity to be heard. >> thank you all for your comments. i would like to invite our last two speakers for today, patrick roddy and max bliss. >> good morning. my name is patrick ronny, san francisco-based researcher, i run a spotspraying.com. today's hearing is supposed to address whether greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft endanger public health but when you mention greenhouse gas most people think of carbon dioxide,

a harmless traces gas essentials to all life on earth. co2 represents just 3% of the planet's greenhouse gas. 95% of it is watervliet even preschoolers no overcast skies make nice warmer and days cooler, clouds insulate trapping heat and reduce temperature range of the lows today's highs. which brings me to resistance contrails. all but the willfully ignorant know our skies have changed dramatically over the last few decades. the dark blue skies about child and have been replaced with a milky white he's crisscrossed with persistent contrails stretching from rising to rise in and spreading to cover the sky. these frail stretch thousands of miles and can be seen by anyone visiting nasa.gov. these trails persist regardless of altitude, temperature, humidity or other atmosphere it conditions. persistent contrails used to be rare but have become an everyday phenomena and all over the

world. physics haven't changed, so what has? what makes these trails form and stretched thousands of miles to which condensation nuclei of date warning on? why they harmful to human health? geo engineers propose spraying tens of millions of tons of reflected particles into the atmosphere in an attempt to reflect sunlight back into space and reduce global warming. this is known as solar radiation management, stratospheric aerosols injection or al be no modification. this process patented by defense contractor raytheon is simple. without condensation nuclei day trek atmosphere water vapor to for persistent artificially nucleated contrails which would spread out and form artificial cloud cover. artificial cirrus cloud cover. when geo engineers discuss solar radiation management the only substances they say they consider spraying are sulfates

or sulfuric acid. however there and literature conclude sulfates have limited effectiveness and highly toxic metal particles of aluminum and barium should be used instead. when confronted they doggedly refused to address the human health impact of their proposals. other key and engineers are more candid about their plans to boys and the sky. stanford admitted in an interview in 2006 he discussed putting pathogens in clouds to wage chemical and germ warfare and civilian populations when working government web site. no surprise they have the best interests at heart. last month i brought this paper to the paris climate conference addressing the human health impact of proposed geo engineering solutions, formally requested be entered into the record. it documents the dramatic increase in alzheimer's and respiratory failure since the 1990s when persistent contrails became commonplace around the

world. i conclude these persistent, trails are nucleated with the same toxic party to the metal and solar radiation management program has been deployed since the 1990s. weather modification research is nothing new. the earliest patent dates back to 1920. raytheon's and produces injecting aluminum and other metallic oxides in the tenth to 100 micron range into the stratosphere using jet exhaust. the u.s. navy has another method for an artificially nucleated contrails, other methods include airships, rockets, chimneys and larry pipes. the best known proponent of solar radiation management is dr. david keith who told the 2010 annual meeting of the american association for the advancement of science that aluminum oxide has four time the radiated force for small particles as sulfur and 16 times

less wakulla regulation reached. sulfur particles stick together and quickly -- who -- much less effective for unit mass. and the applications approved it was very simple to spray high-quality aluminum particles by injecting aluminum vapor into the exhaust. is 2010 paper fort geo engineering proposes spraying 50 nanometers of aluminum, barium, titanium instead of sulfate. and concluded aluminum and no particles are more effective than sulfates in a 2010 respective nature on climate change. the material safety data sheet for aluminum states and here it into the respiratory system as implicated in alzheimer's disease and pulmonary disease and should not be released into the environment without governmental permits with alzheimer's disease rose the 6 leading cause of death in the united states from the 8 from 1999 to 2013

>> host: 94 it did not make the top ten. people in their 20s are showing signs of alzheimer's. research shows aluminum lucky malaysian the brain, bones and kidneys, is a neurotoxin, increasing stress and inflammation of the brain, seven times more available when inhaled when ingested or early. barium is much deadlier. according to material safety data sheet exposure to barium can cause call money arrest, vomiting, diarrhea, convulsive tremors, muscular paralysis, shocked, convulsions and sudden cardiac failure. barium targets the cardiovascular, nervous, gastrointestinal, respiratory reproductive and adrenal gland and liver and should not be released into the environment. in 2011 respiratory failure overtook strokes to become the third leading cause of that in the united states at a time smoking was at an all-time low, emission standards were at their strictest and heavy industry

relocated to china. hundreds of scientific papers the early prove the toxicity of aluminum and barium. according to epa particulate pollution can cause early death from heart attack, stroke, congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma and inflammation of lung tissue and may cause cancer, reproductive developmental harm. but appellates can lower life expectancy by one to three years. water and ice have reflective densities of 1.33 and one.309 respectively and produce rainbows a singular radius of 42 degrees centered on the entire solar point but in recent years a formerly rare phenomenon has become commonplace, 21 degree halo completely and circling the sun. some argue these a lows are incredibly rare sundog formed by ice crystals but nothing changes the reflective index of water and ice with forms 42 degrees a lows. metal salts have a higher

refracted index and form tighter a lows. aluminum oxide for example has a refracted index of 1.762 to 1.778, barium sulfate has referred to index of 1.636. my contention is incredibly rare some dogs are formed by metal salts with higher refracted index than water is reinforced by rainwater analysis taken during a 30 day period when i recorded 21 of these a lows in march, april 2015. i collected rainwater on the roof of my san francisco apartment building on april 5th, 6000, miles downwind from the nearest factory power plant refinery freeway, since it to what certified lab and the recorded barry and at 160 micrograms per liter, less than one gram in an adult human. an earlier test of rain water in january of 2014 recorded aluminum at 190 micrograms per litter. i submit the rain water tests

into the record. san francisco's care should be pristine. wing the prevailing winds off of the pacific ocean. why do concerned citizens pain for our own rainwater analysis and why did the epa stopped publishing date on airborne aluminum in 2002? let me take this opportunity to submit a freedom of information request 48 to release historical results of all metal tests in our air and rain water from the 90s to the present. i recorded hundreds of video showing progression of the persistence contrails in 2011, thousands of others worldwide have documented the alarming increase of persistent contrails. sorry. thousands of of this worldwide have documented the alarming increase of these persistent contrails and been met with deafening silence from supposedly green organizations like greenpeace who is a proud member of the solar radiation management government's

initiative and all governmental regencies including the epa. your mandate is to protect the environment especially the air we breathe. i wouldn't expect you to let the existence of the program, one blatantly obvious, increasingly aware of an outraged populous. when the geo engineering program causing millions of premature deaths a year you must be more than passing back and forth between other agencies, do your job, history will judge you on your action or inaction. >> firstly i thank the organizers for making the hearing goslin think the other contributors and a big thank you to fight for funding to make my trip possible. my name is mack bliss. i know scientists. i am a general builder who has worked out side all my life.

