your allies must know, your allies must trust you. our allies are questioning us right now. we told them trust us. we have your back. and what is happening now, the kurds are being slaughtered as i speak in northern syria and she also said, our allies must trust us and our enemies must fear us. that is my foreign policy. that is susan rice's foreign policy. i want to thank the chairman for working with me, to stand up on this very important issue. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul, yields back. the gentleman from new york, mr. engel is recognized. mr. engel: my pleasure to yield one minute to the the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the chairman and ranking member for coming together. i was on the floor earlier and held the "new york times" saying syrian forces rush in to fill he void and battle lines shifting. we worked hard to get turkey into nato and to respect it for its secular position and its embracing of the ideals of democracy. know to be the cause of thousands fl

we know the truth about occurred allies. they lost 11000 combatants in a joint effort to defeat isis. we dropped bombs from the air and provided intelligence and logistics behind the lines. the curse lost thousands of lives.ve eighty-six brave americans also lost their lives so tragically. it is argued that the cars we're fighting for themselves. of course they work. that is the nature of annoyance. we fight together each pursuing our own vital interest. american leaves no soldiers behind. often a great cost of blood and treasure. we recover our debt and are wounded and we free our men and women who are held captive. this is the matter of american honor and promise. so is it too is the principle that we stand by our allies. we do not abandon our friends. the decision to abandon the cards, violates one of our most sacred duties. it strikes at american honor. what we've done to the kurds, will stand is a bloodstained in the annals of american history. their broad strategic implications of our decision as well. iranian and russ

if you want to be a nato ally, you got to act like a nato ally. can you imagine any nato country invading syria to the benefit of us. they're invading to the benefit of isis. they have a concern about why pg elements in syria. i get that. i have been saying that for years. i told erdogan. this is not the solution. it was you, president erdogan who led the irish fighters flowing into begin with. >> senator graham. >> yes. >> why do you think that president trump listens to you when he wanted to quickly withdraw then and why he's not listening to you now, what specific assurances president erdogan made in the phone call that you participated in with president trump. >> president trump did not wake up two weeks ago and say hey erdogan, you can have syria. in december he announced the withdraw to president trump's credit. we reconfigured that withdraw and slowed in down and reassured the kurds that we are not going to abandon you. we are sympathetic to the problem. for us, they were allies. we are trying to accommodate both interests. what happens is

allies. so we have to think aggressively about how do we use these powers properly, strategically, sustainably. we think about how we use sanctions and financial regulations to drive the exclusion of rogue actors from the system. secondly, we think about defensive strategies, because it's the russians and the chinese and even nonstate actors that are thinking about how to use financial and economic resources to influence, coerce, and to shape environments. so what does that defensive posture look like? and finally one part of the , strategy that has not been fully articulated yet is how do , we use positive economic power as a complement to what we are do, both defensively offensively, to reshape the environment? this comes up when we talk about china in the one belt one road context, how are we investing strategically? how are we promoting the good behavior and alliances, both state and nonstate, that we want to see? so how we think about the use of the economic and financial power and that

attempt to get out of the so-called forever wars in the middle east so can anyone blame america's allies if they're confused does anyone believe that the us will stand by them in their time of need is america 1st really mean america alone or in america on the sidelines of the big global challenges well we're very fortunate today because we have 3 people in the room that have all 'd the answers to these questions kelly playhouses the executive editor of the american conservative magazine james carafano works on national security and foreign policy at the heritage foundation and richard fontayne heads the center for a new american security great to have all of you with us here have a lot to get through today i was surprised by a comment that bret stephens in the new york times made recently where he was agreeing with all people iran's foreign minister zarif and is a reef basically was saying that allies of america. were in kind of a bad place today and that they should neither seek america's permission to do things nor look on at america to secure their security and he's basically saying o

