engagement in iraq. it will drawdown to 2000 forces and it will change our mission from combat to stability. it's in recognition of this change that we will also take the name of the mission from operation rescue freedom to operation new dawn. i have a mother with that name on it. i think i'm the first one to have it -- i have a mug with that name on it. we are focused on a transition to a civilian-led mission in iraq. contrary to some narrative's, this transition is not a strategic disengagement from iraq. it is not. instead, it signals a transformation in the nature of our engagement in iraq and our bilateral relationship with iraq, is shifting the emphasis from security and military to the civilian side. at stake is not only ensuring that stability in iraq indoors as we continue to draw down and that iraqi government continues to build capabilities to meet the needs of its own people, but also to make every effort to consolidate a joint goal we shared with the iraqis, that is to build a long-term stra

out of iraq. we're trying to do it in a way where we stand up the iraqi military. the program we are on so far as pulling our troops out. that is the plan also for afghanistan. train the military so that they handle the problem with al qaeda. in terms of the budgetary process, every spending bill under our constitution originates in the house. since the current speaker became speaker, for the last four years, the argument i made earlier, it is five years ago, i was concerned with the budget deficit at $162 billion. but during those four years we have seen this budget, the spending, go up to where the deficit is not 10 times what it was. my other concern is with the sheer growth of the size of government. we will go now to the next question. >> thank you, congressman rooyce. as a small businessman, i think you can understand our concern over taxes and our concerns. liberal politics and liberal media have done a good job of demonizing the businesses and the rich. they have done this by consistently

we first asked him what state iraq is in today. >> i think iraq finds itself in a difficult situation. it is far from being a democratic state. there were elections have a year ago for the parliament. today, there is no government available, because the different factions cannot really agree upon the new head of government. the situation is very complex. i do not think the invasion has tackled the major issues. it was very positive that saddam hussein was toppled, but the situation that has developed since then has not solved all problems, but has created new ones that are very complex. the basic issue at stake is the fact that there has been a central government since saddam hussein who could control this huge country, which is more and more falling apart, at dividing along ethnic or religious lines. >> 50,000 u.s. troops are staying behind to help the next government when it emerges. what do they have to do? >> officially, it is their task to trained iraqi policemen and soldiers. unofficially, the soldiers are there in order to protect american interests, to protect the iraqi centra

to come into iraq. why it was that iraq at this point, having rejected the inspectors up to then, turned around and invited them to come in? >> i think the main reason was the military build-up by the united states. the idea had begun gently in the spring of 2002 and it accelerated in the summer of 2002 and in august 2002 you had the us national security, what's it called -- doctrine or paper in which they said some sensational things. to me at any rate it was sensational. they said that the us can use force without -- when it sees a growing threat. i had always seen and still see the un charter as a fundamental progress in the international community when it says that states are not allowed to use force against other states in territorial integrity, etc, with two exceptions. one was the self-defense against an armed attack and the other is when there is an authorization from the security council, but the us here did not even refer to the un charter article 2, paragraph 4 or article 51, but simply said

where iraq will go. with respect to the government formation, as difficult as the process and he did as the processes, i recommend not trying to follow it from the press because you will find it even more heated through that medium -- you will see that at some point, like every country, iraq will have a government. the real question for us is not whether they are going to have a government -- they will. the question is -- hallett is the united states going to interact with this country? can we say that we're going have to long term special relationship that we have been talking about for many years? a couple popsicle i was privileged to go to the korean embassy and meet with people who were the first educational exchange people with what later became the fulbright program in the 1960's. i ask one of them, what was the bigges task for you to come to america in the 1950's? one of thesaid to me, it was to convince americans that korea is not a war. korea is a country. about a month ago, i had the occasion t

