forces that you may call symmetrical with combat operations with a unique brand that i am afraid to say here to stay. >> we currently have five in one special operations unit recently received an update with the most effective training provided to date than much of that end of the cybercapabilities. i believe we are addressing that right now.

is minister of defense in this is the first cycle to trade in these areas. >> mr. secretary. descent, commander with u.s. personal do you agree on the assessment that those are iraq and syria? >> i do. we already have. i expect us to do more because we're looking for opportunities so the general is right to. of course, of this is in support of the iraqi

security forces. and by the way not just the united states but we will do more as the chairman said earlier she is granted those requesting expect more in the future we want to defeat isis as well. >> i worry by the way where everything stands right now

in response can you talk to was about the new civilian leadership team with respect to get this audit process done that leon panetta started the deal? that the new civilian team may not have that same emphasis. >> ion fully in support the key for your persistence to do this and also you ask about the future but my guess is this will continue because the logic is quite clear so that will be clear to people who come after

myself were the chairman i am pretty confident to remind them with all the components and as a farmer service chief we have now worked pretty hard at it. those involved in that audit process fully committed to lay on the table the bar that day set from themselves it will change the objective of those individuals they are pretty clear of their commitment to get it done.

>> but just to be sure the resources in this budget are in this three quest? >> if you can defeat them and from the beginning they said whatever is necessary is to provide that recommendation to the president. we will do a briefing or hearing on the issue.

talking about dates for that. and they will stay on the case. >> s.a. representative from the asia-pacific area i would express my sincere sympathy for those killed in and iraq. and referencing north korea and with that asia-pacific region and that tangible development so i am asking

secretary carter what rule for the broader strategy? it is often said that reflects priorities in you spoke last week about continuing the balanced strategy. >> said asia-pacific at then economic activity of greatest consequence for america's future in thank you for everything that's gone does. qualm is sad day critical

part of the asia-pacific is the part of that in there is so much momentum out there. part of that we are determined to be that -- meet that. >> thank you for your contributions. also have a question for you or secretary. spending twice as much on service contractors as personnel even though they do this same work nevertheless the increases spending and service contracts in this constrained environment can debt leverage the cost savings found verses'

contractors? that was mandated in 2008 but we still have not received the report. >> we are committed to reducing civilian and contractor and military. with those services contract saying we are gettg better at that but the chief management officer we're committed to meeting those targets if we don't

work, the tale we cannot invest in the tooth. >> has said we have instructions to keep commensurate with the military with that mandate and looking hard at service contractors might turn is coming in to enforce this in my office just like everybody else to review all service contracts that the satellite did you really need everything you are doing? >> we still have not received the report. >> we will have to get back

to you for the record. >> i yield back. >> thanks for joining this today. general, in the previous hearing with a lot of discussion about readiness entered into a full spectrum readiness to say it doesn't have a constituency that is why it is critical to make sure we are the constituency for readiness for bed and women in uniform. where are we with where we projected to be on the path to restore readiness? so tell us how far away we are and what milestones you

expect to achieve? >> we took inputs of all services along the path as you have outlined and that was a priority so we fully resources those service plans. epg mind we couldn't get to where we needed to be because of those elements with the aspect of time. with regard to where are we three services have indica fyi 21 is where they would get two free received a the resources we projected. allenges they havveue seen numbers between 2281 is maybe seven or eight years away.

>> let the get your perspective that is aviation and readiness. it is across the service branches but is the assessments of aviation in the ted general davis is doing all he can it is a pipeline issue bas o capacity. across the service branches what can we do to get there as soon as possible? >> what is this date of the current aircraft with those associated the last few years so with those platform setter in the ntoryith

the basic aircraft even though it is the most extreme the simar challenges especially those we're confident that those of a ready basic aircraft also for local level maintenance lead to the reason why we are so the aircraft did inventory longer than it needs to be so what we need to do is fully fund the center is in inventory to address the long-term issue to manifest itself.

