the one they did nothing easy about any of this. -- there will be nothing easy about any of this. the going was likely to get harder before got easier. that has already been the case as we've seen recently. it is essential that we make progress in this critical southern part of the country, where in fact and 9/11 attacks were planned by al qaeda during the period when the taliban controlled it and the rest of the country. .

>> and to help achieve greater equality as well as greater quantity, we have directed a much greater partnership with the ansf, an emphasis that is on display daily throughout operations in afghanistan. we get the concept right for developing the ansf, and developing the structures for those concepts. improving the ansf been facilitated by the establishment last november of the nato treaty commission that was created to help expand and professionalize. it is worth noting that the mtma commander had afghan progress in reversing adverse trends in the growth and professionals asian. as general caldwell has also

observed, there is a way to reduce attrition fuuther through considerably augmented partnering, training, education, and recruiting. initiatives are being pursued in each of these areas. in all of our efforts, we and president karzai are emphasizing the importance of include city on the part of the afghan government and its leadership. especially in linking local governing structures to the decision making in financial resources in kabul. much more needs to be done to help the afghan government as irresponsibility for addressing the concerns and needs of afghan citizens. the national consultant of peace held at earlier this month was a constructive step in this effort, providing an opportunity for president karzai to address some of the political tensions

that fueled the insurgency and promote reconciliationnand local reintegration as means to contribute to a politicall resolution of some of the issues that exist. the council he conducted on sunday further this process, and the effort to set political conditions for progress. another critically important part of our joint civil military campaign in afghanistan is promoting broadbased economic infrastructure development. we have seen improvements in the government's ability to deliver basic services such as electricity, education, basic health care, and provides positive effects in other areas including security and economic development. we've worked closely with the international community and the afghan government. water, governance, energy, wrote programs. we are now embarking on a

project with various u.s. government agencies to dramatically increase production of electricity for the kandohar area and parts of eastern and southern afghanistan. we also promote agriculture and economic programs to help them bring products to market rather than continuing to grow poppy. none of this is easy or without considerable challenges. the mission is hugely important to the security of the region and to our country. we are obviously doing all that we can to achieve progress toward accomplishment of our important objectives in afghanistan. we're seeing early progress as we get the inputs right in that country. in closing, i want to thank the members of this committee for your unwavering support and abiding concern for the more than 215,000 troopers deployed

throughout the area, that for their families as well. >> we will try a seven-minute first round. general, let me start with you about the afghan army not being the south were the major fighting is taking place and where is going to take place in the months ahead. with approximately 94,000 u.s. troops in afghanistan, but half of them are deployed down in the south. that is the main focus of our counterinsurgency effort. how many afghan troops are there currently in kandohar, and about how many afghan troops to expect will be there in september? >> i'll be happy to get that for you for the record.

if i could rather just provide the overview of what it is that we are trying to accomplish in that area. you certainly touched on the importance of getting the afghans in the lead. we had a video conference this morning, a weekly one that the secretary does. the chairman and i parttcipate in that. he described, for example, how he will use some of the elements of the additional brigade going into the districts around kandohar city to work with theer afghan partners so they can do what president karzai wants them to do. there are 500 or so local leaders there, discussing what is coming to the province, hat afghan forces lead wherever that is possible.

>> what percentage of time do you think they will be in the lead? most of the time? roughly half of the time? how often will it be afghan troops in the lead? can you give us some estimate? >> it will depend on the component. >> with respect to the police, they are in the lead. the civil order police will be in the lead. with partners, but not by any means full members alongside them. they will be conducting the operations and they will be leading in nos. >> give us an idea. are the operations going to be led by afghan troops? >> i believe that the presence patrols, if you will, will be

ones that are led by the afghan forces, and that the high-end operations that require the integration of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems are an important component of this overall efforts, still led by u.s. forces. >> the numbers that we have are that more than half of those battalions are capable of operating either independently or dependent with coalition support. even if you reduce that number down to 30%, which is what i think the staff is going to be doing, there is a lot more battalions of afghan army that are able to operate independently than we are down in the south. why are the afghans not moving more of their troops down to the south for this upcoming

campaign? >> they have moved more of their troops to the south, mr. chairman. second, they are going to move more of their trips to the south. there are other missions that require afghan troops. >> are they capable of leading most of these operations as you call high and operations? are there enough capable of leading those high-end operations? >> the very high and operations we have afghan partners on and we are developing. not the very high end. those are dependent on u.s. intelligence, and surveillance, and reconnaissance that they do not have the ability to pull down at nor does any other force in the world, for that matter. what i think is probably more relevant would be more of the standard activities, the standard patrols. i think they have the capability to do them and they are doing them.

