thorough . but that is an indication of the is that thethat the president ae military are prepared to carry out airstrikes in syria. what you're asking is related to what is the linchpin of the timing. what we are not prepared to do is to give a clear signal publicly, certainly not from the podium, about what that timing might be. both the president and his military commanders are prepared to follow through on what the president said he decided last week, which is to broaden a systematic campaign of airstrikes against isil in targets and iraq and syria. we add one corollary to that. we had announcement earlier this week that the airstrike campaign already brought in, that there were strikes outside the previous guidelines that the president had offered. that was different than specific mission of detecting american

personnel and averting humanitarian disasters. our strikes outside those guidelines but consistent with the president's view that it is time to pursue a more offensive phase in the campaign against isil. the hill made clear on yesterday that the pentagon is way for a go-ahead from the president. i have not heard anyone say that you or ambassador rice -- >> that is something that i interpreted in the testimony on capitol hill. i think the most accurate way to describe the current circumstance is that after extensive planning by the president's national security team and his senior military in-personncluding a briefing you received earlier this week, the president and his national security team are prepared to conduct airstrikes in syria that are consistent with the brought into airstrike

campaign that the president laid out last week. question.ery simple besides anything else -- >> this is a complex issue. >> i understand. it is a very simple question here. we are not asking about time. we are not saying, tell us when this will happen. we're obviously not asking that. as the president already made the decision? when thet a matter of military sees the time is right and the decision is already made? or do they need another go-ahead from the president? >> the president has made that decision. he announced it in his speech to the country last wednesday. this is a decision that has been made and both the president and the military have been reviewing these plans and will continue to review these plans. they are prepared to carry out and move out with the decision at the present has made to expand our air campaign against isil targets. september 10 is the date?

>> which date? >> that he gave the speech? >> that is the day the president announced of the country that he has made a decision to broaden our systematic airstrike campaign in iraq and syria. >> does he have to give an additional thumbs-up when it starts? >> the president is not going to be a position where he is approving or disapproving individual airstrikes in syria. there are more than 160 airstrikes that have already be conducted in iraq. the president had laid out guidelines to the military for pursuing that airstrike campaign and he did not sign off and review each of those airstrikes and he will not do that in syria either. situation, the best way i can describe this to you is that the president and his military planners are prepared to expand the airstrike

campaign in iraq and serve. are trying tot we clarify is, will he approve that first strike? are they will awaiting the go-ahead for the first strike, not will he approve every strike? the president and his team have been reviewing the plans that have been put together by the pentagon and officials at central command. the president received a very detailed in person briefing on the topic earlier this week. he was pleased with the planning that has been conducted in the president and his military team are prepared to expand this campaign. it will be done at a time and place of our choosing. it will be done at a time and place that maximizes the strategic advantage of those strikes, and they will be can -- coreh the cour principle that the present has

laid out, which is to deny a safe heaven to organizations that try to carry out acts of violence against american citizens or the american homeland. >> you just said that he ought the rise to it, but you won't say whether he has to give the go-ahead for it to begin. >> the president will be regularly consulting with the national security team, as he has been for some time. the question i'm doing my best to answer is to explain to you that the president has already decided -- he did a week ago -- that this airstrike campaign needed to be expanded. he believed it was in our national security interest and that it would be a core part of our strategy for denying them safe haven. the president has met regularly with the team and as a result of those conversations and the thorough work that has been conducted by military planners at the pentagon, both the president and the military leaders are prepared to follow through on the decision that the president made to broaden that airstrike campaign. decided that has

broadening this airstrike campaign is in the best interest of american national security. >> you are saying that he has authorized strike to -- strikes on syria? >> i am describing the situation as it exists now. the president said more than a week ago that he was ready to broaden the campaign. he has consulted with military as a result of the broader strategic decision the president has made, he and the military are prepared to carry out this campaign and they have already begun to do so in iraq. subject,elated military leaders are very skeptical that you can in comp wish anything permanently to move back isis without boots on the ground. someone's boots. they are skeptical that it will be the boots of the iraqis or the syrian resistance. the syrian resistance will take a year or more to train. b, they don't trust the iraqis. they have been at odds with the

