armed forces out of afghanistan. it does not call for an end of the funding requested by the administration for military operations. it does not tie the hands of the president, commanders in the field, or our troops on the ground. it does not provide aid or comfort to those who would harm us or wish us well. instead this amendment will provide a vital contingency plan for withdrawing united states military forces from afghanistan. mr. chairman, most recognize there is no military solution to the quagmire in afghanistan. i remain convinced that the united states must develop an exit strategy in afghanistan before further committing the united states' limited resources and military personnel deeper into afghanistan in pursuit of an objective that may be unattainable, unrealistic, or too costly. unfortunately we are digging ourselves deeper in a hole. in 2001 i voted against the authorization to use force because i feared that giving a blank check to wage war i really worried that this would be for an unspecified period

operations in iraq and afghanistan. for that period america's reliance on contractors has grown to unprecedented proportions, to support logistic security in reconstruction efforts. more than 240,000 contractor employees, about 80% of which are foreign nationals, no work in iraq and afghanistan, supporting the department defense. additional contractor employees support the department state and u.s. agency for international development. these 240,000 plus contractor employees actually outnumber u.s. military personnel in the two feeders. they provide critical support and like our military personnel many have paid a personal price for gold as of may 27, 2009, 4,973 men and women of america's military and at least 13 civilian employees of the department of defense had died in iraq and afghanistan. it is less well known that more than 1360 contractor employees have also died. criticisms of the contingency contacting system suggested for reform in no way diminish the sacrifice of the military and those contractors that gave

i few afghanistan and pakistan as linked, but not e same. sometimes they leave their names and that might be a disservice to their countries because they are unique. i do believe they suffered similar problems. it is not strictly taliban although it uses that moniker, it is a collection of different groups that have turned inward against the government of pakistan and unless they can bring that under control, i think they will have tremendous problems. it also makes afghanistan very difficult because it offers sanctuary which any guerrilla force or insurgency benefit from and makes it very difficult to defeat. it is like burning leaves in your backyard on a windy day, it will keep constantly blowing over and causing problems. we have to see progress in both countries almost simultaneously. >> the 48th brigade of the georgian national guard is back in afghanistan, and again, you and i discuss this. we continue to call on our guard and reserve on a regular basis. it is no longer a volunteer service on their part. we have talked about the seaml

forces afghanistan. on behalf of the committee, we would like to thank each one of you for your service to our country, your willingness to continue to serve. we also want to acknowledge the sacrifices that you and your families made along the way. the support that our military families of pride -- supply is critical. we want to do all we can to support them. if confirmed, these three nominees will be meeting today's concerns in their areas of responsibility, and preparing for tomorrow's. one of the most immediate challenges is implementing the president's news several military strategy for afghanistan and pakistan. if confirmed, two of our witnesses, will need to coordinate closely for the strategy to work. its commander -- commander and supreme allied commander in europe, admiral stavridis will need to work with nato and coalition partners to build the partnership needed in afghanistan and secure allied commitments to the nato mission. our european allies continue to provide the majority of nearly 35,0

i arrived back from afghanistan from a meeting in qatar with general abizaid. i was informed that point that they suspected from the fire might have been the cause of death, and they might have initiated what we call a 15-6, an investigation of that. we were ready for the outcome of the initial review before we went forward with any conclusions. it was a well-intended intent to get some level of truth before we went up. at the same time, we looked at his potential award for valor, and any loss soldier, they immediately look and determine whether a war -- with an award was appropriate. and it is a corporal tillman, a silver star was recommended. -- in the case of corporal tillman, a silver star was recommended. we looked over the geometry of the battlefield and i queried the people to satisfy myself that his actions warranted that, even though there was a potential that the actual circumstance of debt had been friendly fire. i need to stress here that we have a number of famous people in american history killed by friendly fire -- stonewall jackson and the like.

