dialogue. mind towhat i had in say. the problem of the visit is already in your hands create i don't need to call this. we have this tomorrow morning. there is the reception at the white house. that is obviously very important. this is the first speech in english of the pope and then following the great speech to the congress. and tomorrow in the afternoon we [indiscernible] and it is also important. cardinal: we are excited to welcome pope francis to

washington. country, even to texas if i can use a personal association because i am the archbishop in houston. he is visiting the three cities but this is an apostolic journey. he comes as a pastor. he comes as a shepherd. that is to my mind the clarity of the mission of what pope francis is bringing. in his speeches, talks, and his meetings, his encounters. he has come as a shepherd to support his people and to reach out. he is asking for greater service to one another. in short he comes to speak the minds in the heart of the gospel. fromhe point of view

myself and i think of the applicable conference, our role is to step back in leave room for the message of the holy father to be received in all of its fullness. >> thank you. the archbishop of washington has expressed that the diocese is through -- thrilled with the decision of his holiness. we have been preparing for quite a long time here, a number of months for and in anticipation of this visit and we are looking forward to hearing his words of the joy the gospel expresses, and all that he says. and his own example, charity which we have seen over the last couple of years. with all these months of preparation i do want to pause for just a moment and express

some thanks to a number of individuals and groups who have been very involved in the planning and have assisted us to help with this planning. we are grateful for the secret they have given toward security and federal officials who have been part of the planning process from the beginning. ofor bowser from the city washington, city officials, the chief of police, the metropolitan police, the department and fire and emergency services and the city as well. staff inpreciative of to all the people of washington. many are affected by the visit. providedeful they have such a warm and hospitable welcome to our holy father, his holiness and very grateful for that today. and anticipate more

in the coming days. also i want to express thanks for the staff and volunteers. for all they have done to pull anything together. i start with these remarks speaking about thanks. i have always been taught to begin any endeavor with a sense of gratitude for blessings even as we ask for blessings upon the activities to come. thank you. >> thank you. we will now take questions from the media to indicate that you have a question. please raise your hand and our staff will guide you to the microphones. when you're at the microphone, please give us your name, the name of the outlet you represent, and to whom you are addressing the question. >> hello. welcome. thatt to clarify something was quoted from the plane.

you know there would be a lot of interest in this comment which if he pope talking about is a little bit to the left. can you explain about what he was asked and what he meant? he sounded like he was asked about economics. could you clarify a little bit more about what was said? >> think he has answered .uestion the center of his answer, i have , anything something less or more than what is in the

social teaching of the church. line, and this. i do not have to say that some things he is more left or more right than what is in the compendium of the social doctrine of the church. true.k this is someone asked him after the are proposing directions in engagement of the social service in the church.

do you think that the church will follow you and then he said no, the church is not to follow me. i am following the church. following what the tradition of the church is in the social teaching. and this is what i am doing. peoplely there are many not known maybe with the complexity and richness of these. and then [indiscernible] in a limited way. it is in these clear traditions. obviously as we know, he has he was onessed that the team of solidarity. ,e uses also -- some expression

now from social friendship. and inattention to the order and the thing together sanctity. this is to do with the friendship, with human relations, with complete relation between -- among persons. maybe this is something that he [indiscernible] and the social taking of the church. i think that also in the last ours, the church teaching

progressing in the new world of today. the environment crisis and some that are now more crucial maybe as in the past area but always in the direction of the traditional teaching of the church. today stressed that again during this conversation. >> thank you. i am correspondent for macedonian tv. macedonialy know that is the land of mother teresa. can you tell us whether the hope plans to visit macedonia is to mark -- macedonia?

>> the pope has not yet a clear agenda of the visit for the next years. known or public. there is no fixed agenda. trip that is clear and decided our africa in november usecrack of for the world in the next year. other chips are not decided. but it is [inaudible] what you say. hasave seen that the pope then sorry of and oh. macedonia. attached to this

region i think. thatfore i cannot exclude [indiscernible] but there is no project ever visit to -- of a visit to macedonia. >> the world meeting of families began today in philadelphia. pope francis mentioned this morning in his meeting with families, he asked everyone to pray for the world meeting and senate.oming how will the holy father be monitoring the events in philadelphia throughout the week and how will he be emphasizing family life while he is in the united states? thank you. father lombardi: he is very

interested as you know. to the wordas due in philadelphia before the invitation to the congress, before the invitation to the united nations. therefore it is very important for him. is -- we have to see it that participation of the pope and in the context of this in synod. sig the conclusioner of world family day. the encounter with the families this morning and century ago the

cuba wasantiago de designed to stress the continuity of the visit and cuba with the visit in the united states. speech the pope has given this morning for the veryy in santiago is wonderful and very interesting. and take this as a document for the meeting in philadelphia. i think the pope of -- was informed of what happened. we follow also the first days of the meeting but it will come to the end with his contribution

with all his heart. the homily this morning was very impressive. it is a way to appreciate the importance of the family formation of humanity. in many concrete aspects. you have to read the text has it is fantastic. >> good afternoon. [speaking spanish]

father lombardi: i think there are information that arrived to the vatican and the pope. there is [inaudible] that follows what happens. it was also the information of 2000 and more people -- 3000 and more people who were freed, as a sign in the preparation of this visit. in the sense situation may be with those science. is aware of the problems. and therefore he has traveled to cuba and given an important contribution to help the church

to be allies in the difficult situation and to encourage it to thehe contribution for renewal of a society. it is an institution that can move forward and to creativityto promote in the direction of the development of a society of participation, of freedom, and dialogue. and the reconciliation. in these things, if you listen boat --y well to this the speech of the pope in cuba, there are clear references to

these encouragement of the pope to go forward in this direction. the pope is always aware that he that specific possibility [indiscernible] he has practiced always from the faith. everyone has to [indiscernible] his responsibility and creativity to contribute to the well-being of the society. givenk the pope has thinkbution and i something is happening especially with these renewal of contacts and now between cuba

and the united date, otherwise also thisot feel but task. i think the pope has decided to have this trip from cuba to the united states to stress situation and to encourage progress. >> my name is angela. i am from spain. my question is addressed to father the party. you mentioned about the pope came in a humble attitude to receive. expected -- expecting to receive from america? thank you. we refer tordi:

what the pope said in his speech. i am always encouraging to listen. express- he will also history'son for the of the american nation and the american church. that the east and the universal church receives an exchange of gifts create also people anderican faithful. he -- it is impressive work of charity and education and i think that you know better than i of these positive aspects