after moving to the southwest of france in 2009 to region, the high sunshine hours and big blue skies became increasingly aware of the incredible increase in contrails. i began to notice it daily ended has greatly troubled me. i started the graphing and filling the sky for four years. barely a day goes by without seeing various contrails, some thick, spreading, most alarming is watching spurts within contrails, watching and then watching the skies lot out. subsequently i wanted to learn more and became an avid researcher and passionate environmentalist. i have attended and participated in various high-level clinton change and climate engineering conferences. with respect to this hearing on proposed cause or contribute to air pollution anticipated to endanger public health and welfare the major component, 95% of greenhouse gas is water

vapor. constituents from exhaust or projected particulate matter from aircraft form contrails, sirius, haziness and cloud blanket which he eventually certainly do changed the weather, altering rainfall, altering temperatures, inducing trout, reducing frost, etc. ultimately affecting climate change. when the planes are grounded following 9/11 and later in the u.k. in 2010 there were no contrails. the sky cleared of clouds and natural clear blue sky returns confirming aviation is affecting cloud cover. according to various investigations such as 1998 subsonic contrail and special study. and metal particles including titanium, said, sulfate, etc. found in the exhaust plumes contributing nuclear ice

crystals to form contrails. a 2010 study for the wright-patterson air force research laboratory, alter the immune function, open the abstract of this sentence on the basis of their uses in cit fuels, munitions and the most likely scenario for national particle exposure is in relation. the civil aviation authority responded to the concerns of fume incidents, the 2004 investigation into air quality found the peak particular matter found in the air ducts, although the study hypothesizes this may be from heated lubricating oils contaminating the air supply via the air bleed out, 50% of the cabin air comes from the atmosphere and as planes often 5 through contrails all the

aerosols left by other planes investigate net of particles in the trip this year from planes although very difficult must be initiated as soon as possible. many hundreds of pilots and frequent fliers report debilitating illnesses linked to cabin air. please refer to error toxic syndrome. there are many studies about dementia and alzheimer's and other serious ailments in humans, animals, whales, fish and even bees, plants, trees and all life is affected by aluminum toxicity. recently it was announced the one in three seniors will die of alzheimer's. it becomes clearer with research that man of particles may already be in jet fuels and are certainly plan for implementation in the future and by a diesel. aluminum oxide not only has potential negative health impacts but contributes to

making clouds as used in trees rockets for nasa. aluminum oxide as been suggested by geo engineers for solar radiation management, but is known to damage the ozone. it is mentioned in weather modification patents although there are hundreds of weather modification pants using various methods and ingredients. in 1956 u.s. patent 27560974, weather control, the author states we have discovered quantities of very drive superheated water vapor won't disturb the thermal and electrical balance of cloud formation causing dissipation or precipitation. we accomplish this process of our invention by injecting water or water solutions of ionic assaults into the exhaust gases of power plants such as internal combustion engine jet engine and the like. investigation into the huge disturbing increases in

contrails associated cloud covers and changes to the weather, one will be left wondering if this indeed is intentional or deliberate as the extra contrails and cloud generation is in correlation with the increasing growing deviation use. i have taken pictures of novels in line with the engine on pylons committees are described as oil frame but some patents state other material can be evacuated from them. even if oil was leaked out into the exhaust plumes smoke would be generated and smoke is used for cloud seeding for weather modification. 1970 paper by wallace mccray on the possibility of weather modification by aircraft contrails he describes how the ice crystals formed in contrails can see cloud decks below as crystals fall to lower cloud deck altitudes increasing cloud cover as effectively as dry ice

cloud seeding. possible consequences of this are considerable. in fact it seems probable that one project for modifying local climate discussed by fletcher in 1965 mimi modification of cloud cover over the north polar basin by cloud seeding is already underway. up until the mid 1970s document suggested the establishment desire was to intentionally melt the arctic sea ice to free up shipping lanes, access resources and open up vast regions of vice locked land and climate change could likely be blamed on the and the jenna global warming to instigate the beginning of global governance for united nations agenda 21 sustainable development program to create the new world order. interestingly when one begins to research the history of weather and climate modification is surprising how far up the power structure the desire to develop the allies still weather and climate modification program was from presidents eisenhower, jfk,

johnson on words with high priority for these possibilities. johnson administration was using with a modification for geopolitical leverage with india and pakistan in 1967. would we be naive to think interest went away because of a treaty? look up owning the weather 2025. in conclusion pollutants from aircraft such as sulfates or use of particles traveling into life organisms is causing serious negative health impacts to many forms of life. and the climate science, and stakeholders looking for a lucrative funding in the burgeoning climate change arena. or a entrepreneurs looking for success, more darkly hoping to implement one world government system. climate has always had natural

variability and weather extremes that these days some weather extremes can be stimulated with technology. is appropriate to assess the and their projected global warming theory and replace it with climate change is man made by using covert weather and climate modification, to political ends. we don't need to be scientists to observe the sky to see the obvious negative of vix aviation is having and research is a spiraling impact health impact. just are looking up and wake of. weather and climate modification or the new world order. god bless and peaceful. >> thank you for your comments. additional registrants that come in. hour hearing for today, on behalf of the whole panel and the epa i would like to thank

everybody for your thoughtful comments and suggestions. i want to remind everybody the comment period officially closes on this action on august 31st at 11:55. we encourage written comments. we want additional information and anything you can provide. thank you for taking time today. we appreciate it and hope to hear from you soon. thank you. >> a little later on c-span2, outgoing army chief of staff, his last day as taught general is friday and at 1:00 p.m. eastern he gives his final news conference at the pentagon. that is live on c-span2. later this afternoon on c-span2, a look back at the voting rights act which was signed into law 50 years ago. the author of the book gives us the balance, the modern struggle for voting rights in america is speaking at politics and prose

bookstore in washington d.c. as you concede that live on booktv on c-span2 at 7:00 p.m. eastern. booktv continues in prime time on c-span2 starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern, the printer's row it fest with kenneth davis on his book the hidden history of america at war and untold tales from yorktown to fallujah. glenn beck, freedom fest, his latest book is titled this is about islam. 9:20 from the san antonio book festival helen 4, her books older girls, the battle of three women now work and at home. at 10:05:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2 tonight, a discussion on concussions and the future of professional football. >> sunday night on q&a, institute for policy studies fellow and anti-war activist philip bennett on u.s. foreign policy since 9/11.