administration over this because they fear that this will eventually require american boots. >> the president has ruled out the option of deploying american boots on the ground in iraq and syria in a combat role. the commander in chief has ruled that out. but what we will need -- that is correct -- what we will need, however, is boots on the ground to take the fight to isil. they will not be american boots. these will be iraqis fighting for their country, syrians fighting for their country. they will do so after being trained and equipped by american personnel and the experts in countries who are part of our broader coalition. they will be backed up by airstrikes from the u.s. and other members of the coalition. that they can be trained adequately and that they will be able to fight? >> they will not be fulfilling a polite request from the

international committee to fight for their country. these are individuals prepared to do so. what they need is additional training and equipment that will be provided both to iraqi security forces, to kurdish security forces, and syrian opposition fighters. they will benefit from being backed up by the most military air assets that the world has ever seen. they will benefit from that on the battlefield. the president has also been very clear about the fact that we are not talking about a short-term proposition. this will take some time. there is confidence among the president's team, and this includes members of the military, that improved training, improved equipment, the strong support of the international community, a unified government in baghdad, the strong backing of the united states airstrikes and allied airstrikes will alter the

current dynamic on the battlefield. that these fighters, who as you point out, have not been particularly successful in facing down isil, but that equation will change. with the support of american military and airpower, with the support of american and allied forces that are training and equipping them, this will alter the equation. drastically change it overnight, but we will have an impact on current battle. i will try to bring a little order back to this. alexis? as far as planning, the command and control of isil -- and the command and control is in syria. following up on the question from the front row, is the president involved, as i was told he was be, with the drones, that he himself would be issued the ok to target command and

control, in other words, a individuals who are head of the islamic state? >> i am not in a position to talk about the specific targets that the president may be reviewing or even approving. based on the fact that i described that the president described the briefing from central command as the row, i i think as thorough, would be fine to say that the president has a detailed understanding of the plans that have been conceived at the pentagon. in terms of what the specific targets are and how and whether the president will be involved in selecting or acting against those targets, i can't provide any insight to you on that from here. because ambassador rice was talking about the importance of this being a unified command but also a coalition, can you help us understand to what extent members of the coalition, whether it is the french or iraqi government, have a safe in

one the onset of hostilities in syria begin and what kind of targeting, whether the plan is and whether it is in their view satisfactory? >> i think you have heard me describe the role of the united states as both building but also leading this broader coalition. we will seek to work very closely in coordination with other countries who are contributing assets and expertise to this effort. can is something that you at his be led by the united states, but very closely coordinated with members of the coalition who have committed to making a tangible contribution to the broader effort. whatwanted to look back to ambassador rice said about the u.n. resolution. she said it would be a chapter seven resolution, and based on

my rough understanding, that would allow sanctions or military action against countries there were not planning with the security council and resolution. i was wondering that there were countries that the u.s. would one authorization for sanctions or military against because they are not doing enough in terms of the regulations to stem the flow fighters, and especially turkey, which has been the country struggling with the problem may be the most. i don't know if you are worried or even want the resolution to the flow ofup to fighters from turkey. >> that is a question that extends beyond my bounds of understanding of the un security council process. let me say it as a general matter that we will be working with the members of the security council and there will be an opportunity for, as i understand it, other members of the united nations, even if they do not security seat on the

council currently, to participate in the session. there will be opportunity for other members of the united nations to speak and participate in the session. we would welcome the input from the broader national committee on this topic. the reason for that is that this is an issue that is affecting countries around the world. we were talking about foreign terrorist fighters, it is not just foreign fighters from the west, although that is an area of concern for the united states and our allies in western europe. there are foreign fighters they come from other countries, too. there are other nations around the globe that share our interest and concern with stemming the flow of foreign fighters and mitigating the threat that they pose to their home. we will be working closely with the international community to put in place a structure that ensures that the community, the global community is acting in close coordination to meet this threat. as a relates to the possibility of penalties or sanctions or some of those things, i would refer you to the u.s.-u.n. staff

