or let's get more details on this now we're joined by pulling graham from the british american security information council so despite politicking to fight despite the western news reports the mission may be officially over but tell me is it really. well the mission is not sorry for the terms of engagement have changed the the. quality of the mission itself i guess has changed today as you were outlined just now the rules of engagement have shifted and many of the troops have left but fifty thousand is a large number by anybody's calculation and they could easily be brought back into play but so it's difficult to give you a definitive statement one way or the other i think i think today is significant i think it's significant because the power of the united states troops to engage in combat operations has left them in as much as it's not their decision but on the other hand are i wouldn't be a total surprised if they were brought into combat by the iraqi forces various points in the near future and of course the key date that we have yet to reach is the end of next year where troops ought to be pulled out

barack obama to a televised debate about the world's problems and penco from the british american security information council spoke to me and she said the u.s. will only attack if iran fails to halt its nuclear program. i think the whole point of what i. said over the weekend was to tell the iranians that actually the americans mean business otherwise i think if you look at the timeline we're not talking about any kind of military action any time soon i mean you have to look at how long is it going to take to actually get to the threshold of having a deliverable nuclear weapon and we're actually talking anything between three to five years so the talk of the military action i think is really aimed at taking up the pressure on the iranians to to come to the negotiating table is a time when the americans are really tightening the screws with sanctions on iran anything that president obama says this point has to be viewed through the prism of the elections the mid-term elections that are coming up in so in the case of iraq he's able to point to something which he will say is positive look i'm keeping my my elec

from the british american security information council things the threat of war is by the u.s. military just another ploy to build up pressure on the islamic republic. i think the whole point of what i've. said over the weekend was to tell the iranians that actually the americans mean business otherwise i think if you look at the timeline we're not talking about any kind of military action any time soon i mean you have to look at how long is it going to take it around to actually get to the threshold of having a deliverable nuclear weapon and we're actually talking anything between three to five years so the talk of the military action i think is really aimed at ratcheting up the pressure on the iranians to to come to the negotiating table at a time when the americans are really tightening the screws with sanctions on iran the american military is not a. source of resources. clearly his his strategy has always been to to shift. the pressure from. iraq to to afghanistan over time runs out it's now doing. and from all the controversy over iran's nuclear program we talked to influ

is talk about this story tonight joined from washington by painkillers from the british american security information council thanks for being with us tonight the u.s. talks just the weekend about a possible military strike on iran how much of that is bluster i wonder it's already deeply involved isn't it into successful and highly criticized operations does it really want to plunge as you see it into another campaign. well in terms of blast i think the whole point of what our mullin said over the weekend was to tell the iranians that actually the americans mean business. otherwise i think if you look at the timeline we're not talking about any kind of military action any time soon i mean you have to look at how long is it going to take it around to actually get to the threshold of having a deliverable nuclear weapon and we're actually talking anything between three to five years so the talk of the military action i think is really aimed at ratcheting up the pressure on the iranians to come to the negotiating table is a time when the americans are really tightening the screws with sanctions on iran can we ta

paul ingram from the british american security information council says the withdrawal is not before time he believes the u.s. presence in the country has done more harm than good i think it's a mission in a way that they never did have the capacity to bring stability to iraq they unseated saddam hussein relatively quickly and easily but of course bringing stability and security to the country was a much much bigger deal and i think there is there are many even within the u.s. government itself those who have come to recognize that american troops in combat formation in the country actually create more trouble. than not having them and that the best chance there is for iraq for democracy and freedom is for the americans to exit because their presence. is itself a very clear source of insecurity and reaction by many within iraq while terror means a threat in iraq it's also at the forefront of other trouble spots in the world political scientist says the danger is widespread. and. there was an assumption that terrorism is more or less localized in afghanistan and they were looking for