the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 157, the nays are 260. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from minnesota, mr. ellison, on which further proceedings were postponed, and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. ellison of minnesota. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 212 and the nays are 204. he amendment is adopted. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> madam chair, i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises.

the speaker pro tempore: madam chair. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 4870, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4870 and has come to no esolution thereon. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states. section 202-d of the national emergency act, 50 u.s.c. 116-22-d provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the president publishes in the federal register and trands mitts to the congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary

date. in accordance with this provision, i have sent to the federal register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the emergency declared in executive order 136-17 of june 25, 2012, with respect to the disposition of russia's highly enriched uranium is to continue beyond june 25, 2014. the risk of nuclear to the volume ue of fissile material continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the united states. therefore i have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in executive order 136-17 with respect to the disposition of russian highly enriched uranium. signed, sincerely, barack obama, he white house, june 19, 2014. the chair: referred to the --

the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on foreign affairs and ordered printed. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. mulvaney for today and the plans of the week and mr. richmond of louisiana from june 19 through june 20. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house adjourn until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is

touren -- because eric can cantor was defeated.

>> i want to congratulate the two new members of our leadership team he -- team. i want to thank all my colleagues who were dissipated. our job is to stay focused on the american people's priorities. we have made their priorities are priorities. the people are asking, where are the jobs. our job is to make sure we are doing everything we can to promote the economy, to create more jobs and higher wages for >> i want topeople thank my constituents and colleagues. for these trust they have placed in me.

america is struggling with a stagnant economy. it a -- a failed health care law. put people before politics. i wake -- make one promise. i will work every day to make sure this conference has the conference to lead and the wisdom to listen. we will turn this country around. >> i want to thank my colleagues and my constituents for the honor they have interested me. -- entrusted me. join with this team to confront the challenges that are -- that the people around the country are facing. we have solid, conservative solutions that will help our country. we have reached out to the president to would join us. we will continue to move forward

as a united team, building a stronger tune -- team to address those problems. game -- been aig big day for the republican. i am proud to stand with our new leadership team. congratulations to our new majority leader kevin mccarthy. and our majority whip. effortsnited in our you -- in our efforts to move america forward. to make sure moms and dads have opportunities to bring home paychecks for their family. we are united getting americans back to work. getting the job done here on capitol hill. we want to be putting forward solutions rather than continuing to seek an action out of the senate. we are going to continue to work on behalf of the people who sent us here to make them proud and give them more opportunities. >> a couple of questions.

>> a lot of people thought this had to go with a second ballot. [indiscernible] we have a strong team that was representative of our congress. i am proud to be the chairman of a committee that is 176 members. i have worked hard over the year and a half that i have been chair to build consensus. to move conservative solutions forward. to solve problems facing our country. had broads have appeal throughout our conference. the team andgthen address the problems facing america. we have built a strong team.

our conference wants to move forward stronger so we can do a better job of addressing those problems. and now have the white house and senate work with us to address the problems. >> [indiscernible] >> this is a win for america. we will be a more united team moving forward. there is a senate that is dysfunctional. so many ills we passed to get the economy moving. the senate doesn't want to act on them. the president doesn't want to engage. he wants to sit in the oval office with a pen, acting like there is no legislative branch to read people want to see washington working together to solve problems. we are waiting to let the senate and president follow the house. >> [indiscernible] there are probably a lot of grassroots republicans out there that might have voted for --

saying we got him out because we wanted more conservative leadership. elected a guy from one of the bluest states in the union. >> they elected a guy who is the grandson of a cattle rancher. the son of an -- a firefighter. a guy that has grown up in the grassroots. that has spent his time going around, recruiting many of these individuals to get the majority. i have always had to struggle for what we have wanted to overcome. as the grid is thing about america. -- that is the greatest thing about america. that is what this party brings as well. given an opportunity, people will be impressed about what we are going to do and where we are going to go. >> thank you. tonight on c-span,

president obama announces he is sending 300 troops to iraq. then seven republican senators discuss their opposition to president obama's foreign policy. and later, he words the medal of honor to lance carpenter. next, president obama announces he will send 300 military advisers to assist iraqi forces. but no combat troops. this is half an hour. >> good afternoon, everybody. i just met with my national security team to discuss the situation in iraq. we've been meeting regularly to review the situation since isil, a terrorist organization that operates in iraq and syria, made advances inside of iraq. as i said last week, isil poses

a threat to the iraqi people, to the region, and to u.s. interests. so today i wanted to provide you an update on how we're responding to the situation. first, we are working to secure our embassy and personnel operating inside of iraq. as president, i have no greater priority than the safety of our men and women serving overseas. so i've taken some steps to relocate some of our embassy personnel, and we've sent reinforcements to better secure our facilities. second, at my direction, we have significantly increased our intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets so that we've got a better picture of what's taking place inside of iraq. and this will give us a greater understanding of what isil is doing, where it's located, and how we might support efforts to counter this threat. third, the united states will continue to increase our support to iraqi security forces. we're prepared to create joint operation centers in baghdad and northern iraq to share

intelligence and coordinate planning to confront the terrorist threat of isil. through our new counterterrorism partnership fund, we're prepared to work with congress to provide additional equipment. we have had advisors in iraq through our embassy, and we're prepared to send a small number of additional american military advisors -- up to 300 -- to assess how we can best train, advise, and support iraqi security forces going forward. american forces will not be returning to combat in iraq, but we will help iraqis as they take the fight to terrorists who threaten the iraqi people, the region, and american interests as well. fourth, in recent days, we've positioned additional u.s. military assets in the region. because of our increased intelligence resources, we're developing more information about potential targets associated with isil. and going forward, we will be prepared to take targeted and precise military action, if and

when we determine that the situation on the ground requires it. if we do, i will consult closely with congress and leaders in iraq and in the region. i want to emphasize, though, that the best and most effective response to a threat like isil will ultimately involve partnerships where local forces, like iraqis, take the lead. finally, the united states will lead a diplomatic effort to work with iraqi leaders and the countries in the region to support stability in iraq. at my direction, secretary kerry will depart this weekend for meetings in the middle east and europe, where he'll be able to consult with our allies and partners. and just as all iraq's neighbors must respect iraq's territorial integrity, all of iraq's neighbors have a vital interest in ensuring that iraq does not descend into civil war or become a safe haven for terrorists. above all, iraqi leaders must rise above their differences and

come together around a political plan for iraq's future. shia, sunni, kurds -- all iraqis -- must have confidence that they can advance their interests and aspirations through the political process rather than through violence. national unity meetings have to go forward to build consensus across iraq's different communities. now that the results of iraq's recent election has been certified, a new parliament should convene as soon as possible. the formation of a new government will be an opportunity to begin a genuine dialogue and forge a government that represents the legitimate interests of all iraqis. now, it's not the place for the united states to choose iraq's leaders. it is clear, though, that only leaders that can govern with an inclusive agenda are going to be able to truly bring the iraqi people together and help them through this crisis. meanwhile, the united states will not pursue military options that support one sect inside of