>> as far as the concept of readiness restoration how do we get to that point? readiness has traditionally represented treat the end made its i believe it is tied into readiness where d.c. modernization as part of the list that must be attained to restore readiness? >> you are absolutely right. training or grievance but in some forces you mention in aviation and the real answer is a replacement of an aircraft sold that cost too much to maintain or even at those levels is in the

marine corps you are familiar with that. the older versions? >> i will make it quick but i have talked about fyi 17 to be sufficient to descanted everything that we have needed but my greatest challenge as the liggett the budget in the future is the modernization that will come through 20 or 21 but frankly it is whole inventory of joint capabilities we have had for five years of deferred but this modernization and issue is for health and wellness

we're not as healthy as a one to be but you're not investing in the health of the organization which is a readiness. >> i just want to take a rough moment to give our condolences across the european union. . . >> please provide the specific steps that

apartment is taking and what actions congress needs to take to bolster initiatives, funding, legislative. you mentioned the strategy. can you describe the pillars and now it complements current efforts? >> certainly. i will start --dash the german to reinforce. you are right. our mission of protecting the homeland which we need to do at the same time is running overseas is what we share that all levels we work closely with out.

to protect the homeland. we have plans to reinforce them. we support them all a time with equipment technology, intelligence and so forth. it is a two-way street. one thing i want to elaborate on his trance regional. one of the things i am looking at in connection with goldwater nichols is strengthening the role in precisely this way. we have combatant commanders

i look to the chairman command he does next line job of balancing sources. north, and the other combatant commanders. >> to be specific, we ask special operations command to take the lead because they cneive tissue coands and were capable. you have been working at that for a couple of months. the convened to look. critical to that is the intel picture. the 2nd is having an assessment process in a

single vision of the secretary can see. the process to make recommendations so that much like we're trying to provide pressure. trying to do it trends regionally at the same time. us to specific question which is critical. we meet routinely. resourcing or foreign fighte aelligence sharing. up to 15 nations to participate in information intelligence exchange, a

of walls to break down not only to teate cabilities the coalition partner. >> i have my staff follow-up. >> thanks to mr. chairman. the attack reminds us re still at war. we had discussionsbout restorinence. the rand corporation is published a stmitili or grant building the army and hear you talk ou the

eri initiative restore credible deterrence. and then for the secretary and the chief i have a bipartisan bill, the posture actor the army and marine corps. active duty marine corps assuming that that would come with the necessary resources for operations so that we don't follow up the force and complement of modernization because with it. i am interested in your assessment of hothat would impact the rest given that earlier testimony talked

about where we are today based on a series of assumptions. >> i will start. first with the armored brigade combat teams the chairman can elaborate. we are developing operational plans for the defense of nato territory is ordinary attack and hybrid warfare command we are developing those plans and the requirements that come fr them.

that is now a necessity as a consequence of russian behavior. but with respect army and marine corps, the cherrington speak to that. both the army and marine corps, their emis to me has been already this. and they have in strength plans to come down from the levels they were had previously, and the priority is the readiness. >> we made a down payment. in the eri you know we have an armored bct's worth of equipment unpaid for the

constant presence of the overall number to my cannot speculate. it is a function of the aggregate of jnt capability doing what we ne i, my greatest coern is that we have balance in the force know the right for structure but the right capability. we are going to make sure the infrastructure supports the. the operation of maintenance dollars.

we. now the right amount of training or equipment in place. >> thank. >> thank you, general. my colleagues and the american people watching at home for the record maryland path to draw down our land forces to pre-world war ii levels. the general was here last week describing the array in the mission set and given that this takes three to four years to get restored, when you the sum of the welcoming at the resources planning get it enacted. >> thank you. your statement warns expanding influence in the region command your

assessment is a ran more or less capable than they were the day the nuclear deal was signed? >> i believe there and was spreading malign influence and was capable of doing it before or af i have seen no measurable increase but under no illusion. >> heavies it any change in the behavior? >> i have not. >> now i have hundred 50 billion to help them. if there has been no change in my concern is that the world is not more safe the less safe with them having the money. just a couple of quotes from the present.