here. this is an important problem ofn for the the world of today. church.ife of the i think that the question we have to address is the issue of responsibility. in this land there is great power, power of intelligence. of the science of the reflection of the economy and many aspects of creativity in the enterprises. these can help very much the .rogress if it is put to the service of the common good, the service of poor or in the

difficult situation of their lands. surely the pope feels the richness of the sources and the [indiscernible] ofe to be put to the service the common good of mankind. >> thank you. you, i am from a brazilian newspaper. we will you -- will you let us if there is an end to the u.s. economic embargo on cuba. what are the main topics of the conversation that you will have with president obama tomorrow? thank you. >> as i have said i am not a prophet in the sense i do not anticipate what has to happen and what had -- the pope as to

say about the problem of the embargo. flamek populace in the has to -- he would not address this find in his speech. it does not mean he does not of removal process of the relation but not completely that point of embargo. -- yes.e now there are contracts, bilateral contract selling problems. [indiscernible]

concrete policies or solutions. it is to the dialogue. to encourage always process altogether. he has recalled as i have recalled many times that the position of the church, of the catholic church and the popes of [indiscernible] thishave criticized that is as a source of suffering for the people. he is already safe either in the server of pope francis. he has not said that he will address this specifically in the next days. fix thank you.

>> i would like to go back to the question of capitalism. father barty, thank you for your answer. i wonder what the american church thinks about those positions. we have read several opinions that we are worried about calling and defining capitalism as the deadly or culture of idols. i am not sure of all 18 million people would like to hear the same thing. there are some positions that have been considered by some extreme. thank you.

think thatardi: i the sense of the briefing is not to discuss the contents of the doctrine. it is to give information and short answers about what will happen. these questions are addressed in the content of the speech and of the document of the pope. there is a lot to see. substantial answers to your question. but yes. it is in the line of the tradition of the social doctrine of the church. he thinks that he is not driving. there is a substantial tradition in these things.

>> thank you for your question. -- it certainly is true that the u.s. is a place of intense financial investment. find -- economics. -- we have new york's symbol -- new york city as a symbol. the u.s. is not monochromatic. appreciation and understanding of what can happen. the ships have always pointed out that what we do with in the marketplace is a republican never lose sight of the human person. so what happens in the human person and how we deal with for for those who are looking for a better life, the disparity at times between the rich and poor. we may not be as angular in that sense of stating matters as might be true in some other

countries and we have always been aware of the poor. financialportance of immunity to say that working those who are poor to have it defense -- decent wage, a decent living across the boards is good for the economy. where economists say. to my mind the u.s. in many ways in its culture, finances, and motive governing has a lot of tensile strength and attendance -- and tends not to be as monochromatic as simple presented. it goes in waves. the bishops are very intent that we be mindful of our culture where there is such an incredible growing disparities of this issue. without necessarily going into all the details.

i do not feel overly confident down general but important statements. the am reporter with [inaudible] northwesternt of university. earlier the press conference you have stressed the holy father's desire to communicate the idea piece. howhat note and seeing as he is about to speak with president obama and the congress, i was wondering if you could comment as to whether he plans on addressing issue of american involvement in iran, syria or iraq. thank you. i have saidrdi: before you have to listen what the pope will say. not to speak with the safe.

otherwise it is not a surprise. which problem will address explicitly. which problem represents not so explicitly. it will be very interesting. more.have time for one -- i am aorder reporter. this is another anticipatory question. topyou tell us what are the issues on the agenda of the pope ? there has been talk about immigration, furthering the agenda of the answer her on the environment. economists, are we getting it right in predicting those are the top issues and if i may

throw in a simple question, can you tell us about the exchange between the pope and president obama when they met? see the address to the united states we will of issues and it is , the question of the environment. the address of immigration will come.

this is not possible that the .ope confidence -- and speaks also about the environment, emigration. we will see how and when but it is clear that we will speak about this. obviously this is the basis of speeches, many addresses of the pope. find a wide -- you all that you find have mentioned. wonderful.

of the different aspects of the environment and the social crisis and the economy. this is really wonderful. find these aspects in the speech of the pope in the next days. for the meeting with president -- i don't know. normally these encounters are also private. of a private dimension. characteristic because the pope has a

personal encounter. also political leaders. the approach the other as a complete person. as a political leader that has a particular ideology. complete person that meets this person. as aerson meets the pope concrete man. this is something wonderful. this is another way to approach the question and solve something. if you have got a personal approach and personal feeling. help us to understand

maybe the credibility and sincerity of the order. everys sense, i think leader that has a meeting with the pope, the six -- this experience, a personal encounter. this is maybe more important if i can say. [indiscernible] would indicate. they will talk about something. this is obvious. thatis more important is concept of the conversation of the personalt encounter and the appreciation of the personality of the order. that candidate progressed to a chaingood results also --

-- obtain good results. popean a person as the [indiscernible] proposing to do something new built a personal [indiscernible] --t can be the premise to four us to propose something new to happen. i do not know if this is clear. >> thank you. we have many more questions but we will have the opportunity for another reefing tomorrow after the mass of canonization at approximately 8 p.m. father somebody has recently agreed to be with us again, joined by archbishop joseph kurtz. a couple other housekeeping notes. please remember that the text of

the speeches will be posted at media. vatican speeches. they will be available to you digitally. just housekeeping note. we are continuing to distribute credentials tomorrow here at the if colleaguesroom have yet to pick up their credentials do they need to do that tomorrow. we will not distribute credentials on thursday. that is a change. thank you for your time. we will see you tomorrow. >> thanks to all of you. we are asking for blessings today upon the jewish trinity. .his is the day of yom kippur we pray for them in this day of atonement that the lord will continue to bless them.