but our allies. we have to think aggressively about how do we use these powers properly, strategically, sustainably. we think about how we use sanctions and financial regulations to drive the exclusion of rogue actors from the system. and we think about defensive strategies, because it's the russians and the chinese and nonstate actors that are thinking about how to use financial and economic resources to influence, coerce, and shape environments. what does that defensive posture look like? and one part of the strategy that has not been articulated yet is how do we use positive economic power as a complement to what we are trying to do defensively and offense of lay to reshape the environment? aboutomes up when we talk china in the one belt one road context, how are we investing strategically? how are we promoting the good behavior and alliances that we want to see? how we think about the use of the economic and financial power and that of our allies becomes a part of it. and i think we have not figu

and allied spent years -- controlling lands that the u.s. and allied forces have spent years seeking to defend. so let's review. in the weeks following the president's decision to walk allies, turkish fighters, manyed are islamic extremists, have syria. the border into they have abandoned forward perating bases and then sent planes to destroy those bases but before they could be celebrating -- took ating russian troops selfies. they are attacking entire towns literally ns are being murdered in the street. street.nsion of control by the expansion of control by russian and iranian forces are not just a win for those countries in syria but also hreatens our allies in the region. in particular, israel. sense of emboldenment will expand programs to deliver advanced weapons to hezbollah, increasing the already to israel threat only now from syria as well as lebanon. already noted, assad has consolidated his power virtually all overseeria with no -- overseeria with no political or military costs. have escaped to join the fight and thousands more ar

allies. >> i understand turkey -- >> turkey is a nato ally. our traditional, major alliance is nato. we have two people that we have support with who are fighting against each other. the president has also said -- >> one has invaded the other to be clear. >> -- he wants to get the troops out of syria and get out of these long-standing wars. we're being very clear with turkey what is going on. the president was clear in making sure that isis prisoners are not escaping. i've seen your reporting. this is an issue we are on top of. >> let's hear what lindsey graham just had to say about this. he tells axios -- think the president is putting the nation at risk. if i hear the president say one more time i made a campaign promise to get out of syria, i'm going to throw up. your reaction? >> i like lindsey graham a lot. i respect lindsay. lindsey graham and the president are close. this is obviously an issue they don't agree on. these are complicated issues. you can't have one-minute sound bites. nation suritstaff are dent and on top of the situation.

hezbollah and its allies are the majority in government and parliament but it is under u.s. sanctions like its iranian backer that is why it needs a partner like who is supported by the west house speaker to be a birdie is warning against international intervention it seems lebanon is yet again caught in the arena of the us iranian struggle both countries have weighed in the crisis which began as a protest for better living conditions iran is accusing the us saudi arabia and israel of supporting the protesters while the us is calling for a government that will be responsive to the needs of the people protesters who are now confining their street action to public squares are promising to push for radical change they say they are ready for a long struggle to bring down a stick terry and system that has been governing them for decades that was 2nd demand is the formation of a new cabinet from expertise people who have expertise none corrupted nonpartisan so they can govern and conduct the transition phase and our next demand would be the early apartments or elections so we are

we've seen our partners and allies step up and take on important roles. in fact, as we speak, france is playing a leading role in the african. but just about every place that president trump tried to lead from behind provides reminders that there are certain kinds of leadership only america can contribute. but unfortunately, we're not in this alone. the huge progress we have won in recent years against isis and the taliban has come by partnering with local forces. with senator from a broad international coalition. america has only provided limited specialized capabilities to reinforce the local partners who do the heaviest lifting. this approach is sustainable. unfortunately, we know exactly what happens when america forgets these lessons and simply decides we're tired of sustaining the fight. abandoning afghanistan in the 1990's have created the conditions for al qaeda's ability to grow and plan the september 11 attacks from a safe haven far from our shores. president obama's retreat from iraq allowed isis to arise from the still-warm ashes of al qaeda i

turkey is an ally, the free army was an ally, and the kurds have been allies. it's a complicated, messy situation, but a lot of people are not acknowledgic turkey was coming in one way or another, and 50 soldiers would simply be in the way and be a trip wire to a much worse outcome, so i think the president was right in moving 50 soldiers out of the way of an onslaught of tens of thousands of turkish troops. >> why are you so convinced of that? i'm not going to get to whether it was exactly 50 and all of that, but it does seem as if our soldiers being there was serving as a deterrent to erdogan for a period of time. >> they were until they weren't. they were until the turks decided they were coming. they gave us forewarning they were coming and the president made a judgment that i think most military commanders would agree with, that you don't go to war with 50 soldiers. they don't deter anything. once the turks said they were coming, it would have been foolish to leave 50 soldiers in the wakes of tens of thousands of people coming across the border. this is a

