overed today are covered in your book, "the will to lead," it just came out a couple months ago. o follow anders fogh rasmussen twitter at anders fogh on twitter. appreciate your time on "washington journal." >> thank you. great pleasure. do it for the program today, we'll see you back here tomorrow morning, 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific for another "washington journal." until then, have a great monday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] here's a look at some of our live programming on the c-span networks. in half an hour or so we will onng you a discussion

hiv-aids research and funding. then it is white house spokesman josh earnest speaking to reporters. we expect him to speak about the death of fidel castro among recent topics. coming up later, a look at u.s. alliances and leadership on the global stage. that will be live at 2 p.m. eastern here on c-span. an event on domestic security in the age of isis. -- can watch that live looking at the lobby of trump tower. many potential cabinet nominees making their way to the building.

jennifer jacobs of bloomberg -- weng that visitors will follow this story and bring you an update. >> i hope any copyright rewrite would come with the requirement or some kind of framework of putting data in a central repository with people have access to it. it can be searched not only on an individual item by item basis. we move for an on-demand service. -- the competition between humans and thoughts. he is interviewed by a

technology reporter for politico. >> what they do is they keep other fans out of the market. fans already went to see a concert and they can mash buttons on their computer all day long. they are not able to get tickets in their first run. onlyare left with the opportunity of buying those tickets on the secondary market. >> watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span two. a look now at the latest in the fight against isis from today's washington journal.

can you explain how many service members are part of that mission right now? >> i command the u.s. army's 18th airborne. and i command a joint task force operation. is made up of over 60 nations that participate in various levels. are 19 or 20 contributing nations that contribute on the ground or air or sea here that are facing off against isil. they are told they are over 8000

and between iraq and syria and the surrounding region and coalition troops numbers. host: take us through one of the main ways the u.s. services participating in this fight. how close are they getting to the front lines? especially this fight we see so much about in the news headlines? guest: usually more dance to

training, they do that on their own. then we assisted him with onisers who accompany them operations. then we provide them enabling capabilities. some examples are the intelligence reconnaissance asset. >> we talk about retaking most soul. artillery gets tougher to use those things. can we talk about how that effort is going in most soul and what the main u.s. role is there . guest: i think the security is going well.

if you think about this two years ago, it was a defeated army. bay --ding the barricading the gates of baghdad. they have recovered their army,g, retrained their liberated about half of the isil controlled territory in iraq and they have now attacked to liberate most soul, the largest city held by the -- held by isil. pretty remarkable turnaround. our coalition forces are up there doing some of the tasks i described. we are down to advising and enabling capabilities.

there are troops in and around moz oh with their iraqi counterparts, in the skies overhead providing intelligence. and closer to mosul with iraqi headquarters and commanders making the decision. host: special line for iraq veterans if up to the call in and talk to general stephen townsend, commanding general of operation inherent resolve. that phone number for iraq veterans, 202-748-8003. otherwise, phone lines as usual, democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. and as viewers are calling in, general, want to talk to you about our allies in this fight, the ones who are in the front lines who are going into this city of mosul. we hear mixed reviews at times about the reliability of some of

those allies. who are the best -- who are our best assets over there? who's proving to be the best at taking this fight to isis in the city of mosul? guest: well, the iraqi security forces are a broad spectrum of type of forces and capability. so first u the iraqi army -- so first you have the iraqi army. there are more than nine brigades involved in the mosul operation right now. and they're in various states of training and readiness, as you might imagine in any army. the units are in various states of training and readiness. some of the best are up there around mosul now. there are iraqi police, sort of a combat capable police force. again, they're up there now and probably parts of them are better than some army units, better than parts of the federal

police. there are iraqi local police, think of them more like police forces in the united states, mostly law and order, but they're being pressed to do some combat type because of the situation. they're not really trained and equipped for that as much. there are tribal forces, think of neighborhoods securing their own village, sfrorse the neighborhoods, securing their own village. there are militia forces that have responded to calls to defend iraq, and they have a wide range of capabilities, and probably the best overall force is the iraqi counterterrorism service.

