and the requirements over the years have never been for the n.c.o. to qualify for the program through the government, to get the government credential, to have a college degree. that's slowly changing as the army and military changes their requirements. so that's the way it was set up. we don't all have that in every place because we've lost some folks, general powell left, we lost lieutenant colonel over at washington through retirement, etc., etc. so we haven't been able to replace people. so we're having -- some of these programs are run by n.c.o.'s who should have been in the secondary position and not been the supervisor of record. commissioner maufas: and just so i'm clear. you can't have two n.c.o.'s. maybe one who has the -- or is that the this thing that puts them over? they have the college degree? they're at a different level? >> yes. it's possible to have an n.c.o. run a program when there's no officer available. if you have two n.c.o.'s then one of them has to have a college degree. commissioner maufas: ok. >> in order to do that. vice pr

in no small part, it is due to what you initiated when you were secretary of defense and the young n.c.o.'s think this is how it's done. the experience we did in the 1990's have paid off. >> can you talk about the threats you see in a military sense in the persian gulf and in the g.c.c.? >> most of iran's threat will be unconventional or a ballistic missile. they know that if they take on their neighbors in a conventional sense, that they will be exposed immediately. that is not to say they would not do it because wars are often started by irrational impulses. they are growing their enormous ballistic missile capabilities, which is the one thingreceived a lot of attention that has from our military friends out in the region as they realize how formidable their civilian populations are if the iranians start throwing in long-range rockets. sleeper cells, paid terrorists, that sort of thing. a lot it is their mischief they seem to be up to all of the time. you also have this ballistic missile threat that is far more mature, more advanced, more accurate, and much more numerous in terms of mi

the people-to-people aspects of it. oftentimes these relationships get focused as a senior level. he is strong, and we are both very committed to this. our young officers and n.c.o.'s learn about each other. we are not beginning a relationship but actually continuing one over many years. iraq is a critical country in a critical region. i think there is great hope for stability, great hope for economic growth, great hope for a democracy in this region. so there are many reasons, i think, to commit to this overall long-term partnership and relationship far beyond just the military to military aspect of it. >> i know the u.s. military is not directly involved in syria, but there must be some concerned to you, the mounting violence there. has this been discussed, not just the impact of syria itself, but the destabilization of the region, which does matter to you? >> you have stated it very well. each of those countries that are undergoing this revolution and resistance, we focus on them individually clearly. but they all have an impact on the region. with respect to syria, we decry the violence. the violence needs to stop as quickly as possible. the people of syria