-- america's kurdish allies. after fighting side by side, syrian kurds are now being under siege and fleeing their homes. according to the united nations, over 180,000 people have been displaced, including 80,000 children. many are fleeing to the kurdish region of iraq, which already hosts over 200,000 refugees from the syrian civil war. turkey's reckless actions have created a humanitarian crisis that will strain our partners in the region and provide cispa with an opportunity to -- isis as an opportunity to reemerge as a threat to the united states. the international community must come together to provide assistance to kurds and refugees in both syria and iraq. the u.s. special envoy to syria also told congress last week that there have been several incidents of war crimes committed, including the use of whites for forous, which can be used on civilians. we cannot stand idly by while turkey undermines the fight against isis, attacks our kurdish allies, and puts hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in ha

relationship a be salvaged but they are nato ally and i find it incredible that a nato ally is attacking a ground opponent. so to the average american, what does this matter to you. isis cannot re-emerge, the caliphate is destroyed but they are alive and well. 15,000 to 20,000 fighters and without the kurds they will come back. and without the kurds, good luck to help in the future. israel, the nightmare is for iran to be the biggest winner of the vacuum we created from withdrawing from syria if they take the oil from syria and get richer and israel gets surrounded. so at the end of the day, this is about israel, it's about isis and about iran and aligning with assad is not a good outcome for the united states. if the kurds are forced to align with assad, they are aligning with iran and i can't think of a worst outcome to force them in the arms of the iranians at the expense of american national security and prestige. our kurdish friends cannot do it all. and for a few hundred proops, we can fix this problem. we need to reset and get turkey to stand down. the sanctions will receive a lar

oil not allies? what type of message does that send if anybody wants to be an ally in the future? >> [inaudible] >> those are two separate votes and they both should be voted on certainly we should deal with sanctions to just protect president trump to leave our nation vulnerable and i hope leader mcconnell isn't doing that but that is what his actions indicate because he has refused to bring up any of these resolutions. the only reason not to do them he is and opposed ideologically but to protect president trump because he has made so many mistakes. on armenian genocide, turks don't like to hear it because the truth hurts. if we don't stand up for one we won't stand up to any. >> the defense bill won't pass this week leader mcconnell stretches the true saying democrats are preventing it from happening and preventing soldiers from getting paid. first of all soldiers get paid no matter what they get three.1 percent increase in january or not. but mcconnell knows the truth which is simply that unless you have a bipartisan negotiation on the appropriation bills nothing will happen. a

inside of syria may become an ally and it appears they are they becoming an ally o to the statute, theres a possibility of the kurdish area within syria. i object to this resolution because this resolution does nothing to fix the problem. it would stop the arms sales to turkey so i would object to this resolution. >> the objection is heard, mr. president. >> the senator in kentucky. >> the arms sales would eliminate any further sale of arms to turkey and instead of sending a fake message% of the senate resolution, we would be guiding the legislation that would tell them yes, we are serious, we object to the incursion you need to respect the territorial integrity and we are therefore no longer selling arms. i would ask consent. >> the senator for idaho. >> reserving the right to object. >> this is a very fluid situation as we all know. americans are confused about the parties and then when you overlay the politics on top of it where you have a level of animus towards the commander-in-chief it becomes difficult to sort this out. i want to lay out some fundamentals here that we need to deal