who can give you more insight into the process of convening a security council meeting, drafting a resolution, and what those commitments would entail. why is it important for them to have the resolution? what are you looking for are hoping to encourage that could not be done -- i think i asked it to you in a different way a couple weeks ago, but with we are bringing coalition partners and everyone is on board with fighting isil, why is this something that we can do because people want to join us? are there countries that don't seem to be doing what they need to to stem the flow fighters? >> what i will say now is i would not make the case to you that we are going through the security council because we are trying to course other people to do things. countries all across the globe express

concerns about the threat that is posed by foreign terrorist fighters. the security council merely provides a convenient then you for talking about these issues in a high-profile way. we want to make sure the countries around the globe understand that we think this is a priority and we think they should, too. maybe they have -- some of them in waysducted their -- that we think is consistent when ways to mitigate this trip. we think it is a way to find an appropriate venue to discuss it with the international community, so we can shine a spotlight on the issue. it will give us an opportunity to carefully coordinate our efforts. we will take it advantage of this opportunity to put in place a regime that would try to mitigate the threat that is posed by foreign terrorist fighters to the united states and the west, but to countries around the globe. glenn, welcome back. nice to see you. we have been thinking about you.

[indiscernible] president, he said he wanted to achieve the near-certainty of knows the billion casualties. whatline in broad terms precautions are being taken in terms of syria and iraq, in terms of drones and manned aircraft, to avoid civilian cast -- civilian casualties? confirme say that i can there are measures being taken to limit damage or injury to in iraq andilians syria. for the operational details that are related to mitigating so-called collateral damage, i would refer you to the department of defense who can walk you through those details. this is hama continue to be a priority of the commander in

chief. our military planners and commanders understand that this is a priority in the same way that it has been in other countries, including the countries you mentioned as well. >> you mentioned just going into this that there will be a certain number of collateral casualties. if so, what is the general threshold of what would be acceptable? >> for those kind of guidelines, i would refer you to the department of defense. they can speak to this with more certainty than i can. is a broad coalition, why are we seeing other nations so slow to do something on the level of what the u.s. is doing? up until today, it has only been the u.s. acting. if isis is such a greater threat to the middle east itself and there are many more foreign fighters affecting countries like britain, why has it been really all of the u.s. until now? >> there are a couple of reasons. i think you have seen the president assume a very

aggressive leadership role in this effort. it he has been willing to back up that leadership and tough talk with action. ofhink that is the type authoritative leadership that american people expect from their commander-in-chief. i'm confident it is the type of leadership the military expects to it is an indication that the united states is serious about protecting this national security threat, or countering this national security threat. is the principal that the president laid out that we will the night -- we will deny safe havens for those who wish to carry out attacks. >> france is stepping up now with airstrikes. is it political considerations? is that really slowing things a bit? >> another factor is the united states has unique capabilities.

the united states military is a flexible, dynamic, forceful organization that can, when necessary, turn on a dime and a ploy and project american power -- and deployed and project american power in a way that no other country can but we do. to the overtures they have received from american leaders in terms of enlisting them in the broader efforts against isil . -- someident said officials described it as pushing on an open door when the president was talking about enlisting them in a broader international coalition to participate against isil. you have seen secretary kerry traveled the region and as a result of those travels, we have seen a variety of statements from leaders in the arab world,

including sunni-led countries talk about their willingness to work with united states and broader international communities with this effort. this is generally a situation where i sold -- isil is not at war with the united states, they have declared war on the global community. this administration and this president will lead the effort to build a international coalition to bring the fight to isil. the president has a strategy for that and we are pleased with the response. we will continue to ask our allies and partners to contribute more. this will be the responsibility of general allen, who started a week ago today, in his role to coordinate the contributions of countries around the world. i do anticipate that france is the first country, aside from the united states, to step up and carry out airstrikes against isil targets in iraq.