iraq at the expense of another. there's no military solution inside of iraq, certainly not one that is led by the united states. but there is an urgent need for an inclusive political process, a more capable iraqi security force, and counterterrorism efforts that deny groups like isil a safe haven. in closing, recent days have reminded us of the deep scars left by america's war in iraq. alongside the loss of nearly 4,500 american patriots, many veterans carry the wounds of that war, and will for the rest of their lives. here at home, iraq sparked vigorous debates and intense emotions in the past, and we've seen some of those debates resurface. but what's clear from the last decade is the need for the united states to ask hard questions before we take action abroad, particularly military action. the most important question we should all be asking, the issue

that we have to keep front and center -- the issue that i keep front and center -- is what is in the national security interests of the united states of america. as commander in chief, that's what i stay focused on. as americans, that's what all of us should be focused on. and going forward, we will continue to consult closely with congress. we will keep the american people informed. we will remain vigilant. and we will continue to do everything in our power to protect the security of the united states and the safety of the american people. so with that, i'm going to take a couple of questions. i'll start with colleen mccain nelson of the wall street journal. >> thank you, mr. president. do you have any confidence in prime minister maliki at this point? and can maliki bring political stability to iraq? >> as i said, it's not our job to choose iraq's leaders. part of what our patriots fought for during many years in iraq was the right and the

opportunity for iraqis to determine their own destiny and choose their own leaders. but i don't think there's any secret that right now at least there is deep divisions between sunni, shia, and kurdish leaders. and as long as those deep divisions continue or worsen, it's going to be very hard for an iraqi central government to direct an iraqi military to deal with these threats. and so we've consulted with prime minister maliki, and we've said that to him privately. we've said it publicly that whether he is prime minister, or any other leader aspires to lead the country, that it has to be an agenda in which sunni, shia, and kurd all feel that they have the opportunity to advance their interests through the political

process. and we've seen over the last two years, actually dating back to 2008, 2009 -- but i think worse over the last two years -- the sense among sunnis that their interests were not being served, that legislation that had been promised around, for example, de-ba'athification had been stalled. i think that you hear similar complaints that the government in baghdad has not sufficiently reached out to some of the tribes and been able to bring them in to a process that gives them a sense of being part of a unity government or a single nation-state. and that has to be worked through. part of the reason why we saw better-equipped iraqi security

forces with larger numbers not be able to hold contested territory against isil probably reflects that lack of a sense of commitment on the part of sunni communities to work with baghdad. and that has to be fixed if we're going to get through this crisis. jim acosta. >> thank you, mr. president. americans may look at this decision that you're making today as a sneak preview of coming attractions; that the number of advisors that you're planning to send in may just be the beginning of a boots-on-the-ground scenario down the road. why is iraq's civil war in the national security interests of the united states? and are you concerned about the potential for mission creep? >> i think we always have to guard against mission creep, so let me repeat what i've said in the past -- american combat troops are not going to be fighting in iraq again.

we do not have the ability to simply solve this problem by sending in tens of thousands of troops and committing the kinds of blood and treasure that has already been expended in iraq. ultimately, this is something that is going to have to be solved by the iraqis. it is in our national security interests not to see an all-out civil war inside of iraq, not just for humanitarian reasons, but because that ultimately can be destabilizing throughout the region. and in addition to having strong allies there that we are committed to protecting, obviously issues like energy and global energy markets continues to be important. we also have an interest in

making sure that we don't have a safe haven that continues to grow for isil and other extremist jihadist groups who could use that as a base of operations for planning and targeting ourselves, our personnel overseas, and eventually the homeland. and if they accumulate more money, they accumulate more ammunition, more military capability, larger numbers, that poses great dangers not just to allies of ours like jordan, which is very close by, but it also poses a great danger potentially to europe and ultimately the united states. we have already seen inside of syria that -- or groups like isil that right now are fighting with other extremist groups, or an assad regime that was non-responsive to a sunni

majority there, that that has attracted more and more jihadists or would-be jihadists, some of them from europe. they then start traveling back to europe, and that, over time, can create a cadre of terrorists that could harm us. so we have humanitarian interests in preventing bloodshed. we have strategic interests in stability in the region. we have counterterrorism interests. all those have to be addressed. the initial effort for us to get situational awareness through the reconnaissance and surveillance that we've already done, coupled with some of our best people on the ground doing assessments of exactly what the situation is -- starting, by the way, with the perimeter around

baghdad and making sure that that's not overrun -- that's a good investment for us to make. but that does not foreshadow a larger commitment of troops to actually fight in iraq. that would not be effective in meeting the core interests that we have. >> just very quickly, do you wish you had left a residual force in iraq? any regrets about that decision in 2011? >> well, keep in mind that wasn't a decision made by me; that was a decision made by the iraqi government. we offered a modest residual force to help continue to train and advise iraqi security forces. we had a core requirement which we require in any situation where we have u.s. troops overseas, and that is, is that they're provided immunity since they're being invited by the sovereign government there, so that if, for example, they end up acting in self-defense if they are attacked and find

themselves in a tough situation, that they're not somehow hauled before a foreign court. that's a core requirement that we have for u.s. troop presence anywhere. the iraqi government and prime minister maliki declined to provide us that immunity. and so i think it is important though to recognize that, despite that decision, that we have continued to provide them with very intensive advice and support and have continued throughout this process over the last five years to not only offer them our assistance militarily, but we've also continued to urge the kinds of political compromises that we think are ultimately necessary in order for them to have a

functioning, multi-sectarian democracy inside the country. juliet eilperin. >> mr. president, you just mentioned syria a moment ago. the united states has been slow to provide significant weapons and training directly to the syrian opposition. has the expansion of the syria war into iraq changed your mind about the type of weapons and training we're now willing to give the opposition there? is that what prompted secretary kerry to say of syria, "we are augmenting our assistance in significant ways"? and can you elaborate on what you are you doing now that you weren't doing before? >> that assessment about the dangers of what was happening in syria have existed since the very beginning of the syrian civil war. the question has never been whether we thought this was a serious problem. the question has always been, is there the capacity of moderate opposition on the ground to absorb and counteract extremists that might have been pouring in,

as well as an assad regime supported by iran and russia that outmanned them and was ruthless. and so we have consistently provided that opposition with support. oftentimes, the challenge is if you have former farmers or teachers or pharmacists who now are taking up opposition against a battle-hardened regime, with support from external actors that have a lot at stake, how quickly can you get them trained, how effective are you able to mobilize them. and that continues to be a

challenge. and even before the situation that we saw with isil going into iraq, we had already tried to maximize what we could do to support a moderate opposition that not only can counteract the brutality of assad, but also can make sure that in the minds of sunnis they don't think that their only alternative is either mr. assad or extremist groups like isil or al nusra. >> and can you speak to what you might be doing differently, as the secretary of state alluded to? >> well, i think that the key to both syria and iraq is going to be a combination of what happens inside the country working with the moderate syrian opposition, working with an iraqi government that is inclusive, and us laying down a more effective counterterrorism platform that

gets all the countries in the region pulling in the same direction. and i alluded to this in the west point speech. i talked about it today with respect to the counterterrorism partnership fund. there is going to be a long-term problem in this region in which we have to build and partner with countries that are committed to our interests, our values. and at the same time, we have immediate problems with terrorist organizations that may be advancing. and rather than try to play whac-a-mole wherever these terrorist organizations may pop up, what we have to do is to be able to build effective partnerships, make sure that they have capacity.

