storage. if you need anything to get you out west, you were going to get it here. you can imagine a big bussing community downtown. >> on sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern, a tour of president truman's historic sites, including a visit to his home and library. watching c-span's city tour of independence, missouri, saturday at noon eastern on c-span's book tv and sunday on american tv history on c-span3. >> he serves as director, joining us to discuss the u.s. military pullout from syria. threat about the ongoing and the complications of pulling u.s. troops out of syria. >> first of all, it is important

u.s.te that while some officials have noted it flummoxed eight has been defeated, what the attacks certainly show is that isis has the ability to conduct attacks in syria. we have seen them conduct attacks in iraq. they are monitoring u.s. activity. whatconduct an attack -- is interesting about this one is they had clearly conducting intelligence and surveillance on u.s. there. it is probably happening in multiple places. this is traditional guerrilla tactics. the islamic state has moved into this guerrilla phase of the campaign. the u.s. is a major target. >> the campaign in a guerrilla phase, how many fighters are left for the islamic state? are there estimates at this point for what they are down to? we always see the maps down to a small amount of territory, but do we know numbers?

>> it is hard to gauge numbers at any particular time for two reasons. one is the border between syria and iraq is generally porous. the fighters move frequently across the border. we assess in a report in november that there is somewhere in the neighborhood of 20,000 to 25,000 fighters on both sides of the border that are just islamic state or islamic state supporters. shouldtion, individuals realize there are al qaeda linked people at operating. this is not just about isis. this is about other jihadist groups that are operating in the country. host: taking your calls this morning. there was a deadly suicide bombing in syria. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

.epublicans, (202) 748-8001 .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 citedmbers that you just and he this week, is this a group that is in its death throes? guest: it is not in this respect: it continues to operate in iraq and syria, that is its general headquarters. it continues to operate in the -- inadministrations multiple affiliated places overseas freight it operates in libya, egypt and afghanistan, where it has had multiple attacks. it operates in southeast asia. it has been weakened and has lost control of territory, but it is by no means dead. host: what does victory look like over the islamic state?

guest: nobody defeats terrorism. continues in various phases. we have seen it go from al qaeda to the islamic state. we will see new formations in the future. what victory would look like to some degree is the threat to the u.s. into the homeland of the u.s. interest overseas is limited. attacksery few if any and they are focusing on other things. i think that would be victory. no major plots in the u.s. no major inspired attacks overseas reminder of the president in december talking about his decision to pull out u.s. troops in syria. here was a statement he released on twitter. >> we have been fighting for a long time in syria. i have been president for almost two years that we have really stepped it up and we have one against isis freight we have

beaten them and we have beaten them badly. we have taken back the land. it is time for our troops to come back home. i get very saddened to have to write letters or call parents or wives or husbands of soldiers who have been killed, fighting for our country. it is a great honor. we cherish them but it is heartbreaking. there is no question about it. it is heartbreaking. now we have won. host: when the president released that statement on twitter, what was your reaction? guest: i think it is premature to talk about winning. every american president since 9/11, bush on the aircraft inrier on 2003, trump removing u.s. forces from iraq has wanted to declare victory to some degree against terrorist organizations. i think the better approach is

what we see with countries like the u.k., where they consider this a generational fight. you don't hear british intelligence officials talking about defeating groups in the foreseeable future. they talk about weakening and protecting the homeland and using all available resources to target these organizations. winning, when you say things like that, you have to eat your words eventually when these groups continue to exist. i would get read of the winning. it is a false dichotomy. talk about your work from before you join that group, your work with u.s. special operations forces prayed what did you do? guest: most of the work i did was in places like afghanistan or somalia. provided training to security forces overseas freight it is important to recognize if the

president wants to withdraw u.s. military forces, i think that is a justifiable argument. what i would say is where there are u.s. interests, the u.s. needs to continue to work by, with and through local partners. that was a lot of the work i did in the committee. thinkf it -- most people of it as killing or capturing terrorists. the vast majority of work is training, entering and working with local partners on the -- rd, whether they i iraqi forces so they do the fighting and dying for their own country. u.s. is adding some assistance. that is where we want to get to. host: for viewers who might not know. guest: it is a research institute, a think tank and is bipartisan. neither conservative or liberal

call, neither republican or democrat. of its publications are open to the public. people can go to the website and see its publications and videos. host: or you can call in and asked some questions about a busy week in foreign policy. john is in los angeles, and independent. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i have to admit that i am dismayed at this segment following the last one when we were talking about how to be a man. , who ise a man is still going to be at the baddest and who is going to be the biggest and who is going to bully people around. it is time for the u.s. to realize it is not the big guy in the world. we should figure out who we are. if we keep spending the money on war, we will never take care of the money we need to save the world. it is sad, gentlemen, but that