the recent negotiations with iran and the war on terrorism. >> to is isis? what their origins to the widely believed to what are they so violent? all those questions are important and i address them in the book but what is more important in some ways because it is something we can do something about is what is the u.s. policy regarding isis? why isn't it working? can we go to war against terrorism? are we doing the work wrong? is it wrong to say there should be a war against terrorism at all? those are the questions that in some ways of the most important and will be the most useful. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span2's q&a. >> up next on c-span2 a conversation with freshman congressman ralph abraham. the louisiana republican talked about his background as a physician, veterinarian and pilot. the first few months in congress where so far he has been living

out of his capitol hill office. >> congressman ralph abraham, you are batting a thousand when it comes to elections. this is your first ever publicly held office. >> that is correct. the first one we ran for and unfortunately we won it but it was the first one. >> host: why did you want to run? >> guest: i have grandchildren. i felt this country was going was somewhat different than the way it was so that is why i jumped in the race. we need to leave a better country and we certainly came up with and that is why we ran. >> was it hard to get a family on board? >> not at all. i have a very supportive family. diane is my wife. just about everything we elected to do in life, she has been somewhat the wind beneath the wing. my three older children, my three children, we were

considering running, the first word was do it. >> how old are your kids? >> 32, 33, 34, in that area. we have up wonderful period growing up with them. >> you represent the fifth district of louisiana, lot justin strict in louisiana. it is for a land mass, 24 parishes, goes from the top of the state to baton rouge, is a big deal. >> is the parish like a township? >> account the. have very much the same. because of our french heritage we stick with the name parish. >> what is the district like in terms of people and businesses and occupation? >> we're if not the biggest district in the nation. we used to grow a lot of cotton.

good country people. conservative, down to earth, god-fearing so to speak. we have the second-biggest, alexandria. and compared to other large towns across the country comparably speaking it would be a very small town. we are good hard-working people. >> you decided to run because you were concerned about where the country was headed. what are some of the top concerns of people in your district? >> guest: getting away from the constitutional principles. our fathers were men of genius and if you look at the constitution and i will read it, try to read it once every quarter every six months. look at the declaration of independence, it is based on christian values, is based on conservative values but most importantly it is based on small government and we have gotten away from that. the government we have now goes

back decades, not just one or two administrations the stars in the 20s and 30s and the nineteenth century, 20th century where government has outgrown the people, it is no longer a country by and for the people, we are government without a lot of people. when you get organization or bureaucracy as big as we have now it has to feed itself and when it does that it stops feeding the people. that concerns me. we are now of bureaucracy or government that is no longer looking out for its people but is looking out for itself. >> you bring a background by most people's measure would be considerable over the course of a lifetime. you have been a veterinarian, a practicing physician, you have been in the army reserves, the mississippi national guard, you are pilot, when you came to congress you must have had fairly wide selection of

committees to serve on with that expertise? >> we act more when we got elected, veterans because they are near and dear to our hearts, need to be protected and taken care of. they have taken care of ascend least we can do is repaid some. agriculture, the aforementioned reason we are such a big agricultural district and that i need to represent by farmers, rangers, forsters, very well. and technology committee is a fun committee. we discuss things that are new, motivational and on the or ricin so to speak and also discuss very important issues like epa rules, climate change. it is a mixed bag of things on the science committee whereas the va and agriculture are more specific. i enjoy them all and they are all good committees. >> three committee assignments,

constituent work, how do you keep it organized? >> we have a very young aggressive staff that keeps me in line. when i come to work every morning we generally have a quick meeting, with the activities will be and what the week's activities are going to be. i am very fortunate to have good people surrounding me. >> host: we are having our conversation as congress gets ready for the august recess. what have you learned about washington as a governing area and congress that is different than you expected when you got elected? >> as a physician and a businessman, i am used to things happening little more quickly, a little more each fission lee. it is of process you have to adapt to. i am used to giving orders as a physician and have them carried out that they were certainly maybe even that minute or that our. certainly not like that up here. we have to be part of a system

that is a little slow moving and work with it to get things done. >> host: how is your relationship with gop leaders in the house? >> guest: we have a good relationship, the middle being the leader. in louisiana we are lucky to have scalise. he brings not only some character and clarity to the situation but also some power. has louisiana delegation, if we have an issue we want pushed to the front burner, where do we go? >> host: you talk about your background little, what is in your background the best qualified you for being a member of congress? >> guest: veterinarian and physician role. it takes some study to get to

those places in life and being up here in congress you have to do your homework. you don't come up here every day and show up. when i go home at night i am usually reading material for the previous committee hearings the rest of the week. i am tasked to do that, also bolstered hopefully by knowledge base for whatever has come down the pike. it takes a lot of after hours worked to stay ahead of the game and you have to stay ahead of the game. >> some of the members we talk to speaking of after-hours work and number of them are staying in their office, and are you a member of that club? >> guest: it was simply the finances i refused to pay exorbitant rent fees, pretty tight with the dollar. until diane found something

affordable and what was at least fairly reasonable, it was for a couple weeks. across town, the branch is still high. >> host: you get home to the louisiana district every week? >> guest: every weekend. when you stay in washington, i get to see the people and i represent. the week the we get off each month in the district. >> host: what is it about washington that people are not washington insiders should know about how their government runs? >> guest: the good news is there is still even in today's age a lot of bipartisan support. we certainly past 85 of the bills that come down from leadership. the bipartisan basis, we could not do it without help from our

democratic colleagues. there are certainly some ideology and some issues we will never agree on but let's go back to the founders. that is what they wanted. we wanted the debate. if we agreed on everything all the time there would be no need for us to be up here so we have to represent our people and that will cause some divisiveness sometimes but more often than not, we get along better than people think we do. >> host: do you find it more or less bipartisan than you imagined? >> guest: more. i knew there would be some but i have been surprised, refreshingly that there has been more than i anticipated so that is a good thing. we are able to do business for the nation and good business. >> host: you talked about the three committee's you are serving on, the amount of reading you have to do. before we started our conversation on camera talking about an epa hearing.

do you find you get enough time to get your questions answered in those hearings settings? >> guest: no. i will say that quickly, we get five minutes to answer, ask, say a statement, whatever we want to do. i wish there were times i had 30 minutes. when you have 10, 15 people on the committee, you just cannot. >> host: you are often being yanked out of those hearings for some sort of vote on the house floor. how many times have you found yourself going to the house floor not knowing what the vote was about? scalise or someone else has to fill you in? >> guest: never go there not knowing. every morning staff brings me a list of what we will vote on that day. we actually discussed that in the prior week as to what is coming up so as far as knowing what we are voting on i know that every day. ..

as to how epa is in. so they expect me to push back, expressed interest and be the representative in october due. >> the issues confirming concerning the amount.