it pre-dates iraq. if we get -- it post-dates iraq. but what iraq did was produce a fresh impetus of people prepared to engage in terrorism and i think that, if you asked me to produce evidence, i could produce that. >> given the interaction between terrorism and the counter-terrorism policies of the government on the one hand and the iraq situation both before, during and after the invasion itself, how were the two high-level policy areas brought together in government in your time? >> well, they weren't at the beginning. i mean, david omand wrote contest with input from all of us, i think it was sort of 2002/2003. it wasn't actually published of course until 2006 and i would suggest it didn't really begin to have a substantial effect until probably 2005. so therefore at the stage that the government was deciding to take military action we had a pretty embryonic counter- terrorist policy and there wasn't a correlation between that and the iraq decisions. later on, the counter-terrorist policy encouraged in policy- making the thinking

and for iraq. it's it's look it's been a very difficult seven years for the americans no doubt about that. strategically because there they've lost some significant ground in the middle east especially to around a neighboring state who seems to consolidated their influence here the american project was above and beyond the end of the day to try and democratize things here . although the elections were fair and transparent democracy is not something that you can say has become rooted in this state the americans will leave having tried over the last three years to turn around some of the strategic mistakes they made but i think by by any objective measure they have lost ground here they have lost influence in the middle east or the guardians in iraq correspondent martin thank you. well corrino is now here with all the business owners. hello welcome to our business program it's twenty two past four pm here in moscow russia's losses due to the forest and peat fires still raging across the country could

as soon as all the soldiers leave iraq operation iraqi freedom the combat mission in iraq will be over we need more military history the last of america's combat three times you say up to seven years because you could push the war made their way out to the right i really significant milestone george is truly historic watching those stryker vehicles we have a rocket drive out of the rock into kuwait you know. there are a. combat soldier toss it to kuwait gets the gates are closing right now they strike the passing right now. represent the last american combat troops in iraq. but is this anything more than a symbolic exit it was caught on film let's put it this way obama put the deadline for combat troops to leave as august thirty first and even though this was the last brigade there's still a scattering of about six thousand combat troops in the country to have to pack up in the next two weeks and once they're gone well fifty thousand more americans will still be left behind they'll have guns there still troops but hopefully they won't have to use those guns so how do we look at this la

iraq's army commander once the americans to stay another 10 years. iraq cannot cope alone, he says. president obama says that all american troops will be out of iraq by the end of next year. many will end up in afghanistan. the iraq conflict is not exactly over. al qaeda is getting stronger. sunni militants are threatening to rejoin the insurgency. the united states will still help the iraqi government, but as one u.s. officer said, this is no longer america's war. >>> reports suggest the state department and the u.s. is close to announcing the launch of direct peace talks with israel and palestinians. this is after months of indirect talks. the last substantive negotiations were nine years ago. the details are still being worked out. >>> organizers of the commonwealth games in delhi have suffered two blows, two big firms withdrawing their sponsorship because of corruption allegations, and an australian swimmer has advised countrymen to stay away from the event. >>> the american muslim leader behind plans to build a center near the 9/11 attacks has arrived at at a commission. new yo

combat troops are pulling out of iraq. it's been about seven and a half years since that first late-night air strike decimated the iraqi government and lit up american television screens. saddam hussein is now dead. the new iraqi government is still taking tentative steps, and the toll on the united states has been substantial. 4,415 american service members died in iraq. close to 32,000 americans wounded. we watched the invasion happen on live television thanks to some brand new, at the time, exclusive technology. and tonight, once again, we watch the pullout of these combat troops the very same way. though as you watch, remember, 50,000 americans in uniform will remain behind in iraq in what's being called a noncombat role. our chief foreign correspondent richard engel has covered this war for so many years for us, with us from a moving convoy in the iraqi desert tonight. and, richard, i understand your reporting of this at this hour tonight constitutes the official pentagon announcement, correct? >> reporter: yes, it is