fighting a nato ally. fightld be joining a where syrian forces backed by the sheer all aside are fighting turkey and we would then be on that sidedly join now. mr. antle: that is one of the reasons i think our involvement in syria was so wrong. there are a lot of people who wanted us to be involved in the syrian civil war writing against multiple sides -- fighting against multiple sides. this is not a clear-cut case of good guys or bad guys. thiserting the troops at point, their presence for a while made it too high a price for turkey to do the things they were doing. we were certainly deterring turkish action by the decision to move the troops. having moved to the troops and the turks having gone and it is completely different. host: what does the president's decision say to our allies? a --uture conflict where should they trust the united states with this president? mr. antle: this is not an anomaly for the kurds. a very badave had experience at the end of the persian gulf war under president bush -- the

are in trouble so kelly let me let me start with you what is what is the state of america's allies in the world are how we organize our national security infrastructure around the world in the right way or do our allies need to begin looking for other places to secure their their needs. i think i think the latter is correct i mean i'm i'm thinking of george washington's farewell address when he warned against foreign entanglements he warned that in pursuing these friendships partnerships treaties entanglements as he put it would put us in a complicated position and which we were basically selling and sharing our foreign policy basing our foreign policy on other people's other country's interests those entanglements were things that we built after world war 2 that had gone through horrific wars where we had world war one world war 2 nato was securing our security doing a deal with japan and basing u.s. forces broad was something where we looked at is at that time is vital to u.s. national security and our allies around the world put a lot of trust in those relationships so you think go

russia again, which gets to sit back and watch one nato ally impose a sanction on another nato ally.urthering putin's goal of fracturing a nato alliance. that's what putin's about. iran and hezbollah, now are going to be more emboldened to use syria to launch attacks against israel from the golan and other places. isis, isis which is clearly seeing it regroup and it has hundreds of supporters released back into the region. every single strongman, autocrat and dictator around the world who just learned what president trump has done, that will abandon our partners under the smallest amount of pressure. what do you think they're going to do? what do you think they'll attempt to do now? all we're left with is donald trump -- a donald trump shaped hole in american credibility. more chaos. more instant, more threats. threats to the american people, our partners and allies in the region. it was pointed out that the people three -- that isis will flee to europe, what was his comment? don't worry, they'll go to europe they won't come to the united states. that's being a real partner, isn't it

and it has disturbed the balance within our allies. it is deeply unsettling that we are proceeding without a long-term strategy. that is what we all have to work together to do. in this chaos we are emboldening our enemies. that is why i am pleased that at least we have a bipartisan call to action that we have to protect our kurdish allies. this is a issue that was quit over. this is something we have to work together for. we must do this work and not allow other things to distract us. as we work together to protect our allies, we must reinforce the importance and stand up against impulsive decision-making that has reckless consequences and stand for a long-term strategy to provide stability in the middle east. i have the honor of introducing my colleague who can speak more to the importance of our relationship with our allies. >> thank you. i know that the issue of fear and turkey has been looked at from a lot of different angles over the last week and a half or so. i just want to add a particular lens that i thought might be useful f

turkey is a nato member to the traditional ally in the ally of the united states for some time.ut it is not been behaving like an ally recently. it is doing deals with russia, doing what we seen here and being very aggressive in trying to spread in the president has ambitions and becoming increasingly in this country. what do we do about turkey, is this still a reliable nato ally? or have we lost? >> i would take issue with the way you described it, it's a much more complex story than the one you alluded to. i don't think we have behaved as a good ally to turkey. if ever there was a man who is lacking a public relations gene, it is him. he has a claim to making the united states that would put his position in a much more sympathetic like which he never makes a nobody wants to make it for him. when the syrian civil war exploded, one of the countries that was worst affected was turkey. 4 million syrian refugees in turkey. it opened up the whole possibility, as adjusted, the pkk establishing a strategic death in syria to carry out operations in turkey. these are serious problems fo

they are our allies. my friend, talk to my friend from kentucky saying the kurds are better off with the syrians. the kurds don't think so. they'd rather be back to the status quo talking to their leader and certainly america will not be better off at all with isis prisoners escaping. who did this? the president, the president's incompetence has put american lives in danger. simply and starkly put inaccurate. in new york as i said we know how well, we w know well how a small group of fanatics halfway around the world can do incredible d damage and kill thousands of americans here on our soil. it should shake everyone regardless of their ideology and their views on turkey that the president made this decision so abruptlyho without heeding the advice of our commanders on the ground and now has no plan to manage the consequences. after meeting with the president yesterday it was cleared by democrats from public into the room that he does not grab the gravity of the situation. he doesn't understand it. and th