i do anticipate that we are going to see other contributions from other allies and other partners as we move forward in this effort. when you take that fight into surrey with airstrikes, will the military advisers make that decision when ready or what they need permission to be president? do they have the authorization right now? >> both the president and the military are repaired to expand the campaign into syria. the timing for that action will be made at a time and place of the choosing of the united states of america. >> on the question there about allies, can you give us a big picture in the terms of next week? is it, and the president's estimation, to bring ng more allies when next week, yes not just the big picture of this become a but he will have bilateral leadership.

how important the in the u.n. is to roll out more allies in this? >> i'm confident this will be the topic of some conversations the president has had at the u.n. ambassador rice made clear that there are a number of other things on the president's agenda while he is at the u.n. this will be the sustained effort and the focal point of the effort of general allen. he is a retired military general with extensive experience in the middle east. he is the filling a civilian role as a diplomat to coordinate the contributions of countries in the region and around the world in this effort. he is the one who is principally focused on collecting the contributions from countries. the other part of the efforts, and this goes to your question. part of this process involves not just getting countries around the world to issue news releases about what they are prepared to do, but it also

includes trying to identify specifically what are the needs of this coalition? what is it that is needed in terms of logistical support, in terms of refueling asset, military strikes? that requires an assessment of, what are the capabilities of the countries who have volunteered to help and matching those needs with the capability of countries who are best able to provide them. that will take a little bit of time. it is an indication -- the fact we are carefully considering the best way to fill those needs is an indication we have gotten lots of contributions to -- contribution. great respecthas for general allen and secretary kerry and hagel, but it is up to the united states president to show the leadership. he has the u.n. speech and sideline conversations with the allies. you keep talking about general allen, great respect for him, but as the president going to build this coalition himself? >> the president has been

gauging this effort for weeks and i'm confident his efforts will continue at the u.n. in public and private settings. >> he has been doing it for weeks and we only have france to add to the airstrikes. >> we are pleased with the commitment we have received from countries around the world, including sunni-led countries in the region, to make contributions to this coalition. ed that they have responded in this way and we look forward to working with this coalition to come push our goal of ultimately destroying isil. >> you are talking about military advisers who served alongside iraqi security forces. , thoughse u.s. forces they are not in combat, will they get combat pay? >> i am not for money with details like that. i would refer you to the department of defense. earlier talking about combating sexual assault

and domestic violence. that secretaryd hagel is going to look at their efforts with the nfl. is her interview at the white house about the president and first lady's let's move campaign which is a stars from sports? are you reviewing your relationship with the nfl? >> the it's on us campaign is an effort to work with colleges and universities. athletic closely with conferences, the pack 12, the big ten, the a-10 and others. we need to make sure we are getting the word out that it is on all of us to stand up and combat sexual violence and sexual assault on college and campus communities all across the country. toant to encourage everyone go on it's on us.org and pledge

to fulfill the commitment that you will join in the effort to make it clear in communities all across the country that we will not have a permissive environment when it comes to sexual violence and assault. if you have time today to do that, i would strongly encourage you to do so. as a relates to the white house's relationship with the nfl, i don't have any announcements to make here. we are pleased with the cooperation that we have gotten from a variety of organizations as it relates to this specific initiative. there are other organizations, including professional sports leagues, that would like to contribute to this effort, we are open to hearing from them. next week, can you tell us anything about who the president with?ng to hold -- is the white house seeking a meeting with rouhani? >> the bilateral schedule of the

president typically will layer into his broader-set schedule. it is something that is still under development. i don't have any announcements to make in terms of specific eating's the president has now. can give youay we more detail about who he may be meeting with. with president, there's nothing like that on the schedule. i do not anticipate anything like that being added, but we will see. >> is there next dictation that the president will, away from the meetings with commitments from arab nations to participate in military operations? isthe thing that i would do try to convey to you that this is part of an ongoing effort. we are going to have to theations prior united nations general assembly meeting with our arab partners that have signaled a willingness to join this coalition. we'll have conversations during neralnited nations ge