and show to the left is upset in afghanistan that he did quote and the iraq war but the iraq war was essentially ended by the sofa agreement that the iraqi government put in place ok i want to ask you what you're an interpretation is of what's going to happen in iraq once the u.s. pulls out at the end of august is the security situation going to deteriorate is democracy going to deteriorate is it going to get better what's going to happen i think one of the things that this withdrawal so essentially was what president obama is doing is he's keeping to the promise of the sofer agreement the status of forces agreement that the president bush signed with prime minister maliki that is a positive that he's keeping to the reasons. and i think one of the things that will happen with the prime minister is all over who ever succeed say money should be should be allowed is that as i said earlier they have to stop politicking and they have to stone governing now if the only way that they have to get themselves out of trouble is to resort to violence again and i'm talking about the government he

margaret warner has been reporting from iraq. here is the first of a week of stories on how this transition is going. >> warner: testing their turret machine guns as they leave base is the only time these american soldiers have fired their weapons recently. this u.s. infant ree unit is helping iraq's federal police push al qaeda and other militants out of the city of mozul. the americans' commission is not to do the job but t to-- advise and assist the iraqis as they do it. rolling toward town this hot august morning, a convoy of identical iraqi and u.s. armoured humvees. the advisor, u.s. army lieutenant colonel dan reed. >> the word right now is the sight of... . >> warner: the advisey, an iraqi federal police by grade-- brigade commander and today a man very much in charge. he is inspecting his unit's outposts in west mozul. he shows us the sites of two car bomb explosions late last year, both targeting him. as we move on to the very heart of town, it's general hamid's men who fan out and provide security for him, for us and f

iraq a strong democratic country. i think that's why we're seeing it take so long. we all would like to see it completed as soon as possible. i think the quicker, the better. it's important that they get moving forward with their continued development. but it's also important to not allow terrorists to try to exploit this time now we have while we're forming this government. i think everybody realizes that. they're trying to move forward as quickly as possible. >> schieffer: general, how confident are you that you're going to hand this military task over to the iraqi military people now? and i bring that up because the chief of staff of the iraqi joint forces was quoted in "the wall street journal" this week as saying the u.s. army may have to stay in iraq until 2020, because he said he doesn't think the iraqi army will be ready to take over until then. as i understand it, our plan is to be out of there by the end of next year. how confident are you of these folks being able to handle this? >> well, first, they really

i do think we're at that stage in iraq. large numbers of foreign troops can become a hindrance to their self-sufficiency. >> what are the chances of a military coup? >> i think there is always that risk in a long-term counterinsurgency. i would suggest that is quite minimal at this stage, but it is something we want to be looking out for five or 10 years down the track. >> the u.s. troops are staying behind in a training capacity. is it not a danger they will become the targets of insurgents? >> it is. but training is not a full description of what they are doing. they are accompanying the iraqi forces on certain operations. they are providing key, what the military called, enablers. they are still engaged. they are in the wall of dealing with iraqis in the -- the role of dealing with the iraqis and in the street is being dealt with by the iraqis themselves. >> can you see the possibility that if the worst happens and iraq implements, than large numbers of americans -- and iraq implodes, and the large numbers of americans w

turning to iraq to u.s. backed militia leaders have said al qaeda is trying to bribe members of their group to return to the terrorist organization some officials in iraq say it is making a comeback partly due to the power vacuum and political instability of the war torn country and u.s. paid mercenaries called the sons of iraq and they fought on the side of coalition forces but now it seems as offering to pay them more once the americans leave the journalist who broke the story to my colleague shay said that it could be a big problem with militia. members defect. the sons of iraq were a group who were credited with helping stop the violent insurgency throughout two thousand and six two thousand and seven been hailed ever since by the americans as people who are a cornerstone of the future security for this country however as the americans prepare to lead their heritage over responsibility in managing the sons of iraq program to the iraqi government the iraqi government's commitment to the potomac predominan

