company that had a contract with the mill. anyway, that is a long story. host: you know what -- we have to leave it there because we are out of time. what is the headline from the unemployment report? guest: the recovery is gathering roots. it looks a little healthy but the plant, it is still too soon to know whether it is going to be strong enough going forward. host: greg robb, marketwatch.com, thank you for being with us. president obama will be at a lithium factory in charlotte, north carolina, a little later, about 11:55 a.m. thanks for being with us. enjoy your holiday weekend. thanks. . [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] .

>> and just a bit more about the president's trip later today to charlotte, north carolina. and he will be speaking at a latrine-lithium battery company and talking about jobs -- he will be speaking at a lithium

battery company and talking about jobs. the presentation comes at about 11:55 a.m. eastern here on c- span. and then comes news about jobs. a large number of jobs were created last month since the recession began while the unemployment rate remained at 9.7% for the third straight month. as we will take you live to the pentagon with the third army commander of lieutenant general webster in kuwait. live coverage here on c-span. >> william webster, who is the commander of third army during kuwait. they have 155,000 military and civilians operating dindane of 15 countries. -- operating in 15 countries. it is a big job. he took command in may of last year. right now is a sustaining -- is

assisting our two combat operations supporting both the response will drawdown in iraq and the buildup in afghanistan and reset of the army. general webster, thank you again for taking the time. i understand you are going to give a bit of an overview before you take questions. let me turn it over to you. >> thanks very much. this is my second tour of duty in third army. i was deputy commander for a general mckever -- general mccurtain in 2002 and 2003. and i commanded multinational division bad debt in 2005-06. -- more multinational division baghdad in 2005-06. i thought i would tell you first of all that our three main missions are sustaining those

two current fight in afghanistan and iraq. that includes the responsible drawdown from iraq as well as the buildup of forces in afghanistan. the second main mission that we have is to be prepared to go to any of the other countries other than iraq or afghanistan if something should go wrong and we should have to conduct other operations. perhaps, in natural disaster all the way up to combat operations. and the third is building the partners capacity here in the region and centcom as we attend to make them stronger -- attempt to make them stronger, our allies, in the region. if you would like, i can just go to questions. or i can talk to some more about what we are doing. >> it looks like they would like to get writing to questions, general.

>> i wonder if you could " -- clarify for us whether or not this is the largest movement of equipment and troops since world war ii, or if it is comparable to the gulf war. also, could you give us a breakdown of how many pieces of equipment you are moving and how much will stay behind in iraq? >> this is the largest operation that we have been able to determine since the buildup for world war ii. when we started this operation we had about 2.8 million items of equipment in iraq along with about 88,000 containers containing some of that equipment and some of them being used for other purposes. as well as about 41,000 pieces of rolling stock that had to be moving -- moved out. rolling stock meaning vehicles

as well as trailers. we are about 35% through with that now. we began last june moving equipment out of iraq and we are sorting it out here in kuwait. some of it goes into afghanistan. some of it goes back to the army to be reset back in the depots and then for training. >> could you say how many are being left behind in iraq and will not go on to afghanistan? or is any equipment being left behind for the iraqi security forces? >> there are a number of programs run by the department of defense and the state department driven by what general odm janelle has requested. the total number -- what general odierno has requested. the total number, i do not have

that with me. i do not know what the total will be. it will be after we finish some programs. we did take a total with general odierno last year when the iraqis requested equipment. we conducted a number of boards that look at the hot dogs that look at all of that equipment, determine what the costs and benefits are -- we conducted a number of boards that look at the goodman and determine what the cost and benefits are so we can decide what to leave behind. >> could you tell us how it is going with the northern route, with the supply into afghanistan as opposed to through afghanistaand pakistan and whats that being used at? >> the no. distribution network, as we call it, consists of five

different routes that u.s. trans com has set up for us that involve both the content of europe and the continent of asia. it is redundant means beyond the capabilities of what we have in pakistan. the long list of those is about 5,000 miles long. the good news is that because of the great team work by our partners there, we are now able to move about 50% of supplies that we need in afghanistan over those five routes of the northern distribution network. that compares to the two routes that come up from the coast of pakistan into afghanistan, and one of them is about 600 miles long and one of them is about 1,200 miles long from the coast. i was in afghanistan just last week to check on our troops and to see firsthand how the

movement of equipment is going. i went on patrol with some of the troops who are securing some -- one of those routes up to the gate that comes through pakistan and things seem to be moving extraordinarily well. those northern routes have given us a great deal of relief and additional capacity. if any of the routes are blocked by weather or any action -- by weather or enemy action. >> i wonder if you would talk about the analysis that goes into looking at, for example, a humvee to say that this is still good quality and to go on to afghanistan or this is about a worn and should be left behind in iraq -- battle-worn and should be left behind in iraq.