>> what they wanted to do is raise the flood plane to have 100 year plan that of 100 years plan. in louisiana we are already flying the state with some aspects of the 40% of louisiana was in the flood plane. that goes to insurance rates may pull to do things we have to be up against because they come up weakly to do stuff under the radar so to speak and our job is to watch the gate includes the day when it needs to be close. >> the reserves and the mississippi national guard, what is it you like about piloting an airplane? >> there's nothing i don't like about piloting an airplane. if i am not working here or in the district came usually up in

the clouds. i do fly for the civil rights patrol and not hillary. i get to use my skills and a good play and i just enjoy it as a passion. >> is the military and civil aviator, what are some of your policy concerns? >> let's go back to my agricultural district. we have cropped dusters line right now as we are speaking every day and they are flying high in so to speak over the crowd even if they should hit a drum and will bring them down and kill them. the faa has issued some rules that are being talked about and debated if it got to have airspace issues. the drones are here to say. they offer some wonderfully good

potential for the agricultural site, irrigation sites. i think the potential is unlimited. but we've also got people flying these aircraft in the same airspace. if it popped up on one of those big jets coming in and hit a windchill it could be some major damage. the faa has it task had out. we have got people just recently stopped. fires are being fought because drones are in the way of aircraft delivering water to the area. it's kind of the work out pretty soon because they are becoming very popular. >> as their pilots caucus? >> there's an aviation caucus. you remember the veterinarians and physicians. go back to that.

is that an unusual move for someone who's been a physician as well? >> there's a few of us across the nation. there have been others from the medical profession and like i said it's a unilateral move. to me it was more difficult to get into this score than it was medical school. the competition was much higher when i was applying for veterinary school. unfortunate take advantage state medical school is difficult. it's a very hard-core spirit >> continuing to do farmer work comes in handy. >> i was on a tractor a few weekends ago and i can basically do anything that needs to be done as far as racing across, growing across.

bush hogging is where you take a large or click pasture. >> we were before we started but there's something on your wall going back to your comments about the declaration of independence, a letter writer walt from george washington to the sultan of morocco. >> my wife found in a rummage sale, she loves to go to them and she was able to pick that up somewhere in the district. i wanted it up here because it goes back to our founders. even back in that day, washington -- [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon. first before i start, i want to send out my prayers -- killed in afghanistan this week. the special forces group reminds us that we have our soldiers around the world doing dangerous

and important things every single day and that is a reminder of the sacrifice they make. my thoughts and prayers go out to his family. i first want to thank the press by what i believe to be a positive relationship over the last 15 years mainly for me as i worked around the world and here in the pentagon, i really do appreciate the work that we do. i appreciate the candor and dedication you have, especially how you have covered the army in many different parts of the world. i've always found it important that the press raises issues, keeps us honest, helps us work through tough issues that we have and i truly appreciate the relationship we have had. i have always enjoyed the time i have had with the press. so thank you very much for that. so as i get ready to go out the door, a couple points i would like to make. i believe this nation is an important inflection point

specifically regarding national security. security environment remains uncertain and dynamic and we all know that they found what is going on in eastern europe oppression and aggression, cheney's military increase investment in military and increased aggression by china in the pacific. we continue to have the middle east that shrouded in stability with the rise and the underlying sunni shia conflict that continues to boil in the middle east and i believe these are long-term problems we have to deal with for the foreseeable future. we continue to have to work permission enough in a stand to ensure government is able to survive and maintain itself for many years ahead and it's important that we stay engaged in afghanistan. we have to be concerned with the growing movement of global terrorism whether it in north africa and central africa and

other parts of the world. as always we have an unstable, unpredictable provocative north korea to be concerned with. as i quickly summarize a lot of issues. i didn't name them all. those are the major ones. the problem we have today is a dynamic environment with increasing requirements on military while we continue to have decreasing resources in our military. this is of great concern to me personally as we continue to move forward. what i worry about is we are sacrificing our long-term viability of military to meet environmental environments. i worry about reduced modernization and our forthcoming impact that might have two, three, four or five years from now because many of

the problems are toothless that are persistent or, not ones that will be solved overnight. a couple of things we do in the army and i say in the last 18 and that is something to move to the future. it is trying to give a strategic damage in the complex world we live in and identified unique roles roles in army will play and a key characteristic in an army that leaders of great competence and commitment. we must be interoperable as well as other services and joint force. we must be expeditionary, scalable in order to meet requirements around the world across several different

continents. where publish an army operating concept that looks to the future and what we need to look at in 2025 and beyond. we have challenges that will help us to synchronize send organize sufferers and what we need to do and develop in future leaders and what is required of them and we have to look at new areas. we significantly increase investment in fiber. and we are developing new readiness models that will help us deploy forces when needed not time and increase our ability to deploy quickly. we've increase and develop a publishing total force policy that amuses the entire force in a way that we can sustain over a long period of time. these are a few of the things

working now on with that i will open up for questions. >> general, first of all thank you for doing this and i think we all appreciate females both here at the party and the smaller gatherings, we certainly hope that you've encouraged your successors to do the same. i want to ask you about the two women who appear as though they may be completing ranger course. we have been told they've gotten through the hardest part. i'm wondering if you could take a step back and look at that as you view your career and how things have changed and whether or not you think they should inform the army's decision on whether or not to open a history to to open the traits of women and your personal views are as you leave because your name may not be on the recommendation.