some of the assets that have been devoted solely to afghanistan over the last decade we've got to shift to make sure that we have coverage in the middle east and north africa. you look at a country like yemen -- a very impoverished country and one that has its own sectarian or ethnic divisions -- there, we do have a committed partner in president hadi and his government. and we have been able to help to develop their capacities without putting large numbers of u.s. troops on the ground at the same time as we've got enough ct, or counterterrorism capabilities that we're able to go after folks that might try to hit our embassy or might be trying to export terrorism into europe or the united states. and looking at how we can create more of those models is going to

be part of the solution in dealing with both syria and iraq. but in order for us to do that, we still need to have actual governments on the ground that we can partner with and that we've got some confidence are going to pursue the political policies of inclusiveness. in yemen, for example, a wide-ranging national dialogue that took a long time, but helped to give people a sense that there is a legitimate political outlet for grievances that they may have. peter maer. >> thank you, sir. going back to where you see prime minister al-maliki playing a role at this point, you said that it's a time to rise above differences, that there's a need for more inclusive government. is he a unifier? and how much clout does the united states ultimately have

with any of the leadership in iraq at this point really? >> well, we still provide them significant assistance. i think they recognize that, unlike some other players in the region, we don't have territorial ambitions in their country. we're not looking to control their assets or their energy. we want to make sure that we're vindicating the enormous effort and sacrifice that was made by our troops in giving them an opportunity to build a stable, inclusive society that can prosper and deliver for the basic needs and aspirations of the iraqi people. and at the same time, they are a sovereign country. they have their own politics. and what we have tried to do is to give them our best advice about how they can solve their

political problems. now that they are in crisis, we are indicating to them that there is not going to be a simple military solution to this issue. if you start seeing the various groups inside of iraq simply go to their respective corners, then it is almost certain that baghdad and the central government will not be able to control huge chunks of their own country. the only way they can do that is if there are credible sunni leaders, both at the national level and at the local level, who have confidence that a shia majority, that the kurds, that all those folks are committed to a fair and just governance of the country.

right now, that doesn't exist. there's too much suspicion, there's too much mistrust. and the good news is that an election took place in which despite all this mistrust, despite all this frustration, despite all this anger, you still had millions of iraqis turn out -- in some cases, in very dangerous circumstances. you now have a court that has certified those elections, and you have a constitutional process to advance government formation. so far, at least, the one bit of encouraging news that we've seen inside of iraq is that all the parties have said they continue to be committed to choosing a leadership and a government through the existing constitutional order. so what you're seeing i think is, as the prospects of civil war heighten, many iraq leaders stepping back and saying, let's

not plunge back into the abyss; let's see if we can resolve this politically. but they don't have a lot of time. and you have a group like isil that is doing everything that it can to descend the country back into chaos. and so one of the messages that we had for prime minister maliki but also for the speaker of the house and the other leadership inside of iraq is, get going on this government formation. it'll make it a lot easier for them to shape a military strategy. it'll also make it possible for us to partner much more effectively than we can currently. >> given the prime minister's track record, is he a unifier? can he play that role after what we've seen play out over the last couple of weeks is brought into play? >> i think the test is before

him and other iraqi leaders as we speak. right now, they can make a series of decisions. regardless of what's happened in the past, right now is a moment where the fate of iraq hangs in the balance, and the test for all of them is going to be whether they can overcome the mistrust, the deep sectarian divisions, in some cases just political opportunism, and say this is bigger than any one of us and we've got to make sure that we do what's right for the iraqi people. and that's a challenge. that's not something that the united states can do for them. that's not something, by the way, that the united states armed forces can do for them. we can provide them the space, we can provide them the tools. but ultimately, they're going to have to make those decisions.

in the meantime, my job is to make sure that american personnel there are safe; that we are consulting with the iraqi security forces; that we're getting a better assessment of what's on the ground; and that we're recognizing the dangers of isil over the long term, and developing the kinds of comprehensive counterterrorism strategies that we're going to need to deal with this issue. and that's going to involve some short-term responses to make sure that isil is not obtaining capacity to endanger us directly or our allies and partners. but it also is going to require some long-term strategies, as well. because part of what we've with respect to isil is a broader trend that i talked about at west point -- rather than a

single network, a discreet network of terrorists, this fluid combination of hardened terrorists, disaffected local leadership. and where there's vacuums, they're filling it and creating the potential for serious danger for all concerned. thank you very much. >> on iran, mr. president, any words on what you're willing to do, and are you also willing to work with them? >> our view is that iran can play a constructive role if it is helping to send the same message to the iraqi government that we're sending, which is that iraq only holds together if it's inclusive and that if the interests of sunni, shia, and kurd are all respected.

if iran is coming in solely as an armed force on behalf of the shia, and if it is framed in that fashion, then that probably worsens the situation and the prospect for government formation that would actually be constructive over the long term. >> what's your sense of that right now? >> well, i think that just as iraq's leaders have to make decisions, i think iran has heard from us. we've indicated to them that it is important for them to avoid steps that might encourage the kind of sectarian splits that might lead to civil war. and the one thing that i think has to be emphasized -- we have deep differences with iran across the board on a whole host

of issues. obviously, what's happened in syria in part is the result of iran coming in hot and heavy on one side. and iran obviously should consider the fact that if its view of the region is solely through sectarian frames, they could find themselves fighting in a whole lot of places. and that's probably not good for the iranian economy or the iranian people over the long term either. i suspect there are folks in iran who recognize that. a iraq in chaos on their borders is probably not in their interests. but old habits die hard, and we'll have to see whether they can take what i think would be a more promising path over the

next several days. thank you very much, everybody. >> on the next washington journal, maryland representative donna edwards discusses the 2014 elections. and walter jones talks about the military, lyrical, and diplomatic options available to the u.s. concerning iraq. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation at these book and twitter. washington journal, live at 2:00 a.m. eastern. -- 7:00 a.m. eastern. thate irs has reported lois lerner's crashed computer and her e-mails have been lost. they testify about the loss of the e-mails and the

investigation into the legend irs targeting of conservative groups. starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. books you can keep on -- >> you can keep in touch with c-span. call to hear congressional coverage in the washington journal program. every weekday, listen to the recap of the events on washington today. of theo hear audio public affairs programs beginning on noon eastern. 200 -- long-distance or phone charges may apply. senatorsrepublican came to the senate floor to criticize the president's foreign policy. john mccain is the first speaker. this 50 minutes.

reports thatsee is has taken over the major refinery. names we use to hear often like falluja, all of these are under the black flag of al qaeda. a worse, which is organization. believed we see isis working on baghdad. which i do not believe they can take. the second largest city is now under the black flag.

