so that's what general breedlove has. a striker regiment over there. he's got light infantry, foot infantry and strikers and very little else over there. that's why we're rotating in armored brigade. so striker fatality is going to up-gun that particular weapons system. it's critical and it's important to deterrence. i've taken a hard look at d-sigs. my rough assessment is that d-sigs is performing reasonably well at kind of echelons above big grade. we have to move it around and jump it from place to place. ease of use for young soldiers. there's a very high density training requirement, et cetera. taking a hard look at that whole piece on the d-sigs. i've got personal experience with it. very, very good system at the strategic level, operational level. your ability to pull down national intel assets, et cetera. when it gets down to the tactical level, more difficult to work with. not quite as fast. difficult to jump from location to location in the mobile battlefield. those are important systems, yes. >> thank you. in a final comment, i share senator

general breedlove spoke recently of a shift in nato doctrine from assurance to deterrence, which i think in some ways is arguably a return to the past. i wonder if you could talk a bit about russia, what you think the actual threat is that russia poses to the alliance right now. what are putin's goals? on his actions arguably a response as some argued years ago to nato's expansion right to russia's borders? is there a limit that you see to, i will say putin, but russia's desire to expand its own sphere of influence? or do you see it, do you think they see it as a defensive mechanism? >> i will say some words about russia in a moment i will stop commenting on the introduction to the question because that is also related to this concern, whether part of the debate in united states provides reason for concern in europe at the united states is not focused on europe, the united states is not going to continue transatlantic alliance and so on. first of all, i would like to say that the first time i visited the united states was in 1980. then i was 21 years old. no, not 21 years old. i visited

the effect of a permanent armored brigade for general breedlove will be achieved. the disadvantages of forward stationing cost, et cetera, are not going to be incurred. and the advantages of rotation, battle focus, mission focus, that does get achieved. i personally think the advantage of rotation outweigh the disadvantages. >> that's a great explanation and i appreciate that feedback. i'm going back to something we've discussed many times over and that's the modular handgun program. i'd love to have you visit a little bit more about this. it really has turned into a boondoggle. just to work on this issue has turned into something more than it really should be. i do appreciate your high level of motivation and attention to the issue. and we just want to make sure we're getting the program right and we're streamlining this so we can get a better pistol in the hands of our soldiers. if that's what's needed, that's what we need to do. can you give me an update on your efforts and where we stand in this process right now? >> i think you got a little bit of an update or

so that's what general breedlove has. a striker regiment over there. he's got light infantry, foot infantry and strikers and very little else over there. that's why we're rotating in armored brigade. so striker fatality is going to up-gun that particular weapons system. it's critical and it's important to deterrence. i've taken a hard look at d-sigs. my rough assessment is that d-sigs is performing reasonably well at kind of echelons above big grade. we have to move it around and jump it from place to place. ease of use for young soldiers. there's a very high density training requirement, et cetera. taking a hard look at that whole piece on the d-sigs. i've got personal experience with it. very, very good system at the strategic level, operational level. your ability to pull down national intel assets, et cetera. when it gets down to the tactical level, more difficult to work with. not quite as fast. difficult to jump from location to location in the mobile battlefield. those are important systems, yes. >> thank you. in a final comment, i share senator

do you share my concern and general breedlove's about u.s. force protection in europe? and what do we need to do to make sure that force protection is adequate and how do we move forward? >> i would start off in terms of concern, i am concerned in particular for one big reason. what we've seen is too big attacks in paris and brussels. now counterterrorism is out aggressively. we know also that our other parts of the network that are still at large. so if you believe you are being closed in on as the tears come what do you do? you rapidly put together an attack. there is no target better than a military person deployed overseas. we saw that with a bullet the two airmen killed in germany at an airport. that's a target of opportunity. so if you're either an inspired recruit were some in the network that knows you're on your last few minutes, this is a great target of opportunity. i think there's a huge risk for that as these investigations progress if they can't operate as cells for groups that have in the past they will pick targets of opportunity. baby to pick europeans

and we have heard those comments from general breedlove as well. i admire him. i think he's on to something there. i am concerned that turkey could do more to help stop the flow of refugees to europe. and as you know over the past couple of years, it's been pretty easy for terrorists to negotiate, they have lines of communication through turkey, who is a nato partner, and to plan and conduct attacks in europe, as well as in iraq and syria. so, i'd like your take on if you think turkey is doing enough to stem that flow and cut those lines of communication, to refugees and terrorists and to europe, and can turkey do more and if so, what do you believe they should be doing? mr. scaparrotti: senator, turkey, as you stated, is an important ally. a nato member that sits on the southeastern flank really, i think, at the nexus of the challenges you talked about. you have an aggressive russia, they've encountered the escalation personally. counterterrorism, the isil threat, syria, and the refugee challenge that you talked about. it's important that they work hard to secu