they secure large numbers -- large numbers of convoys. the presence patrol as a framework activity, but when you get into the more challenging scenarios, certainll in the difficult operations, u.s. forces ended up leaving the bulk of those. >> let me ask you whether or not you continue to support the strategy of the president which has additional forces coming in, but you continuu support that july 2011 for the start of reduction in u.s. forces from afghanissan? >> i support the policy of the president, mr. chairman. as i have noted on a number of occasions, my sense of what the president was seeking to convey at west point in december were

two messages. one was a message of additional commitment, culminating in the more than tripling number of u.s. forces, tripling the number of substantial funds that you all have authorized for the national security forces. and also a message of urgency, the urgency was the july 2011 peace, noting that what happens issa beginning of a prooess for transition that is conditions based and the beginning of a process of responsible drawdown of u.s. forces. >> when you said you continue to support the president's policy both in terms of additional troops and also the setting of that date to begin the reduction for the reasons the you just gave in terms of laying out the urgency for the afghans to take responsibility, is that represented of your best

personal professional judgment? >> in a perfect world, mr. chairman, we have to be very careful with time lines. we went through this with iraq, as you recall, and i did ask to set a time line ultimately in iraq. testifying before this body, i said we would start the drawdown of our search forces in december. based on a prediction of projections that we will establish. we are assuming that we will have those kinds of conditions that will enable that by that time in july 2011, that is the projection, and that is what we have supported.

>> do i take that to be a qualified yes, a qualified no, and not answer? >> a qualified yes. there is a nuance to what the president said that was very important that did not imply a race for the exit, a search for the light to turn off, or it did imply the need for greater urgency, and that target was, i think, and number of targets that included the leaders in afghanistan, it included some of our partners around the world, it may have >> general, just to follow upm. here, there is a great deal of confusion about this. you just said that beginning with a droll, there were

deconditions based, contingent upon certain factors. there is a recent work by jonathan alter that basically quotes, inside the oval office, president obama said that, be honest with me. you can do this in 18 months. sir, i am confident that we can hand over. if you can't do the things you say in 18 monnhs, no one is going to suggest we stay, right? yes, sir. an agreement. he goes on to say that he was trying to turn the tables on the military and box and then after that spent most of the year boxing him then. if after 18 months, the situation stabilizes, he

expected troops to begin to come home. conditions did not stabilized enough to begin an orderly withdrawal of u.s. forces. that would undermine the pentagon goes to believe of more troops. at the inclusion of an interview, referring to vice president biden, he was adamant that in july of 2011, you will see a lot of people moving out. bet on it. i don't know if that book is accurate. it has quotes in it. honestly, general, there is a disconnect between the comment that you just made in response to the chairmen and what is being depicted here. the president's repeated

statements thaa in july of 2011, we will begin withdrawal. this obviously sends a message to our enemies that we are leaving, and our friends that we are leaving. and then there is accommodation in the region. i guess maybe, could you clarify the difference between what you just said and what is quoted in the book that are direct quotes? i am confident we can train and hand over in that timeframe. if we can't do the things you say, no one is going to suggest that we stay, right? that is a quote from the president of the united states. >> senator, i am not sure it is productive to comment on conversations that took place. >> i understand that.

>> i would come back to what the president said at west point. that is something that i support. that is that july 2011 is not the date where we race for the exits. it is the date where having done an assessment, we begin a process of transition of tasks to afghan security forces based on conditions. and we began a processsof irresponsible drawdown of our forces. >> do you believe that we will begin a drawdown of forces in july 2011 given the situation as it exists today? >> it is not give as the situation exists today.+ it is given as projections are. i do believe that that will be the case. >> you believe that we can begin a drawdown in july 2011 under

the projected plans that we havv? >> that is the policy and i support it, senator. >> i understand you supporting the policy. conditions on the ground, will they indicate that we will begin a withdrawal? in the words of the vice- president, july 2011, you will see a lot of people moving out. bet on it. do you agree with the comment of president karzai's chief that he has lost confidence in the ability of the united states and nato to succeed in afghanistan? >> i do not, senator. as i mentioned earlier, we just did a video teleconference, a weekly conference.