united states has achieved something, a long-term deal with iran that will prevent a nuclear weapon, a new direction from a different path. september 10th of 15, a vickers -- victory for democracy. in the budget that was presented command i agree the maligned activities in pursuit of missile technology continues to pose a threat. the budget continues efforts to hold iran accountable. one statement, september budget statement comeau five months later, what is the defense department doing to

mitigate waswhat is a clearly growing risk from the iranian ballistic missile program? >> well, thank you for that. you are right. the nuclear deal with iran was about the nuclear weapons program. if implemented it will keep them having a nuclear weapon. that doesn't stop them from other capabilities. one of those is ballistic missiles. that is why we are strengthening defenses in the region, in europe, to defend friends and allies, forces that are deployed, widely have aegis afloat and ashore and why our other partners picture -- procure

the same missile-defense is from us and is why we hope is room for both the iron dome system in the sling system will also developing the arrow system, so we help them with that too. >> if i could quote, what he said on february 9 from iran is a joint comprehensive plan of action. general austin we have seen no indication that they intend to pursue a different path.a different path. i think he is talking about with regard to maligned activities, but just a few

things that they have done. aside from what they did --dash sailors they continue to test ballistic missiles. this violated the un security council resolution. they lost another medium-range missile. the revolutionary guard corps is not given to threats. >> it was struck and has not change our commitment at all.

we remain posture to have committed to defending our friends and allies. it is good if implemented, which has been so far. eliminating the nuclear danger, but for everything else we remain full speed ahead and then course for what we are doing last year, the year before, and this programs are just building. >> my time has expired. i just don't understand why we would not have included the other threats. >> the gym to have the gentleman's time has expired. i would like to talk about the current rule of engagement. they are coming to me saying

of this is dangerous. i understand the need to try to keep down civilian casualties, but i have a concern that we are protecting our enemies more than those we are trying to save. throughout our history we have people who havegiven their lives so that others can live. with what we see taking place to live very restrictive rules of engagement, hundreds if not thousands of innocents are killed and become fatalities because of genocide. are we really winning? i would like you to adjust the rules of engagement. quickly assess all the time. so your question is apt and appropriate.

we would every day. >> was last time we change? >> we modify them all the time. >> i would like to distinguish between rules of engagement and collateral damage. i want to make it clear the rules of engagement are enduring. you can pause the identifying enemy you can engage. we make an assessment virtually every time we engage. right now we start with a baseline of zero, but if we are target that justifies, we will make that

adjustment. it was sometime in the last couple of days or decision was made to expand. hope you havehope you have tried not to do is make movies of the very people we are trying to protect and try to make sure that the end of the day we don't become the enemy. 510 years from now it will be because we won the war, not because they dropped the bomb. i understand that is a fine balance. i would personally give my life if some of my family can live. my other concern comes tomorrow we in any way, shape, or form trying to work out a system of justice for those that we detain?

we are not dealing with timothy mcveigh, world war ii where the end we sign a piece treaty. we are releasing people guantánamo. do we really have a formal system of justice? we are country of laws and i think this is an expectation. i have a serious go in that direction. >> we have various possibilities for attention. there is detention but transferred to another country. we did that in the case of them say afraid or custody became the government of iraq. and we have the possibility

of criminal prosecution in article 3 quarts which is also been exercised. with respect to guantánamo comeau what uses the reason why we are looking for a place to detain those people in guantánamo bay, there are people that it would not be safe to transfer to another location. i will sign off on their transfer. that is why we need an alternative detention facility for law of war detainees. >> also like to see them were clear system of justice. >> thank you.

i want to thank our witnesses. we appreciate your service to the nation. thank you for your service. secretary, general, the department has had to reconcile the reality of emerging great power competition. i highly commended and am supportive of your vision for the 3rd offset strategy and i look forward to seeing how that unfolds in the courts you be supportive. prion that comeau what should the balance between the forward deployed power and sufficient surge ready reserve capacity look like. >> first of all, thank you for your support.

it is an important part of planning for the future. this is a budget that tries to turn the corner. particularly to high-end potential opponents. thank you for your support. i am sorry. the 2nd part of your question. >> as we evaluate architecture, what should the balance between forward deployed and surge ready capacity look like? >> i will start. it is important to have forward forces because they are the 1st edge of the response to a crisis.

just being there is a way of working with friends and allies. but what deters is the full weight of the american military that will arrive on scene. and that is what we, we talk about deterring opponents, what deters them is not just what is right there in front of them the full weight of the american military. our surge forces are critical part of the deterrent. that is an indication but not the whole story. >> getting that balance right is dynamic.