relations in iraq. then q&a with greg parker. >> the c-span network provides politics, public affairs, nonfiction books and it is all available to you on television, radio, online and on social media networking sites. find our content any time through c-span video libraries. we take c-span on the road with our local content video. it is washington, your way. the c-span network, now available in more than 100 million homes, provided by cable. >> now, the changing relationship between the u.s. and iraq. the water from the decker terry secretary of state. the center for strategic and international studies post this event. this is 55 minutes. what's good morning, ladies and gentleman. i and the double winner this morning. president asked me to stand here and i am happy to do so for three different reasons. the first is i am a member of the board of csis so i'm honored to be able to participate in these activities. the second as i was in on the take off as it were on this iraq situation so i want to see how

troop withdrawal from iraq. six am in the russian capital i matras a thanks for being with us here on r t our top story moscow was finally breathing more freely as the den smog and noxious fumes that have been tormenting the russian capital for days finally subsided officials say some wildfires are now under control but many are still raging because of record breaking heat artie's a nice and now weighs in a badly hit region of resign some two hundred kilometers southeast of moscow with more. this is how it all starts with a small flame that can quickly and golf the entire forest making this a very fierce battle for emergencies workers and volunteers. one of the biggest operations in fighting these fires happened from the air port an airport in the resign region one of the worst hit by these fires and the emergency services has invited our team to come along for a ride on this ill seventy six. the . water line they make and. if you want to drop over the past. service like. the same turn down below our first. flig

number one, iraq's government hasn't formed yet. there is still a lot of fault lines along kirkut, around mozul and whether we like it or not u.s. influence is tied to the number of troops we have on the ground. that doesn't mean they shouldn't withdraw, but we've got to be prepared if we do withdraw them, that we're not going to have that tripwire in place should iraqi crises break out in this time without a government. >> how about that brian katulis t has been five months since that election. they are still trying to make sense of it, sort it out. how do we know that we can afford to pull back as the president promised? >> i think we can afford to because u.s. troops for the last year in essence have not been on iraqi treat stroos. one of the biggest market points and michael wrote about this last summer was when we withdrew from populated areas. and much of our draw down has already been implemented and as admiral mike mullen the chairman of joint chiefs staff said last week, he is pleased with the progress. so our top military

in terms of iraq, we were not directly involved in the decision-making to go to war in iraq. that was generally other people, although we were involved, obviously, in a number of meetings and in some of the discussions and of course in the jic. our focus was then on dealing with the manifestations of terrorist threats in the united kingdom since 9/11, and since 9/11 and before our work was increasing exponentially. it increased very much more when we went into iraq, but our main focus was dealing with the protection of the united kingdom. >> what about espionage and sabotage? >> we were still concerned, as we are today, with the threat from espionage and the threat from the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. in law we still have a responsibility to work on serious crime. in practice, while i was director general we pretty well gave that up because of the pressure of work on terrorism, and of course terrorism, not only terrorism from a global perspective but irish terrorism, continued to take quite a lot of our resources. >> there was establishment of the joint terr

invasion of iraq. a spokesperson is said to say, that the last combat brigade is leaving the country. in pakistan there is new flood warnings. that's our world news, thanks for being with us again. >> see the news unfold. get the top stories from around the globe and click to play video reports. go to bbc.com/news to experience the in-depth, expert reporting of "bbc world news" online. >> funding was made possible by: the freeman foundation of new york, stowe, vermont, and honolulu, newman's own foundation, the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation, and union bank. >> union bank offers uniqu >> union bank offers unique insight and expertise in a range of industries. what can we do for you? >> there is one stage that is the met and carnegie hall. >> o, that this too, too solid flesh -- >> it is the kennedy center -- >> check, one, two. >> and a club in austin. [woman vocalizing] >> it is closer than any seat in the house, no matter where you call home. >> the top of the world, and i'm there, i'm