at the farm gate level, i kilo of opium now costs about $75 in afghanistan.by the time it reaches pakistan's border it's gone up and die or 12 times. by the time it's refined into crystal heroine, and move towards the west it's gone up again about 200 times. so if you're the guys who are moving it out of the farm areas, you're making a bit of money. if you're the guys moving it to other parts of the world, you're really making a killing. and so i'll end on that note. 9/11 only cost $500,000. so i think people often say to me, well, the last thing we want to do is get involved in another messy drug war. colombia has been a total disaster. mexico is looking pretty messy. why should we bother doing this, getting involved, sucked into this in afghanistan? and i'll agree that the things i think need to happen to turn this around are going to be extremely expensive, extremely complex or it's going to take a long time. it's not going to be easy. it's going to take a lot of coordination, which is something that the coalition operating there has famously lacked since

that's the life of women in afghanistan. it's a living hell. i think it's fitting and appropriate that we, who have occupied the country militarily for years now, should take a look at the effect of our policies on afghan women. i'm very much in favor of this amendment because it's a matter of human rights. thank you, and i yield back to the lady from california. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: i ask to claim time in opposition even though i do not oppose the amendment. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms.s are lehtinen: with the fall of the taliban, afghan women came back from the brink but the gains made since 2001 have been fragile. we recognize that any prospect of better lives for the women of afghanistan and girls are inherently linked to the success of the development and reconstruction of their country. furthermore, we all desire greater levels of accountability, quality, and impact from foreign development assistance to afghanistan. all aimed at creating the enabling envir

i think this is really obstructing our purpose in afghanistan. -- our progress in afghanistan. . . i think that is what brought the taliban to power in 1994. my question is, if we do not work to clean up the corruption in the afghan government, we may not be able to win this war. what, if confirmed, can you do in terms of taking steps that would implement our new strategy there that would lead to more honest government and and the corruption that is plaguing the government? >> sir, i concur with what you have stated in terms of corruption. i think it has a corrosive effect that undermines the legitimacy of any government, particularly in afghanistan, where it is a real

that's what we need in afghanistan. the way that we're going to lose afghanistan is if we start focusing on how we're going to pull out successfully. well, we need to do is win, win hard and win strong and then we can all come home. i'd have to -- mr. mckeon: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. duncan: i thank the ranking member from california. i will yield back and respectfully oppose this amendment as a united states marine, as a united states congressman and representing all of our men and women in uniform fighting for all of us. let's win and get the job done and then we can come home. thank you. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. mckeon: mr. chairman, i yield myself the balance of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mckeon: thank you, mr. chairman. i think mr. hunter stated it very clearly. the exit strategy should be to win and then bring our forces home. it was stated earlier that general petraeus made a statement that afghanistan has been known over the years as a

we were behind in afghanistan what we had in iraq and not near as many as assets. the secretary directed some changes at the beginning of this calendar year in many of those forces have flown in and some of the others are flowing in as part of the 82nd combat brigade. i believe that the time will be down very close to about what it is in iraq. if confirmed, one of the things i will look at closely is to make sure we maintain the ability to get our casualty's -- and that is all of our casualties to the right level of care. >> thank you. admiral, a major focus of european command is building partnerships with in the region. there are several security cooperation programs dedicated to building relationships. these programs include peacekeeping and they help minimize conditions that lead to conflict. what is your assessment of the capacity of building efforts of european command? >> let me begin by saying i am and complete agreement that this kind of effort but because -- we call this phase 0 and that is working early on in the problem. it is crucial to the security of

we were attacked because al qaeda had sanctuary in afghanistan, and instead of going into afghanistan the way we should have, we shortchanged that mission that i voted to go into and turned around and went into iraq and we had president obama with his constant focus on iraq lead us to a very dark period, very dark period in our history, where we lost thousands of our soldiers, thousands more are wounded, and you all know the story of the torture and all the rest that accompanied this and led us to a place where america has lost its standing in the world. this president inherited two wars -- yes -- he's trying to end one and refocus another. and he inherited the worst recession since the great depression. i call it the great recession. and he also has to cope with threats from north korea, iran, from pirates on the open seas, instability in pakistan and then on top of it all he's facing and we are facing a health threat from the swine flu so he comes to us with an emergency spending bill. do i like everything in this bill? i do not. this is about a compromise. i do not like everything