so we make adjustments annually to make sure we get that balance right, providing access and making sure we're responding to crisis. so when you ask the right balance is a constant process of evaluation. >> thank you. going back, technology game changing will provide us the advantages we need. how do you believe we can best direct investment and policies to ensure the progress that we made get

sustained in the next a ministration. >> in this and other matters the strategic logic behind our investment this is intended to.toward the future. and we have crafted a carefully. the needs that it highlights and will we had put in motion are so compelling but i'm confident they will continue. >> i have been one of your biggest proponents. i believe it is imperative the services understand the type of requirement.

how will he managed job security has been for us and incorporating cyber technology senate? >> thank you, and i yield back. >> thank you. this following up who are you aware of any discussions to close the naval station or transferred to cuba? >> i am not. >> in question. >> i am not. >> the department deliver product entitled plan for closing the guantánamo bay detention facility. is this committee has previously stated, the requirement has not been met.

they were on a case-by-case basis, transfer to another country was along for detention. in recent testimony officials testified that there is a requirement, they do not know their prisoners would be housed. we have a location. do youyou have to determine which of these three options appropriate? >> generally speaking we do. it has worked out. with respect to the report and the question of

location, we were not specific about location. the optimal location will depend upon several things that we don't know right now. if we canwe can do it quickly will pick an existing facility and trying to build on that. if we have a longer period of time we may build a new facility from scratch. depend upon the number. that will depend upon the structure of the military commissions process. so the reason that we have to discuss this and

submitted the plan. >> i am familiar. >> reason the plan calls for dialogue is we cannot select the optimal design location until that conversation has been had. i hope you will give it consideration. put it on the path to being dealt with. >> i understand and apologize for interrupting. the american people look at this as i do is a dangerous precedent, but secondly we were reminded that there is

an active war on terror. the 1st question was about strategy and things we handover. i look at this, and we are still waiting for a detailed a detailed plan. my question is, is it possible that due to such factors as bureaucratic obstacles, delays and timing, inability to negotiate, an opportunity to conduct a capture of her to operational be lost over this issue ever inhibit a question on these attacks and engaging the issue of not going there. >> that has not occurred in my observation.

>> that would be one of the 1st things i would ask. will be the disposition. >> what if the answer comes back. you know, we simply don't know. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the marine was killed last weekend. we have a law that required you to submit by february 15 a plan for defeating these people.

you are in violation of the law. would you care to explain? >> that is not my question. >> we are going to submit that report. >> am going to ask you again for you in violation of the law? >> i don't think that is a satisfactory response. we pass a law, it means something.

it's not too much --dash that you comply with the law. you need to give us a plan now. let me ask you about another report. d ur submit when the president puts forth his of 30 year ship plan for the na he did not do that either. >> i don't know. there are many of them. >> i believe that onisn process. completion. >> that was supposed to be submitted. now, the existing plan calls for 52 combat ships.

you requested 40. sec. of the navy told us he needs 52. there is no study change that. mr. statically this is there is no navy study or analysis that would change that. what is your basis that updates the requests there is no navy analysis comeau what is your basis? >> the basis is something we decided jointly and that this requirement, going to buy 4952. it is successful a has been good at what it does.

forty is enough. the reason we made that decision as we believed aerince that the money is better spent on ships that are more capable. >> where is your analysis? >> we did analysis in the course of preparing the budget. >> this is an important strategic point. we need ships that are more capable and lethal and high-end. >> if that is so important why would you give a new ship plan? >> i'm sure it will reflect that.

>> you're supposed to give it to us when the president's budget submitted. the main i think these laws are important, but they are. people wonder why america is angry right now. it isnow. it's because people in washington feel like a law. ofnalysiatplan and some sort different from the navy's analysis on reducing the request. >> thank you. prioritize. low, medium, high for the military fight the next five years. >> thank you. >> did not have the mic on. how about the priority of ensuring if we send troops into harm's way they have the best capability for close air support so they

come under fire. >> close air support is a critical part of the joint capability. >> great. how about if we have an american who is supposed to eject or a shot down. >> combat search and rescue is a must-have. >> just in general. i am pleased to see you are choosing not to multiple, but i am concerned about the five-year plan. we havewe have month on the equivalent of 418 squadrons, have nine remaining in their a lesser plans than they used to have. the squadron i commanded used to have 2400 down to 18. they are current in three theaters. i have confused about the statements.