>> thank you, everyone. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> c-span as live coverage from washington dc, the first stop on the pope's tour. the welcoming ceremony for the pope. the obamas officially welcomed him to the white house. later the afternoon, starting at at thehe canonization basilica of the national shrine of the immaculate conception. 8:30.ay morning at c-span coverage begins a capitol hill as pope francis makes history, becoming the first intiff to address a meeting

congress. and then, coverage from new york a the pope i -- as the public tends the general assembly. ad at 11:30, he will hold multireligious service at the memorial of the world trade center. ate on tv, or online, cspan.org. coming up, the senate armed services hearing. talking about u.s. policy in the middle east. -- thehe right arrival arrival of pope francis in the united states. by the president. his arrival at the vatican embassy and the briefing on the pope's visit. on the next "washington journal," we continue the

coverage of the pope's visit. our guest is jim nicholson, the former u.s. ambassador to the holy see under the bush administration. "washington journal" his wife every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. you can join the conversation with your calls and facebook, or on twitter. coalitionnsparency posted its third annual gathering wednesday in washington. members of the technology executive and legislative sectors consider ways to keep data protected, while making technology accessible. see its wife at 8:45 eastern on c-span-three. a signature feature of book-tv is the all-day coverage of book fairs and festivals from across the country. with top nonfiction authors. here is the schedule. in early october it is the

southern festival of books in nashville. then, we are live in nashville. and you're the end of the month, we will be covering to book festivals on the same weekend from the nation's heartland, the with constant book festival in medicine. faculties coast, the boston book festival. in november, we will be in k.rtland oregon for wordstoc at the and of november, we are live from florida for the miami book fair international. that is a few of the fairs and festivals this fall on c-span2's book tv. the retired general and former cia director david petraeus talking about u.s. foreign policy in the middle east. he spoke about syria, iran, and the nuclear agreement. he begins his testimony with an apology for sharing classified information. this hearing is almost three hours.

>> i asked the committee to consider a list of 3725 inatione been before the committee, the required length of time.

is there a motion? and second. motion carries. the armed services committee meets this morning to receive testimony on u.s. strategy in the least. ago, our nation was losing a war in iraq. despite the favorable comments the secretary of defense had stuff happens. we were losing the conflict. in fact we were at a point where there was almost sufficient toes in the u.s. senate force a complete withdrawal from iraq. -- then a seminal event event in place. the day that i will never forget. 2007.ber 11,

general david patrice appeared before this committee with ambassador ryan crocker. their compelling testimony was critical in securing support for the search. plannedrated campaign to defeat al qaeda brought security to the iraqi people and created the possibility for meaningful political reconciliation. now i meet again. at a time ofain grave security challenges. more than ever, our nation must be able to draw upon the wisdom and experience of its most distinguished leaders area that is why i'm so pleased to welcome has had this committee many appearances before this committee, one of our most distinguished leaders, welcoming back general david trias for his first appearance before congress if -- since leaving government. i want to thank you on behalf of

this committee for your willingness to testify today and offer insights from your decades of distinguished service, especially your leadership in iraq, afghanistan, and is director of the central intelligence agency. thess the middle east today old order is collapsing. the regional balance among states and social order within states. no new vision has emerged to take its place and across the region, ks fills the best ungoverned spaces left kind. filling this vacuum have been terrorist groups such as iceland one handand -- on the and hostile states such as iran and russia on the other. this is integration has been made worse by a failure of u.s. strategy and leadership to shape events in this final part of the world for the better. too often we have confused our friends, encouraged her enemies, this taken in excess of caution for prudence and replace the risk of action with the perils of inaction.

iraq and syria one year after the president commenced airstrikes and committed u.s. troops, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and commander of central command have characterized the fighting against isil as a stalemate. isil is consolidating control of its core territories and expanded its control in syria. efforts to retake iraqi cities like most all my falluja, and ramadi have foundered. isil is expanding globally to places like afghanistan, lebanon, yemen, libya, and egypt. this appearance of success only enhances isil's ability to radicalize, recruit, and grow. the obama administration tells us there started working. ultimately -- their strategy is working. the current policy does not appear sufficient to achieve our

goal of degrading and drying isil. put it mildly, committee hearing did little to alleviate concerns . in the absence of an effective strategy violent extremist groups like isil, al qaeda, and their appearance are expanding across the middle east and africa and south asia, and quitting afghanistan. after 14 years of fighting in afghanistan decisions made in the months ahead will determine whether our sacrifices were worth it. after pulling out of iraq against the advice of our military leaders, the president's plan to withdraw from afghanistan would risk of replay of that failure. we look forward to your views on this policy. in addition to the so-called islamic state, the islamic republic of iran has in another main beneficiary of the middle east peace descent into chaos. many of us have urged the administration to. -- adopt a regional strategy to counter iran's malign activities in the middle east.

unfortunately, that has not happened. the administration is too often controliran as an arms challenge rather than the wider geopolitical challenge that it is. left unchecked, iran has stepped up its destabilizing activities in iraq, syria, lebanon, brain, gaza, and elsewhere. whatever one thinks of the nuclear agreement, it will not resolve this larger iran challenge and will likely make it worse as iran gains new legitimacy, the lifting of sanctions and billions of dollars in sanctions relief. into the wreckage of our middle east policy has stepped put in. as in ukraine and elsewhere, the proofs -- perceives the administrations in action and caution is a weakness and he is taking advantage. his ongoing military buildup in syria is the greatest expansion of russian power in the middle east in four decades. it will

it will melt him to maker, undermine u.s. policy and ultimately prolong this conflict. the main beneficiary will be isil. administration first condemned vladimir putin's move but has now agreed to military to military talks m.p. mulcair:. the first step toward a solution is recognizing there is a problem. that seems beyond the capacity of the administration. the result to partisan attacks and talking points that require a willing suspension of disbelief. in a display of self-delusion, they can rival the bush administrations iraq policy at its worst. they say time is on our side,

the strategic patience is all we need and we should just stay the course. when our earlier strategy in iraq and the broader middle east was failing not so long ago, we think we have leaders like our distinguished witnesses were willing to face a situation with realism and a president whose everlasting credit took responsibility of that failure and changed course. other american presidents have demonstrated a similar capacity for change. there is no reason president obama cannot do the same. no one believes there are good options. they never are. no one believes these kinds of problems lend themselves to purely military solutions. they never have and they never will. no one expects us to succeed overnight and no one believes that america can or should solve every problem by itself.

but that does not absolve us of our responsibility to make the situation better where we can. these problems are hard. but as our witness once said, they are not hopeless. now more than ever, we need reasons to be hopeful again. i thank you for before the committee and look forward to your testimony. senator reid. back onreagan: welcome the general petraeus. this one easier and continues the committee's review. you have experience in a number of leadership positions in the u.s. military and as director of the central intelligence agency. can make she prepared and qualified to provide your perspective on the situation in the middle east and thank you for being here. the situation in the middle east presents a deeply complex problem. they challenge our nation's security today.