>> so i would say first off as we continue to move forward as a military, the most important thing i was talking about talent management in order to best manage to pick the best people to perform to standards with established in our army. women and rangers scored another look to meet the standard they should go and urged the ranger title. that is how we want to operate as we move forward. if we can meet the standards we should be able to perform and i think that is where we are headed. we have not made any final decisions but i think those are coming shortly. we have really collected some significant analysis and done incredible studies over the last two years and integrated women into formation and again it is about can they make the standard or not and if they can, wheeling towards the fact it would be good if we allowed them to

serve. i don't know how it's going to come out because you never know. several days left yet in ranger school. but the feedback i've gotten with these women is how incredibly prepared they are, the effort they put forward has been significant. they've impressed all they come in contact with. they are clearly motivated and frankly that is what we want out of our soldiers. i think this has been a great effort. we will run another course in november and that is where we are headed right now and make a decision after that whether to make it a permanent -- make it permanently open to women. >> general odierno, given the fact he done as many tourists and iraq is anybody have them look at it now, could you reflect a little bit on your perspective but what is happening in iraq and how it

came to this point and the solution you see out there because everybody's got their list of solutions. do you think a no-fly zone and do you think it is time to play u.s. troops, soldiers on the ground with iraqi forces, even potentially serious rebel forces to pick out targets to help them further train on the ground. is it even feasible? >> i would say this. as i look at iraq and i've said this before it is frustrating to look at what has happened inside of iraq. i believe that couple years ago in 2010-11 we have a place headed in the right direction. violence is down, politics were okay and we turned it over to

them. by the agreement we made back in 2008 that would take full control in 2011 and we would leave. as it turns out they were prepared to handle it and it's more politically that it was anything else. they weren't able to work together and based on that people became frustrated and when they are frustrated they turn to violence with no other way to get their point and not allowed a group like isil to it were the fissures inside iraq. same thing happened in syria. two countries right next to each other with the same problem and you gave them a fairly significant piece that enabled them to build capabilities. i believe -- first off i absolutely believe that the region has to solve this problem. the u.s. cannot solve this

problem for the region. they've got to get involved in the part of the solution and i truly believe that. i said before we could go when their with a certain amount of american forces and probably defeat it. the problem is will be where we are six later. for me it's about the political dynamics, economic dynamics that has to be done by those in the reason. it's important for us to support that by training and develop capability and capacity. i believe if we find in the next several months that we are not making the progress we have, we would absolutely can better embedding some soldiers to see if that would make a difference. that doesn't mean fighting that they would be moving with them and that is an option we should present to the president when the time is ripe. >> when you say that, you made both in iraq and syria?

>> i would have to look harder whether we do it in syria. >> i know you generally don't comment on politics -- [inaudible] so when you hear it donald trump say we should just moved in with our troops and take their oil and rob the iraqi soldiers, is there anything that you could have military utility. >> here is the issue i learned over the last 10 years or so with that limits with military power and so we can have an outcome, but again the problem we've had is to achieve sustainable outcome. and the problem we've had this big bad outcomes that they had been only short-term outcomes because we have an probably

looked at the political economic side of this. it's got to be offered to come together. if you don't do that it will not solve the problem and that is what i continue to look at. i think for me, if you said to me right now isil is a direct threat to an imminent and they're getting ready to have an attack on the united states, that's a different issue. that is a different issue. maybe we have to look at putting troops on the ground. that is not where we are today. what we want to do is try to stop a long group that is potentially tempting to be a long-term influence in the middle east that is clearly promoting extremism and frankly

suppressing populations in the middle east. in order to resolve that unique countries of the middle east and the surrounding them at to be involved in the solution. [inaudible] >> idea. right now i do. >> you know it was debated on who last iraq, kind of who lost china in the late 40s. the narrative goes something like the brilliant surge succeeded while abandoning iraq setting the stage for sick. ms. them to return and the force collapsing and the close of isil. do you agree with the narrative? >> i don't think it's black and white. i think it is great. the military options we cannot provide an opportunity to be successful. i remind everybody that i sleep in at the end of 2011 was negotiated in 2008 by the bush administration. that was always the plan. we promise that we would respect

their sovereignty and so i think based on not i was always her plan. we can argue whether he could have adjusted and had a better outcome. i will not get involved in the argument. it is not black-and-white. what i would say is having military on the ground allowed us to be on this brokerage between some of these groups and i think as we all let back leaving some soldiers on the ground might have helped a little bit and prevented where we are. >> given the sustainable outcome judged against that was the iraq invasion a mistake? >> tony, i don't like going back there. it's like monday morning porter backing. here is what i would say. all i know is if saddam hussein was incredibly ruthless and who is suppressing it population and i know there's always been a story we've been in there and there was no nuclear weapons.

i've said this for years. i talked to all the iraqi generals. they will tell you there were nuclear weapons. they believed they were. the bottom line is they absolutely believe there's nuclear weapons on the ground. to say we shouldn't have gone in there i think it's a little bit of hindsight. by the way, we don't know where we would if saddam hussein was in power. he was moving towards terrorism and if he continued problems in the you don't know what he might have done in being part of the problem with terrorism. it's difficult to say if it was worthwhile. we did it and we have to make it, the best way we can. >> general, given your experience in iraq can you talk earlier about the growing conflict between shia and sunni and the increased influence now of iran inside iraq, even

militarily, do you see any possibility there can be any reconciliation between the sunni and shia's? >> it's becoming more difficult by the day and i think there might be some alternative solutions and might have to calm sometime in the future for iraq might not look like it did in the past but we have to wait and see how it plays out. we have to deal with isil first and decide what it will look like afterwards. >> talk about the possibility of partitioning. >> i think that is for the region and politicians to figure out, diplomats to figure out how to work this, but that is something that could happen. it might be the only solution but i'm not ready to say that yet. >> for the second time they claim to a packed into the u.s. military computer systems and retrieved vital personal

classified information. what do you know about that? you mentioned cyberdefenses earlier. are we inadequately protected against an attack, even somebody like isis? >> i don't want to downplay, but this is the second or third time they've claimed that in the first two times i'll tell you what ever they got were not taken by in a cyberattack. they were lit up beside him right now so far i have not seen the list myself, but what i believe is this is no different. but i take it seriously because it is clear what they are trying to do and so it is important for us to make sure our forests understands what they are trying to do even though i believe they've not been accessible. >> sir, do you think isis is winning right now and do you think the u.s. betrayed the

sunni tribes that rose to give our province? >> so i think isil has been blunted somewhat. they have not made any progress since we started airstrikes. we have gained some back mostly by the great work of the kurds, some work by iraqi security forces. i think right now we are kind of at a stalemate and continue to make some progress. it's important we continue to support them. the reason it is downplay as we continue to retrain the iraqi security force to build the capabilities to conduct operations. that is why although it hasn't gone as well as we like it too, it is important to continue to train syrian forces, syrian rebels because that's a military strategy you want to have your enemy respond to several different fronts. in my opinion we want to develop

capabilities of the iraqi security forces and syrian rebels helping push the west. i still think that is something we have to work out. we have a lot of work to do a better job with syrian rebels, but we have to stay focused and try to continue. >> thank you, general. what is the future of afghanistan is now because taliban and al qaeda still in afghanistan and pakistan are waiting and warning the u.s. and nato then they will -- 15 years ago. how much are you worried with china and pakistan because pakistan is doing what china is telling them and you are expanding the and including afghanistan.