assembly meeting and we will have meetings after the assembly meetings with arab partners who are prepared to join this coalition. this would be a sustained, ongoing effort. i would not lay out any deadlines because frankly, we are moving aggressively to secure commitments and publicize them when those governments are ready to do so. we are pleased, as i mentioned, with the response we have received from our partners in the region and from our allies around the world. lead asident is proud to broad, international coalition like this against what is a core american national security priority. the cr that just passed goes through december 11 and when congress comes back in november, they are talking about doing another short-term cr. do you need a full-year funding when you come back -- when they come back? i regularlyy when

say on this topic, which is that we would always prefer that congress engage in a budget process, or a budget that allows for longer-term planning. that passing budgets on the short-term basis is ok if you do it once or twice, but doing it repeatedly adds to instability. you hear members of both parties talk about how important it is for some certainty to be granted to businesses who are trying to run a business in eight dynamic economy. they do not need the added variable of the congressional budget schedule. that congressd acted in bipartisan fashion to pass the discontinuing resolution over the course of the week. that was the right move and i, members of congress for putting aside congress, voting their conscience, showing their

support for the administration by giving this authority to ramp up our assistance to syrian for passing ao continuing revolution that did not have the kind of ideological writers on them that has fouled up this process in the past. we are hopeful that congress, when they return, early this fall and -- late this fall and early winter, that they will be able to pass in such a spirit. on the question a couple of things joe biden had said. said wase things he that he and the president both the --ke the dutchmen at preventre able to do is bad things from happened. >> i think that is a colorful description. i think the president has

talked a lot about how as the united states of america and the u.s. president, or under the leadership of the u.s. president, is the indispensable nation in the world. there are a lot of urgent crises around the globe that may not have a direct impact on the united states of america, but do represent the broader united states interest and require american involvement. >> it just seems like an interesting strategic mission. >> again, i'm trying to describe to you the way i think the president and vice president both view the responsibility of the united states. thisaying the role of indispensable nation, we project the kind of american leadership and in a way that protects our interests around the globe. >> he expressed some the stall joe for the days when republicans had senators like bob packwood. does the president wish that bob packard was still in session? >> i don't know that they

actually met. it sounds like the vice president may have had a relationship in the past, but the president has not. bob packwood left under a cloud of sexual harassment accusations against him and -- >> i think the vice president has a stronger record than anyone else in d.c.. when it comes to his decades of leadership when it comes to combating violence against women. i don't think the vice president is in a position to have to explain that to anyone. >> back to ebola. the cdc has a working projection that the a bowl of outbreak could reach 550,000 more people without additional efforts to contain it. does the u.s. response the to be expanded? is the government prepared to

reach out in a larger role? >> just a couple of days ago, you will recall the president announced a significant escalation of u.s. assets and aid that will be deployed to address the of bola outbreak in west africa. ebola outbreak in west africa. i think this was welcomed by countries and citizens in the region, but also by countries around the globe. contributing department of defense assets to this effort, capitalizing on the logistical expertise has galvanized the international community in a way to bolster their confidence in the response to this ebola outbreak. i anticipate it will have the effect of other countries ramping up the assistance they provide as well. it is clear that there is significant assistance that is needed to shore up the public health systems of these individual countries, to provide

logistical support to other aid workers who are trying to meet these needs. we know it is required to stop an outbreak but that is why it is important for us to act early to prevent this outbreak from spreading a whole lot further. there's a lot of work we need to do and some people would indicate that the international response has not been as quick as we would like. that is why you have seen such a strong commitment from the united states. this is more than half a million people, not a number that i have heard of. >> there are a wide range of projections about this. the projections that you are citing are longer-term projections. they hypothesized that robust intervention does not occur in the outbreak spreads out of control. that is why the president was demonstrating a sense of urgency escalate our

response as soon as possible to try to prevent some of these broader, catastrophic predictions from coming true. >> can we go beyond one billion? >> i do not have any other announcements to announce at this point. question takes in both questions. the aspect of u.s. efforts to -- with a epidemic president be meeting with other world leaders to enlist them for their financial contribution to really support the global effort on both of these wars? i think the president will be discussing the issue with world leaders when he is in new york. there are a variety of ways that nations can can to to this broader effort. on the military contributions that nations are