taken in iraq. as the hurricane took the city by storm residents felt their constitutional rights were being blown away the armed populace keeps the government in check the government should not be in charge of the populace the populace should run the government and whatever the government has the guns and the populace doesn't have the guns the government does what it wants in the aftermath of katrina new orleans was in complete chaos law enforcement couldn't handle all the problems and on streets like this one every single building with looted except for one occasion is pa i say or three smith and wesson club action shotgun the twelve gauge semiautomatic joined guido's is the owner of cajun's pub she decided to take things into her own hands there was vans with. them and they were breaking into any businesses where there was no sign of anyone around and that they didn't mess with us here because i stood out front. with my shocked we don't protected her patrons when law enforcement was nowhere in si

things are stable in iraq but not too stable. we're leaving iraq but we're not abandoning iraq.e're paying attention close to home the budge' it close to them but we're still fighting terror abroad. he has to do all that balancing. obama is a guy who loves on the one-and-/on the other hand formulations. i expect we'll hear a lot of that. that makes it hard to write a speech. >> lehrer: difficult, do you agree, mark? >> i hadn't thought of it as being difficult, jim. it's obviously a speech he's giving voluntarily. >> lehrer: he didn't have to do it. >> he did not have to do this. it is at a time when the administration is looking for successes. this is a box you can check off, a promise made, a promise kept. but i think it's an awkward speech for the president because the president still believes and argued throughout his career and certainly in his presidential campaign that it was a pre-emptive war, it was indefensible, that it was a national catastrophe. that the united states went to war against a country that had never threatened the united states, never attacked the united

expectations for iraq? caller: i am expecting iraq's economy takes off. and i think democrats, republicans, and independents alike will understand the fact that iraq can add to the bailout the deficits of the ninth stage once they get industrialized. host: chicago. democratic line. you are next. caller: how are you this morning? host: good morning, carl. caller: my feeling is i am glad we are pulling our troops out. i know that it is probably not going to be peaceful over there -- you might -- some might want to keep troops there forever. but i think the media was wrong -- saying george bush is right. how will you say something about him being right when they never challenged bush about lying about the war in the first place? 4000 of our troops died over these lies. so, president obama says george was right -- no, never. these people died. 36,000 wounded. many seriously. but in the future, i expect that they are still going to be -- have not even formed the government. they are going to still have problems. we will need to be there. these republicans need

role to the stability of iraq. he spoke at a forum hosted by the denver world affairs council for about an hour. >> good evening. my name is kim. we're going to have a discussion. i am on the boards of iie. i'm taking the place of karen this evening as your hostess. we have c-span with us this evening. they will be taping uninterrupted. during the question and answer time, after the speakers, we would ask that you please come up to the microphone to ask your question, but do not touch the microphone. also, to watch the people in line and tried to keep it down to four people in line at a time. if there are more, kuwait and we will try to get to your question as soon as the next person is done. -- wait. you have evaluation forms on your chairs. please fill them out. we appreciate that. if you're not a member of iie, take the opportunity to join, because we would love to have you be able to join us at more these kinds of events with these kinds of speakers. with that, i would also ask that you please remember to turn

they represented a threat to the viability of the government of iraq. we judge that neither of those things are capable today. they did not controlled territory and do not represent a strategic threat to the viability of the government. that is a huge change from the darkest days of 2006 and 2007. most noticeably in most optimistically, is the ability for them to roll with the punches. if you remember what it used to be like in 2006, he would get a bombing on tuesday and 50 civilians might be killed. the next day 50 sunni men would show up in the landfill with bullet holes in their head. the cycle would be repeated over and over again. which do not see that cycle happening now. do not get me wrong, we want to start the cycle again. the reason why they killed so many civilians is the one that are rocky -- they want the iraqi people to turn on themselves. they have no intention of turning back to the levels of violence that we have seen before. we also see this in terms of the shiite militia threat. if your member from the 2006 and 2007 time, the biggest