>> with the taliban and i would say they claim a lot of rings first of. and so, i think, listen, there's violence inside of afghanistan. less than what it was. the afghan security forces in my mind are doing a pretty good job going after that. i think pakistanis have gotten good work lately with the death of mullah omar and it's interesting to watch with the taliban is going to be. we have to watch that carefully. things are still on a path where it can be successful. we have to continue to support the afghan security forces and continue to support dialogue between afghanistan and pakistan. listen, pakistan has the right and we have a very close relationship with pakistan. they deal with us, too. i have a good relationship with

gender relationship with general rubio and he talks regularly to john r. campbell in afghanistan. that is their right to do that. i'm not concerned about that. we have to continue to work with them to solve this difficult problem and i think and, pakistan, the united states and other countries have to work together to solve this problem. it is all in our interest to do that. >> you might ask in the future that it might be -- >> we have to judge the environment. if we think it the right thing to do we have that conversation. >> you mentioned at the beginning that there was a decrease in resources. what can other areas of government to to support the mission of the military? >> the whole four years i was chief of staff would've been in this deadlock about worried about the debt which we should

be and in my opinion without the military hostage because of the arguments over the rest of the government and how we solve the problem of spending and the rest of the government. the point i'm trying to make is that it's coming to a point where we should be careful because i think where the point of degrading ourselves work will be really difficult for us to meet requirements. whether we like it or not, we are a world leader and we have to lead in many different places around the world and we have to have capabilities to do that. i worry if we don't solve the problem we will have the capability to do that. [inaudible] >> can you confirm -- [inaudible] safe zone inside northwest area. >> i cannot discuss that.

>> how many iraqis including kurds and sunnis have been trained by the u.s. forces on the ground? >> as of this morning when i was briefed about 16,000 since the beginning of the year. >> according to focus and is -- [inaudible] like how close were these? >> obviously we've had conversations. >> there is potential reports from the campaign at the result of coalition air force strike and can you update me on that? >> i didn't hear what you said. >> reports as a result of coalition air forces strength.

>> i'm not aware of that. i can answer your question. >> hangs, general. what is the top military threat to the u.s.? some have said russia appeared wanted to know if you agree with that. also, if you ran deal goes through and has billions in assets, do you think you will spend more money on supporting terrorism in the region and other committees? >> i would say russia is the most dangerous because of a couple things. they are more mature than some other potential adversaries and i think they have since stated intents that concern me in terms of how the cold war ended. for me, i am can earn and they have shown some significant capability in ukraine to do operations that are fairly

sophisticated. for me, we should pay a lot of attention. what was the second question? >> -- iran. >> i support anything that supports the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. and so i support back, but as i've said before, we cannot be naïve and we must understand iran is conducting operations in several different countries whether pmn, syria, iraq and we must be aware that must assume some of the money they get activity if we have to be aware of that watch it closely.

>> major acquisition programs during her tenure have not been terribly successful although you've been in budget deadlock the whole time. what do you say to your successor how you feel off the modernization of the army forward. >> i think for the first time, i would tell you because of the new army operating costs, for the first time we have a good understanding of what we need. for us it's about protection of situation awareness. we are looking at developing firepower for light units, media minute and have unit that situational awareness and pass information quickly and with programs in place to do that though we have to continue to push on programs. those are the ones for me that are the most important. we also have to contend man on and capability, autonomous capability. all of those things are important to us as we move to

the future. >> thank you on the sir. in your view, what were wrong moving forward to the u.s. program to focus on other partners? >> a couple things. i think the training went fine. how do you play those forces and we will learn some is not an figure out how to best employ them to ensure survivability in the region and that is the kind of thing we have to work on. centcom is working hard to make sure we do that much better than we did the first time. >> what would be some of the lessons learned? >> it is about how used them, where you use them, can we provide protection? those are the things we have to take a look at as we go forward. >> going back to iraq, did you talk about why the troops could they do different? what is it they would have enabled due to change the

situation? >> one of the things i believe to have been if the iraqi security forces became clear skies. would have been his leaders were taken out, not who is loyal to iraq, but who is loyal to the leaders inside. -- inside iraq. he no longer had an army for many different parts of iraq. data from certain parts of iraq and we were there, we would've prevented things with that from happening. we could have reassured some of the other groups that they would continue to participate not only in the military that the government as well. [inaudible] >> absolutely a days. it is important -- i don't

mean -- the reason, everybody says why can't we do what we did in germany, korea, japan. everybody tells me that all the time. we cap people there for a very long period of time. we are still in europe 70 years later, still in japan. we are much smaller in it much different relationship. that is how you help to establish long-standing institutions. i'm not trying to compare germany or japan or korea to the middle east. it's a different environment. i'm not saying it's exactly the same. but i would say is having a there helps to establish and to shed capable of being more sustainable and lasting for a much longer time. >> was there a way around the legal issue about whether or not they were legal protections.

>> bottom line is you would have to have the iraqi parliament approved that. and i was the problem. i don't know if it could have convinced them to do that or not. i will say we had the same problem initially when we initially hammered out the agreement in 08 as well. i don't know the answer but could be convinced them in their own best interest in our best interest to have us stay longer and i can't tell you whether beijing able to do that or not. [inaudible] >> no. what would have been his to put your soldiers and marines at risk for being arrested and that causes all kinds of problems. we are in violation of international law. we rendered human mandate that ended the end of 2008 in agreement with iraq that ended at the end of 2011.