prepared to make. there are other ways for them to contribute to the success of this effort. financial contributions are welcome. the government of saudi arabia has indicated the willingness to host a training base for syrian opposition fighters in their country. we have seen commitments from the germans and others to commit to these training efforts. financial also tools we are deployed to choke off the funding that isil benefits from. that requires the cooperation of the international community. there is expertise some countries can lend it to that effort. there are a variety of ways in which countries can contribute and we will certainly welcome those contributions and the president will be discussing those in the content of the usga next week. the first gulf war, there were countries who did not contribute boots on the ground but picked up the tab. that is the question i have. will the president be pushing these world leaders to help support both of these very, very

difficult efforts? >> i doing to state the president will be discussing the wide range of ways that countries can contribute to the broad campaign against isil. includes financial contributions, financial tools to choke off funding, the deployment of humanitarian assistance. in some cases it could include military assistance, refueling ability, training capability, expertise that some countries around the globe have to build up the capacity of the iraqi security forces. there is a wide range of ways that countries can contribute to this effort and i am confident that the present will be discussing those contributions at the u.n. next week. people have made a casing congress about the need for action against isis. what is the degree to which the

president will be making the case to other member states of ga next week, and how much will that involved -- there is no direct threat this time to the united states under article 51. how does the united states intend to build the international legal argument against action against isis and will the presently having that discussion? >> in the context of asking your question, you have demonstrated a greater facility of you when details than i can muster from here. the president is looking forward to discussing the issue with other world leaders at the you when general assembly. the president, as he mentioned, will be addressing the general assembly on wednesday, i believe it is. an opportunity to discuss why it is certainly a priority of the united states for an international coalition to take the fight to isil and

degrade and ultimately destroy them in a way that is consistent with the counterterrorism strategy with allies around the world. >> let me back up on the details and about a nuanced political or legal strategy. philosophically, does the president need to make an argument to international partners that needs to be done, or does he feel like it is already there? you have cited 40 allies have our ready made contributions. is there still convincing to be done or do we have a we need to move forward? confident that the actions the president decides to take will be entirely consistent with international law. there are already 40 countries or more that have committed to this effort and i think it is an indication that they are also confident in any actions that this coalition would take would

be consistent with international law. say that it is difficult to characterize private conversation. i think a lot of the conversations that take place are not focused on the specific issue. is prettyat it clear, based on the terrible violence and mayhem that we have seen from isil, you have for the minister's be got about how a safe haven in syria threatens the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the iraqi people. there is a pretty clear understanding across the globe that international coordination against isil is not just allowed, it is required. >> the president is domestically from 2001.actions

internationally, susan rice mentions -- action at this point relying on a 13-year-old committed for opponents to that do not exist in their current form anymore? >> he goes back to the question about the united states and the broader international coalition being at war with al qaeda and its affiliates around the world. that is the same way that we are , the broader international community, is at war with isil. the president has given a speech on this topic. if you are interested, i think it is worthy of rereading. the president is confident he has the authority he needs under that authorization to use military force, to carry out military action against isil. wars consistent with the

that the united states is waging against al qaeda and its affiliates around the world. >> [inaudible] does the president have any sort of bilateral plan? the president is looking forward to speaking to the clinton global initiative. it is something he has done on previous visits to new york. i do not have a preview of his remarks but we can look into that to you. i know the president is looking forward to the president and former secretary of state. you said you are pleased, but are you satisfied with the degree of commitment from arab nations so far to fight isil? we are verye that pleased with the productive conversations that have taken place between u.s. officials and

sunni-led governments in the regions. those conversations have been constructive. you have seen public statements, and the communiqué is one countriesrom these indicating their support for the broader international coalition that the united states is leading. i think there are a couple of reasons for that. for many of these countries, the mayhem that isil is causing is occurring on their doorstep. it poses a direct threat to the stability and security of the countries. thesecond thing is, and president mentioned this a couple of weeks ago, many sunni have,ments in the region for a long time, perceived their sectarian rivals, shia-led governments, is the greatest threat to the safety and security of their country and their people. this latest threat that has emerged in the form of isil may actually impose a more immediate threat to them.