is where we are and we are fighting for survival and you guys are picking a date coal. big hole. a guest: this is not about war. this is about protecting american interest. forget that in the last two or three years, we have at major attacks inside of the united states inspired i the islamic state and san bernardino and california and orlando. we had a vehicle attack in new york city on halloween in 2017. we had an individual arrested this week in georgia for plotting a major attack at the white house, which would have occurred this week with something equivalent to a rocket propelled grenade and guns. he was targeting secret service, department of homeland security. areave individuals who

committed to conducting terrorist attacks inside of the united states who are inspired and in some cases directly linked with individuals operating overseas. we have seen this in europe. europe has had attacks in the last year and year and a half. a suicide bomber at a concert, we have seen them in france and germany. we are not over this. forgettingome and about the world, it doesn't mean these kinds of organizations stop trying to target us. this is not just about military forces. people need to understand this is also about assistance overseas, diplomatic efforts to try to end some of the wars that are raging in these areas. doesn't mean the u.s. needs to be policeman in these areas by the need to find solutions. host: brad, independent, go ahead. caller: i am happy with president trump's decision to pull out of syria.

the u.s. has not been involved in any good overseas conflicts and the idea that we need to be in these things is a bad idea. we create more anti-american feelings being there and doing the things that we do. over with the first segment, i have an example of toxic masculinity. i encourage every woman to look into susan rice and hillary clinton and cement the powers convincing barack obama to destroy libya. if you look at that, i know that is three ladies but it is toxic masculinity. couple of quick points. i think it is important to recognize that just because the

u.s. leaves these areas means any of these problems are solved or if the u.s. isn't there. on 9/11, the u.s. was not in afghanistan that we were attacked by organization headquartered there. and011, president left pulled out all u.s. forces from iraq. 2014, iraq13 transformed itself into the islamic state. rejuvenated and conducted major attacks in places like paris, inlin, london from its bases iraq and syria. it inspired attacks in the u.s., as well. i believe it is a misnomer to believe because we are there that it inspires these groups and if we leave, it means that we -- they would stop targeting us. i believe the evidence shows quite strongly the opposite is true. whiche have to look at is

of these groups are targeting the u.s. and where do we need to work with local partners. host: a republican from ohio, go ahead. caller: i am all from pulling out of syria, our men and women, and i am all for telling the men that invaded europe silently to go back and fight their own battle. but we have a government that wants to try to protect our borders. we could save a lot of money and putting into our borders and instead we are spending it on hiring -- hiding for someone else's borders. andhould pull out of syria tell the men to head back home and fight their own battles. guest: this perspective is an important one and the debate on whether to be there or not is important. i should note that this issue is broader than just syria at the moment.

the u.s. as withdrawing some of its forces from afghanistan, going from 14,000 to 7000. the u.s. is looking at decreasing forces in somalia and africa. this is more than just syria. this is military forces withdrawing from a range of places. what the president is doing is not pulling u.s. forces back home, he is doing in many cases is focusing them on other kinds of competitors, in particular states. if you look at the national defense strategy, this is not about pulling forces back home and trying to save money, per se. it is about prioritizing other competitors and in particular, if you watch what the president has said, if the chinese, meaning american deployments in asia, it means iran. militaryme of the u.s. forces from dealing with the sunni extremists to sheer once,

the national security adviser has talked about. this is shifting resources to other competitors. i think it is important for people to understand that. host: that ties into yesterday's other big story. hisident trump announcing new missile defense strategy, the first comprehensive update of the policy in years. the headline from the washington post, president trump promising defenses to shoot down any missiles anytime anywhere. prioritize thell defense of the american people above all else. for 20 groundls based interceptors at fort greely, alaska. and sensors to immediately detect foreign missiles lodged against our great nation. we are committed to establishing

a missile defense program that can shield every city of the united states and we will never negotiate away our right to do this. seth jones, your thoughts on the take away from the president's announcement? focus it is important to efforts on building better missile defense capabilities. when we look at u.s. adversaries, we look at chinese missile capabilities, they are improving, including longer range missiles. we look at russian capabilities, they are pointed largely at the u.s. north korean missile capabilities, they are expanding. ironic capabilities are primarily focused on building their the terry through its missile -- military through its missiles. it seems to be a major focus of