-- ally? given the events of this week, how confident are you when a ks does they as united states have its back whether it is the ukraine or the baltics? thank you. >> thanks, eric. the simple answer is yes, me personally 100%. i have been a part of nato and spent my first seven years there and i have complete confidence in the alliance. i see it day in and day out. over the events of the last few days, i think you can even back it up. there have been questions, is the u.s. committed to nato? yes, absolutely. chris -- has put more capability. nato commandrough structure adaptation right now which is a three-year process. the, strongest alliance for past 70 years but we have a clear recognition that what has worked for the last 70 will not get us to the next 70. nato command structure adaptation during the cold war we had 25,000 personnel. we optimize during the peace dividend, we got it below 8000. we're adding 1200 back in? who's adding the most? the united states. we're putting brigades bac

stand behind its word and stand with our allies in times of need.ur adversaries know the united states seeks peace that will not hesitate to defend our national interest or the interest of those we have sworn sacred alliances. donald trump i believe, i'm uncomfortable to say this about a president, but he is a complete failure is commander-in-chief. is most wreck one - - reckless and incompetent commander-in-chief we have ever had. and he fails repeatedly. he doesn't understand. he is just incompetent. i mean it. he has impulses and they are impulses that he has. and then when the unpredictable happens he's not prepared and it's always somebody else's fault. it never stops at his desk. talks are based on nothing more than a delusional promise by a bloodied dictator. causing huge pain including here in iowa 160 workers laid off here in the quad cities with john deere not to mention the pain it has caused to manufacturing. so virtually no gain at all in the strategy. iran is growing more and more provocative. starting this nuclear program because dona

if allied forces crossed the same river north of paris and allied forces have crossed the river south of paris, why can't they not cross the river at paris? he told eisenhower at this point paris was fundamental, it was essential to the governing of france at that point and in the very near future. eisenhower responded that he would do what he could, but at this point, he could make no promises of when he would cut loose part of the allied army to move into paris. the following day, de gaulle sent word to eisenhower by de gaulle's senior military commander. what he told eisenhower was information that the french were receiving from paris was that the city was on the verge of anarchy. there was no police presence. transportation had completely stopped. food shortages set the city on the verge of famine. and de gaulle argued that if allies don't move now, they were risking a humanitarian disaster and perhaps the destruction of paris itself. as it happened a number of times early in the war, de gaulle and eisenhower, two extraordinary personalities, were putting that relationship to the

we have seen our partners and allies step up with important roles and as we speak france is playing a leading role in the effort but just about every place obama tried to pleave them behind there are certain kinds of leadership , only america can contribute. but we are not in this alone. going up against isys and the television we partnered with local forces. america has only provided limited special ops capabilities to reinforce the local partners to do the heaviest lifting. this approach is sustainable. unfortunately we know exactly what happens when america forgets these lessons and suddenly decidespl we are tired of sustaining the fight afghanistan in the 19 nineties help to create the conditions for al qaeda's ability to grow their attacks from the safe haven far from our shores. allowing isys to rise from those ashes of al qaeda and iraq and syria will invite more of the chaos that breeds terrorism and our adversaries will certainly fill that vacuum. the ignite the brutal bashir al-assad regime with those arab communities and create the same conditions that let isys grow in the

homeland and our allies. absent continued counterterrorism pressure, isis is likely to return, whether in syria or elsewhere. only through vigilance will we keep ourselves safe. partnership with the kurds will remain an important part of that strategy. turkey has assured us they'll continue to battle the islamic state. to say the least, i remain skeptical of turkey's counterterrorism guarantees. we have tread this ground before. we have offered turkey the opportunity to combat isis and its affiliates. turkey has promised to provide forces to combat isis, but turkey has failed to follow through with those forces. worse, sometimes the forces in question had questionable ties to jihadist or al qaeda linked groups. the fact of the matter is turkey's primary concern is its decades'old struggle against pkk. in addition to sacrificing our gains against isis, turkey's actions threaten further instability and chaos in a country that's already suffered years of destruction and devastation. reports of syrian and russian