i asked him if iraq was a threat. he said iraq is not a threat as far as i'm concerned to jordan or to any at this time. i think we are very, very concerned with the question of the people of iraq and how much they can continue to endure in terms of hardship they have endured so far. the root cause of instability is the palestinian-arab problem. if that is resolved, much can happen. >> that is in essence what i was trying to say. he was far more clear about it. i believe deceased husband; is that years ago. >> first of all, throughout all the conflicts and confrontations between for example the united states and iraq, he forever -- he never defended the occupation of kuwait. he condemned it and called for withdrawal of iraqi forces from kuwait but he did emphasize the importance of considering the needs and potential damage to the people of iraq. if there were a military rather than a diplomatic solution. >> you know the administration here has heralded the arrival of democracy and they feel that democracy for loss of

they all realize that's not what's best for iraq or the people of iraq. so that gives me confidence that that won't happen. >> warner: you were asked under what circumstances would the u.s. military come back and your response was only on the complete failure of the iraqi security forces, if you have some political divisions within the forces that cause them to fracture. it sounds as if you're saying you do remain invested here even in the military sense. >> first of all we think we have an opportunity here, iraq, if you just look at iraq as geographically, it's such a strategically important place for the phone middle east, not just for iraq. and then you look at the fabric of iraq, you know the shia, the sunni, the kurds, iranians in force you know relationships with kuwait, relationships with syria, relationships with saudi arabia-- it's such an importt country in bringing overall stability to the region, so clearly we want to have continued interest here. again, a re-intervention of u.s. forces would be a decision that would be made you know through o

official languages in iraq. parts of kurdistan are lush, but the series of mound's has defined our region and has provided sheltered areas in the days of our persecution and genocide from saddam hussein. it is from our country and said the three wise men set forth to jerusalem. one of ancient languages of civilization, aramaic, is still spoken and taught in parts of kurdistan. atop a prominent hill lies the citadel, one of the oldest continuously inhabited places on earth. it is in kurdistan where archaeologists found some of the oldest human fossil ever. these bolts or now the centerpiece of an attraction in the smithsonian's national -- natural history museum in washington d.c.. it is for the headwaters of the tigris and euphrates our townare found. the shape of kurdish territory in power had shifted over the century, reaching imperial knights during medieval times, sharing and contesting power in the modern era, and experiencing ization, andrginal as asia at times come out right genocide. in 1946, kurds in ir

can you say that iraq is stable today? what legacy are you leaving for iraq? and finally, what lessons can we learn from iraq as far as security and terrorism in afghanistan is concerned? >> i think iraq is increasingly stable and i think the security problems are not ones that have broad political significance they have terrible significance for people involved in them, obviously, but they are the kind of security problems that are not somehow shaking the political structures. so i take from that a sense of stability in the country. iraq has been around a long time, so i think we can take heart from the direction there. in terms of the legacy, someone else should answer that question. but what i like to think is that we have been able to establish a relationship with iraq with an appropriate amount of engagement on the u.s. civilian side and an amount of engagement that is appropriate to building a long-term relationship. you cannot be hands-off in iraq. you cannot go there and say that as an iraqi problem, not my problem -- because frankly it is everybody's

, the last combat unit in iraq. >> a bay area soldier puts a face on the war in iraq. he talks exclusively to nbc bay area new as that last battalion rolls out. good evening, i'm jessica aguirre. >> i'm tom sinkovitz. 7 1/2 years after the first usair strike, the last u.s. combat troops are out of iraq with a bay area soldier at the head of the convoy. just hours ago, 4,000 soldiers from the 4th striker brigade drove out of rack in their armored vehicles. they are now in kuwait. so is richard engel, the only american reporter embedded with them as the troops pulled out. >> reporter: a short while ago he watched the last american combat troops crossed through this gate leaving iraq and entering here in kuwait. they were from the 4-2 striker brigade based at ft. lewis in washington state. they call themselves the raiders, and now they have a special place in the history of the iraq war. >> we're going home! >> reporter: they were the last 440 american combat troops to leave iraq and enter kuwait. >> it feels great to know that we were -- that this battalion, the 1st and

