but we have seen increased numbers trying to bring in some sort of funding stream to build a base. but i think there are -- they are a ways from that. the afghan forces, our forces continue to look at that. the taliban, if they have foreign fighters, whether they are uzbek, chechen -- we have seen pieces and parts of that. up in the north. we have seen reports that they have seen a lot more foreign and othern the kundhz areas. as far as numbers, the increase on foreign fighters, i don't think i could give that to you, ma'am. what numberser: are we looking out for isil and the taliban? do you have any hard numbers on that? i know you said it was difficult to determine the number of

recruits, but where are we? ma'am, thepbell: numbers i would give you would be based on different reports i am seeing. i think an open press that i 3000 on theuld be daish and three years and years -- the number of taliban inside afghanistan have gone from 20,000 to 80,000. i think it is hard to distinguish which people just sympathize with the taliban and which ones are actually hard-core taliban. the intelligence community continues to look at that. what i would say, the afghan security forces have really impacted the taliban this year based on the number of casualties they have caused the taliban. with the afghan

national police and local police officers, we visited about that a little yesterday in my office. what you think are the biggest challenges, the reduced weaknesses they have, and will they be able to become the biggest -- weaknesses they have, and will they be able to become professional as we assess what our position is going to be an afghanistan? general campbell: for the police, the number one issue i stress with them is getting the right leadership. the police have several thousand that are untrained, eventual police chiefs. they are doing that to get them out on a checkpoint, get them into the fight. but they've got to get them into the right training to make sure they have that. i think the afghan local police have taken a lot of casualties because they have beard outside what they were designed to do.

designed -- they were not equipped, they were not trained for that. but they have miss utilized them by putting them on those checkpoints. again, i believe training is the key for the afghan police. at i think what we need to say here cases areice in many doing the same thing as the army. they are fighting very, very tough like the army. they are not manned. they are not equipped. senator fischer: if the president were to decide to keep our forces in afghanistan longer, what do you believe and the the reaction partners. to our nato would they be able to continue? there are 41ell:

countries tight end now. the ones i having gauged and for the most part are very supportive. it for the most part, they want to provide financial support or troops. states, theynited will see nato come into that. senator fischer: so they believe that they would continue to stabilize the country? general campbell: yes, ma'am. senator mccain: senator gillibrand. i would likebrand: to continue the line of questioning about young boys being abused by afghan commanders and also young girls. what is the military policy when a service member becomes aware of abuse.

senator donnelly: --general campbell: what our policy has said since 2011 is even have to report instances of sexual abuse of your chain of command. them towhat i expect do. senator gillibrand: so those who have reported up the chain of command, have you reported those instances? these are froml: 2010, 11, 2012. i did not have anything to do with those cases. any reports that would come to me, we would make sure we provided that to the afghan government as well. president ghani has made it clear he does not tolerate that

and he will prosecute that. the cases you referred to are four or five or six years ago. senator gillibrand: have you followed up to see if those cases were handled properly? general campbell: no, ma'am. senator gillibrand: if the policy changes in 2011, and i believe that they were handled incorrectly, who is doing that investigation? general campbell: ma'am, i will take that for the record. i don't know. ok, pleaselibrand: report who is doing the investigation. if those individuals did not report this and obviously there commanders were not following the policy in 2011 and 2012. what was the policy before 2011? general campbell: ma'am, i think as senator cotton talked about

-- i was in 2003, 2004, myself. seen one who did not report it. it has always been the policy if you see this he reported. policy toays been our treat people with respect. i can't imagine someone not doing that. senator gillibrand: why do you think the various troops to the reported this were told it was their culture? why do you think there is an understanding you do not intervene when it is their culture? are they poorly trained, or just a knowledgeable or do you think commanders are getting it wrong in the field? general campbell: ma'am, i cannot speak for those and those arees, either completed or ongoing. i would tell you all of the forces i have been involved in absolutely understand what the

requirement is. that all of the people currently in the theater go back and train again. what willllibrand: so we do today? if you hear screaming from children, what would the soldiers do? reported upbell: the chain of command. senator gillibrand: what does the chain of command do with that information? reported tobell: the senior afghan leadership. senator gillibrand: if the thean culture says -- if afghan leadership says it's our culture, what do they do? general campbell: the afghan leadership i have dealt with, i do not think they would say that. they understand this is not conduct -- this is criminal conduct. they want to hold people