we would've been there they go if we didn't have the agreement. >> the way you frame that you make it sound as if there was never any areas robust effort against the iraqi parliament. >> i hesitate to say that because i wasn't there during that time. i told there was an effort to do that so i can't tell you if those they robust effort. i don't want to comment because i simply wasn't there at the time. if i was there i'd give you an honest answer but i simply wasn't there at that time. >> have you see the future of syria? do you believe in a solution could train late without having the president -- [inaudible] >> i don't know. my assessment would be very difficult to have syria the way it did before is forever changed in some way. one of the things we have to

work through us with our partners in the region, what will it look like. we have to think about that. i don't think any of us have a solution that was preventing clues the current leadership to still be in place i don't know. that is something we have to think about as we go forward. >> when you say partner, do you mean i ran as part of those? >> i don't know. we have to see. the best solution we can get everybody to agree to it. you want everybody to be involved with that. whether that's the right solution are not, that is probably a good question. >> u.s. intelligence agencies estimate isis is the same strain as it was at the beginning of this war. do you think it's time to change the strategy? >> here is what i was. they might be at the same strength but i will tell you

based on what i've seen with significantly reduce leaders and that's what we've done before. that makes a difference because he got second, third, fourth stringers coming in. they're still able to stay at 20 to 30,000. they're not as capable as they were a year ago for 18 months ago. they are still able to recruit and get people to comment on high. this is why this is not a silly military solution. there is an information campaign that they are very successful took her people to comment and that is part of what we have to do with our partners this has a more moderate voice that doesn't make this look like a great cause. that is part of what we have to work through as well. >> i'm just curious about further advances by russian backed forces possibly building

a land bridge to crimea. as you leave, talk about what did the strategy is working in iraq. do you have any evidence the administration is working there i am curious is elected next day just to make talk about russia. how concerned are you russia will try this seems abhijit and nato allies bordering russia and latvia. >> constantly assessing nato to any other interaction and what i worry about his miscalculation they receive, maybe nato might not be as concerned and they make a mistake and miscalculate and do something that would violate that greatly concerns me. i would say what we have to do is continue to refocus nato within our military with our

nato partners to build capability. we are on our way to do that. we have to continue to increase our ability to move quickly their. i think we could do that by helping to increase interoperability but nato forces to understand what nato capabilities are available and we have to keep working because a true deterrent is one where people are worried if they do conduct operations there will be some level of response. we have to continue to improve so we can deter any further action. >> a long way to go. >> i think we have deterrent and i think we do a good job of that. we have to continue to increase that so the risk is up for anybody who might consider could not in operations in eastern europe.

>> you talk about russia and what it does is -- [inaudible] i gave prepared -- are they prepared -- [inaudible] >> in the last 18 months we have really started to train for what we call hybrid warfare, which is the warfare i consider russia is in fact conduct. we are doing 10 brigade rotations this year. we did about eight last year specifically focused on this. so we have. we are in the process of increasing capabilities and your point is a good one. we came off of 10 years of counterinsurgency operations. i suspect my worry about dollars is what we need is to continue to train in the capability and

we've been doing that a year and a half now. all of a sudden sequestration comes back in and that will have an impact that is one of the concerns we have. we are not where we need to be. we've got 33% now who can operate at that level. and my goal is we should have about 60% and that is what we are working towards. so we are hoping by the next couple of years, i don't want to get a date on that. >> one of the nato exercises shows the one minute of what areas need to be improved -- >> last time we were doing this in europe, i remind everybody that our job was to protect era. one of the things we've learned is logistical challenges, for example, eastern europe has a different road than western europe. moving supplies is more

difficult. we are learning great lessons like that. our ability to sustain ourselves and the capability nato now has been how we have to better integrate those we are using our readiness center we have two do that. we have a large exercise going on right now with our partners to work this problem. we will do tomorrow. >> details about the helicopter crash that occurred in okinawa. >> we are still waiting to find out what happened. i don't know yet exactly what happened. i was briefed on it this morning. the briefing was the helicopter crash and we are not sure what happened yet. we have investigators taking a blood. >> what was the type of training taking place? >> a training special operations

forces with several different nations. >> to japanese -- [inaudible] >> i do not want to comment because i do not have the facts that there's been conflict in reporters. [inaudible] >> i just wanted to ask if there is a concern that would have an impact on the greater strategy or security of the relationship between the u.s. and japan especially given the opposition. >> i'm not going to overreact to one of them. it is important we work with allies and japanese allies and we have to continue to do that. i'm not going to predict the issue inside japanese politics but it's important now as we work together. when i started this, there are risks in the work we do every single day and unfortunately we understand that going in.

we have is they want to prevent any of those risks but sometimes an or should it be we have accidents. >> a few weeks ago general hodges told reporters about a plan currently the united states is helping train the ukrainian national guard and i would be completed in november and there is a plan out there to train military forces of ukraine's. at the time he said it had not been approved yet. do you have an update on that? >> i would say we have a plan developed to do that. we have not had made a decision on whether we will move forward with that. >> you also said that that law holding military hostage. if you have extra money to use, wherewith thou go? >> directly to readiness in moderation. the other piece is also about and string in keeping and strengthen our lower than 450,000 active components. we have to then invest in

readiness. i will take one more question and barbara i will let you ask it. don't make me regret it. go ahead. >> i want to ask you about -- i know what you do walk away without us asking you about a decade of remarkable survivability of america's war wounded and veteran of 17 we know you know an awful lot about. as you finish what concerns do you have over the long haul that america is war wounded of the last 14, 15 years over the decade would get the care they need and the money they are for them to get the care they need. the other side of the equation from the active duty. >> first off i would tell you i do worry about that. i'm encouraged by what i'm

seeing. as you said somewhere in the beginning of this, we have soldiers -- not only about soldiers, but caregivers as well and the sacrifice caregivers make anyone viable life, but we have to make sure we provide resources necessary. there's a couple things. first, we have the military have to be cognizant and do everything we can. we also have to ease restrictions we have on using those organizations, private organizations out there helping much better than we were five years ago. we are able to combine private enterprise and help wounded warriors with formal department of defense programs so we come together and make sure we have -- we can combine resource to make sure we take care of these young men and women not

turn and we are getting better. we've had relaxation of those restrictions but we have to continue to watch. i worry about long-term pts. i think we have to continue to invest in that. the neck of centers donated to us not only at walter reid but satellite sites plays an important role in that. i worry about senior theaters that we have. we were talking yesterday in my office. in 2003, someone who was a captain is now a colonel or brigadier general. they've probably had six or seven deployment over that period of time. we tend not to talk about our leaders. we have ncos who were sergeants are privates back then who are master first-class or sergeant majors to cut six, seven committee deployments.

they are doing well but we have to make sure they have continued programs and things we can't forget. one of the most important things for me sales cannot forget those families whose sons or daughters or husbands or wives gave their lives over these last 10 or 12 years. we have to remain connect to it. i say go around, i had meetings with families all the time and day about just staying into the army, to the mess they are sons or daughters or husbands were in for me that is incredibly we do that because we should never forget the sacrifice they made in the sacrifice their families and children continue to make because their dad or mom is no longer here. that is something i will live with the rest of my life is thinking about that and the

sacrifices they made. the reason it is hard as we all understand, but i had the opportunity to stand side-by-side with the young men and women who they really cared about what they were doing. they showed incredible selflessness and encourage in what they did. for me, we should be so proud of dad and their sacrifice and it's important to remember that and take care of their families and children of go forward. thank you very much. enjoyed it very much. god bless all of you.