extremists who are carrying out terrible acts of violence, acts of violence that are completely inconsistent with the tenets of islam, who were essentially, under the name of their religion, carrying out these terrible acts of violence in a way that could be destabilizing to their country. there is a clear interest for these arab governments to be involved in a broader inter national coalition to destroy this terrorist organization. what if a country that has a power in the region only proposes to train the syrian opposition when they can contribute heavily in airstrikes in syria? what is the say to other countries in the region? >> you are referring to saudi arabia? i think the commitment of saudi arabia is to host a training

base that would allow the international community to ramp moderateg provided to syrian fighters. if saudi arabia is prepared to make additional commitments to the coalition, we certainly would welcome additional and i'm confident that general allen and others in the state department are in regular touch with the saudi's about some of these issues and the process of building this coalition is not something that is just a one-day effort. it is not the effort that one day we will make an effort -- announcement that we are done building the coalition. it will take sustained effort. we are confident from the positive response we have received from countries allow the globe that we will have the coalition that will reflect the unity of opinion that we will

ultimately degrade and destroy them. let me do the week ahead. it overlaps some of what with what susan said. on monday, the president will sign the america's promise summit declaration at the event. many of you are familiar with america's promise and we will have more information over the weekend. president first lady lady will travel to the new york city for the 69th session of the u.n. general assembly. afterward, the president will deliver remarks at the clinton initiative global 2014 meeting. in the evening, the first lady will attend the reception for as of state and the government. the president and first lady will remain in new york for tuesday nine. on wednesday morning, the president will address the general assembly. presidenternoon, the will meet with the president of

the united nations general assembly. afterwards, the president will attend a luncheon hosted by u.n. secretary-general ban ki-moon. the president will attend a meeting of the open government partnership. the president and first lady will also spend the night in new york city on wednesday. on thursday morning, the president will deliver remarks at united nations meeting on the a bola epidemic. in the afternoon, they will return to the white house. on thursday, the president will deliver remarks at the global security health summit at the white house -- that is on friday. willturday, the president deliver remarks at the phoenix award dinner in washington dc. further on this evening, the president and members of his family will be traveling to camp david where they will spend the weekend. i hope you all have a great weekend.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> a look at some of the political ads being broadcast in arkansas. of the for a live debate candidates to be arkansas' next governor. that starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. democrat gazette said the attacks on mike ross are not true. there was never a justice department investigation and the house ethics committee approved the sale. -- why isson

hutchinson attacking the family? hutchinson is a dz lobbyist who has a record of putting millionaires before arkansas citizens. cutsa hutchinson voted to pre-k loans. he a process -- he opposes the process to expand pre-k. mike ross says that education must be a priority. a focus on career training and college opportunities. >> i know my kids will have what it takes to ahead. >> that is why teachers endorse mike ross for governor. the -- have you seen the latest smear piece? aa hutchinson reported mistake on his taxes himself. many of us make mistakes on

taxes. asa was honest enough to admit it. --tunately, arkansas >> it is a $16 billion industry and arkansas's largest. with 97% of our farms family-owned, our next governor must fight on their side. when some criticize free, it only hurts our farmers. whether it is rice, wheat, or poultry, i want to keep arkansas business open to the world. it is the best way to grow our economy and create jobs. i amasa hutchinson. we will hit the ground running and never looked back. >> a look at some of the ds beingl a broadcast in arkansas. join us for a debate of the candidates. our coverage picks up at 8:00

p.m. eastern on c-span. >> this weekend, our campaign 2014 debate coverage continues at 8:00 eastern on c-span with live coverage of the arkansas governors debate. debatingmike ross former u.s. congress and asa hutchinson. that is followed by the texas governor's debate. saturday night at 8:00, live coverage of the iowa governor's debate between governor terry .ranstad and his opponent atc-span2, saturday night 10:00 on book tv's afterwards, columbia university director of astrobiology talks about life on earth and the current debates about how it began. sunday, author morton storm on his experiences as a member of al qaeda in his later life as a