accountable. are there going to be people that disregard that, just like you have and maybe any other country, yes. but again -- aretor gillibrand: but you saying then that our policy is still not to intervene. what our policy is based on what you just said is reported to the afghan authorities. if they choose to do nothing, we do nothing. general campbell: no, i did not say that, ma'am. senator gillibrand: what do we do if they do nothing? general campbell: in the 14 months i've been there i have not had a case where i had to go back to the afghan authorities since they you have to do something on this and i think that is a result of the afghan -- of the afghans understanding they need to improve in this area. if something is brought through my chain of command to me and this is abuse of children i would make sure i go to the afghans and say here is the report. you need to check out this report and i would expect them

to do that. we worked through our central function three and i have folks i had to continue to train, advise, assist in this syria. we would absolutely expect them to go do something. if they did not do something and evidence thatible something happened, i would president.to the blaming it on culture is not the goneur forces would have -- you wouldllibrand: so take it to president obama and try to make him engaged -- general campbell: i would raise it to president ghani. again, as soon as this news article came out i called president ghani and said, hey, we've got to make sure -- and

before i could even finish the sentence, president ghani said that is absolutely criminal behavior. -- we talked to the very next day, the president was there. all of the senior cabinet members were there, and before he started his agenda of things to get through, he raised this issue, and he made sure they understood that this behavior would not be tolerated. so, i have no doubt that the afghans get this and i have no doubt that our military personnel understand what is expected of them. senator mccain: senator tillis. senator tillis: thank you, mr. chair. general, welcome. i think we have to go back and talk about a number of positive as as that have occurred result of our presence in afghanistan. you did a great job of

summarizing that back in february. life expectancy, children in protecting women and children. it is a great story. for america's presents, i do not think it would be a story you didn't tell back in february. i want to go back to this drawdown. you just don't wake-up monday morning and say i've got to bring down 1000 troops and all of the material that go with them by the end of the month. it takes a lot of planning. i know you have a proposal that the president is giving you a lot of flexibility which led you to keep the 9800 there now, but at what point do you have to start taking actions for the therial drawdown to hit 2016 and of your target? we have to be weeks or months away from you putting those

plans in place. general campbell: yes, sir. sir, it becomes a matter of physics. how quickly do you have to start? if the president does not make any decision, how soon do we see our troops drawdown to an embassy presence in kabul? general campbell: every day de-sscope -- every day we cope our theater. senator tillis: so -- i apologize for being short. of got a couple questions. you are already taking steps to than 9800.r less we just know know what the number is? yes, butampbell: sir, the course of action i recommended, if we get a decision -- senator tillis: i think the administration needs to be

crystal on this. this is not something that should take long and anyone who situationed this knows the president is going down a perilous path. you mention some things i have not heard you talk about. , the other funding streams that are at risk that are also an important part of the gains we made in protecting those gains, can you tell me about any progress or concerns you have with that? sir, this is al: critical year for 2016. they will meet at the warsaw conference and that will for 2018, 2019, 2024 afghanistan -- senator tillis: but that is still an open switch if we continue to build on our games there? is that correct? general campbell: yes, it is

important we do not lose -- senator tillis: thank you. something else i want to reinforce that senator graham touched on, and he was trying to make the point that there is tonterterrorism resources help us do our job in the region. what i think many of the american people do not understand is the value of the ct effort with respect to threats and other regions of the -- areas of the region and threats to the homeland. this is the birthplace of the 9/11 attacks. there are people lauding terrorist actions against americans, whether it is american installations abroad or in the homeland. presenceo an embassy only, we have produced say we would lose all of our counterterrorism presence in that region. did i hear you correctly? general campbell: sir, we would

not have the ability to conduct counterterrorism as i do today if we were just based in kabul. thetor tillis: so, based on current plan, a plan the current administration is considering -- we know it is going to be diminished, but it could almost all go away by next year based on the current plans as you understand them today? glidel campbell: sir, the slope i am on is to go to about 1000 at the end of 2016. isator tillis: i think it irresponsible and dangerous and i appreciate the work you are doing because i know you probably have a different view. i respect the fact you are going through your chain of command, but this president needs to understand he needs to be decisive and take different action or he is putting american interest at risk. thank you all for your service. senator mccain: senator manchin. senator manchin: think you very much, mr. chairman. thank you, general. i think what we're trying to get our hands around as far as

should we stay question mark if we do stay, how many will stay? what effect will that have? a goes back to the training, the money we have spent, the effort and time we've spent on the training, how many people we have to adequately carry out the training? how much money with that cost? it just goes on and on and on, as you know. do you thinks, afghanistan is more stable and better prepared to take care of itself and with our help or not our helpelp or than iraq was? the leadership in afghanistan is a much more different mindset and determine today than when iraq was -- when we made our decision to leave. if you could give me just a little -- i just heard you say about 1000 is what you intend to recommend? is that wrong?