military equipment and capability are falling into what is becoming the largest and richest terrorist organization and base in history. this has come about in the last couple of weeks. what does the united states of america doing? we see on the front page of the wrist --n post, usc's rift in iraq and airstrikes. we need to act, mr. president. we need to understand why we are where we are today. the senator from south carolina and i visited iraq on many occasions. we could havefact left a residual force behind.

the situation would not be were it is today. president ofthe the united states, if he wanted to leave a residual force, never made it clear to the american people. two thousand 12, the president said, what i would not have done is left 10,000 troops in iraq. that would tie us down. in 2011 theed departure of the last combat soldier from iraq. the fact is, because of our fecklessness and the fact that we did not leave the residual force behind, we are paying a price. paying ae of iraq are heavier price. what do we need to do? we have to understand there are no good options. no good options remaining. this is become a nation of failure after failure -- this is

the culmination of failure after failure. for us to do nothing will ensure the space for terrorism, over 100, have come back to the u.s. there are hundreds and hundreds leaving the the -- leaving the battlefield and they will pose a threat to the security of the u.s. i say to the critics, you cannot confine this conflict to iraq and syria. the director of national intelligence has said and secretary of homeland security has said these people will be lanning attacks on the u.s. what do we need to do? maliki has to be transitioned out. the only way that will happen is for us to ensure iraq ease -- iraqis that we are going to intervene. nobody wants and combat troops.

airstrikes are an important factor, psychologically and in other ways. that may require some forward air controllers and special forces. we cannot afford to allow a syria iraq enclave that will pose a threat to the u.s.. united states of america and if we act we going to have the act in syria as well. a residual force could have checked the conflict. and what are the iranians doing while we are not making decisions? the head of the kurd's force is the one of the most evil people on earth was reported to be in baghdad. i say to my colleagues we must make this threat and the

president of the united states must make decisions and i am convinced the national security of the united states of america is at risk here and the sooner that all of us realize it the better off we will be. i yield to my collyialolleaguao south carolina. >> the senator from south carolina. >> i would ask to be recognized for four minutes. >> without objection. >> thank you. mr. president, contrary to what maybe poplar belief there are plenty of democrats worried about iraq. the question is what do we do it about it. it is complicated. but we have to asess does it matter what happens with iraq? yes, i think it does. iraq could be a fail state that spreads against the country you

will feel at the gas pump and at the wallet. it will affect the world oil market and throw it into turmoil. military does it matter? it does in this regard. isis is an off shoot of al qaeda because they al qaeda kicked them out. they will have safety from syria to the gates of baghdad. they are sworn to attack us. part of their agenda is to strike our homeland. their goal is to create an islamic state that would put the people under their rule into darkness and i don't know want to hear war about women studies unless you address iraq and syria. you want to see a war on women i will show you one. can you imagine what little

girls are thinking today in the sunni part of iraq and syria? the hell on on earth. the people that will do that to their own what would they do us. i don't mean to be an alarmist but i am alarmed. i am telling you what they are saying they will do. our director of national intelligence said the safe haven for isis in syria and now iraq presents a great threat to the homeland. the mistake the president is making is not to realize we need lines of defense. 10,000-15,000 would have given the iraq military the capacity they don't have and con --

confidence -- they have today. and you have seen the collapse of iraqi army i thought would keep us safe. you cannot kill all of the terrorist to keep us safe. our goal is to keep the war over there so it doesn't come over here. it is in our national security interest to partner with people in iraq and there were many who wanted a different life than isis would have. many shia's want to be iraqiraq shia's not iranian. so the decision to look for ways to get out totally has come back it haunt us and we are on the verge of doing the same in afghanistan. the taliban would be dancing in the street, they just don't believe in dancing, when they heard we were leaving in 2016.

can you imagine how the afghan people feel believing we would not abandon them that we are pulling out the troops. can you imagine how the young women in afghanistan and pakistan feel? they could be in the cross hairs of the people trying to take afghanistan down. but what about us? president obama is going back to a pre-9/11 day. those in america who think if you leave these guys alone they will leave you alone you are not listening to what they are saying and the only reason 3,000 died on september 11th and not three million is because cannot get the weapons. but if they could they would. and they are close. the taliban will regroup and the

afghan army will meet a terrible fate and the people that wish us harm will come back our way. the region is a target for radical islamic. at the end of the day your job is to protect us. the afghan people are willing to have us stay there in enough numbers to protect them and us. mr. president, before it is too late change your policy in afghanistan. don't take this country back to pre-9/11 mentality when you treat terrorist their rights rather than gather intelligence. we are letting down our defense all over the world. if we continue on this track it will come here again. i yield the floor to senator

chandler. >> senator from georgia. >> i rise to join my colleagues in talking about the direction of foreign policy especially relating to the middle east. the policy has unravelled and the president made it a priority and attempted to forge a new beginning between the muslim world and the united states. the middle east over the last three years have been beseized by resurgeance of violence, instability and terrorism. the administration has chosen to confront the challenge that has implications for u.s. security by leading from behind and relying on a strategy that includes view concrete measures. the shortcoming of the strategy

are evident in both syria and iraq. and in september of last year the administration praised the u.s. russian deal disarm syria of its chemical weapons and buy time for a diplomatic solution. here we have today where the syrian have missed deadlines, have chemical weapons and continue to use barrel bombs filled with chlorine and other chemicals. in addition to the disaster that unfolded in syria allowing to status quo to continue has given the islamic state and others the save haven they needed to grow into the force we phase -- face -- tide. and terrorist are training in

syria today planning to attack in america and american interest. i have heard some in this body talk about the intelligence failures of iraq. the intelligence community makes fair share of mistakes and i am the first to criticize them when they do. but these recent events including the resurgeance of isil are policy and leadership failures. they provided warning of the declining security situation in rebecca libya but they did rit little to enhance security in benghazi. it wasn't an intelligence failure. it is a policy and leadership failure on the part of the administration. with regard to iraq,

intelligence including director clapper's testimony at a january 29, 2014 hearing has been clear that iraq was vulnerable to the threat from isil. i encourage any member to read the intelligence if they are questions regarding the assessment about security in iraq and the rise of isil. it was clear in 2011 as u.s. forces were withdrawing that iraq was vulnerable to resurgeance and we have seen the violence escalate during the administration's failed policy. this was easily predicted but we have stood by and watched as it has occurred. again, this is a policy failure. not an intelligence failure. perhaps the most concerning

aspect of the foreign policy is the counter-terrorism strategy. i hear them touting the dissire of them being on the run. but nothing could be further from the truth. al qaeda is on the run but they are running from one country to the next and taking over one country and the next. violent extremism is on the rise in the middle east and the warning signs have been visible for years. that includes the benghazi attack, the rise of al qaeda affiliated groups, the resurgeance of isil and the fall of the second largest city now in iraq. yesterday a terrorist flag raised over the largest refinery in iraq. the administration is only

willing to take limited steps to curb this disturbing trend. instead of focusing on making counter terrorism operations more effective, the administration has been focused on ending the wars in iraq and afghanistan while america's enemies grow stronger. this approach has been a huge gamble that continues to jeopardize america's security. we have sidelines tools we use successfully to counter al qaeda in the years immediately after 911 including the effective long-term detention and interrogation of enemy combatants. we know far less today about terrorist organizations. since the president ordered the close of guantanamo bay in january of 2009 our nation has been without a clear policy of detaining a suspected terrorist. without a policy, including one

that identifies a facility to holding terrorist that are captured outside of afghanistan, the ability to conduct ongoing operations has been limited. i recognize there is no one-size fits all solution for handling terrorist. but our detention policies must foster intelligence collection before prosecution begins. al qaeda is determine to attack the united states. we constantly face new plots looking to murder america like the may 12th plot to put an ied on a u.s. bound aircraft. this plot luckily didn't materialize but we will not always be that lucky. we know al qaeda in the arabian peninsula represent one of the biggest threat to the homeland.