double agent. the 50thark anniversary of the warren commission. at saturday at noon, counsel and staff members to the one commission described their investigation. sunday afternoon at 4:00 on real --rica, the 1950 42 our cbs report4 cbs commission with dan rather. ut the know abo programs you are watching. you can send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. the obama administration's decision to send troops to spreadto help combat the of a bola was the topic of

today's pentagon briefing. this is about five minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. a quick couple of opening comments. i hope you had a chance to see secretary hagel's remarks today at the national pow mia recognition ceremony on the river terrace. one of the things he talked about was the ongoing transformation of how we account for and recover are missing

personnel from past wars, which as the secretary said, will personnelew defense accounting agency this chandler. i would like to give you some context. next month, all of the different legit offices will be combined into one. by the end of october, a single directorate responsible for all external communications and outreach to the public, to families, and congress will be established. in december, and armed forces medical examiner will be named and in place to oversee the scientific operation at dod laboratories in hawaii and omaha. the new agency will achieve initial operative abilities this january and will continue to refine its process over the following 12 months before becoming fully operational in january of 2016. the dod has been working closely with everyone who has a stake in this new agency and its mission,

including families, veterans, service organizations, and the employees who comprise the workforce. we will continue to stay engaged. agency isnew completely established, you must remain committed to continuously improving its operations. as secretary hagel made clear today, those american still missing in action deserve nothing less than our constant vigilance and full effort of working to bring them home. as the president announced on tuesday, the u.s. government is increasing its assistance to help affected countries do with the most devastating ebola a break in history. the defense department brings capacity to support our partners, especially do lead federal agency, usaid. let me provide you with a brief update on what dod is doing to support this effort. major general there a williams -- darrell williams will lead the response.

he arrived in monrovia two days ago with a 12 person assessment team. conductings assessment to build treatment units for ebola in nigeria. there also assessing what we will need to sustain operations for up to six months or however long assistance is required. major general williams, along with ambassador debra malik have met with liberian officials, including the president, to discuss the increased response to the a bola crisis. more people are treatments will be constructed. they are quickly assessing the capacity and payload of the runway capacity. it will help our overall

response going forward. we it is paid that two c-17's will arrive this weekend with approximately 45 personnel and they will begin establishing command headquarters for general williams. currently, program funds approved for the unity of all of the sponsor of $30 million. this includes our efforts previously announced, such as the 25 bed deployable hospital, diagnostic equipment, and personnelcosts -- equipment. they will be providing urgent humanitarian assistance to fight a bola. this is on top of a previous request of $500 million. the dod will be compared to devote billion dollars to response efforts. we are working through all the process and we expect additional personal and materials to continue flowing to

the area over the next months. i will take your questions. understand, and was -- or any ash can you help us understand, will any of these troops be directly caring or touching patients affected by the virus? puttingcautions are you in place to stop the spread to his? troops and will be working directly with those patients? spread to those troops and will they be working directly with those patients? >> as of now, they will not be patients directly. you will be in support of other experts. a key component of our troops anywhere, in any situation is to make sure that we adequately prepare them, train them, and equip them for their own personal protection. as i mentioned, personal protection equipment is part of the material you are sending with him -- we are sending with

them. they are trained on how to protect themselves. there is no intent right now for them to have direct contact with patients. >> here's is a look at what is ahead on season. live coverage of a nstar arkansas' next governor. after that, a discussion about the intelligence and national security. later, more campaign 2014 programs with a texas governor debate at 10:00 eastern. >> and alive, now, to the arkansas governor's race. -- served as a u.s. congressman for 12 years. mr. hutchinson is another former congressman. it was an administrator at the drug enforcement administration.

this is live campaign 2014 coverage on c-span. >> the governors square off. two candidates with explosive political history. the attorney turned up lawmaker. the small businessman who became a congressman. tonight, your chance to see where they stand and how they differ. democrat mike ross. >> there are big differences. >> republican hutchinson. >> we want to expand opportunity and reflect our values. >> the debate begins now. form your