he just happened to hurt our one ally. and the comdem nations wendemna pretty strong. >> with the exception of rand paul and mike lee, i think most republicans came out, including lindsey graham who's been on board for just about everything. the president jumped head long into this based on one phone call from the president of turkey without any of the implications whatsoever and most troubling without consulting anyone at all just making this decision unilaterally. >> all right. we're going to talk about this much more with former aide to the george w. bush administration elise jordan. the author of the book "the a world in disarray" richard haass. and national security expert columnist of usa today and author of the book "the death of expertise" tom nichols. president trump spent yesterday defending his decision for withdraw troops from syria even as key republicans and allies urge him against leaving america's kurdish allies open to an assault from turkey. multiple current and former u.s. officials tell nbc news that th

he is now your ally? no, no they are not our ally. can no longer unite the country. but we are at the same time working together with our friends to reach a political settlement which should be the lasting one and the establishment of the constitutional committee is a very crucial step to that end and the first meeting will reconvene at the end of this month in geneva. therefore, we have no political relations with assad, but russia and iran are the guarantors of this regime, and we are the guarantors of the opposition. if there's any message, sometimes it goes through... but it's all very mixed now. the opposition to bashar al—assad in the case of the syrian kurds are now fighting alongside him against your troops. look, when it comes to ankara... the situation on the ground has been always very complicated. very complicated. ok, so... and those terrorist organisations like daesh and ypg, they fought each other but they sold weapons to each other, they provided food and everything. we know it is a very mixed picture but the russian f

to the united states and our allies. and that with since 2014 we cannot afford to take our eyes off but we must consolidate with that terrible organization that sound strategy to ensure our success. to many of our partner forces with our brothers and sisters those the must have fought and died and we must ensure that their sacrifices were not made in vain. thank you mister president i yield the floor in the absence of a quorum. >> mister president i rise today to address the current situation in syria. first i welcome the vice president announcement of a cease-fire which will prevent further loss of life. that is a central question those that were not negotiated before the president could go to m the troops so what is happened over the past seven days since us announced a withdrawal. and russia has assumed control of the previous military positions in the us has been forced to bomb their own facilities to prevent appropriation by russia and turkey. now that is being portrayed as a victory. it is far from a victory. serio

how should we answer those friends and allies? >> joel, we just heard from a sampling of senators from all over the political spectrum. is there anyone who is in favor of the president's decision? >> it's brutal, craig. i think rand paul is in favor of it, and he's alone. he's very lonely right now. he doesn't make a case for why this is good for the united states. he's just saying we shouldn't be involved, we should maybe evacuate everywhere around the world which is not how one secures the country and our interests overseas. what we saw yesterday was an embarrassment. i'm sure ambassador jeffrey felt very humbled by the discussion. i'm sure he agreed with most of the criticism coming at him. he had to put on a brave face in that venuvenue. >> kristen, are you skill with me? >> i am. >> has the white house, has the administration been taken aback by the bipartisan nature of the criticism? he heard from ted cruz, lindsey graham as well. it would seem as if the only republican so far who is backing this idea pubic lickly is aforeme

army europe and nato allied land command. topics included nato alliances, military readiness, and european security. this event was put together by defense one. this is just over 30 minutes. >> i would like to invite our stingers guess and moderated to take a seat. while they assemble, i will .ntroduce them and lieutenant general jt thompson, commander of nato allied land command. our panel will be led and moderated by patrick tucker, defense one technology editor. thank you all. [applause] all right, thank you all for joining us today. thisso pleased to have exceptional panel here to discuss the future of the united states army and the incredibly important theater, the european theater, and, you know, i've been covering different aspects of u.s. army activity in europe for some time. there's one question that is usually sort of a perfunctory .uestion this year, that is not exact with the case. i will go to you, jt, as well as you, chris. i wonder if you can talk to me a little bit about the current status and your feelings a