no, sir.ampbell: 1000 is the current position we are on. senator manchin: we are on a glide path to 1000 by 2016? sir.al campbell: yes, that is to go to a normal in busy presence that president obama discussed back in 2014. senator manchin: basically that would be the same glide path we were on -- may be no difference with barak and we saw the results in iraq? general campbell: sir, afghanistan is not iraq. you have a government that want to there. that wantsgovernment the counterterrorism capability. you have a fighting force that is very resilient or it i think there are some between iraq and afghanistan. senator manchin: do you think they will change the recommendation on the 1000, that will be up? sir, i havebell:

provided courses of action to my leadership that provides senior leadership with options based on changes in the last deed of years. senator manchin: the money we have spent right now, the youning for the afghans, do expect that to continue, i was pouring money into train their people? sir, we arebell: working very hard to continue to bring that number down. senator manchin: do they have any economy at all other than the war effort? is there economy sucking off at u.s. taxpayers? to they have any ability to carry their own load? general campbell: each year, we try to up the commitment to the national security. there economy is very, very tough. president ghani based on his background in the world bank is working very hard on a successful regional economic conference.

there was just the dubai conference where they had investors come to take a look at the different airfields we would leave. but it's going to take a long time to build their economy. theywould not be able -- will be dependent on the international community for that money for years to come. lostor manchin: we soldiers and one of those was from west virginia. sergeant brian hamm. c-130 -- we fly a lot in our guard, as you know. they are very capable aircraft. information you could share with me i could share with the parents? general campbell: sir, my thoughts and prayers are with all the families. i talked to the cruise just to

gather the men and talk to them that very morning. the investigation is ongoing -- senator manchin: did the accident happen on take off? general campbell: yes, sir. i can talk to you one-on-one. senator manchin: if you could, i would appreciate it, just to give this family some relief and closure. yourank you general, for testimony. i know it is not easy to testify . i think all of us appreciate your testimony. i am going to follow up with a number of the previous questions you up and asked. first senator shaheen had asked about a you win investigation -- investigation into the hospital accident. does the u.n. usually investigate deliberate attacks on civilians when there --when they are by the taliban? general campbell: sir, i have to

pass -- senator sullivan: i do not think they do. does it seem fair and balanced that the u.n. conduct an investigation on something that is clearly accidental, when they do not investigate deliberate taliban killing of civilians? do you think that would be viewed as fair, balanced, something the command needs? general campbell: -- general campbell: i cannot comment on the u.n.. i have complete confidence in the team that we have your they will be thorough and transparent. if there were mistakes made, we will make sure they come out. if people are to be held accountable, we will make sure we will. senator sullivan: i think most of us here do as well -- i certainly do not think an additional investigation by the u.n. would be warranted or welcomed by this committee.

let me ask you the issue again -- this is senator graham, senator tillis sprawl questions. you are very focused on managing risk. if we go forward with the plan, does it increase the risk we taliban could take over the government in two or three or four years out? sir, again, ill: think we have another year and a have to continue to grow the afghan security forces if we went down to 1000 around kabul. we would not have the ability to train -- senator sullivan: how about what it increase the risk the homeland would be attacked? senator tillis asked to be very good and direct question that rct capability would basically end. with that increase the risk -- i am talking incrementally increase the risk the united states of america would be attacked? sir, when thell: decision was made by president obama and 2014, ct was not one

of the variables tied into that decision. i was asullivan: lieutenant colonel in the marines a couple years ago, i was assigned to a pt in afghanistan. when they were looking at the first posture, we were looking at the first posture that would mission tom the oes the rescue support mission. it was frustrating to be working on that because we had not gotten guidance in terms of numbers from the senior military -- actually senior civilians. so, you of said you cannot talk about options, but have you actually been given a timeline by which the white house is --ng to respond to your senator tillis mentioned the clock is ticking. have you received information you are going to be given guidance by a certain date or have you requested a certain date by which to be given