well are nations military is playing a critical role in addressing this and lasting solutions will require diplomacy and persistent attention. as the committee heard at last week's hearing, the media threats to the u.s. and our partners are isil. iraq provides them a violent base to spread their theology regionally and globally. the brutality of my soul coupled with that of viasat regime -- assad regime has forced many to flee. the refugee crisis highlights the urgent need for us to focus on restoring security in the region. the national coalition enabled by the leadership of retired

general john allen has brought together 60 plus countries to respond to the isil threat. including programs to train local forces. we are very interested in your views on the value of multilateral approach to confronting isil. i would be interested to hear whether you support the efforts to build local forces on the ground to liberate and restore security to areas previously under iso-control -- isil control. given your experience on the ground in iraq both as an operational and strategic level commander, i look forward to hearing your assessment of the military campaign on whether the iraqi security forces can summon the will to fight successfully against isil and other opponents.

hasadministration conditioned our support to the iraqi government under continuous efforts to be more inclusive and responsive to the concerns of the sunnis, kurds, shias. in syria, according to public reports, the dod run a variety of setbacks. many have criticized this program and i would be interested in your assessed of the viability of this program. assessment of the viability of this program. what president putin hopes to gain from military intervention is unclear. we would like your perspective on that issue. the other major issue to the u.s. is iran.

oa enterede jcp the implementation phase. the worlds will be watching to ran will be held accountable to this phase of the agreement. the most significant effort we can take along with our allies. iran's destabilizing activities are a critical concern. this continues the support of financing of the assad regime and shia militias. demonstration has made a significant commitment to our partners in the gulf cooperation council. we want to ensure they have the necessary capability to overcome any threat to stop your assessment of these efforts would be appreciated.

the u.s. continues to have nearly 10,000 u.s. forces in afghanistan as part of the support mission. a critical decision will have to be made in the next few months assuredg it u.s. forces be retained in afghanistan the on 2016. altly, we cannot forget qaeda remain a trans regional threat to the u.s. and other interests around the world. your insights with respect to what can be done to keep the pressure on al qaeda and the organizational structure would be deeply appreciated. andk you for your service for joining us today. chairman mccain: welcome. gen. petraeus: thank you, mr. chairman. it's good to be back. thank you for this opportunity to discuss the situation in the

middle east. as you noticed, this is the first time i've testified in open session in congress since -- asing a director director three years ago. i think it's appropriate to begin my remarks this morning with an apology, one i've offered before but nonetheless one i want to repeat to you and the american public. four years ago, i made a serious mistake, one that brought discredit on me and paying to thoseo me -- pain closest to me. it was a breach of the values i've been committed throughout my life. there's nothing i can do to undo what i did. i can only say again how sorry i am to those are let down and strive to go forward with a greater sense of humility and purpose and with gratitude to those whose to with me during a very difficult chapter in my life.

in light of all that, it means a great deal you have asked me to share my views on the challenges in the middle east where i spent most of my last decade and government. i thank you for that and for the support and friendship you have long extended to me. the middle east today is experiencing revolutionary upheaval unparalleled in its modern history. at the root of this upheaval is the disintegration of state authority in multiple countries. this has led to a violent struggle for power across a vast territory. the competition between different groups within states and one between different states in the region and some outside it. almost every middle eastern country is now a battleground or combatant in one or more wars. the principal winners thus far

have been the most ruthless, revolutionary, and anti-american elements of the region. this includes sunni extremists like the so-called islamic state . iranhe islamic republic of , hoping to establish a regional hegemony. all of the revolutionary forces are exploiting the upheaval in the middle east well exacerbating it for the while hostile to each other, the growth of each is feeding the radicalization that is fueling the other. none of them reflect the hopes of the overwhelming majority of middle eastern or's fault -- easterners. they pose a threat to regional and global stability and to vital national interest of the u.s.

the repercussions of developments in the middle east extend well beyond it. indeed, the middle east is not a part of the world that plays by las vegas rules. what happens in the middle east is not going to stay in the middle east. we see this in the global reach of the islamic state of the sanctuaries it has seized in the region. in the scene on the of refugees fleeing the conflict of the middle east, and the danger of the nuclear cascade sparked by iranian actions and in the escalating tensions between the u.s. and russia over syria. international peace and security do not require the u.s. to solve every crisis or to intervene in

every conflict. ineffective oris absent in the face of the most egregious violations of the most basic sensible's of international order we have championed, our commitment to that order is inevitably questioned and further challenges to it are invited. i will focus here this morning on three countries at the eye of the present gop political storm -- a rock, syria, -- iraq, syria, and iran. while there have been significant accomplishments, the progress achieved thus far has been inadequate. an impressive coalition has been established. key isis leaders have been killed or captured and support for local forces in iraq and

syria has helped rollback isis. some elements of the right strategy are in place. but several are under resourced well others are missing. we are not where we should be at this point. in iraq, we have halted and reversed isis's momentum in some areas but we have seen gains in others. in my judgment, increased support for the iraqi security forces, sunni tribal forces is needed, including embedding u.s. advisor elements down to the brigade headquarters level of those iraqi forces fighting isis. i believe we should explore use of joint tactical air controllers with select iraqi units to coordinate coalition airstrikes and we should examine whether our rules of engagement for purses and -- for purses and shrek's -- four precision

strikes are effective. u.s. personneled at the iraqi battalion level, nor would i support clearance operations before a viable hold forces available as critical as the frontline fight against isis is, however the center of gravity for the sustainable feet of isis in iraq lies in baghdad. we should recall because of iraq's unraveling was the behavior oforrupt the former prime minister and his government. this is what alienated the sunni-arab population we worked so hard to get back into the fabric of iraqi society. his actions created the conditions for the islamic state to reconstitute itself after which it gained additional

strength in the syrian civil war and slept back into iraq. the key now is for the u.s. to help strengthen those in baghdad who are prepared to pursue inclusive politics and better governance, goals that unite the iite,ity of iraq's sh sunni, and kurds. and kurds areni given a stake in the success of iraq and not its failure. with the backing of iraqi citizens, iraq's senior shia cleric and one shia party has embarked on reforms resisted by the leaders of the major iranian supported militias and the former prime minister. the reality then is that the

challenges in iraq are natalie -- are neither purely political or military, they are both. what's required is an integrated civil military plan in which diplomatic and military lines of effort are coordinated to reinforce each other. all the elements of that effort are required though it is the iraqis who must provide the ground forces and achieve reconciliation if the results are to be sustainable. we do not yet have the proper civil military architecture in place to support this though we do appear to be moving closer to it. the operational headquarters for the military campaign against isis and iraq is based in kuwait. the u.s. ambassador in baghdad. always have a day-to-day military counterpart.