until recently, they were part of the armed forces. they're now a separate force just recently. but they've had a training relationship with u.s. special operations forces, even since 2011 during the time period between 11 and 14, and so they're probably the most capable of all the forces. but all these forces are engaged in mosul and taking the fight to the enemy there, isil. scommoip as the fight happens, we have heard reports upwards of a million civilians still in mosul. what's being done -- what are you trying to do to work with our allies there to reduce civilian casualties, collateral damage in the city and to the innocent people that are there? guest: well, the greatest level of concern for the iraqi people coming from the iraqi security forces. they certainly don't want to inflict unnecessary casualties

on their own people, and damage to their own infrastructure. second behind the government would be the coalition. we're here at the invitation of the government of iraq, so we don't want to inflict unnecessary collateral damage or civilian casualties. we're probably running, and you've heard this before, i think we're running the most precise campaign in the history of warfare here. we go to extraordinary lengths to try to avoid a civilian casualties. and when we think that we will, when we hear that we may have inflicted can'ts through our own media or watch dog groups that are out there, we investigate each and every one of those reports to determine if it's credibility or not credibility. and if credible, we investigate to see how we inflict the collateral damage and how we can avoid it in the future. so there's a lot of concern at

all levels here for civilian casualties. we work really hard to avoid those. host: general stephen townsend is our guest. phone lines are open for viewers to ask their questions. special line for iraq veterans, 202-748-8003. otherwise, democrats, 202-748-8001. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. we're going to start with kendrick in lancaster, south carolina, an independent, and kendrick, bare with us. with a little bit of a delay as we talk to the general live from baghdad. go ahead with your question. caller: yes. can you hear me? host: go ahead, yeah. caller: thes definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. i heard this before. we train the soldiers. we've been in iraq over 10 years. we're going to train them. and when they come to the fight, they throw down their weapons in iran. we've been there losing, losing lives, causing lives.

will they fight the battle for them? they fight their own battle. we been training and assisting iraqis for over 10 years, and ain't nothing changed. they still got -- well, they got elite fighters. what i see tv, being there pushing them, they will never fight. host: got your question. general townsend on the end game and the concerns about doing the same thing over and over again in iraq. guest: yeah, thanks there. i've heard that definition as well. i would suggest we're not doing the same thing over and over again. to your point we've again in iraq for more than 10 years, we were there in 2003 to 2011, and then we left. we left because the government of iraq didn't desire us to be

here anymore. they invited us back in 2011. so there's the fist thing that we're doing differently than last time. we're here at the invitation of the government of iraq. i'll tell you the other big difference. you say that if we weren't here pushing, they would be fighting. that's not the case at all. i was here during the iraq, the previous iraq war. and in those days, we led the fight, and we brought the iraqi armed forces along with us on operation. that's not the case here at all. we're not leading the fight. in fact, there aren't coalition soldiers at the front leading the way, engaging the enemy directly. who's doing that? the iraqi security forces, the counter terrorism service, the iraqi army, iraqi police are the ones leading the way, doing the fight, taking the fight to the enemy. our forces are behind them, given their commander's advice and giving some help with

enabling capabilities. but the iraqis have their own artillery. they have their own air force. they're using it. we're just helping them. they have their own intelligence capabilities. we're just helping that effort. so it's a completely different situation today than it was from operation iraqi freedom, which i participated in. host: that line for iraq war veterans, joe joins us from sun city center, florida. joe, good morning. you're on with the general. guest: hey, general, i was in fallujah -- let's see. we took five cities. and george h. didn't go any further. he didn't want to destabilize the area. so the iraq people awarded russians with the oil drilling rights, which was kind of cruel, you know,, 5,000 people, that's

roughly 40,000 gallons of blood, you know? and then w. bush went in and destabilized everything, and, you know, all the doo doo hit the fan. you know, after i got out of the service, i got a job on the base as a civil serve ant, and i used to work for the admiral, admiral's row. and one confided in me. he said the president dismisses all the generals and admirals. and appoints his generals and admirals. i would like a response. host: what is the question, joe? caller: um. is it true or false that we

turned over the drilling rights to russia? and is it true that the president dismisses all of this generals? host: we will turn it over to general townsend. guest: ok. thanks, joe, for that interesting question. i am not sure what it has to do with the operation. thank you for your service. you called in on the veteran's line. thanks to you on your service to our nation. i am not sure about the drilling rights. i don't think the russians have exclusive use to drilling right here. iraqi does the drilling -- iraq does the drilling of oil here and sells it on international market.