guidance, given that the clock is ticking on this very important issue? sir, as we layl: out from a planning perspective, as we lay out different courses of action, we havedp's -- we have dp's were decision points. are we sullivan: approaching one pretty soon? general campbell: everybody in the dod is looking very hard at these different courses of action. as we talk about the retrograde and the time it takes, i think the senior leadership understands windows decision points are and when they have to get those out. yes, sir. let me ask avan: final question. having spent time in afghanistan and pakistan, i know you would probably agree with this. there is a narrative in the region that in the 1980's we were very active there because

of the soviet invasion and we were very helpful in terms of our assistance to people in those two different countries. and then there is the sense that in the 1990's, we "abandoned" the region. i think that's a very powerful narrative. i do not know if you have seen it. i have certainly seen it when i part of then that world. i think it's really important testimony. we are overwhelmingly welcomed, as you mention, by the civilian population, by the afghan leadership. do you think if we drive down to just the embassy for us, which is kind of what we have in the we would oncerld, again resurrect this idea of ofndoning the region, abandoning the people there, the government there. and if that were the case, how do you think that would impact america's national security if any part of the world that is the heart of the battle against al qaeda, the part of the world

that brought us 9/11, that we were viewed once again is unreliable and having abandoned the region, which is a narrative that is very powerful still in that region? do you think -- do you think that narrative would be resurrected question mark how do you think that would impact of national security? haveal campbell: sir, i been tied up with afghanistan for many years. anybody in the thetary will tell you ability to continue to train and advise and assist our afghan partners to improve on their capability is what any military person will tell you -- again, i said the afghan people continue to want to have a coalition presence. the understand the impact that has for them. so, that's what they want.

continue to want to a must we do something that dissuades them from that. we have come a long way from their. -- from there. a lot of asked to do with this new national government. they understand, different from president karzai was, we provide a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. a lot of our minimum in a paid be ultimate sector price. -- a lot of our men and women have paid the ultimate sacrifice. senator sullivan: thank you, general. you to general campbell for being here. thank you for your outstanding service. as do myeciate it, constituents. i am going to go back to a couple points we have talked about many times already, general. but going back to the sexual assaults, the sexual abuses by the afghan national security

afghans, again, the particularly the young boys, it seems many of the folks i have talked to who have served in that region, it was common knowledge this was happening and i do not believe there was a dod that we turn a blind eye. in fact, since 2011 there has ,een a policy in place educational materials, classes, so forth. there may have been kind of an unofficial do-nothing policy. we are starting to see that corrected as it comes to light. but it does affect the minimum women that serve with us -- the men and women that serve with us -- how they operates within that is an issue. a trust issue. there was a 2011 report by dr. jeffrey bourdon.

he was a military behavioral scientist. commented -- and i am quoting "several u.s. soldiers reported they had served and alienated them from the civilian populace and they were numerous accounts of canadian troops complaining about the rampant sexual abuse of children they witnessed personnel commit, including the practice and raping of sodomizing of little boys." has any service member or civilian on the your command now or during your previous command of rce reported up the chain an allegation of a sexual assault against afghan children? gen. campbell: on this current tour, i have had not any reports. i don't remember anything specifically from 2010, 2011.

i can go back and look at records. i cannot stress enough that this is about discipline, discipline of our men and women understanding what right and wrong is. about treating people with dignity and respect. as i said, even the afghans, president ghani all the way down, understand how important this is. they have reiterated to me that this is serious. the people that conduct this criminal activity will be prosecuted. we have reiterated to our men and women that if you see this, you have to report this. so, what you are referring to is 2010-2011, maybe 2012 reports. i think a lot has happened in that time. i cannot comment on any particular company level, unit, withinel,

that unit that the members of the unit felt it was ok to do something like that. i cannot comment. sen. ernst: do you know of any instances where an afghan soldier was held within that unit that the members of the unit felt it was ok to do something accountable or afghan leader and any disciplinary actions on their behalf? gen. campbell: i have seen some disciplinary actions over the last year in gross violations of human rights when it comes to abusing soldiers, abusing of other members of the command. i have not seen it with sexual assault of children in the last 14 months. sen. ernst: thank you. i think it is important that we stress that not only is it unacceptable in our own ranks, but also those we are serving with. thank you for that. going back also to capabilities and conditions, rather than the timeframe, if we look at keeping 10,000 troops on ground in