that is part of the requirement. we highlighted concerns about shortfalls. loiter time, lethality, weapons load, close combat, and made capability and digital targeting capability because of that they have agreed to do a fly off. which hadglad to see because we were concerned this would have increased risk. in your budget you say the a-10 will be replaced uadron the squadron.

it seems to me that the outcome is being predetermined. we have yet to have a file. that you are saying we are. determining the outcome. similarly we have the air force leadership basically said the f3 five will replace the a-10. that contradicts the requirements document in their own statement. there going to put 49 a-10s in the barnyard, 96 the year after that. the fly off on happen until at least fy 18. i'm just concerned about contradictions.

this is there newest excuse. talking about how they just don't have a it. we have hundreds of people playing the tube and clarinet wearing a uniform. we really had a manning crisis. but we are not at that place. i concerned where we are right now. do you think that if we put it in the barnyard we will it be a risk to american lives? hawe need is it out to have the ability to deliver closer support effectively. as the advocate for close air support and joint capabilities i absolutely believe we need a transition plan. >> that means you don't agree with this putting in the barnyard.

>> what i don't agree with his getting rid of the capability without replacing it. met to look at the issue and make sure we look carefully, the capability gaps that will exist and from that how does that inform the program in the future. as the proponent i can tell you,you, i will look at this will a closesuor perspective. >> my time is expired. we should not be putting any more in the barnyard. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> general, thank you all

for your service. how would you assess are combined capability today, down to and advise and assist role. i am concerned about the fact that we have not trained. how would you do that? >> there is no question the course of a decade the joint forces ability to integrate and biology rooted. we are two and a half or three years and focusing. we are focused on restoring full-spectrum readiness as well as making sure

exercises regenerate the kind of capability we had. >> i am concerned with take a look at shifting capability. and not allowing them to be a strategic reserve. take a look at mobilizing them on a periodic basis, but i think that we are not taking a hard enough look at being able to more cost-effectively maintain capability and utilize the guard and reserve more. >> i concur.

i think a simple dichotomy made sense in the cold war. it improved its versatility proving uniquely valuable. that is important. and so being creative and effective about the use of the reserve component for strategic effect absolutely, we are thinking that way and need to continue to do so. >> global forest management. in virtually every place for

your the guard and reserve are integrated into that. not typically use them you can go to south america today i can get africa, asia , look at bct's that are being mobilized. i would tell you today the guard and reserve are fully integrated. and vision that to be the case in the future. we actually can't meet requirements without fully integrating.

this attack in belgium, is a result of the fact that we are making gains in iraq and syria in terms of isis on isis needs to maintain the narrative of being ascended in order to attract recruits and money from across the radical islamic world and that this is a way to maintain that by striking outside of their territory? >> congressman i can't say whether this particular tactic has resulted that is the putting greece pressure on the enemy in iraq and syria and the narrative begins to erode because the freedom of movement arose in the resources or road and support

that they are going to lash out and conduct terrorist attacks we would expect the things we saw in belgium to be a result of pressure that they feel in other places, there's no question about it. they will balance conventional tactics which we have seen from the enemy with guerrilla tactics in places like syria and iraq where they are not as successful with terrorist attacks around the world to maintain relevance and continue the jihad. there's no question about it. >> thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the gentleman -- i have got just a couple of issues i want to touch on right quick. mr. mccord we have talked a lot about readiness and training and maintenance. it is true is it not that virtually all of the money for training, for maintenance of aircraft and support this in the base part of the budget. >> that's correct, the vast majority mr. chairman. >> secondly my understanding is as you all were putting together your budget request, over

$5 billion of that request, $5 billion was savings, inflation and especially fuel savings great obviously it goes up and down and you have a very long period when you have to formulate your budget. my question is, as you look at it today how do your assumptions on the process of fuel measure against the reality of today? is it better or worse than you assumed? >> it is better. are you talking fy16 or 17? >> 417. >> the prices we were directed to assume are higher than today. as you note the fiscal year hasn't started and want start for some time after that but there's a long time these prices at the hole before such savings would actually be realizable that they are lower today.