afghanistan is somewhat another story. the casualties the numbers of attack and so forth are on the rise in afghanistan. you have seen the recent actions of the department of defense and president obama's administration in terms of how we intend to deal with that. the marine corps portion of that is some 10,700 marines who have now reported to afghanistan at the end of last month. we'll be operating in the south as a marine expeditionary brigade but as important, maybe moreso, as marine air ground task force. we'll have responsibilities for the province of helmen. there's a particular issue in that province we have to deal with that troubles us greatly. that is 893% of the opium harvested in afghanistan coming from that province, representing 95% of the opium sold throughout the world. i'll admit to you that the last time we went into the theater, that we went under a misperception. we were concerned the drug control effort there didn't have a holistic approach associated with it. there were eradication team, their efforts

assistance programs in afghanistan. congress intended that sigar would exercise its authority swiftly. and it came into existence in 2008 in july of last year with an authorization to hire 18 auditors, 13 inspectors and three investigators. but from the beginning, sigar has been hindered by certain limitations contained in standard federal government personnel authorities, and by the difficulty of attracting qualified candidates to work in the difficult security environment of afghanistan. a year after its creation, sigar has conducted only one independent audit and has only hired nine auditors, five inspectors and three investigators. this resolution would help resolve this problem by granting sigar a special hiring authority under 5 u.s.c. section 3161. section 3161 would allow sigar a more flexible accepted service authority and empower the office to select, appoint and employ the necessary staff to fulfill its duties. in particular, section 3161 would grant return rights to federal employees, provide interagency det

cost about $75 in afghanistan. by the time it reached pakistan border is done of 12 times by the time it is refined into crystal heroin and moves toward the west of has gone up 200 times so of fewer moving it out of the farm you're you're making a bit of money but if you are moving it to other parts of the world you are really making a killing 9/11 only cost $500,000 so i think people often say the last thing we want to do is get involved in another messy drug war columbia has been a disaster, mexico is looking messy why should we bother doing this and getting sucked into this and afghanistan? i will agree the things that need to happen to turn this around will be extremely expensive and complex and will take a long time, it will not be easy, take a lot of quarter nation which is something the coalition operating there has famously lacked since 2001. but i think the consequences of not fighting this could be astronomical, absolutely unimaginable. so on that happy note too. [laughter] i am open for questions [applau

regarding afghanistan, i would highlight that afghanistan is a uniquely complex environment, counterinsurgency in afghanistan is very different than it has been anywhere else where we have operated. it is really a village by village, valley by valley counterinsurgency. one of the things i'm finding myself saying more often is presence without value is perceived as occupation. and in afghanistan in particular, occupation is resisted as -- it's simply their culture to resist outsiders and they pride themselves on a long history of resisting outside influence. much of afghanistan has not felt the presence that the impact of a central government in kabul, ever. and as you said, i think a large part of our goal there is to encourage the people who are now a deciding where their allegiance will be, is urging -- it's causing them to decide to place their bet with a legitimate government, whatever level that is, whether it's legitimate tribal, local, regional or a federal government. it will come down to ultimately where they place their bet. and in the absence of metrics, it will be our sense of wher

that's not so much the case in afghanistan. i think there are still some left over from the russian experience but we believe the weapons systems are mostly coming in across the border and from the most part from pakistan, from what has previously been called safe haven in pakistan. i'm encouraged that that safe haven could be going away that the lines of men and equipment coming in from pakistan can be disrupted to say the least and perhaps eventually closed. i think the introduction of additional u.s. troops into afghanistan are going to give us the opportunity to get out and work closer with the afghan border patrol units and help to strengthen their ability to control their borders, but that, i think, is the final answer. there has to be a more stringent border control to try to stop things before they get into the country. >> what is your opinion of the taliban movement in pakistan? does this group have close ties to afghanistan? if that they do, how do you differentiate in that border control policy? >> i think that for t