afghanistan, if there is a decision point where we keep 5000 or zero, is there anyway you can broadly describe the conditions thaon the ground before we get to those points? do we leave it the same? at what point can we get to 5000 and so forth? just very broadly. thank you. gen. campbell: i think based on what has happened since the president made his decision in 2014 to go down to 1000 around the embassy, we have taken a look at all the conditions. based on those, i have provided options to take a look at the mission sense we want to do in the future. we still have to train, advise on different levels. i believe we have to have a counterterrorism capability. you need a certain amount of forces to be able to do that.

those are based on what is happening in the last couple of years and as we look in the future. conditions on the ground have changed since 2014. the senior leadership, the joint staff and the white house i looking at these options, -- are looking at these options, understanding conditions on the ground have changed. we have a look at the pros and cons and go forward. sen. ernst: thank you. my time is expired. i thank you for your valuable, no bs assessment of what is going on. thank you, general. sen. mccain: senator blumenthal. sen. blumenthal: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, general, for your extraordinary service to our nation and your present role. -- as a question about interacting with the taliban and other factional parts of our

opponents there. do youl a threat regarded compared to the taliban the to elements involved -- the taliban involve any other factors with da'ish. gen. campbell: they have different names for it. everybody is looking at this to make sure they cannot grow, they cannot build to a level to do something like you have seen in iraq and syria. daesh and taliban have different philosophies. they are fighting each other. within the ranks of the taliban, there are reconcilable's that understand the only way to end this is a political solution and

they want to be a part of it. inside of the taliban, there are 20% or 30% that are irrecon cilable. i do not believe that daesh are in the reconcilable branch. they will be irreconcilable at this point in time. sen. blumenthal: are you satisfied with the efforts that have been made towards reconciliation and negotiation so far? gen. campbell: not satisfied because we have not got to it. i think there is a lot more that can be done by both afghanistan and pakistan and the taliban quite frankly. we have to continue to move towards a peace process. the first day president ghani took office, he talked about bringing in the taliban. that you have to be a part of this peace process. you cannot continue to kill fellow afghans, fellow muslims. ess.art of the priesteace proc

i think he genuinely wants that to happen and he is doing everything he can, including spending a lot of political capital on pakistan to help them reduce the violence inside of afghanistan to drive towards reconciliation. sen. blumenthal: is that goal of reconciliation one of the factors you consider in your recommendation as to what size and scope the american presence should be an over what -- and over what period of time? ist your answers suggest there is some different kind of picture that it would look like. gen. campbell: i think there is a lot of different audiences out there that understanding a continued presence of the coalition would have an impact

on president ghani, the afghan security forces, the afghan people, the taliban, pakistan and on nato. i think all of those audiences have aering levels would decision to continue to have a larger number of coalition forces, not only the u.s., but the coalition would have a huge impact. sen. blumenthal: you make reference in your testimony to two other trends that i think are concerning. the brain drain and loss of economic resources, the drain on capital. has that increased in seriousness? gen. campbell: there has been a lot of reports of afghans trying to leave the country. a lot of the countries in that area -- the refugee issue in

europe. a lot of that are afghans trying to leave. president ghani has reached out to the younger generation for them to stay in afghanistan. that has been, for lack of better term, a drain on human capital. the future of afghanistan is two things -- the afghan security forces and this younger generation of afghans that are tired of 35, 40 years of war. sen. blumenthal: one can hardly blame them given the impact on their futures, economic, social and family. is afghanistanis as a country that is really dependent on the political factors and social and economic factors that are hopefully supported and promoted by the americans as well. thank you, mr, general.