be explaining that to its allies in nato. it's complicated isn't it what secretary s. for said this morning and what they have said before was that the u.s. troops who had been in northern syria who were in effect the buffer between turkish forces threatening to come into the kurdish areas and these syrian kurdish groups were allied with the united states he said that it became clear that turkey was going to go in no matter what and that he was not willing to risk the life of u.s. forces and that's why the u.s. pulled out which of course turkey saw as a green light to go in those are questions that the other nato allies are going to be asking secretary esper and of course his turkish counterpart as well as they arrive for the nato defense ministers meeting this afternoon the united states likes to put all the blame on turkey for this but there are certainly european governments who were not at all comfortable with the u.s. decisions and so i think that there are going to be some very frank discussions around the nato table this afternoon ok maybe we'll see some frank a

that first off is a nato ally. as we talk about sanctions and discussions about maybe we should not do it, nato basically threatened to overrun u.s. position. that did not change with a cease-fire. i look at that and i'm like, that is interesting to me. it is interesting when we look at what a nato ally did as we talk about they have a cease-fire with russia now, not with us, maybe we could have negotiated something but probably this was bad enough that we never would be party to it. it is an interesting thing to keep in mind as we deal with what to do. we are in a tough position now. a lot of tough decisions. i could not even give you an answer i think is right right now and where to go forward, but i think as this body decides what to do in terms of future behavior, i think taking a strong stand and saying the united states will not be pushed over without consequences is important. to both of you, again, deeply respect you being here in your hard work. i know you have put a lot more time into this than i could ev

we ought to care about our allies.s wouldn't be happening if not for the impulsive decision by the president. with drawing our forces it's what secretary madison warned against. tush ish president took this as a green light. the consequences will be far lasting, the damage to our standing, the fact the kurds are now entertaining the russians to protect them because the americans wouldn't. this is an unmitigated disaster. i fear as said this will result in the resurgence of isis. >> margaret: i want to get to the other big topic. that is the impeachment inquiry you are leading do. you see this widening? >> well we're keeping our focus right now on the president's coercion of an ally, that is ukraine to create this sham investigations into his political opponent. we have discovered in short order not onlyheon that call but also the prep tory work going into the call. the effort to condition what the ukrainian president deeply sought, a meeting with the president. to establish this new president to the ukraine had a power

absolutely. >> nato ally. i understand, officially. are they acting like an ally? >> nations have interests and they have legitimate security concerns what happened with the pkk and active insurgency inside turkey. i think what we got to do is find the common ground. turkey's security is not enhanced by the pullback of the american forces. >> turkey doesn't know that, do they? >> turkey has a different view of it. that's where diplomats have got to figure out a way forward. >> if you were ahead of the pentagon right now,mreact to a saying the following. this is what a distraught soldier on the front lines fighting alongside the syrian defense force. i am ashamed for thest tim in my career. said the distraught soldier. american troops are doing nothing, the source lamented, sitting by and watching it unfold, of the president's decision, the source said he doesn't understand the repercussions about this. are you concerned about troop moral? >> we are always concerned about troop moral. we have a 100% vol ter force. all the marine, coast guard, have looked forward pas

he is now your ally? no, they are not our ally.e that assad can no longer unite the country. but we are at the same time working together with our friends to reach a political settlement which should be the last one — make lasting one and the last one — make lasting one and the establishment of the constitutional committee is very crucial step to that end in the first meeting will be reconvened at the end of this month. in geneva. therefore, we have no relations dish political relations with assad but washer and other guarantors of the regime, if there's any message it goes through... the opposition to assad in the case of the syrian codes are now fighting alongside him against your troops. when it comes to... it's very complicated. and those terrorist organisations like by pg, they fought each other but they sold weapons to each other, they sold weapons to each other, they provided food and everything. we know it is a very mixed picture but the russian foreign minister, your counterpart has said that he will mediate in talks betwe