i would recommend facilitating this will stop -- this. i'm very encouraged the general selected to lead the campaign in q is one who launched the reconciliation initiative on which we subsequently built during the search, leading eventually to what became the awakening. in my view,o note the commander in baghdad should focus primarily on a rock -- iraq. let me know turn to the situation in syria. geopoliticals a

instability. the fallout from the meltdown of syria threatens to be with us for decades and the longer it's permitted to continue, the more severe the damage will be. that frequently said there's no military solution to syria or other conflicts in the middle east. this may be true, but it's also misleading. for an every case if there's to be any hope of a political securityt, a certain context is required and that will not materialize on its own. we and our partners the facility it and over the past four years, we've not done so. it's been clear from early on in syria, the desired context requires the development of capable ground forces.

such a sunni elements are critical for any objective one might have in syria. defeating extremists like isis, changing the momentum on the battlefield to enable a negotiated settlement, and upholding that agreement while keeping prices down -- isis down. we're no closer to having that force than we were a year ago: support for such forces was first considered. sunni arabs will not be willing the islamicinst state unless we commit to protect them and the broader population against all enemies. that means protecting them from the unrestricted warfare being waged against them. especially by his air force entities of their own bonds -- barrel bombs.

this has been the primary source of civilian casualties. it has also been a principal driver of the radicalization fueling isis and the refugee crisis. the problems in syria cannot be quickly resolved. their actions the u.s. and only the u.s. can take that would make a difference. assad the use of a barrel bombs must end and if they continue, we will stop the air force from flying. we have that capability. this would not end the military and crisis in syria or the broader war or bring about the collapse of the regime. what it would remove a particularly vicious weapon from assad's arsenal and it would show the syrian people that we can do what the islamic state cannot, provide them with a

measure of protection. i would also support the establishment of enclaves of syria protected by air power where a moderate sunni force could be supported and where additional forces could be trained. internally displaced people can find refuge. of theis more conscious cost of military intervention or of the limits of our military power than i am. andommander in iraq afghanistan during the height of combat, i wrote more letters of condolence to parents of america's sons and daughters then any of my contemporaries. i don't take recommendations for any kind of military action lightly. carry action can also profound risk and cost for our national security. we see that clearly today in

syria and russia's recent military escalation in syria is a further reminder that when the u.s. does not take the initiative, others will fill the vacuum, often in ways that are harmful to our interest. russia's actions to bolster as sad increase the support for moderate opposition in syrian civilians. we should not allow russia to push us into coalition with assad. while we should not rush to oust assad, he cannot be part of the solution in syria. he is the individual seen by sunnis across the region as responsible for the deaths of some 250,000 syrians, the displacement of will over a third of the population in syria, and the destruction of any of their once thriving communities.

let me turn to iran. the nuclear agreement negotiated by the obama administration contains many positive elements. it also contains problematic elements. the the next 10-15 years, agreement will impose meaningful constraints on the wrong -- iran's nuclear activities and increase the resources available for them to pursue the line longer-term,d the the risk of iranian proliferation will increase. the key question going forward is what will be the relationship of the u.s. to iranian power. will we seek to counter it or to accommodate it? as the obama administration thought to promote the nuclear

agreement, it senior members select the form to counter malign iranian activity but many in the region worry the white house will pursue the latter, attempting to work with iran beginning with syria. this would be a mistake. to be sure the idea of reconciliation with iran should not be dismissed but it's one thing if reconciliation means iran abandons its policy, sponsorship of extremist prophecies, and pursuit over its neighbors. it's a different matter if reconciliation entails accommodating those actions. iraq, syria,en in activities are's not only hostile to us, they

exacerbate through the feelings of alienation and disenfranchisement which dries radicalization and the growth of groups like isis. thus rather than viewing the nuclear agreement as marking the end of a hostile relationship that will enable our disengagement from the middle east, we should see it as inaugurating a new, more complex phase of that competition that will require intensified u.s. involvement in the region. this should include several important actions. u.s. should make absolutely clear that we will never allow iran to possess highly enriched uranium and that any move in that direction will be met with military force. this guarantee must be ironclad to reassure our partners in the region and have the desired effect with iran.

such a declaration would carry maximum credibility if issued by the president and congress together. second, we must intensify our work with our arab and israeli partners to counter iran's malign regional activities. this can take several forms, including continued use of existing sanctions authorities against iranian entities tied to terrorism and human rights abuses. it should also include expedited approval of weapons systems software partners in the region and greater integration of the capabilities and it should encompass additional actions to demonstrate the theater remains set with respect to our capability to carry out military operations against iran's nuclear program if necessary. beyond these actions, we should understand that the most

immediate test for the credibility of our policy will syria. we do in iraq and the outcome in those countries will be the basis for the judgment of friend and foe alike about our steadfastness and competence in affording extremists. the situation confronting the u.s. in the middle east today is very hard but as i observe, when i took command in iraq, amidst terrible violence, hard is not hopeless. as complex and challenging as the crises in the region are, unconvinced the less is capable of rising to the challenge. i ended my statements in the

past by thanking its members for their steadfast support for the men and women in uniform. repeat the gratitude that so many of us felt during the height of our engagement in iraq and afghanistan for the committee's extraordinary support for so many critical initiatives on and off the battlefield, even when a number of members questioned the policies we grexit you to -- we were executing. this committee has played a critical oversight role, opposing tough questions about u.s. policy. i highlight the leadership of chairman mccain in this regard for questioning the strategy before 2007 and calling for many of the key elements that make possible destabilization of that country. the questions members of this committee ask about our approach in syria and the broader fight against isis continue in this tradition. this committee's unwavering

support of those serving our nation has meant a tremendous amount to those on the battlefield and those supporting them. it with those great americans in mind that i've offered my thoughts here this morning. thank you very much. chairman mccain: thank you very much and thank you for the most apprehensive overview this committee has received on the situation and i'm very grateful and i would mention perhaps one admirable and important part of my experience was watching your leadership not only in the architect of the surge but your motivation of the young men and women who are serving in the military as officers and enlisted your inspirational leadership to them was something in which i will always remember with great