>> i'm just a little concerned that there are some shins built in the budget and nobody knows although it has been going up some in recent days. as you point out this doesn't start until october 1 and i was just wondering how it measured up. 10 usc 153 requires the chairman of the joint chiefs provide a risk assessment to congress by february 15. we heard from the service chiefs that they have provided that input to the chairman. my understanding is it's been done and it's sitting in ost somewhere. you all have any clue about when that might be coming? >> chairman nye can answer that. we be completed sometime ago. what we want to do with teach together to discuss with the secretary. we did a week ago monday so now we have the secretary coming over right away. it is complete.

we worked on a part of what will you see is the difference is to construct. we look at each of the five challenges we have spoken about and really get after it in a meaningful way the risks associated with each one of those five challenges and the more i would call a crosscutting risk of the joint force. while it has been a couple of weeks late i hope you'll find it worth it in again one of the reasons why we kept that little bit longer was so we could have a top opportunity to do a face-to-face with the secretary and we did complete that last monday. >> i think this is important so i look forward to it and it is significant for the committee. if i could just make an offer again to both of you. it has been one of my goals and i have certainly not been as successful as i wanted to to reduce the paperwork that congress puts on the department so fewer reports of a briefing can be done, a one-time report rather than a recurring report. i would offer again if you all

want to submit to us reports that you think are superfluous or over burdensome and not worth the time and effort, give me that then i will definitely look at it because i want to continue to reduce the unnecessary or less than necessary paperwork burdens that congress puts on. as the same time what's left you are serious about and so time is important. again we have talked about the isis report and come up with reprogramming request. we don't have a strategy on where it's happening so i'm trying to have fewer things but he serious about the ones that we have. please tell me and give it to me about things you think are necessary but at the same time as you have heard today i think there is frustration when the law is not applied with. finally, general dunford i saw an open letter signed by several

dozen retired military, other notable names that the time is right to relocate goldwater-nichols of 30 years ago and we needed to be serious to significant changes in order. although they did not detail what those changes should be by the way in the letter. i want to ask your view there is a fair amount of interest about examining and perhaps modifying the goldwater-nichols requirements. please tell me what you think we are on the senator needs to happen and suggestions you may have. >> bank chairman first of all i do think there's an imperative for reform at this time and i think it's a result of the change of war. the basic nature of war in my opinion doesn't chairman change. but that specifically i mean most of the crises that we have

today immediately cuts across multiple combatant commands. sea air space cyberspace and understand they are multifunctional. special operations dry capabilities and so forth and that has changed the nature of integration of the joint force and frankly the requirements of the secretary to make timely decisions in a trance regional multi-dimensional domain. change with regard to goldwater-nichols is number one making sure secretary does have the ability to make decisions in a timely manner and making sure he does have the ability to integrate the joint force in the trans-regional multi-domain multifunction flight. also requires in my estimation the joint staff take a different approach to strategy and to ensure that we write strategies for for example the problems we spoke about today. it's an just an aggregation of operations plans if you're dealing with russia or china that you have a strategic

framework in which those operations plans are met and the military strategy needs to be refined to provide the framework and with which all plans are developed to the final piece of that an execution is the secretary's ability to prioritize and allocate resources in a timely manner or by this ongoing in multiple combatant commands at the same time. from my perspective as we think about reform please should focus on the character of war and what reforms are necessary to make sure we can fight in the 21st century and what i've alluded to our fundamental changes in warfighting in the 21st century that i think can -- we can reinforce and optimize the joint force ability to meet with fundamental changes and are prepared to make those recommendations to you chairman. >> manage a second back? that's exactly along the lines that we were thinking and the chairman alluded to earlier. obviously we will need your support and that required statutory change but those are the dimensions to which i'm looking to the joint staff and

the joint chiefs of staff especially the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff given the changed nature of warfare. >> i'm anxious to see what you suggest even if it's not all the reforms that some of these other folks are pursuing but obviously with the market basically for this committee in a month away for us to have time to look at it we will want to see it promptly. >> i am planning that quite soon. it will involve the capabilities come the joint chiefs of staff and the chairman while preserving the independent military advice that they give to me and the president. >> good, thank you all three for being here today. the hearing stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]