resources of the russians, chinese, the north koreans and the iranians. it is important that the u.s. continue to develop its capabilities to shoot any threats directed at the u.s. homeland. i think it is important to recognize no system will be completely infallible. the israelis have recognized this. they have built a sophisticated system in israel. of a war, not system will be able to shoot down every single missile coming in. there are decoys and other governments have capabilities. we shouldn't expect this will be full proof. host: less than 10 minutes is left with seth jones. jerry has been waiting in maryland, democrat, go ahead. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am a third-generation

democrat. i am totally disheartened and disappointed in the party and anybody who doesn't want to stand behind this individual that we call our president, that we should respect him and what , iis trying to do, he believe, he has the best interests of the american people. for anybody who wants to heh-pooh on him if you will, is fighting political session. need borders,s, we need walls, need security, not just in our country but in every country. as -- be, as people, entitled to feel that way without being called racist. long before this man stepped up to the table. host: i will let you pick up on

that last part. guest: it is important to recognize why we have terrorists and sunni extremists. he said jihadists. general a result of past american presidents. however, the u.s. invasion of iraq seem to be a calling cry for many of these groups. what we see over the last couple of years is probably most -- probably the single most significant event that allowed for a resurgence is the arab spring, which led to a collapse countries likend libya, the u.s. was involved in that a little bit. egypt, syria, the u.s. had no hand in syria, a collapse of the assad government in 2011, 2012 and 2013 provided a major

sanctuary for cribs to operate. yemen is another good example. past, u.s. actions in the are not necessarily the major reason for these activities. poor economic conditions in these countries. they are complex mixes. host: you talk about these terror groups. when it comes to syria, is it just the islamic state or how many other groups are active? guest: syria has the largest percentage of jihadist groups operating anywhere in the world by our estimates. 60,000 or 50,000, 70,000. host: groups or individuals? guest: groups or support networks. if we look at parts of western syria, there are tens of thousands of individuals group that hasa direct links to al qaeda.

down along the jordanian border, we have some groups operating. this is much more than the islamic state. there are number of other groups operating. just targetings. the islamic state or other groups, as well. guest: at the moment, the u.s. focus has phenomenally been in eastern syria, where the islamic state is most active. in the west, it has been western operations, russian our iranian operations and turkish operations. syria,u.s. pulls out of as many people want to happen, countries like iran have moved into that vacuum. we do have to ask ourselves, is that something we are ok with? host: democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. jones beingfor mr.

on this morning and hearing what he is saying. my point is that the u.s. is ignoring all of the terrorism that is taking place in africa and most recently, the bombing in nairobi, kenya. i think that diplomatically, the u.s. should start to pay more attention to the african nations because kenya is strategically located and with mr. johnson's experience in somalia, it would be very helpful for the u.s. to deal with kenya in this regard. thank you for taking my call. guest: it is a great question. in africa, the primary focus of terrorist activity at the moment, there are four areas. one is in west africa in nigeria , the second is in north africa, particularly out of libya, we have a number of different jihadist groups. a third is in east africa, the horn and countries like somalia and kenya. the fourth is insight help. she is right.

shael.fourth is in the numbers are continuing to rise. this is where partners can be quite helpful. we look at the last time we saw an increase in jihadist activity. it was the french that stepped the fastovided assistance to molly. at kenya and somalia, we -- we work with partners. the canyons have been an important partner. host: jim is waiting in westfield, massachusetts. morning.ood as far as terrorism goes, i think we have to come together and realize this is an issue

that will probably never go away. understanding that, i think it needs to be handled in a regional manner. the players in different areas need to step up to the plate and start policing their own and fighting the terror issue on their grounds. we can't, as a nation, run around the world for much longer mole with thesea jihadists. need to withdraw from syria and places like this and protect our borders. if we had spent the money that we spent overseas fighting terrorism, if we had put all that money to strengthen our border and our entry points, another 9/11 would be very hard to believe. they are going to try, but we have learned a lot since 9/11. to keep going back to 9/11 is the ultimate excuse to be overseas.

i think it is a because we are working together insecurity issues as we haven't been in the past. this is not about 9/11 anymore. this is about looking at the threat as it exists today. i would urge people to look at the case in georgia, the fbi arrests and individual plotting a major attack in washington against the white house. that was an individual who had the intent and had some capabilities to do it. an fbi informant provided intelligence into that individual and into that network. the other thing i would say this. washington journal live everyday at 7:00 a.m. eastern. we will leave the last few minutes of that take you live to the u.s. house.