they are continually plotting against our interest and seeking new recruits. especially among the own citi n citizens and former detainees. explosive experts continue to roam free posing a threat to the safety and security of u.s. citizens. the proposed closure of guantanamo bay presents significant risks of the united states and yemen efforts to counter aqap inside yemen. a portion of the detainees remaining are yemen citizens. transferring them to a country plagued by prison breaks, assassination and open warfare at this point could prove catastrophic. they would join other gitmo

detainees and worsen the security situation. the most example of a failed and dangerous policy on the part of the administration is the exchange of five guantanamo bay detainees for sergeant bergdahl. he are happy he is back. but the deal of five individuals from guantanamo bay who make up every morning thinking of ways they can kill and harm americans wasn't the right thing to do. there are other ways to handle. yet the administration without notifying congress and that was clearly intention -- the failure to notify congress of what they plan to do. when they signed the papers and didn't release them for two and

a half weeks shows they didn't want to come to congress and that reason is because they knew there would be objections on both sides of the aisle. whether it is iraq, afghanistan or other parts of the middle east, americans have fought and died in the war against al qaeda. our nation is leery of war but the concern remains. i have asked the president to declassify the personal files on those five individuals. tell the american people what we know about them and look the american people in the eye and say this is a good deal. i know they are going to return to the fight and seek and kill and harm americans but this was a good deal. that is for the american people to decide. and i urge president obama, my congressional colleagues and the american people not to abandon

the gains we have made in the fight against terrorism since 9/11 but let's remain steady and continue to fight the good fight. and i would yield to my friend from north carolina. >> senator from north carolina. >> i ask consent to speak for up to five minutes. >> without objection. >> i want to join my colleagues to discuss the administration's misguided foreign policy especially relating to afghanistan and the threat of al qaeda, the taliban and the network, despite what the administration would have you believe, al qaeda and the taliban remain capable and committed advisary in afghanistan. they are a threat to the safety and stability of the region and

continue to attack troops and plot against the region at home. yet for some reason, this administration failed to recognize time and time again and worse they are chosen to ignore. al qaeda isn't ruined. it's senior leader ship continues to plat plot attacks and serve as an inspiration to a series of affiliates in syria and iraq and else where. these affiliates are plotting against the united states of america with thegoid guidance and support of al qaeda's senior most leadership. the al qaeda brand is alive and well the and the strategy to end the conflict not win it reveals a profound failure to analyze

threats in the region, the world and the united states of america despite what this administration has you believe: ... ork is done will not, will not, end the fighting. we cannot take the pressure off off, or our enemies will bring the fight here to our doorstep here at home. but al qaeda is not well a loan in afghanistan. it's well established that the aoccoquanlyi -- acany network is the link between the taliban and al qaeda. it is responsible for a significant number of u.s. casualties and injuries on the battlefield in afghanistan and continues to actively plan potential catastrophic attacks against our interests and the interests of others in the region. the group routinely targets the group routinely targets but duke said car targeting

civilians and using murder and intimidation tactics against the afghan people they have mounted assaults and suicide attacks on civilians and u.s. forces with a deadly effectiveness, yet the administration took until late 2012 at the urging of the senate of the united states in a bill i introduced to actually name that timing that work as a foreign terrorist fertilization. why is that important? that changes the game. provides us the full range of diplomatic and military tools to use directly against the al qaeda network. it is against that background that the administration then negotiated with a network the release of five high-level taliban fighters for sergeants bergdahl. in other words, the president

rewarded the network for its incarceration of u.s. service member, strengthened its relationships with the taliban, emboldened the taliban, and undermines the afghani government all with one decision does anyone in this administration believe that that high-ranking -- five high-level taliban officials on set free would not return to the fight? if they do, then they have not paid attention for the last decade or longer. i understand that this nation is weary of war. i understand the sacrifices made by service members, and i work every day to ensure our brave nurse, veterans who are providing the care and treatment they deserve. their efforts should not be in vain. mr. president, we are here today , marine sgt kyle carpenter will receive the medal of honor.

19-years old was he signed up to go to the marine corps, a young marine in combat who saved his fellow marines just begun a grenade. i -- he completed his freshman year at the university of south carolina at 24-years old. he is an american hero. he could be any one of our children or grandchildren. what makes this country great is that we have people like kyle carpenter that step up when asked and to more than we could never ask of them. our service members served as sacrificed overseas so that we could be safe at home. we cannot in good faith let the administration dishonor their efforts with a misguided policy. the continued drawdown of u.s. and coalition forces in afghanistan will provide al qaeda, the taliban, and the

network with a safe haven to train the operatives and plot further attacks against the united states of america and their allies. contrary to the campaign statement of the president and vice president, al qaeda is not on the run, and i urge this administration to avoid further actions that may endanger our nation. mr. president, i yield the floor to center in off. >> the senator from oklahoma. >> unanimous consent. >> without objection. >> mr. president, the subject today, of course, is the failed foreign policy of this president and administration. it is hard to your do it in a limited amount of time because once something happens like benghazi and we get into the

middle of that, all of a sudden you turnaround and is president turns loose arguably the five most heinous terrorists from guantanamo bay. at the same time we have a policy that was going so well, and now we find out that is not working out either. if i have time now will touch on that. the first thing i want to do is mention benghazi. being the ranking member on the armed services committee, i have the opportunity to really be there and see as it was happening, the ambassador that was sent over there and was killed, a friend of mine. we spent time together. and as we got closer he realized and started sending messages to the president and the white house task to send security over

there. he said, right now that terrorists are actually training in benghazi. they had flags flying. they knew they were organizing something. so he knew that and had requested. the president elected not to let's send help at that time. the question a lot of people have is, al qaeda, they knew there was an organized attack. i can tell you how. we have four people responsible for revising the president on threats, intelligence. as cia director, at that time john brennan, the director of intelligence, james cropper, the secretary of defense, leon panetta, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general dempsey. all of them were acknowledged when the index was hit in

benghazi that day that it was an organized attack. they suspected it but the new for a fact that it was. so you are talking about the individuals who are responsible for advising the president to all of them were well aware that on the day of the end next attack in benghazi it was organized terrorist attacks. several days later gave rise to the shows in order to try to make it sound like it was some video that someone had. now, why would the president not want to that meant that this was an organized terrorist attack? it is right before the election, and he had a lot of people who thought that then on and having been captured, there was no longer that big a threat out there in the middle east. so it was for political reasons that we ended up losing four lives. and then just recently they're

saying now, they found someone who has been around for two years. the press has been talking to report two years. why all the sudden they're saying now that this is the guy that perpetrated benghazi when, in fact, this all came from the white house. i just think they are covering it up, and i am very much offended by that. the one thing i wanted to talk about and know that some other members will be here. having to do with the release of the five taliban terrorists to be released. let me tell you a side of this that people are not talking about that i feel strongly is the reason for it. this president is approaching that last death of his second term.