in iraq while the same time increasing resources and afghanistan. within this framework we must look of the mistakes of our her decision-making with respect to contracts in iraq and avoid a repeat of those mistakes in afghanistan. as we have said before lessons learned must be lessons bolles. we will need every bit of experience, judgement and resolved at our disposal to get this right. as such it is imperative the commission has every opportunity to perform its work without hindrance. so i want to take this opportunity to thank the commissioners that are here and the rest of the members if you would be good enough to exchange debt with them and the staff for undertaking this assignment. over a month ago when i appeared before the commission on its first hearing, we noted we would be looking for to this date when we would switch seats. done write, your help safeguard the lives of our civilian and military personnel in iraq and afghanistan. done write your work will rebel the trust of the united states sade-- taxpayers to spend their dollars. those t

in afghanistan, my last trip was in 2005, somewhere around 50%. through the country team leader, greater than 50%, for ambassador bremer, his provincial authority to the levels we need. this would all be debated, we bring it up and it goes back to the other departments and agencies of the government, do they have the manpower to do what we asked them to do and the answer is still no. >> host: this is like on the democrat line. >> caller: good morning. let me state, this is not greta, this is susan. this is your favorite pacifist anarchist. let me state first and foremost, if i may, in relation to the last topic, so far as president obama not releasing photos, i was in the marine corps, the president is the head guy, the head of the military, he has a responsibility to the troops, and in terms of the cost, one american soldier's life, don't release the photos. there is a responsibility, as i understand about coming clean, make us feel good and all this, but it will cost one american soldier his life, don't release the photos. the problem in the mid

and regarding afghanistan, i would highlight that afghanistan is a complex environment, counterinsurgency is very different than it has been anywhere else. this is really a village by village, counterinsurgency, one of the things that i find myself saying is that presence without value is seen as occupation and in afghanistan, occupation is resisted. it is the culture to resist the outsiders and they pride themselves on a history of resisting outside influence. much of afghanistan has not felt the presence and the impact of the central government ever, and as you have said, i think that the large part of the gold and is there, is to encourage the people who are deciding where they will -- where the allegiance will be, they are placing their bets on a legitimate government, at whatever level that this says. if this is tribal or local, where a federal government. this will ultimately come down to where they placed a bet. and i think that in absence of other metrics, this will be the sense that we have on where people are placing their bets that will lead us to understand whether the efforts

our country serve together in afghanistan. in recent months i have come to appreciate our partnership with chancellor angela merkel. i value her wisdom and her can or. i admire her for her leadership and pragmatic approach to getting things done. she and the german people have welcomed me to germany twice, during the nato summit and in dresden. today, i returned the hospitality. angela merkel shares my belief that soap -- no single nation can meet the challenges alone. the united states and germany, one of our closest allies an indispensable partner will continue to play a leadership role across a range of challenges. we are building on the steps we took at the g-20 summit. i underscore our commitment for strengthening financial regulations and i welcome the chancellor angela merkel. as we prepare for the g-8 summit in italy and look ahead to pittsburgh, we agree on the need to avoid protectionism. let me say, to answer, that i have been impressed with your approach to and criminal some pierre i hope the u.s. will match econom

and happening in afghanistan and pakistan today.

of a peaceful afghanistan. this amendment recognizes that limiting the rights of women is counterproductive to all of our efforts to help afghanistan move forward from the devastating damage of taliban rule. i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand up for the women of afghanistan who are suffering, who deserve our help and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 15 printed in part c of house report 111-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. royce: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 15 printed in part c of house report 111-143 offered by mr. royce of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 522, the gentleman from california, mr.

afghanistan. in afghanistan we do not want another repeat of the very significant problem that the department of defense had in afghanistan with losing, yes, losing significant military equipment to the taliban. u.s. taxpayers deserve better. in this bill, we are giving them better. we're giving the oversight. and every essence -- in every essence, we are making sure that aid we give to pakistan is properly used, that benchmarks are in place, that oversight is in place. we're making sure that any entity being used, whether it's being used, and certainly their nuclear weapons do not fall into terrorist hands or other hands. we made sure under the leadership of ms. lee who is on this committee, with the chairman's manager's amendment, that we have safeguards in here to make sure none of these funds are used to even expand the nuclear capacity. this is an extraordinary bill at an extraordinary time. it is heavily bipartisan and i commend the chairman on an excellent piece of legislation. the speaker