i supported iraq -- they supported iran and the iraq-iran war. there were accusations of the iraqis that the syrians were behind a terrific attacks on the ministries of finance and foreign affairs in downtown baghdad. it's in the flow of foreign fighters from syria drawdown significantly for various reasons, but it needs to draw down more. syria is home to many iraqi refugees. it is a very complicated relationship that could be better and we hope it would be better but it needs more work. with the rest of the suny arab world, we see more success -- sunni arab world, we see more success. we have seven or eight further arab embassies on the ground. slowly but surely that relationship is picking up. but the broader world, the eu, the wto, the imf, and particularly the un has been heroic interact, despite attacks on them in 2003 and particularly in the work on the elections, we have a lot of help out there. >> the formation of the government? judy and we're following that very actively. by president biden was out there recently. we're not engaged in

to come into iraq. y it was that iraq at this point, having rejected the inspectors up to then,urne around and invited them to come in? >> i think the main reason was the military build-up by the united states. the idea had begun gently in the spring of 2002 and it accelerated in the summer of 20 and in august 2002 you had the us national security, what's it called --doctrine or paper in which they said some sensational things. to me at any rate it was sensational. they said that the us can use force without -- when it sees a growing threat. i had always seen and still see the un charter as a fundamental progress in the international community when it says that states are not allowed to use force against other states in territorial integrity, etc, with two exceptions. one was the self-defense against an armed attack and the other is when there is an authorization from the security council, but the us here did not even refer to the un charter article 2, paragraph 4 or article 51, but simply said that in

it postdates iraq. what iraq did, produce fresh impetus of people -- if you ask me to produce evidence, i could produce it. >> given the interaction between counterterrorism policies on the one hand and the iraq situation before and after the invasion itself, howard a to a high-level policy areas brought together in government? -- how were the high level policies brought together in government? >> they were not at first. it was not published until 2006. i would suggest it did not begin to have a substantial effect until probably 2005. that is the stage of the government deciding to take retraction. we had a pretty the embryonic counter-terrorism policy. the correlation between -- later on, the counter-terrorism policy encouraged in policy- making the thinking of the implications of auction more formally than previously. >> you spoke about the tactical air vent level. it did that drive a greater address to a higher level policy? >> i think i dispute that it was all tactical. there are reports of differen

troops out of iraq.: that appears to be with the afghan taliban would do, wait out until the foreign troops leave. there are two possible outcomes. one is that the insurgents are concerned that they want to maintain they are still an active force and need to play a role. there is also a conspiracy theory that some of the bombings are due to various iraq factions various they're trying to keep the troops there. it is a bit hard to tell. it is probable that it might be both forces and acted because insurgents are probably divided by various groups. host: richard weitz is the director for military analysis at the institute. he has been with the hudson institute since 2003. weapons of mass destruction and nonproliferation policies and he is our guest for the next 20 minutes. jefferson, ga.. are we after weapons? i am hearing we are in afghanistan iraq afghanistan for some of the oil and minerals in the ground. is there any truth for that? guest: as far as i am aware, not so much. there would be no reason to

where iraq will go. government formation, as difficult as the process and he did as the processes, i recommend not trying to follow it from the press because you will find it even more heated through that medium -- you will see that at some point, like every country, iraq will have a government. the real question for us is not whether they are going to have a government -- they will. the question is -- hallett is the united states going to interact with this country? can we say that we're going have to long term special relationship that we have been talking about for many years? a couple popsicle i was privileged to go to the korean embassy and meet with people who were the first educational exchange people with what later became the fulbright program in the 1960's. i ask one of them, what was the biggest task for you to come to america in the 1950's? one of them said to me, it was to convince americans that korea is not a war. korea is a country. about a month ago, i had the occasion to meet with the i