as is always the case when you get down toward the end of your term you start looking for a legacy. one of his legacies is closing guantanamo bay. this president has been talking about it for as long as i can remember, certainly longer than he has been president. i go back and tell people in oklahoma, why does he want to close its? and you cannot answer that. we have had that base since 1903. it is the only good deal, one of the few good deals and governments, we only pay for $5,000 per year, and have the times the cubans did not cash the check. we have this thing and have actually 778 people they're incarcerated and being interrogated prior to the time that mr. obama became president of the united states. now we're down to 149. as far as that researchers, no one argues the fact that the humane treatment is beyond anyone's

expectation. there is no place else in the world that they can do that. they are fully compliant with the geneva convention. they have had people go in there and look at the maximum-security prison and have attested to, human rights organizations, the red cross, and everyone else agrees it is a very humane place while they are interrogating. as i said, there is no place else they can do this. if we start doing this in our court system they get marin writes, constitutional rights, and people are pretty offended when they find out and this keeps us from getting information that would affect some of the others. an expeditionary legal process like there, the only one in the world were they can do this. and so this is a place where we can actually get in there, interrogate can get information, incarcerate people, not intermingle terrorists with the prison population in this country, which is what the

president has been talking about doing. i say that because these guys are terrorists, not criminals. you put them in our prison system and by definition their job is to train other people to become terrorists. that is what they would be doing . so i have to say this, too. all of the talk about osama bin laden and the fact that we do have in there i am glad we were able to bring him down. but how did we did it? through information we received through interrogation at guantanamo bay. i always say that because people wonder why in the world would he be wanting to do this, and how does he want to fulfill this expectation or lacey that he has let me tell you. if you would take out of the 149 individuals left, the five most heinous, most dangerous taliban terrorists and turn them loose,

that would put him in a position then to get rid of the rest of them with the exception of those awaiting war crime trials. so what happened, he turned them loose, number one. number two, he told the taliban exactly when the united states is going to leave. regardless of conditions on the ground. thirdly, he has said that he is going to declare an end of hostilities. now, that is a phrase from a proper phrase, end of hostilities. this is not a war. it is a hostility. if he does that, that would then give him we justification for opening the gates, turning everyone lose from guantanamo bay, and closing guantanamo bay. that, in my opinion, is the estimation. the threat because of that? we are in a position right now where we have five people who are turned loose, even if we trusted the country to hold these five people for one year, the velocity -- philosophy would be we will turn you loose if you

promise not to kill americans for a year. that does not make sense. this is something that should not have happened. we have people there making decisions, celebrating as we speak. one of the five individuals, i will end with this, a taliban commander over in afghanistan. listen to this, mr. president. he said, talking about one of the five guys, his return is about the glory, and a hundred thousand tell them fighters on the side. now they have the right lion to leave them in the final moments before victory in afghanistan. that is what happened. that is how it is viewed. with that, i will yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> the republican whip. >> how much time remains for the allocation of this side time?

>> the republicans have eight minutes remaining. >> i know we, perhaps, have another member coming to speak. i would short please advise me after i have used five minutes of the eight minutes. >> i will do that. >> i want to talk about the intersection of national security and death. over the last five years president obama has had multiple occasions to embrace real, structural, entitlement reform that would help solve our long-term debt problem. you might wonder why i am talking about that when the subjects that we are generally talking about is national security, including what has happened in iraq and syria. it is because the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said, admiral mcmullen, when asked what the single biggest threat to our national security was, he said, it is our

debt. the president had an opportunity when the simpson bowles commission released its recommendations in late 2010. as you recall, a bipartisan commission the president himself appointed to help come up with a formula to deal with this with our fiscal problems. unfortunately, once they made their recommendation in december 2010 the president walked away from it and nothing came of it. even though we are facing an addition of $17 trillion in debt, we are facing more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. perhaps it is because those numbers are so big that we have a hard time getting your head around it, but people have become desensitized to the urgency of dealing with our debt and these unfunded liabilities. the president has never once endorsed any sort of reform necessary to deal with this challenge or to prevent a future crisis. the fact of the matter is

somebody someday -- probably these gunmen and women, they will be the ones to have to pay this back because our generation will have failed them unless we meet the challenges that this presents it seemed like the only part of the federal budget that the president is eager to cut its national defense. under his latest budget plan defense spending would drop from under three and a half percent said just over 2 percent of gdp by 23. at the same time we are told the u.s. army might be shrunk to its smallest size since pre-world war two. president obama needs to realize that even america's current military capabilities are proving inadequate for global challenges. for example, one former assistant secretary of defense has declared that because of pentagon budget cuts president obama highly touted pivot to asia cannot happen. in other words, despite promote

-- promoting an asian pit as a crucial element of american foreign policy, the president has failed to take the necessary fiscal steps to make sure that happens or could happen. this, of course, makes it a hollow policy, one where the promises are extravagant and the delivery is anemic. it will do major damage to u.s. credibility among our allies and adversaries. the prospect of bringing department of defense spending back to sequestration levels has alarmed senior officials in all branches of government. the chief of naval operations has said that reverting to sequestration levels in 2016 would leave the navy to small and lacking the advanced capability needed to execute missions that the nation expects of the navy. secretary of the air force has said that going back to those spending levels would compromise

our national security. chief of staff of the army said it would put our young men and women in uniform at much higher risk. in other words, the president cannot simply keep cutting defense spending and the military in order to find his other priorities. at the same time ignore this 70 per cent of spending that is on autopilot, so-called entitlement spending. that is where the big money is and where the reforms need to take place, but it won't happen without a leader. well, we all know what is happening in iraq. i know time is short. i don't want to take any more time than necessary away from my colleague from alabama. this map reflect what is happening now in iraq. the civil war with syria, which the president had drawn a red line that once crossed there was no consequences associated with. now this border between iraq and

syria has basically been wiped away. we see all of these places where the isis, a horrific terrorist group worse than to let -- al qaeda, has basically taken charge. this is what happens with failure to lead. i know time is short and i want to make sure my colleague from alabama has some time to speak. at this point i asked the rest of my remarks be made part of the record in yield the floor >> without objection. >> mr. president, the senator from alabama. >> mr. president, with consent, would not be allowed to speak for up to five minutes? >> without objection. [silence] >> mr. president, when a nation commits itself to a military effort, it is a very significant