in afghanistan, 20 billion. in kuwait, 18 billion, and in the other countries supporting iraq and afghanistan, 12.7 billion. $154 billion. and we know is we don't have enough contract office representatives. we don't have enough quality assurance representatives, we don't have enough log -- cor 11 officers watching the contractors. we have 70% of the contracts go to subcontractors. adderall in this country makes it a requirement we can only oversee the subcontractor by going through the prime and so we have to get the information secondhand. i think we need to reexamine that 70% of the dollars i mentioned are actually going to the subs. we have another issue and that is if it is afghan employees or iraqi employees we have to deal with those governments and there's certain protections and hoops we have to jump and it would strike me if we are going to spend our dollars there which should have greater ability to oversee the contracts done by the folks paid for by us. >> thank you. >> i do know in the report you us

. >> let me turn to afghanistan. i've written that i think this book is the best guide to the policy choices that we face in afghanistan. we now have president obama's announcement of what his afghanistan pakistan strategy will be after a review process of several months and i want to put you on the spot a little bit and ask you to comment on that policy with this preface. to me as an observer it seems as if the president is leaning in two directions at once. you talk in your book about an enemy centric strategy that would focus on al qaeda in afghanistan and a population centric strategy that would get you more into nation-building area. and i've been trying ever since the president's speech to figure

afghanistan was central to that. the argument is we should leave afghanistan in chaos or leave iraq in chaos, i don't think that is a good argument. our national security is tied to stable countries and particularly stable countries in that region. let's say we didn't go into iraq, saddam hussein was still in power, their neighbor and hated foe iran, developing nuclear weapons, you would think iraq would be developing nuclear weapons. would that provide more stability in the region and the world or less? i don't agree with the premise that we are less secure, i think we are more secure. these countries, there are fifty million people in iraq and afghanistan, they have a constitution, they have governments, they are imperfect, every government has its imperfections, they are imperfect, their fledgling in many ways, the iraqi government has only been doing this for 3 years so they had to get their feet under them. they're doing pretty well by all reports. >> host: these concerns about the role of the military-industria

nobody has one of war in afghanistan in the long run. alexander the great, the mongols, the british, the russians. wind ship another hundred, 200, 500 -- y another 5,000 or 10,000? i believe he is not completed decided. and i hope and i would like to tell him please don't make this war a new iraq. this is what i am hoping. i am hoping when he spoke in berlin the day after everybody was enthusiastic. it was, in berlin, like a festival. everybody was happy. i called an american friend of mine. he owns a big, great american newspaper. we vote for him. we made it. of course. the germans weren't allowed to vote. impressive. when he was just right now for the 16th anniversary in u.s. trade. impressed everybody. people feel that this man is not only cool, but he is also a heart. sometimes cool people have great hearts. >> let's throw this open to the sea of people will came to hear you. please wait until the microphone comes to you. >> thank you for coming. is this on? okay. the so i just want to say something to mark crispin miller. why did yo

if you are one of those people there will be work for you in afghanistan. [laughter] is that all? >> [inaudible] it is minor by am worrying about the justification behind it all on their and whether or not, is it justifiable to them or is an aspect of the war against america or the hypocrisy? >> a good question. the taliban has a bogus justification that they explain to farmers that they persuade or force to grow poppy which is that is long bands and the use of our traffic or trade of narcotics or alcohol. so their justification is that it is okay because it is a jihad against the infidels because we sell the drugs to the infidel last. but very little afghan hero when reaches the united states. and is about 70% of bigger when in europe and the u.k. but the vast majority of afghanistan drug crop ends up in pakistan, iran, central asia, countries like tajikistan has used her when problems. a totally bogus argument. >> i am curious looking at the book on the cia with the national drug trade and i'm curious to the continuity of your work and you're dead to hamper also two weeks ago th