>> thanks for the question. we have a large team of experts from army material command and defense logistics agency that looks at all of this equipment in iraq where it currently sits. if the equipment is not fully mission-capable, in other words, it does not have enough life left in it based on a set of detailed manuals that our teams use -- and it is army standards that we are talking about -- they will pass that equipm back to us on trucks. we will all that equipment back here to kuwait where our kuwaiti partners are allowing us to conduct a very large maintenance operation. we refurbish the equipment here and set it up for issue again. some of that equipment is going

back up into iraq and some of it goes to the united states for reissued to our troops there. if it is in bad enough shape, or we lack the capacity for some of the tougher rebuild actions, then we will send it back to the depots in the state's four issues -- for issue from those depots. the we do a cost-benefit analysis of all of these items of equipment as well as the transportation coming out of iraq. that way, we can make better informed decisions about the costs. sometimes the operational costs -- the operational benefits would cause us to make a decision that might not look mountain -- monetarily beneficial, but it is all done for the right reasons. and we set up a number of boards that have my own maintenance and supply experts look at it in the end. it is a big decision-making

process that goes from end to end. >> a great benefit to the taxpayer what your doing, as opposed to buying all new equipment, that you are ableo refurbish and do some sprucing up to keep equipment in the fight. >> that is absolutely right. the equipment we have got, as you know, has been ridden hard. when i was in baghdad in 2005 and i put 20,000 miles on my home -- my own humvee, and that was significantly greater than what was planned for the life of the vehicle. but the equipment will be pulled down here and as innovation has come forward from the states with engineering improvements on armor and protection for soldiers, we also do that work here and send it back out to them. we have a big process of taking

accountability for all of the equipment that comes out of iraq, whether it is a piece of rolling stock like a humvee, or a non-standard item like a hand- held radio. we look at that, clean it up, and we have a team of experts here from across the department of defense who help us bring it to accountability and put it back into the system. so, our other units could use it or it could be sold if that decision is made to other countries. >> can you tell me what is the total cost of this operation that is going? and can i ask, there are some things like helicopters but cannot just transferred directly from iraq to afghanistan.

how much of that is involved in your program? >> i'm sorry, i could not understand those two or three questions. could you help me out? >> alesi if i can paraphrase and get it right. the first aspect was the cost, if you could put a cost figure to the operations of retrograde and transfer of equipment in the theater, as well as if it has a particular operational name to what you are doing. and to some of the aspects that -- things that you might have to do to make equipment ready for going from one theater to another. the example was a helicopter that might need different rollerblades if it goes from iraq to afghanistan -- wrote to her place if it goes from iraq to afghanistan. -- different rotar blades if it goes from iraq to afghanistan.

>> in terms of the cost, we are going through the cost-benefit analyses and trying to find redundancies and eliminate those where it makes sense. the overall cost of operations in tudotheater is well above myy grade, but i can tell you that we saved about $3.8 billion, billion, last year by finding those redundancies' and efficiencies in our processes and we were able to apply that $3.8 billion toward last year's build up in afghanistan. as you may recall, about 20,000 troops were added last year. we were able to apply those moneys to afghanistan to help defray those costs. in terms of a name, we have been planning this operation to drawdown in iraq for a long time and we have reversed it

several times, and all through that timeframe we have called it "responsible drawdown." but this fall as we also started to build up in afghanistan because of the president's decision to do so, it became obvious that the sum total of what we are doing to continuing to fight in iraq and at the same time shifting our main effort to afghanistan and conducting combat operations there at the same time, that the scope of our operation was larger than even the term that patton made in world war ii at the battle of the old job where you turn to our own third army, on its heels 90 degrees, and attacked in to the flank of the germans. when we looked at that operation historic week -- a historic lee, and we were --

historically, and we realized we were much greater in size than that. he called it a nickel. we realized we were nickel ii. and the last question, i'm not sure i recall that. >> the last question pertained to how you might modify equipment that is going from iraq to afghanistan, such as is a helicopter needs to be equipped to berotawith a differ. the >> sure, the enemies we have fought have sometimes changed from neighborhood to neighborhood and their tactics would change and sometimes come full circle to the original way that they were doing things.

but we see the same in afghanistan. we are checking the situation daily to look at the enemies operations -- the enemy's operations and how the terrain and environmental conditions as well as actions are affecting our soldiers in afghanistan. we are trying to anticipate that and pass back the necessary changes to our army so that they can improve our equipment. one good example is when we first started sending in laps to afghanistan. -- mraps to afghanistan. when we first of us started sending them over there, our largest was a very cumbersome -- was very cumbersome and too top heavy and we were breaking axles.

we looked for an hour -- an alternative, and as you recall from this year, the mrap line protected vehicle is lighter weight, more agile, independent suspension and a number other -- of other improvements. we are now flying those in at a rate of about 400 per month and we plan to move that up to about 1000 per month to get them into afghanistan over the next couple of months so we can swap out with up armored humvees and some of the larger andmraps that general mcchrystal is using. the equipment that we get in here, frequently it will have of grades in the armor that we had to it. for instance, today's armored

humvee is on version seven of its our markets that we add on to it to the outside -- its armored kits that we add on to it to the outside. some of the " and we will get out of iraq does not have the latest -- some of the equipment we get out of iraq does not have delayed his armor on it. we have to change? the suspensions as well as adding on the latest armor -- change out the suspensions as well as adding on the latest armor. but we are trying to get to this before they realized they needed. that is our goal. >> this is jeff with "stars and stripes" and i'm glad relations have improved with the stars and stripes since general patton. in july, russia agreed to transport troops as well as supplies to afghanistan. the first fight was in october, the you know how many flights have been since then?