admiration. you called for in your statement what some of us have been asking for four years and that's they'll bonds have to end -- barrel bombs have to end. isis are not the ones that have ,000 of their countrymen, that's assad and we should own up to that. calling for a your assad to that we tell stop the barrel bombs and establish an enclave where people could take refuge and could have protection from the .nsane cruelties there will be blowback on that. doesn't that mean we will have

to have american boots on the ground, back in the quagmire -- i can see the reaction now from some of my friends, the same ones. what is your response to that that this would then cause us to be involved with boots on the ground and back into the quagmire that characterized our involvement prior to the search. gen. petraeus: i think very important to underscore the fact that he cannot be a part of the long-run solution in syria. the individual held responsible for well over and he isrians a dead the magnetic attraction that is bringing jihadi's to syria to fight him. if we are to support a force, it won't work for us. it won't be supportable if we ssad'ssupport it against a

actions, the most horrific of which are the dropping of their old bonds and that can be stopped. we can doel bonds and that. don't have to put any boots on the ground to do that although i think at some point, we should not be closed to the possibility of some advisors or support elements they can something like that in the same way we have them in iraq. entering a this as quagmire. i see this as taking out the most horrific casualty producing items. general allen has said well over 50% of the casualties have been caused by an indiscriminate barrell bombsc --they are bombs.

chairman mccain: i noticed the russians have aircraft's primarily as intercept or's -- intercepters. isis doesn't have an air force. it's very interesting. your take on what vladimir putin is trying to accomplish with this buildup in syria and what should the u.s. do in response? i think what: vladimir putin look like to do is resurrect the russian empire lost on we see this in a variety of different activities or at least the soviet union. he has a number of different activities in a variety of countries around russia and now he is in syria as well and trying to revive russian relationships with countries in the middle east. i think the immediate objective

he has in syria is to solidify the quarter on the mediterranean coast where he has his airbase and the only naval base left in the mediterranean. he would like to shore up his allies. at the very least, he wants to make sure they are not thrown under the bus by other regime until he has some better sense of the way forward. his objective is to keep the naval and air base. beyond that, you once to solidify his grip, which has increasingly.d

keep a syrianeast state. cannot be part of the long-run solution and we should not be quick to oust him. chairman mccain: so the u.s. should do what the response to this significant military buildup? gen. petraeus: we should not go in league with this. should not think we can partner with russia and iran against isis. isis,sia wanted to fight they could've have joined the 60 plus member coalition that general allen has together and help drop bombs on isis. they have some capabilities that will be useful to that fight.

certainly anything we were doing in that region. that can show that we will not accept that. i was in thehat ukraine a week or so ago. the violence is down somewhat in the east. i think vladimir putin is not playing the strongest hand in the world, although he's playing his hand tactically quite effectively. at the end of the day, he has come out of for reserves. those ofurn through the course of the next two years and if the sanctions are still imposed, he and the company's

that have debt will not be able to go to the world markets and get money to finance their government operations. i think he has a limited window of a couple years to continue and we haveactions to be very careful during this time when he could actually flash out and be more dangerous than he has been. reid: thank you very much. i just want to go back to the point you made. long-term, assad cannot be the future of syria that short-term,

you acknowledge there has to be -- gen. petraeus: syria could get worse. it's hard to believe but it could. implyr reid: does that for the temporary expedient measure, we would have to work russians towith the create a transition? you seem to pose this dilemma of he cannot stay forever but we don't know where to move. gen. petraeus: i think the -- i think being seen to work with him would unravel our relationships with the sunni partners in the region. what we can do is ensure we don't launch an offensive or

support an offensive by opposition forces that could precipitate his departure before there's some sense of what will follow. this sunni arab force we need to support is essential not just to fight isis, it's essential to create the context within which he might get a political /greement . forcer reid: it could them to leave, is that the solution? gen. petraeus: it could force a negotiated settlement out of which i would think there would come something that would not include assad. i don't see how he's possibly part of the long run.

you have continually reviewed the complexity of this issue. who is going to do the negotiations if we're looking for a negotiation agreement? the petraeus: secretary-general happens to be the same as sergey in iraq during the search. -- surge. in afghanistan, he was also highly capable. there is an extent process. york him on sunday in new coincidentally. senator reid: we should begin to energize this human process as an effective means to create a forum for negotiation? gen. petraeus: correct. this does exist.

it's been halting to put a happy face on it but it does exist and it's something on which we could build as there is a sense of t he context developing. in those who are supporting tehr a and moscow. senator reid: you were for isil forces on the ground -- what can we do through that allies that effort? is it possible to rebut allies? -- to revitalize? gen. petraeus: if we cannot do this, we will not defeat the islamic state. kurds there are iraq all the way to

take out the capital of the islamic state and expected them to hold that. it's not their traditional territory and the same is true in iraq. the merger shouldn't go further. there is recognition that shouldn't go. there also has to be the development of this force and that's moving along. placek the pieces are in if we will resource them and actually make a critical policy decision. that's the critical element for a sunni force in syria. they are not going to be willing to be supported by us if we are not going to support them when they are under attack as well as when they are under attack on

isis. senator reid: do you think it's been a long and winding road but it can be done putting in the field indigenous forces and the key policy decision is they will be protected against any foe. gen. petraeus: and take down the barrel bombs. that, we are to have to support some forces that will not have run all the way through our training program. pushing everybody through that is not necessarily the solution for wrapping up -- ramping up. senator reid: one of the approaches to taking down the barrel bomb is illuminating the -- allth -- the other is to destroy the aircraft. of somes the risk

response if not by the syrians, some response by russians at least protesting. gen. petraeus: it was publicly reported that had we taken out the chemical systems in the redline issue that a lot of that sea andve been done by air launch missiles. we are already in syria and errors race -- airspace. we have already put lids on the ground. ground.ots on the we have the capability to do a great deal and i think we know how to do it and without undue risk. senator reid: thank you.