forces in iraq and in afghanistan to rebuild their countries, they're also putting their lives on the line and those of their families. the insurgents in iraq and in afghanistan have targeted these hardworking patriots and their families in hopes of terrorizing the local people and discouraging cooperation. it is because of this very real danger that congress created the section 1059 and 12 4 special immigrant visa programs and they allow for certain iraqis and afghans to actually serve as translators. these are folks who are protecting our young men and women in uniform as translators or interpreters or otherwise employed by the u.s. or as contractors to come to the united states to escape the targeting by these terrorists and insurgents. i am aware that the state department prepared a study of these programs in july, 2008, but i believe it is necessary, actually, to follow up on this previous study in light of the troubling reports that i received earlier this year. i was informed by our state department folks in iraq and in afghanistan and i was informed by the commander of u.s. fo

i will ellen tell you a little bit about the trip that i was on in pakistan and afghanistan, and then i will finish by talking about the priorities for the intelligence community that i have the privilege of bleeding, so let me start by talking about a few of these areas that are of concern to us in the intelligence world. one that is perhaps and usually at the head of the list now are the national security implications of the worldwide economic recession, which we are now enduring. it is one thing to look at it as a financial and economic problem, and i will leave it to others to predict how long the current recession is going to go on and when we are going to come out of it, but we tried to view it with regard to the events coming out of it that might help or harm american security interests and the effects, cut both ways. venezuela, russia and iran have less oil revenue. that can be a good thing if it means reduced funding for actions which are against u.s. interests. the overall slowdown has put general pressure on military budgets throughout the world and that is a pretty good th

living in caves in afghanistan. we think of them as a liberal fanatics, gun-toting, basically backwards illiterate people. and what i would like to put forward to all of you who have climbed days kindly come down to hear me speak out like to put out another model but i also think is useful. i am not suggesting that omar has developed a taste for pork or osama bin laden has started drinking nor are they about to open a new wing however what i have done over the last five years is to investigate the taliban operation on the ground level. when you start doing that, they start looking more like best. -- in this. antacid do with the way that they earn money. one of the mistakes that the western governments have made that was made in our operations in afghanistan is to underestimate them as religious fanatics who live in caves. we need to start looking at the enormous economic forces that are bankrolling the insurgency that is now spreading rapidly across pakistan not just afghanistan. chose to move through quickly, the t

he died serving our country and the people of afghanistan. his death reminds us how difficult it is for men serving in afghanistan. he and the moment. he and others who lost their lives shall never be forgotten. i'm also sure the house will send condolences of jason swindlehouse and jason crestville following their deaths in captivity in iraq. the making of a hostage and cruel and barbaric act and can never be justified. i can assure the house the government are doing all we can and our thoughts and the thoughts of all people in this house will be with the families and friends for those who wait for news. mr. speaker, this morning, i had meetings/% u$e minister and colleagues in the house and i will have further meetings. >> regarding troops, the mr. speaker, one of the key issues raised with me by my constituents is that the house more specifically access to affordable housing and the need for mortgage finance. my constituents are aware that despite the urgent need for more house building,xvñ conservative generally campaign against it. as we

of afghanistan. our brave men and women are unequal in the world. they are educated, motivated, but they are tenacious. they bleed red, white and blue. they meet and exceed any task our country sends them to accomplish with great skill and with great pride. they are america's backbone. our heroes, the best of our nation are amazing examples of the youth of this country. jarrett was a proud and accomplished sold year and at just 20 years of age, he was only one day from becoming a sergeant when he died in afghanistan. texas is proud to have called him a sold year, a son and a hero. he will always be remembered by his family, friends and a grateful nation for his service. his love of country, excellence and achievement and love of his family will be engraved on the hearts of every life he touched. jarrett's wife, his mother and her husband and his father, michael and his brothers, chase, jason, brandon and his sister are living testimony to the memory of this one brave sold year's love of life, love of

certainly within afghanistan. what i would like to ask you for the record, if you would, explain the impact of the soft capabilities of those partners in the current fight as it exists in afghanistan, and if you could update as well on iraq as we transition out. >> yes, sir. from your visits to the nato soft coordination center, you understand how this team is coming together and there is bonding that is occurring across the special operations forces of nato at the headquarters environment. i think it's inspired, certainly stimulated the activities of some special operations forces being provided to the isaf effort in afghanistan. so i'm not the expert on how individual nations special operations forces are performing, what their activities are in afghanistan. that's outside my realm of responsibility. i'm not sure my monitorship is strong enough to give a coherent and accurate answer on that at this point. i will say that in my discussions with nato's soft leaders, there is a sense of community that is forming wi