-- the first flight was in october. do you know how many flights there are been since then? >> i do not have that number. and we will pass that to you when we get off of this conference here. our friends and partners are allowing us to move a lot of equipment through and over their country's and that has been -- their countries and that has been a big help. we have been -- i was just in kurdistakyrgistan last week tryo maintain accountability of troops, but also mostly to push them through to general mcchrystal so he has the maximum boots on the ground time with all of the troops there. i will give you the number, but our friends and allies in the region are helping a great deal.

>> you had mentioned mra earlierps -- mraps earlier. what are the value of those if they are not used in afghanistan? >> i do not have a number on the after market value. i'm joking here, but i guess we could throw a couple of them on e-bay and see what the market would bear. but what we're doing is adding improvements to them in terms of suspension and armor if we can and we are sending them back to the states. when we say that we have got 30 different variants of the mrap,

really, there are five basic mraps and there are modifications to them. it is reviving truck makers putting these out, such as oshkosh. and then as soldiers make recommendations and the missions change, they have added and changed the troop hauling capacity of those. that gives us 30 on the variants. and some of them have lower levels of armored. and what we do not want to push lighter armor in afghanistan, that trucks will be very good for sending back to: as and putting in the hands of soldiers who are training to deploy -- coarsening back to the states and putting in hands of soldiers who are trimming back to deploy. -- who are training to deploy. we are beginning to start talking about providing some additional mraps to our native

allies in theater. we are not sure how that will shake out yet. the we are holding some of them to see which direction the secretary wants us to go. >> justin fischell from fox news. i want to follow up on the question asked earlier about the total cost. you said you know how much you are saving. that means you probably know how much you are spending. i have seen an effort like this cost in the tens of billions. is that accurate? >> yeah, that is accurate. if i recall right, and i will double check the numbers and send them back to you, but if i recall correctly, at the height of the surge in iraq, we were spending about $20 billion there through third army in terms of

repairing and equipping and supplying troops on the ground. that came down to about 16 billion last year and this year we think it will be down around $9 billion. for total army operations in iraq. some of that money will be pushed over to afghanistan in those savings. i do not know if those figures tell, but those are the ones i have close at hand. >> that is very helpful, thank you. can you give us an example of something that is simply not worth it to bring back or refurbished? is there a great amount of equipment that you will just leave because it just does not make sense financially? >> yeah, absolutely. a couple of examples come to mind. first, the old suv. there are a number of suvs we

bought, nontechnical vehicles we call them -- non tactical vehicles we call them. some of the folks from other governmental agencies, when we escort them in and around the green zone and other places. we might have paid $30,000 for those non-tactical vehicles when we bought it several years ago and it might only be worth a few thousand dollars now, $5,000 to $8,000. you could say, we could use them back in the states, why don't we ship them back into the states or to afghanistan? and then we look at the cost of doing business. first, taking them back to the states is a non-starter because they do not meet epa standards back in the states. and then the second thing would be, it might cost as much as $10,000 to move an suv, maybe

even greater depending on the route that we have to use to move an suv into afghanistan. it is cheaper for us to turn that over to the government of iraq through the right programs and let them keep it. another example might be t- walls, you know, the ubiquitous jersey barriers that we have of various heights in iraq and afghanistan now. you would think that with the thousands of pieces of t-wall that we have around the solder city and the green zone and other places, that the right thing would be to track them down to afghanistan. but those might cost somewhere around $800 to $5,000 depending on the size per piece to pour initially. but it might cost $5,000 to ship it. that is one of the cost figures

we looked at recently. it does not make any sense. it is cheaper, more beneficial to our government to buy them in afghanistan or adjacent countries, and that, of course, it contributes to businesses in afghanistan. that is the kind of process that we go through for many of these items we are pulling out. >> two more quick ones. >> i'm with abc news. can you give us a sense of the timeline and priorities of the operation? what you would like to be bringing out first from iraq and what the priorities are for bringing into afghanistan, and if you have a sense of milestones or goals along that time line that he would like to share with us. thank you. -- that you would like to share with us. thank you. >> each of the units that goes in there has mission essential units that general mcchrystal and the staff has approved.

we have worked up and defined what that equipment list is. high on the list are always mraps, radios, blue for strikers, counter-ied equipment -- blue force trackers, counter- ied equipment. when we get that equipment in there, we have units inside afghanistan who mount that equipment in the confederation -- configuration that we need so that we can draw from the issue point right into the fight if we need to. >> do you have any sense of how long this will take to get stuff out and he in? -- and in? >> without saying too much in detail, you know, the president told us he wanted to move in there as quickly as possible. initial estimates were tt