>> thank you. i agree with the senator. yes certainly done that and we appreciate it very much. talkedng we haven't about much is the refugee situation and it's been my that we develop a strategy in the middle east that will be difficult to address. it's also become more severe if we don't. in january, the general testified and said we have many potential allies around the world who will rally to us but we have not been clear about where we stand in growing the violent jihadist terror threat. he said we don't have a specific strategy there. the role ofr stated

the u.s. is indispensable and it's time for a global upheaval in the consequences of american disagreement magnifies and requires larger intervention later. i would ask if you agree with these assessments. gen. petraeus: i do. sen. inhofe: if we have a strategy in the middle east and dealing with these countries, i don't know what it is because we've been waiting for these and it seems to me you will not resolve the refugee problem. it's a very real one. here we are expanding the numbers we would be willing to accept and it's just a drop in the bucket. thinkthat time, i don't it's going to resolve the problem. specific have a

explanation of the strategy of the administration in the middle syria, iraq, and iran? gen. petraeus: i will to defer to the administration for that. sen. inhofe: i have been deferring to the administration and we still don't have it. i happened to be there right after the ukrainian elections. how proud they were and how committed they were to us that they for the first time in 96 years don't have one communist in their parliament and immediately, vladimir putin started sending troops and equipment in, similar to what's happening in syria. you did respond to what they are trying to do with their military

buildup in syria. is there anything you would like to add in terms of what their end game and what they're trying to accomplish? back toraeus: let me go the ukraine. i think what vladimir putin wants us to ensure that ukraine does not succeed. his nightmare would be thriving, vibrant democracy with a free market economy on his western border. he can look at poland and see what happened in the 20 years since poland and ukraine had roughly the same per capita gdp. can to do whatever he keep the conflict bubbling but what he really wants to do is to ensure that there is failure and ukraine and in that regard, the future of the ukraine will be

determined in kiev. there are concerns about political inviting and so forth. ukrainian leaders have to pull together and get the politics right. way iraqi leaders have to pull together because the center of gravity of the fight in a rock actually not on the front lines. the future of iraq is determined by politics in baghdad and we have a unique opportunity right now to support the prime minister, who is a year into the job, pursuing aggressive reform. he's done away with the vice presidencies, eight ministries, and is now asking for examination of the activity of the chief justice, someone who was a chief justice during the

surge but increasingly became used by the prime minister to go after the senior sunni arab politicians and support other activities that ultimately alienated the sunni population and undid what we achieved urge.g the s sen. inhofe: i go back to oklahoma and talk to people and they contend we are over complicating this deal we have proposed with iran and that you don't really need to go beyond their location is important. i don't think the verification is there. i would like you to analyze that part of this deal. if we have something that can go as long as 54 days before we

find out whether iran is developing some of the things we think they are, i would like to know how that verification plays into this. gen. petraeus: sure. sen. inhofe: thank you. general, thank you for your service. characterized, if you would come on the solution that follows assad. in order to get there, how could in theract with russia u.n. context in order to bring about a political solution? gen. petraeus: i think it's important to him knowledge that there are various -- to acknowledge there are various potential options for syria. one could be you could put the entire country back together again and have a multiethnic democracy. i find that probably remote in

terms of possibilities. although later love knowledge and we cannot put humpty dumpty back together again and there will be a number of states .arved out of the old syria perhaps more than one. is going tothis happen. --will not have negotiations you will not have negotiations unless the individual most responsible for the civil war feel they are threatened and their survival is in question. if you can get a that point, you might have the leverage to conduct negotiations in which case we would expect russia would be on the side of keeping a favorable regime to them. overriding national

interest in the world case. beyond the vladimir putin straddling the role stage is to -- world stage is to maintain the seaport he has and the airbase in that court or that connects them on the mediterranean coast. sen. nelson: are we not getting sadse to that point where as feels completely threatened? gen. petraeus: i think the russian intervention gives him a degree of new hope. i think he has been losing recently, gradually, steadily over recent years and there's a sense he might not be able to continue the fight. progressively, what has happened over the years has been that first, advisers entered to help. russia provided some equipment lebanese entered on the side

of syria as well. there are reports of various shia militias from neighboring countries of fighting on his behalf and certainly the support --m russia, if it concludes includes a considerable amount of military hardware, will bolster him. sen. nelson: turning to around -- iran and the agreement, i read your op-ed and i find it very compelling. there are a lot of conclusions the two of you group that i had run as well -- the two of you had as well. , it was in the short term certainly is in my judgment in the interest of the u.s. with the agreement but in the long-term, and he speak in terms

of 10, 15 years down the road, do you want to expand them on idea and i will quote -- that thereing confronted from -- gen. petraeus: and persuading countries in the region that they don't need to go to the iran will bet that at the 15 year mark because then we will have a real threat to the proliferation regime and place. is any element here ironclad u.s. position, ideally from both congress and the white house, that states unequivocally

towardsiran ever moves weapon grade, we will stop that militarily. sen. nelson: your other sentence that leapt at me -- verification means only that we catch them if they cheat. what matters more is that the iranians recognize that they will pay a meaningful price when we catch them. gen. petraeus: correct. absolutely. advance and know in there are provisions in this. i think the snapback provision is fairly artful. there are many positive features in this. the elimination of the entire 20% stockpile, the elimination percentage,hed intrusive inspections.

of positive but some problematic ones because along with that will come the release of at least $50 billion according to the undersecretary of th. and while most of that undoubtedly will go to worthy programs for iranian citizens, they will be a portion that ends up in the pockets of the force and enables them to further enable lebanese, hezbollah, and yemen who got their way with force of arms and shia militia. sen. nelson: thank you, mr. chairman. >> general, thank you for your service to your country. it's been so valuable to us. those who've watched your career, who have seen you serve

the country, i'm not aware of anywhere whose done a better job then you and my respect for you and your integrity is unmatched and senator mccain, i believe his opening statement is very important for all of us. to question senator reid has asked raise the kind of practical questions we have to deal with and i believe at this congresstime, we as a needed to assert itself. the first thing congress should say to this administration is show as a strategy that will lead us out of this grass we are in and we don't have that today. youlieve -- and i will ask -- you've seen the political world and disagreements. study think it's possible for republicans and democrats on this panel in this congress to agree on a long-term, overall

strategy for the middle east that could guide us for decades to come and isn't that important? gen. petraeus: it's interesting is this is one of those moments where there seems to be bipartisan sense of a need to do more and that includes to define all the elements of the strategy. some of those elements are there. some are under resourced and some are missing. sessions: if we had an overall goal, it would be important to have our allies join and not. do you think that's -- join in that. do you think that's possible? our european allies to join with us on the plan. it has to extend the on the next presidential election. it so is good to

recall winston church oh on allies. the only thing worse than having allies is not having any. bit of my time in afghanistan in particular, but also in iraq, doing what might be turned coalition maintenance. i firmly believe that we should never go it alone if we can avoid doing that. although we should also recognize that there will be different contributions from different countries. and at the end of the day, there were virtually no countries in it gena stan that did not have -- inaveat of some type afghanistan that did not have some caveat of some type. and finding what each country can do well and which country needs to be augmented by u.s. assets to enable her contribute the most it can given the limitations that it has. sessions: i think this is a historic hearing. you -- and you have

already answered it about the middle east, i think today -- -- and we worry, could we be successful? if you go to iraq with a sirs, can we achieve a successful result? you said yes. i asked you if you got to the point where that was impossible, would you tell us so? and you said yes. and you succeeded as you suggested that we could succeed. i cannot say how much i value your opening statements. i think we should all appreciate the efforts of senator mccain at , in thee in 2007 when presidential election, he placed everything he believed about the forces and our men and women in mbat above any political goals.