this is a very serious time for us. sen. reed: it is also the sen. sessions: it will not impact the outcome. is that correct? gen. campbell: you are talking about the afghan security forces? sen. sessions: there are some battles to be fought. military conflict is involved and will continue to be involved for some time, is it not? gen. campbell: afghanistan will continue to be a very dangerous place and the kurdish forces will continue to be challenged. sen. sessions: the president has said he would like to negotiate with the taliban and that has been attempted for a number of

years to date. is it harder or easier to negotiate with the taliban. a reasonable solution, a peaceful solution if we made it irrevocablee an commitment to leave at a certain date? gen. campbell: the reconciliation piece will be led by the afghan government. you absolutely want to operate from a position of strength. i know it is a difficult question. i would translate it to say you needed to have a military strength, and if it is not there, we can give confidence in the taliban that if they can be successful militarily, even of the people of afghanistan do not prefer taliban domination. we are setting that up to allow

that to happen and that is a very dicey things. in terms of going to 1000 troops, this is really not a military presence, is it? this is simply an embassy security force essentially. gen. campbell: sir, the goal right now were the intent is to have a security cooperation office. that would be more than embassy force protection. it would also be the ability to have oversight for military sales, the money that would go into afghanistan as well. sen. sessions: it is essentially it a fighting force and signals we are completely out of the fight militarily, i would suggest. i think that is a dangerous signal to be sending. you talk about -- we need to train, assist and advise more. is it your recommendation that

that capability extend beyond the end of 2016? gen. campbell: i have said the afghans will continue to support the many areas we have identified that they will need continued help -- aviation, logistics, intelligence. areas, it would require more time. to what extent do they have rotary aircraft helicopter capability for evacuation of wounded or resupplying remote forces or otherwise taking the battle to the end? does that remain a problem? air campbell: the close force capability is just starting to grow. they have relied on the mi-35. they are down to two. 7's that allow them to move wounded, provide resupplys. they have hatried to put in

machine guns. we have put in a little attack bird that can give them a little better close air support capability. fixed-wing capability will start in 2017, 2018. sen. sessions: i'm worried about it. in your best military judgment, what additional risks are we undertaking if our goal is to create a stable environment in iraq where people can go to school and have a chance for wesperity -- what risk are incurring by setting a firm date of ending by the end of 2016? gen. campbell: as i mentioned many times before, whenever you put a time on something that

always give somebody the ability to manipulate that, whether that is the enemy or friendly forces. i think the options we have provided to the senior leadership, weighing both -- is looking at different outcomes-based on what has changed over the last few years. sen. sessions: the president of the united states has made some very unwise decisions in this regard. complicating the life of people in afghanistan and making difficult, lot more in my opinion. i don't want to make a partisan argument. we had a deep commitment to afghanistan. an entire international coalition on that part. bipartisan, this was a good war. i think it is possible to achieve the goal you stated. do you believe it is possible? gen. campbell: i would not be

there if i did not think it was possible. sen. sessions: i agree. outink to completely move and radically reduce our presence difficult, in my opinion. riskst want risks, incredibly the gains men and women have fought so hard for and allies around the world that have helped us. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your leadership. i think we would do well to listen to your device. we should've listened in iraq and we should listen in afghanistan. sen. mccain: thank you, senator. general, as i understand the present plan is there will be increased reductions beginning in january. is that correct? gen. campbell: sir, to get down to -- sen. mccain: the embassy centric, you begin those withdrawals in january.

gen. campbell: i would have to look back at the exact numbers. sen. mccain: roughly. we are in october and the plan now is in 2017 we are down to an embassy-centric f orce. that is the plan? gen. campbell: yes. sen. mccain: we are sitting here in october and you don't know whether to begin three months from now a rather significant withdrawal of troops which requires a lot of planning, a lot of logistics, a lot of assets. and here we are sitting in october and you have been asked to provide the white house with a series of options. is that right? gen. campbell: i have provided options and in those options i the slope ied for

have to take to get down to the required numbers. we -- inin: so, addition, you have been asked for the best option, the one option that would secure iraq succeed in a mission in the most effective and efficient fashion. instead, you will ask for "options." most of us were top to believe there is only one option for victory and success. you have been asked for options. dare i ask how many? i'm not sure i have been asked for options. i have taken a look, since i have been on the ground the last 14 months, seen where the afghan security forces are at in different metrics we take a look at. in order to ensure they have the

right capability -- sen. mccain: is there only one option to achieve the most efficient, most effective, least in danger of further casualties? i don't understand this. study of usually my warfare is you develop a strategy and you implement the strategy with a plan. you don't say, hey, we will have five or six plans, options. most commander in chiefs i have known of calder military people together -- call their military whate t together and say are the best strategies and how do we get there? in my getting something wrong? gen. campbell: i could not comment if you are getting something wrong. i have provided -- sen. mccain: options. gen. campbell: train and assist