, complex decision. i was here when we voted to utilize military force in iraq and afghanistan. the majority of the democrats in this body supported that. the american people supported that, and through tough times success was achieved in this sense that iraq has elections, a functioning government. when the u.s. military was drawing down its personnel the country had a reconciliation with the different groups, and we are on a path that gave us some prospects, i believe it is fair to say -- critics can have different opinions, but it is

clear to me that we have prospects for a successful conclusion of that effort, which would allow a relatively stable, relatively democratic nations to be established that did not provide threats to the united states or its neighbors. and so we should not have done that. well, we did that. that is what happened and was the situation when president obama took office, and he failed, in my opinion, in negotiating the time of drawdown and statuses of forces agreement that needed to be established to be able to create credibility in this new and fragile i'll regime and hold our military together, keep them trained while the reduced dramatically our presence of military activity. we will be there as a supporting , background, equipment, intelligence,

aircraft, lift capability. we have given them time frames. a very clear. well, we can't reach an agreement. we are pulling everyone out. the general talks to us recently and told us that he has 100 soldiers. i asked him if he would prefer general patraeus, and he said yes with a bit of a smile. but he only has 100 people. i guess i would say we are worried about it. one of the things that is so critical in the conduct an understanding of what we are involved in is to understand that the nature of a terrorist threat is going to be there for a long time. we are just going to be dealing with it for a long time. it is a significant number, not a majority by any means, but a significant number of radicalized people in the middle east who want to destroy the united states.

they see as as an evil force and oppose what we oppose, want to take over their neighbors and continue to expand they are regent -- recently functioning racemes that provide some freedom and order and societies and impose a theocratic government and legal system on those countries. and it is not good for us, not good for other countries, and not good for the united states and the world. one of the things we have to do is, when you capture a person committed to the destruction of the united states and is attacking our people, they are not criminals, they are warriors and most of their activities are clearly contrary to the laws of war, so they are on lawful combatants.

and they are -- when you capture a soldier in battle whether lawful or on lawful you do not normally if they have complied with the rules of war, on like this group, you do not try them per say. you hold them until the of war is over in the peace treaty has been signed and an agreement has been reached. that is not being -- not happening now. and as a result we have a confused policy that is releasing dangerous criminals like the last five we just released under this confused thinking. determined to attack president bush, guantanamo, and it became a symbol in their mind of the policies being used to detain people who are captured. enemy combatants, lawful or

unlawful. when you capture them, you hold them. you do not release them so that they can go back to work. it we send soldiers out to capture them, and once they're captured we release them so they continue with the war. as justice jackson once said, the pact is not certified. all right. one additional moments. >> is there objection? without objection. >> they have to be treated properly. they do not have to be released. recaptured, for example, one man last year for conspiring with osama bin laden. he goes back to somalia. the 1988 bombings in east africa that killed 2204 people before

9/11, he is a treasure trove of intelligence. a group went in and captured him, took him away at risk of their lives. they took cam out on a ship. they said he was sick and not doing well. what happened? they took him to the united states justice department, turned him over for civilian trial. the purpose of capturing him was to get intelligence. he is a warrior. you want to talk to him and see what you can learn. he was placed in federal custody where it's a lawyer, speedy trial, a public trial and the things that prisoners of war do not get. yet this is all happening and has been happening over and over again. this president has a lack of understanding of that nature of the conflict we are engaged in. the evidence is a policy that is

dangerous to our safety, and it is wrong to send out the americans and capture people like this and then treat them in a way that allows them to minimize the opportunity to obtain intelligence coming up next president obama awards kyle carpenter. later president obama's announcement about sending troops to iraq. >> on the next wornle maryland representative donna edwards discusses the 2014 elections and efforts to turn out women voters.

and north carolina congressman walter jones talks about the military, political and dip gnat i can options available to the u.s. concerning iraq. we'll take crour calls and you can join the conversation on acebook and twitter. >> about $10 million in bonuses was paid out by the phoenix va system over three years while veterans dealt with long delays. the house veteran's committee hearing on friday live on c-span 2. >> on transparency and freedom of information and i think my colleagues would give a similar

grade whether they are liberal or conservative. the freedom of process has become a joke. this administration has perfected the stall, the delay and redaxes and excuses. it's shocking because i feel strongly the information they with hold and protect belongs to the public. there is no sense of that when you ask for it. they covet it as if they are a private corporation defending their trade secrets rather than what they hold is information they've fwathered on our behalf. the changing face of network news and her career. sunday night an c-span's q and a. >> next president obama awards the medal of honor to kyle carpenter who was severely injured in afghanistan in november 2010. lance corporal carpenter is the youngest recipient of the medal

of honor. this is 20 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and medal recipient corporal yle carpenter. ♪ >> if you would, please pray with me. this hty god, we pause at

historic event to ask for your presence at this place. as we give honor to one who demonstrated the virtues on which this nation was founded, we would be reminded again of your grace that has allowed this country its freedoms that so many like corporal kyle carpenter have sk cry ficed to defend. we would ask you hear our gratitude, through the love of his gracious family and the support of his countless friend and mentors. know of our deep appreciation for this marine's faithfulness. that when faced that day with the crewsable of self-preservation or self-sacrifice he responded with valor to safe guard the life of his friend. and now as the nation's highest award for such selflessness and courage is draped around

corporal carpenter's neck, enkirble him with the depth of her love. sank fy his inner most and unspoken thoughts so as he carries the weight of this honor, he will be enabled and emboldened to speak on behalf of and encourage those whose untold sacrifices and humble service need his firm and compassionate voice. we lift up in prayer all those who remain in harm throughout the globe. and those who have given their lives in service to this country. bestow your wisdom on those who lead this nation and shape its endeavors. may all of us as americans yield ourselfs to your divine guidance and follow the examples of these our heroes who loved country more than self-and mercy more

than life. god bless america. amen. >> thank you everybody, please be seated. on behalf of michelle and myself welcome to the white house. the man you see before you today , corporal william kyle carpenter should not be alive today. hand grenades are one of the most awful weapons of war. they only weigh about a pound but they are packed with t.n.t. if one lands nearby, have you mere seconds to seek cover. when it detonates, it's fragments shoot out in every direction and even at a distance, that spray of shrapnel

can inflict devastating injuries on the human body. up close, it's almost certain death. but we are here because this man, this united states marine faced down that terrible explosion i have power, that unforgiving force with his own body willingly and deliberately to protect a fellow marine. when that grenade exploded, kyle carpenter's body took the brunt of the blast. his injuries were called catastrophic. it seemed as if he was going to die. while being treated he went into cardiac arrest and three times he flat lined. three times doctors brought him back. along with his parents who call kyle's survival our miracle, we