>> former u.s. ambassador to syria, robert ford's focus the middle east institute earlier this week about the every nuclear agreement on what it means for the region. this is 90 minute. >> thank you, mark. thank you are coming to this event today. it seems to be overbooked. sorry we don't have enough chairs. certainly there is a lot of interest in this matter. i think c-span and cnn and others taping are covering this event. the event is after the iran deal, obviously it still has to go through congress and there's some obstacles. there, but we are looking at the regionals, dynamics, repercussions as the deal moves

forward. we have an excellent panel. i'm proud to say at all in the eye people to help us understand inking in iran and turkey and the goals, repercussions on iraq and syria and how to best get a handle on the very complex unfolding repercussions and dynamics. i will introduce their speakers briefly. they will speak in the order they are seated. they will make initial remarks and then i will engage them in a bit of q&a and then we will turn to a q&a with you. to my immediate left is alex vatanka. alex is a senior fellow at the middle eastern institute. he is iranian of origin and covers iran and iran's foreign policy for us, writes regularly an american international press and comments in the media as well. before joining mei, the u.s.

with jane's defense and was heading their islamic affairs department. a lot of experience and covers iran very tentatively. he was here with us. some of his observation of how this has unfolded in tehran among the different power blocs and opinion spectrum of opinion. to his left is tom mahon, known -- thomas lippman known to most of you i'm sure and it's had a long and illustrious career, is an award-winning author and journalist covered and written on middle eastern affairs in american foreign policy for several decades. he was also former bureau chief at the "washington post" and is well known in that capacity. he has a book coming out in early 2016 called of the crossing, how and where sadat in the 1973 war changed the world. he will be sharing his views on how he sees the gulf countries,

saudi arabia and others reacting to the deal vis-à-vis the u.s. and iran. he will be followed by dr. gonul tol. gonul is founder and director of the center for turkish studies at the middle east institute. she is also an adjunct professor at george washington university, lectures at the national defense university. many of you are familiar with her writing and appearing as in the turkish press and international press, covers turkish affairs domestic in terms of foreign policy and we are very happy to have her with us, help us understand the turkish reaction insurance policies in relation to the deal. to her left is ambassador robert ford, also does not need introduction. currently a senior fellow at the middle east institute that he has had a very long and

illustrious career in the u.s. state department, was the last u.s. ambassador to use area, but before that served as deputy messenger in iraq on a senior political adviser to iraq, ambassador to algeria in bahrain, extensive mix. and iraq is. in the middle east in general. he received the presidential honor award for his leadership of the embassy in damascus and recognized in 2014 with the secretary of state distinguished service award. in 2012 he received the annual profile in courage award from boston jfk of library for his defense of human rights in syria and he is a frequent writer, and referrer that appears on the hill and advisor on issues relating to his area and iraq and we are happy to have him with us to walk us through his views of the possible repercussions of this. alex, let me start with you and trying to understand, helping

the audience thunders and reactions in tehran so far what has been the spectrum of opinion, spectrum of reaction and how this will impact iranian politics, but more importantly the foreign policy towards the region. >> thank you are a match, paul and thank you for coming. as we discussed this, i take note of the fact he said five minutes pretty much and no more. a set of bullet points and i hope we talk about the bullet points that might be of interest to you. each of these are aimed to give you a flavor of what happens inside the islamic republic of iran following this deal. discovered the most important point at the top of my list. reformist moderates come intellectuals, most of the ukrainian media and public opinion is in favor of this deal. when i hear president bush -- i'm sorry, president obama --

freudian moment there. talk about hardliners, i have to scratch my head in the car to find those hardliners. that is the headline in terms of the overall landscape. the atmosphere has changed. since the deal was signed he then criticized the deal. there's a big difference now if you compared to before the deal being signed. you couldn't really talk about nuclear program. as a taboo issue. not the hard-line exist and are loud and criticizing the deal. what they have done is open up the entire debate about the nuclear program. if you look at the coors of the last 13 years of us having to do with the iranian nuclear issue, this is probably a peak moment where you actually have something that looks like a serious debate in iran but the pros and cons of a nuke or program. people ask the question they've

avoided as long as they have. what is the actual cost of the program and nobody knows. the fact is debated in iraq tells you things are changing. i don't see any credible hardliners they can do anything to stop this deal. what might happen is the deal itself as we move forward to his implementation stages will fall apart. that is not something you can ask back. that is something that will, as a result of not being able to continue on the path of implementing the deal from the 14th of july. the every man supreme leader ayatollah khamenei has been paid and i know there are press reports and analyses in the u.s. attacks about the vagueness and on most sins the vagueness means he's opposed to it. i don't read it that way.

if you look at the course of the man's role as iran's supreme leader, it is where he comes out and favor if anything in black-and-white terms. he keeps his options open. he wants to see how it unfolds. if you listen to the people closest to him, 17 year foreign minister veterans and chief foreign-policy adviser, he is out there defending the deal. if you listen to people like a very personal friend of the ayatollah khomeini they grew up as children and happens to be the joint chiefs of staff today. he has done out there defending the deal vigorously. i listen to people and take into account that given his position in the islamic republic is not going to be the type of person you might have expected from iranian politicians. it's not going to be ahmadinejad. that is not the guy's character. me say something about the revolutionary guards.

obviously they are the third interest party and the islamic republic if you put rohani on one side, they have not come out against this deal. what they do instead is sort of come out there and give speeches where they say we have to make these tactical retreats as part of negotiation but the strategy is still in place and we will continue to be on the path we've been. basically they are keeping themselves relevant in an error that might soon be upon them or they might feel less relevant. if you look at the rhouhani administration's key focus in terms of where you go onward and i can give you names and talk about individuals. from his office to his oil minister to foreign minister, there is a team in the rhouhani administration, most of them are educated in the west and most of whom know each other back to the 1980s the network together

from 1989 to 1997 and when they came in from 97 to 2005. these are not people that by accident showed up in her joining the party. there is a cohesive thinking on their part in terms of what they'd like to take the country and that is their strength. so far they have been able to go to the supreme leader and say you need to sign this deal because without this deal, what will happen is the resistance will start unraveling from within. ..