capabilities in afghanistan post-2016. sen. mccain: you have given them "options" plural. most commander in chief will say give me the plan that it takes so we can succeed in the best and most efficient way to accomplish our goal. we all know the goal is a free, stable, democratic afghanistan. ofl, it's curious times, but course, those of us that make any criticism apparently don't know a lot of the things that the president of the united states knows. i thank you, general. you are doing as you are ordered observed firsthand your leadership in afghanistan

on several occasions. i think it is outstanding. obviously, i'm not complaining at you because you are playing the hand you are dealt. i just don't understand why this administration does not understand that if we do what is presently planned beginning three months from now that we will see the iraq movie again. there is no doubt in anybody's mind about that. now we see a burgeoning, or embryonic isis. we see the iranians providing weapons naand more for the taliban. we just saw an attack on one of the major cities in a part of afghanistan that we, up until now, we believe was the most secure. someems to me this lends urgency to action which would reverse what is clearly a deteriorating trend. finally, general, we look

forward to the results of your investigation of this terrible tragedy of the attack on the hospital. i want to emphasize -- i know i speak for all of my colleagues that we are deeply regretting this tragedy. we do point out from time to time about the fog of war. this hearing is adjourned. gen. campbell: thank you, sir. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> next, more road to the white house beginning with ohio governor john kasich taking part in a town hall of the u.s. this manic chamber of congress. and then marco rubio at a campaign stop. later, general john campbell on the u.s. airstrike that hit doctors without borders whe clinic in the country. johnr michigan congressman dingell was admitted to a hospital in detroit today. he tweeted about the incident

this afternoon. "back in the hospital. being old sucks." he is expected to undergo a hard procedure. the house returns for morning business tomorrow at 10 a.m. on thursday, republican leadership elections will take place to find a replacement for outgoing speaker john boehner. on friday, they take up the bill related to crude oil exports. the senate continues work on legislation to authorize 2016 defense programs. long, c-spangn takes you on the road to the white house. access to the candidates at 10 all meetings, news conferences, rallies and speeches. reading your comments on twitter, facebook and by phone. as always, every campaign event we cover is available on our website at www.c-span.org.

>> ohio governor and republican presidential candidate john kasich took part in a town hall hosted by the hispanic chamber of commerce. the chamber's president asked him his views on immigration and economic issues. he was also talked about reducing gun violence. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. host: good morning, everybody, or afternoon. welcome to the fourth presidential candidate question and answer session. as president and c.e.o. of the

united states hispanic chamber of commerce, i have the honor of ceo of the u.s. hispanic chamber of commerce i have the honor of representing 4.1 hispanic-owned businesses that together contribute over $661 billion to the american economy. we advocate on behalf of 250 major corporations through our network of 200 local chambers and business associations worldwide. we represent the interest of business men and women who happen to be of hispanic descent, we never forget we are businesses. every product we create and service we provide goes to benefit this american economy. as an association that represents 4.1 hispanic business owners we have an accountability to make sure our voices are heard by each candidate. not only as business leaders,

but taxpayers, campaign donors and ultimately as voters. that is why this is so important. this question and answer session is the fourth in a serious. previously we hosted ted cruz, matin o'malley, and senator bernies sanders for questions about campaigns and our country. he hosted jeb bush two weeks ago on the same topics. today we are joined by ohio governor john kasich. this is our first engagement with the governor, we have been watching his campaign and are familiar with his body of work in ohio and congress. the goal is simple. this form is met to set the record straight on a wide array of issues for hispanic americans

including jobs, the economy, the border and issues that affect all of us. we will spend 45 minutes in question between myself and the governor and then take a few questions from the audience. with that i would like to welcome governor john kasich. [applause] >> let me start by commending you for keeping your word and coming to talk to the hispanic community unlike others in your party you obviously have a busy schedule especially with the third gop debate coming up so i want to thank you for taking the time to talk to us. >> my pleasure. why wouldn't i come? this is great. >> good man.

to kick it off, i want to get your take on the primary landscape. you said before no republican has every won the white house without winning ohio, so my question is would a bit of a hometown and home field advantage, what is your plan to become the nominee? >> the situation is a brilliant way in america to pick a president. you start over in iowa with the caucus that is different. and it is unpredictable what happens over here. after ohio we have new hampshire which is 1.2 million people. that is like running for congress. there you show up and very much like iowa you do a lot of these to town halls. i have done 18 of them.