general mcchrystal spent the time conducting the council in kandohar, going to and from with him as well. in that process, there was certainly no sense on his part nor on those of the others that were with him that there was a lack of confidence in the united states commitment to pfghanistan. as i mentioned earlier, thh fact that we have more than tripled our forces from january 2009 to the end of august 2010 is of enormous significance. the same with the civilian structure, the sameewith the funding, and the same with others. >> let me reiterate my admiration and respect, general, for you and our military

leaders and the difficulty of the task before them. i think your one of america's great heroes. i continue to worry a great deal about the message we're sending in the region about whether we are actually going to stay or not, and whether we're going to do what is necessary to succeed rather than set an arbitrary time line. the best way to -- >> we are going to recess now for a few moments. we will recess until the call of the chair.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> de general returned to the room and said he fainted because of dehydration. [applause]

[inaudible] >> my apologies.

i got a little bit lightheaded. it wasn't senator mccain posing questions. -- senator mccain's questions. [laughter] i just got dehydrated. >> you have told us your more than ready to go. you always are. you're that kind of an incredible person. i have consulted with colleagues, anddwe're going to overrule you. we're not going to continue. we would feel better about it, we will try to continue tomorrow morning. 9:00 is fine. you look great, we would just feel better. i know if you have checked your schedule or not, but we thank both of you. >> can i mentioned that i would finish the thought that i had when the general felt a little ill, your one of america's

greatest heroes. we look forward to seeing you again tomorrow. >> think you, mr. chairman. >> i know you feel better, but we feel better doing it this way. we stand adjourned until tomorrow morning, tentatively at 9:00. >> thank you, chairman. [applause]

>> the general will continue his testimony before the senate armed services committee tomorrow morning. live coverage at 9:00 eastern on ccspan 3 and c-span.org. >> this weekend on c-span 2's "book tv." charles bauden chronicles one of the most corrupt places on earth. in the novel that took him 30 years to publish, matterhorn. it followed bravo company through vietnam.

more than 30,000 viewers have already joined us on twitter. >> tomorrow morning, simon lomax from bloomberg news joins us with an update on climate legislation and the kind of impact the oil spill will have. then congressman scott garrett, working with the senate on a financial regulation bill. and walter isaacson, we will talk to him about contaminants during the vietnam war. according to a new report, 3 million vietnamese people and 150,000 children are still feeling the health effects from the contamination. "washington journal," live every morring on c-span. bp's ceo will be on capitol hill this week to testify before a house energy and commerce

subcommittee. we will bring you live coverage thursday on c-span 3 and that c- span.org. having visited the gulf region for the fourth time since april, oil spill from the oval office. he makes his decision tomorrow. >> good evening. as we speak, our nation faces a multitude of challenges. at home, our top priority is to recover and rebuild from a recession that has touched the lives of nearly every american. abroad, our brave men and women in uniform are taking the fight to al qaeda wherever it exists. it to buy, i have returned from a trip from the gulf coast to talk to about a battle that is assaulting our shores and our citizens.

on april 20, an explosion ripped through the deep water horizon -- about 3,000 milee off the coast of louisiana. 17 others were injured. a mile beneath the surface of the ocean, oil began spewing in the water. because there has never been a leak this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. that is why just after the rig sank, i assembled a team of our best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge, a team led by nobel prize-winning physicist and ourrnation's secretary of energy. experts from academia and from oil companies have provided ideas and advice. as a result of these efforts, we have directed bp to mobilize additional equippent and technology. in the coming weeks and days,

these efforts should capture up to 90% of the oil leaking out of the well. this is until the company finishes growing a relief well that is expected to stop the leak completell. already, this is the worst environmental disaster america has ever faced. and like an earthquake or hurricane, it is not a singge event that is a matter of minutes or days. the millions of gallons of oil that has built a the gulf of mexico is more like an epidemic. one that we will be fighting for months and even years. but make no mistake. we will fight this bill with everything we have got for as long as it takes. we will make bp pay for the damage the company has caused, and we will do what ever is necessary to help the gulf coast and its people recover from this tragedy. tonight, i would like to lay out what our battle pis