in included stops in afghanistan, pakistan and singapore. you are watching live coverage on c-span2. >> decore becoming a director of national intelligence admiral blair spent 34 years in the united states navy. is less job in the military was as commander in chief of the pacific command the highest ranking officer over u.s. forces in the asia-pacific region. previously was the director of the joint staff and served in a budget-- for idf policy positions on several navy staffs and the national security council. he was also the first associate director of the central intelligence-- director of central intelligence for military support. after returning from the navy in 2002, admiral blair l.t. national security studies at the national bureau of asian research and the general of the army omar n. bradley strategic leadership at dickinson college and of the army war college. he was also the president of the institute for defense analysis, a federally funded development corporation focused on national security and serve as deputy executive directo

when i read we have four -- 240,000 contractors in the arena as in afghanistan and iraq put together and 80% of them are foreign nationals it seems to me that this is just a gravy train of money for these defense contractors, number one, and for all these contractors and i think almost anybody in this country, almost in the average american would say that it's ridiculous that we are still spending all this money hiring all these foreign nationals and doing, committing all the waste fraud and abuse and allowing it to go on over there and i think it's really sad and it's really shameful. thank you. >> i think the other question we asked were part of that question is what is inherently the governmental responsibility and what is not. what are we doing with some of these people? are they doing a job that should only be entrusted to somebody that is a u.s. citizen or a member of the armed services or in some respect responsible in the chain here, security strikes me as one of those things very much who's protecting whom within these countries and that is the hearings we have had in the pa

since 9/11 we have deployed individually 78,000 sailors into iraq and afghanistan. sailors who had been serving on ships and submarines and airplanes but who are now into the fight supporting our ground forces there. clearly, our seals have a large presence in the middle east. in iraq and afghanistan, but as you saw, it was the seals that performed the rescue of captain phillips. we have construction battalions who not only are in the fight in iraq and afghanistan, but they're also part of our humanitarian missions around the world. our sailors are serving in provincial reconstruction teams. in fact, last december i was in afghanistan on a very cold mountain talking to a team leader who happened to be a nuclear submariner and who had been driving a nuclear submarine around a few short months before. we have navy doctors who are distributed on the ground with our ground forces, but they're also on ships around the world with our sailors, and they're also key in our humanitarian assistance efforts around the world. in every ocean, on every continent you will find amer

afghanistan has become the u.s. military's main effort and central front. president obama author on some 21,000 additional u.s. troops including more than 10,000 marines in the southern part of the country reinforcing our british, canadian, australian, dutch and danish allies. as you know, president obama ordered a comprehensive civil military strategy focused on protecting the afghan people and appointed a new leadership team. our goal is in afghanistan that doesn't provide a sing query for al qaeda that rejects the rule of the taliban and has a government that works for the needs and security of the afghan people who elected it. u.s. government is also sending more than 400 civilians to the country, most of whom will be deployed outside the capitol to the reconstruction teams and various other units laboring to bring improvements to the lives of afghans at the provincial and district levels. i believe with the new strategy we and our international afghan partners will have both military and civilian capacity to be able to make headway. of course the situa

when i was in afghanistan, which i just came back recently from a three-day trip there. afghanistan and pakistan, there is no question that some of our allies were doing an incredible job, but there needs to be more. i was very impressed with the work they were doing, the country -- where they saw afghanistan going. host: you had the chance to talk to the head of missile defense and asking him questions. you said that missile defense is often used to defend against north korea, but he also said that it could be used to defend against iran. was that surprising to you? guest: it has always been about north korea, and there are some significant issues that we need to watch when it comes to north korea. but i had made the comment that north korea, it is important that we have a strong missile defense. i made a slight comment that there was minimal attention on iran. everybody jumps to the microphone and said absolutely not because of the impact of what iran could do. that was, i would say, news to not only myself but other members. they indicated in a very important impact.