dismembering a sovereign nation in the heart of europe for the first time in seven decades, general breedloveith clarity and purpose. he pushed ucom and nato to address the strategic reality we face in europe. that will be the urgent and unfinished task left to you, general scaparrotti, if confirmed. over the past two years, vladimir putin has been learning from bloody experience in ukraine and syria that military adventurism pays, that diplomacy can be manipulated to serve his strategic ambitions, and that the worst refugee crisis since world war ii can be weaponized to divide the west and weaken its resolve. the only deterrence that we seem to be establishing is over ourselves. indeed, two years after russia invaded ukraine and annexed crimea, the administration is still not provided ukrainian forces with legal assistance they need to defend themselves and which the congress' has authorized for fear of, quote, provoking russia. this fear of escalation only encourages the kind of aggressive and dangerous behavior we saw last week when russian fighter jets conducted simulated attacks within 3

and we have heard those comments from general breedlove, as well. and i admire him. over the past couple of years, it's been pretty easy for terrorists to negotiate. they have lines of communication through turkey who is a that i t nato partner. and to plan attacks in europe and syria.i nato partner. and to plan attacks in europe and syria. do you think turkey is doing enough to stem that flow and cut the lines of communication to refugees and terrorists in to europe and can turkey did more and if so what do you believe they should be doing? >> senator, turkey as you stated is an important ally. a nato member that sits on the southeastern flank really i think at the nexus of the challenges you talked about. you have an aggressive russia that they have encountered the escalation personally. counterterrorism, the isil threat, syria and the refugee challenge that you talked about. it's important that they work hard to secure their borders, that they take part in the security operations that are ongoing to reduce the refugee flow. and if confirmed, i will obviously make

do you share my concern in general breedlove's about u.s. force protection in europe? and what do we need to do to make sure that force protection is adequate? and how do we move forward on that? >> i would start off in terms of concern -- i am concerned, in particular for one big reason. what we have seen is two big attacks in paris and brussels, and counterterrorism is out aggressively. we know also that there are other parts of the network still at large. if you believe you are being closed in on, what do you do? you rapidly put together a hasty attack. there is no target better than a military person deployed overseas. we saw that with the two airmen killed in germany. that's a target of opportunity. if you're an inspired recruit or someone in the network that knows you are on your last few minutes, this is a great target of opportunity. i think there is a huge risk for that as these investigations progress, the way they have in the past, they will pick targets of opportunity. mostost vulnerable, targeted u.s. people will be state department employees and departmen

of that equipment physically inside europe, i'd like to defer that logic and rationale to general breedlove if that's okay. >> it is and i've had the opportunity to ask him about its. but it sounded to me like you're saying that the locations are based not just on their military effectiveness, but politics have also been part of those decisions. >> sure. sure. >> i'm not suggesting -- >> diplomatic negotiations between countries they have to occur before we get that locked in. >> okay. one of the things that obviously our continued readiness depends on is the effectiveness of the guard and the reserve. i was pleased to see that this budget included two military construction projects in new hampshire that are very important. right now we rank 51st out of 54 in terms of the condition of our facilities and armories and so can you -- i don't know, maybe this is appropriate for you, secretary murphy, to talk about how we ensure that the national guard has the resources that it needs to be ready whenever we expect them to deploy. >> yes, senator. the national guard, we're total force. we're not t

equipmentoning of the physical inside europe, i like to deferred that two general breedlove. >> i have had the opportunity to ask him about it. it's as like you're saying the locations are based, not only on their military effectiveness, but politics have also been a part of those positions. general milley: sure. >> i am not negotiating that -- general milley: negotiations that have not occurred. ourne of the things continued readiness depends on is the effectiveness of our reserve. i was pleased to see that this budget included two military construction projects in new hampshire that are very important. we ranked 51st out of 54 in terms of the conditions of our facilities and armories. you talk about how we ensure the national guard has the readyces it needs to be whenever we expect them to deploy? guard is a total force. where one army, one team. -- we are one army, one team. sen. shaheen: sometimes the resources do not seem like we are a total force. secretary murphy: there is a $1 million budget. the milk on budget has been the lowest it's been in 24 years. numbers,dial down the ro

do you share my concern and general breedlove's about u.s. force protection in europe? and and what do we need to do to make sure that force protection is adequate, and how do we move forward on that? clinton watts: i would start off in terms of concern. i am i am concerned in particular for one big reason. so what we have seen is two big attacks in paris and brussels, and so, now counterterrorism is out aggressively. we know also that there is, as daveed mentioned, there's other parts of the network that are still at large. and so if you believe that you are being closed in on as the terrorists, what do you do? you rapidly but together a hasty attack. there is no target better than a military person deployed overseas, and we saw that with the two airmen killed in germany. that is a target of opportunity. and so if you are either an inspired recruit or someone in the network that knows that you are on your last few minutes, this is a great target of opportunity. same with embassies and consulates. so i think there is a huge risk for that as these investigations progress