. >> general dunford. >> thank you for the question. we have taken the rest not with our deploying units but in its organizations everything general austin has asked us to do from a marine corps respectively are able to do. as general odierno said should this continue it's a question of capacity. everything we are doing at a sustainable deployment. to give you some idea of how fast our marines are turning right now we are deploying from seven months home for 14 months and in some cases less than a backup for seven months in perpetuity. that sustained level of operation tempo something that concerns me and isil is just a part of that. >> that also makes it pretty difficult on the homefront doesn't it? >> senator, there are two issues. one of the time available to train for all of the missions in the second is obviously the time available to spend time with family. we are particularly concerned with or mitt grade enlisted marines when it comes to that particular challenge. >> general odierno, as we look forward how are you planning to mix

>> yes sir. >> general dunford, your predecessor had projected that you have to decrease your in strength of about 187174,000. is that still active? >> senator, that's correct, with sequestration. >> with sequestration. could you explain to a layman what may seem like a relatively small reduction of about 13,000 could be so hurtful to the core? >> the biggest impact would be that reduce capacity would have an impact on the deployment ratio of our rings. so today we consider the optimal force and we did a study on this and 2011, the optimal force would be 186,800 marines. that would allow marines to be gone for seven months over 21 months and gone for seven months again. we call that a one to three deployment to dual. we can than 182000 that puts us at a one to two deployment dwell so we are deploying some month, over 14, back out for seven. if we go down 104,000 with the marine security guard plus that would be about 175, the only change i would make for my predecessors comment, if we go down to that level many of our units would be closer to one to one and one to two. marines would be ho

dunford said the forces we put forward, we will put forward and they will be the most ready.we are required to have a response wars and a contingency the contingency force and we owe that to the combatant commander and a has to be there on time and it has to be proficient. if we are not there today, we will never get there with sequestration. >> thank you general. if you could be sustained. >> giving you a long-term capability, test facilities, those kinds of things over time it will cost us the ability to operate in the future. a multiple simultaneous operation and we simply don't have the capacity anymore to conduct that particularly in these areas and etc. the capability gap is closing its we the people trying to catch up with us technologically and they have momentum and if we let them get too close we won't be able to recover before they pass us. states and nuclear business and in the space business we cannot forget that that is one of the fastest-growing technological gaps in the cyberarena if we don't try to get ahead in that particular race we will be behind for the n