thank god they did because with that singular act of courage kyle you not only saved your brother in arms, you displayed a herism in the blink of an eye that will inspire for generations valor worthy of our nation's highest military decoration, the medal of honor. kyle and i have actually met before during his long recovery at walter reed. he and some of our other wounded warriors came to the white house to celebrate the world series champion cardinals. some of you may be aware i am a white sox fan. kyle likes the braves so it was a tough day for both of us. but after the ceremony, michelle and i had the chance to meet kyle and at the time he was still under going surgeries but he was up and he was walking and

he was working his way toward being independent again, towards . e man you see here today and kyle, the main message we want to send is welcome back. we are so proud to have you here. we just spent some time not just with kyle but also with his wonderful family and anybody who has had a chance to get to know this young man knows you're not going to get a better example of what you want in an american or a marine. despite all the attention he's still the same humble guy from gilbert, south carolina, population of about 600. today it's population about 500 90 something. these days he's also at the university of south carolina, just a normal college student he

says cheering for the game cox. you notice kyle doesn't hide his scars. he's proud of them and the service that they represent. and he tells me this and i'm quoting him. he says the girls definitely like him. so he's working an angle on this thing. i wasn't sure whether i was supposed to say that in front of mom but that was a quote. i want to welcome those who made this man the marine he is, kyle's father, jim. kyle's lovely mom, robin and his brothers price and payton, one of whom is going to be joining kyle at south carolina, another game cook and we have one who is going to be at the citadel.

we have kyle's marine brothers who served with him in afghanistan and through his recovery and i want to welcome the members of the medal of honor society whose ranks kyle joins today. kyle and his fellow marines served during the surge of forces i ordered to afghanistan early in my presidency. their mission was to drive the taliban out of their strong holds and protect the afghan people and give them a chance to reclaim their communities. they were pushing their way across open fields and muddy canals bearing their heavy packs even as it could heat up to 115 degrees. in one small village they turned a dusty compound into their base. the insurgents nearby gave rocket fire and grenades. that morning kyle said our alarm

clock was ak-47 fire. some of the men were by their bunks gearing up for another day, some were heating up their meals, some were in make shop on centers planning the day's patrols. up on the roof behind a circle of sandbags two marines manned their post. nicholas. nce corpal the compound started to take fire. seeking cover kyle and nick laid down low on their backs behind those sandbags and then the grenade landed with a thud. its pin pulled, it was about to explode. and kyle has no memory of what happened next, but what we do know is there on that rooftop, he wasn't just with a fellow marine, he was with his best friend. kyle and nick had met in

training. in afghanistan they patrolled together day and night. a friendship forged in fire. kyle says about nick he was my point and i love him like a brother. when the grenade landed, other marines in the compound looked up and saw it happen. kyle tried to stand, he lunged forward toward that grenade and he disappeared in the blast. keep in mind at the time kyle was just 21 years old. but in that instant he fulfilled those words of scripture, greater love hath no man than this than a man lay down his life for his friends. they found kyle lying face down directly over the blast area. his helmet riddled with holes. part of his vest was blown away. one of the doctors who treated him later said kyle was literally wounded from the top

of his head to his feet. and for a moment kyle was still conscious. his eyes were open but he couldn't see. kyle remembers everything went white. and yet even then his thoughts were not of himself. one of the marines who was there remembers how kyle kept asking one question and that was whether nick was ok. then as kyle's strength drained away, he sensed the end was coming. so according to kyle's memories my last thought was to make peace with god. i asked for his forgiveness. i was trying to make the best and most of my last few seconds here on earth. a medal of honor is presented for gallantry on the battlefield. but today we also recognize kyle carpenter for his valor since in the hard fight for recovery.

eventually kyle woke up after five weeks in a comma. i want you to consider what kyle has endured just to stand here today, more than two and a half years in the hospital, grueling rehabilitation, brain surgery to remove strap nell from his head, nearly 40 surgeries to repair a collapsed lung, shattered bones, multiple skin graphs. he has a new prosthetic eye, new jaw, new teeth and one hell of a smile. and kyle is the first to give credit elsewhere. his doctors he says put me back together well. today is also a reminder that in past wars somebody with injuries as severe as kyle's probably wouldn't have survived. so many of our wounded warriors are alive not just because of

remarkable advances in technology, but primarily because of the extraordinary dedication and skill of our military and va medical professionals. we need to keep doing everything we can in our power to give our wounded warriors and those who treat them the support they need. this is a wonderful tunalt to ask doctors deborah malone and the rest of kyle's medical team who are here. i see their amazing work every time i visit walter reed. it's pretty rare where you got a job you know you are doing god's work every single day and they do an incredible job. [applause]

>> thank you for the miracles you work for our wounded troops and veterans. kyle says he'll wear this medal for all who serve and for those who didn't make it back and for those who struggle still. so today we also honor two members of his team who made the ultimate sacrifice in that deployment. kyle's friend, timothy jackson d lance corporal hews of greenwood, lance louis. and our thoughts are with the marine who kyle saved that day, his brother nick. i had the opportunity to meet nick as well nearly two years after the blast on one of my visits to walter reed. nick also suffered greivis wounds. he couldn't speak for more than a year. he endured multiple surgeries. today his recovery continues. he lives at home with his family

where he is watching this ceremony. nick on behalf of all of us, i want you to know we honor your sacrifice as well. your perseverance is an inspiration. just as kyle was there for you, our nation will be there for you and your family as you grow stronger in the years ahead. if any of our wounded warriors seek an example, let me amend that, if any american seeks a model of the strength and silience that define us as a people including this newest 9/11 generation, i want you to consider kyle. after everything he's been through. he skis, he snow boards. he's jumped from a plane with a parachute thankfully. he trudged through a six mile mud run. completed the marine corps marathon.

wants to do a try agent lon. he's a motivational speaker, an advocate for his fellow wounded warriors. he's thinking about majoring in psychology so he can use his own experiences to help others. he got stellar grades. and by the way, he's only 24 years old and says i'm just getting started. in other words, kyle is a shining example of what our nation needs to encourage. his veterans who come home and use their incredible skills and talents to keep our country strong. we can all learn from kyle's example as we prepare for the reading of the citation, i'd like to close with his own words. a message i think for every american. it took a life changing event to get me to truly appreciate the precious and amazing life i have been blessed with. please take it from me, enjoy every day to the fullest, don't

take life too seriously, always try to make it count, appreciate the small and sitchle things, be kind and help others, let the ones you love always know you love them and when things get hard trust there is a bigger plan and you will be stronger for it. pretty good message. corporal carpenter should not be alive today but the fact he is gives us reason to trust there is indeed a bigger plan. god bless you kyle, god bless all who serve and protect the precious and amazing life we are blessed with. may god continue to bless and keep strong the united states of america. semper fi.

>> the president of the united honor exposure present in for conspicuous gallantry of the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as an automatic rifleman with company f second battalion regimental combat team one, forcemarine expeditionary forward in helmand province afghanistan in support of enduring freedom afghanistan. and corporal carpenter was the member of a platoon-sized coalition force with two reinforced marine rifle squads partnered with an afghan national army squad. smallad gathered in a village in order to disrupt enemy activity and provide security for