that is how that works. it is not true that each president fires all of the generals and admirals and rehires his own generals and admirals. that is not how it works. generals and admirals sustained a roles. we all serve at the pleasure of the commander-in-chief. in theory, the commander-in-chief could fire admirals and generals, but typically, they do not. if you look at history, and who is in positions from one administration to the next, you will see a line of continuity that serves our nation well. thanks for the question, joe. host: general, a question about the strategy right now. a lot of focus on mosul is where we are seen a lot back here at home. can you talk about what is

happening in syria and what the u.s. is doing there. and what happens after mosul falls? guest: sure. well i sell, also known -- isil is a threat to the entire world. if you look at recent events in europe and united states, you will know that. some examples are belgium, france, florida, and new york, texas, etc. it is very important that the whole world coalition bear down on this problem. why are we so focused on iraq and syria? isil and its franchises are a

worldwide phenomenon, but the core of eiffel -- but the core of isil and so-called caliphate is right here in iraq and syria. this is where it started. and this is where the leader, baghdad he, claimed the original isil -- the original caliphate. that is why mosul is very important in defeating isil and mosul. also, you mentioned what are we doing in syria? we are engaged in our partners there. when we are going to do is go down there and take raqqa and liberate raqqa take it back from isil. what this will do is come i think, do a lot to discredit, destroy the narrative of isil, which is their mythology has

depended a lot on having this physical, qualify state. when they lose their capital in iraq, they lose their overall capital in syria. it goes to discredit their narrative as a terrorist organization. this, what happens after mosul? i don't think i sold -- i don't think -- isil postal purses here. our partners in in iraq and syria will have to keep working to reduce the threat. who what we are ultimately working towards is reducing the threat of isil and building of the local security forces to a

level where they can handle in the persistent threat that remains on their own without a lot of help from the coalition. host: just one follow-up, you talk about that after we kicked them out of raqqa, we will give raqqa acted their rightful owners. how do you figure out who those rightful owners are in syria amid a civil war that there are several different rebel groups against the syrian government? guest: ok. so, first of all, we are not charged with helping to solve the civil war. the civil war that is ongoing in syria is certainly complicated for us, but our mission is to defeat isil in syria and in northern syria. had to be figure out with a rifle owners are? we ask them, we ask the locals. it is our effort, and a lot of

time and energy goes into recruiting folks from the local areas. for example, our local partner force will go to great lengths to recruit folks from the raqqa area to make sure that that forces representative of the local citizenry, and looks like them and is from them. you'll ask them -- we will ask them to govern themselves and secure themselves. the liberation force, which could come all over syria, will move on, but the force left behind will be folks from raqqa. an example of that, there are other towns and cities in northern syria turned back over to local people to govern and secure. host: back to the phones. barnett is waiting in marshall, north carolina. the line for democrats. marshall, good morning.

caller: good morning. i have one question for the general. would you go please tell me -- would she -- would he tell me how many people are left over from blackwater? guest: thanks, barnett. we don't really have any mercenaries over here. mercenaries, in my mind, are paid to fight. contractors come nonmilitary -- contractors, nonmilitary personnel picked a fight. what we have are contractors performing security duties many of them for the united states or for other countries.

they do things like guard the eyepiece -- guard vips. they do functions like that to free up a reduce the need for military forces to do that. we also have contractors over here to cook our food and service to us. and they perform a wide range of tasks so we can reduce our uniform footprint here. no mercenaries, but plenty of contractors, some of whom are performing security duties over here. host: kathleen is in new york, republican. go ahead, kathleen. caller: first, i have a comment that i believe are national guard should be here protecting our nation, not over in the middle east. secondly, i really feel that if the people over there in iraq particularly, are handling their

defense well, and we just -- and then we just don't belong there. let them handle their own problems. thank you. host: general townsend? guest: ok. will she made a comment, --well, she made a comment, she didn't really answer a question. -- you didn't really ask a question. she made a comment about the role of the national guard. i don't disagree with her. the national guard actually does help secure our own country, america, and the states. they help secure our nation there. they are also a part of our armed forces and a part of the normal rotation of the u.s. armed forces overseas, so national guard units get mobilized.

that is why they exist, not only to protect america at home, but go do, as part of the regular forces, security operations and military operations overseas. we have a number of national guard soldiers today that have immobilized and our own federal duty performing just like the rest of the armed forces. i am very proud to serve alongside them and have them in our formation. when they are done here, they will go back home and resume their duties defending america at home. then i think, well, i don't member what her second question was exactly. i got it. she was mentioning that she thought that the local folks could handle their own defense, and they should. and the reason we came here, for a long time, we watched iraq struggle with the threat that is

isl. -- with the threat that is isil. isil is not just a threat to iraq, it is a threat to america, and that is why we are here. host: let's go to martin in new jersey. you are on the general towns and -- you are on with general townsend. caller: and the fight against isis, -- [inaudible] they gave a positive response about favoring the reduction in collateral damage in going after isis. host: martin, we are losing

you a little bit. we will try to get that line a little bit better. let's go to anthony, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span, and general, thank you for your service to america. eventually, iraq, when their civil war -- but is any type of political solution? i will take your response off air. happy thanksgiving, sir. host: general, go ahead. guest: thanks, anthony, and happy thanksgiving to you.