gen. petraeus: i recall him saying i would rather lose an election that was both. mccain: i did both. [laughter] it is really: important to remember that the surge that mattered most was not the surge of forces, but the surgeon ideas. it was a change in strategy. big ideas are everything. and shifting from consolidating on big aces and getting out of the neighborhoods to recognizing that the only way -- mega bases and getting out of the neighborhoods to recognizing that the only way is number way. it was costly but necessary and it actually did bring security and broth violence down by some 90%, coupled with the other big idea that you can't kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength insurgency. you have to promote reconciliation.

thank you for your service and your wise words. i think it is a challenge for us to see if we can't at this point in history develop an overall view of the middle east. i think we need to see the whole region. and within it, we will have allies. we will have our problems. we will have things that we will have to accept, even if we don't like, and some things we will have to accept and provide leadership on and a long-term agreement of that kind among both parties and all of our people, including our allies around the world. i believe it would be a positive development.

my hand is open to try to reach the kind of agreement. chin: we try to find something that will resonate over in that part of the world, especially with syria being in trouble right now. you can look back at past performance and find out and learn from that. when qaddafi was taken at a libyan we had nothing to replace him with, we see what happened in libya. is it impossible to find a moderate with based -- with the

different sectors involved? gen. petraeus: there has been a lot of discussion of this. besser jeffrey has written about this. sen. manchin: that is the caution that we have with assad right now. we'll -- who do we replace them with? you playaeus: again, the car that you're dealt. you can influence that sometimes. there may have been a moment to do that. i ended up being in afghanistan in months of that. i was there for the initial piece. we should remember -- i have been prior -- i have been tough on crime mr. maliki here. but during the surge in the years after the surge, he is the one who went after the shia militia in foster. very frankly impulsively come as you recall, in the charge of .ights we called it march madness in march of 2008.

it was a very close-run affair until we could get all the forces marshaled to support his elements that were on the ground. was a resounding victory there and sadr city and a number of other places in baghdad and set the conditions for a period of relative stability and reasonable harmony that lasted for several years after that. tragically, he undid much of what was done during the surge, no longer honored agreements that were made with the sunni population, with the so-called sons of iraq, and so forth. again, there has been a lot of academic and pundit discussion, think tank discussion on why we hung with them, especially because former premise or allow in parliament but could not form a government and there was a lot of wrangling back and worth. this is something that is in everyone's mind and everyone's

memory. and again, surly the experience with qadhafi. although i think the point at which we committed to support the up spring, the wellspring of citizens going after qadhafi, that arguably was the right move. what needed to happen after that, of course, was to immediately, as quickly as possible, try to carry out a ddr program, a disarmament, demobilization and reintegration program for all the different militias, try to help form security forces as quickly as possible. i think we have learned some lessons in that regard. so that when you got an inclusive government, it is supported wholeheartedly and you move forward. the iran nuclear decision was perhaps the most difficult for all of us. not just in this committee, but in the whole senate membership. with that being said, i lean

strongly toward supporting because i want to work with our allies. if i could not go home and explain it, i could not supported. i could not explain to us virginians what happens after eight to 10 years or 15 because we put them in a position to be stronger if they have not changed. it since we hold them accountable for their actions as terrorists, then how do expect them to change their ways later on? so that was the one thing that stopped me from supporting it. what i would ask you is how damaging to our allies would we have been, with the u.s. have been if it had been defeated, if we had not -- those who voted for it had not voted for it? would it have damaged our relationships with our allies who are saying we are going to go without you? gen. petraeus: absolutely. i think there are big questions about the sanctions regime, could you get it back together. we kept china and russia on

board through this process. does it all become unraveled and so forth? i think the real question -- this is a reality, focusing forward, taking the rearview mirrors off the bus. the biggest question is what happens after 15 years. all the restrictions in the agreement end and iran can move out quite smartly in a variety of different areas and building its enrichment capacity and other elements of the program. and that is why it is so vitally important that the u.s. be very, very clear, still clear, ironclad, why the white house and congress together should be very clear about what would happen if iran ever made a move towards weapons grade enrichment. that will also not only hopefully deter iran, but also reassure our gulf allies. that is another very important consideration.

sen. wicker: i think we could have gotten the forces if we had really tried. gen. petraeus: they probably wasn't going to be approved by the parliament. 3500ieve we now have troops on the ground without a forces agreement. we feel comfortable doing this now that we really have to. candidly, that was something we might have considered trying given that the trimester was going to give his personal assurance and test it out. there is no guarantee that having 10,000 troops on the ground would have given us the influence or prevented by mr. maliki from taking the highly sectarian actions that he did. but i would have liked to test

it -- to have tested the proposition. wicker: i am encouraged that you are so positive of his reforms and the fact that he has the backing of iraqi citizens in the streets. i assume by that you mean kurdish iraqi citizens in the streets. gen. petraeus: i mean shia iraqi. the sunnis desperately needed without this, they have no source of revenue so those same breakup by the way, it is one thing for curtis, which is largely autonomous and now oilally pretty good revenues come in and although not enough. they are running a deficit and they still need what they can get a mother 17% at of the oil

revenues from iraq proper, which means really need to southern provinces that produce the most. but there is no oil or gas revenue going to be provided for the sunni areas. there is no production in those areas. so one of the really serious problems is how would they survive. the second is who draws the boundaries, where the borders? the state of politics is so fractious that you have a population that is alienated. how in the world are you going to have an amicable divorce? this will be a very fractious divorce and it will be another civil war perhaps along the lines of syria. concern about that. anybody wants to pursue inclusive politics but i don't think people have picked up that there are huge to mistress and going on in the cities of iraq in the southern part of the country because of citizens who are outraged