our objective would be to see an organization like isil defeated. our military objectives -- i'm separating out the fact we have military objectives the president has articulated that aim to protect our facilities in iraq and prevent this humanitarian catastrophe. in that long-term strategy of working for the defeat of isil, we will participate not just through our military action, but through our training and eequipping of iraqi security forces, kurdish security forces on the ground. because ultimately, they are the ones who are going to have to work to evict isil from their communities, and, again, their efforts to form an inclusive government in iraq i think will go a long way towards enlisting the support of those communities who have been somewhat disaffected from the government. >> the response to jim foley's brother, pretty emotional comments. he said, and i quote, the united states could have done more on behalf of the western and american hostages over there. >> well, first of all, our hearts go out to mr. foley and the entire foley family.

at the time fallujah was in control of isil. fallujah is still in control of isil. i made clear our advice was not to move in, to set a cordon that cordon remains in place. though it is fairly loose. so far they are holding the provincial capital of irbati. what has changed is a significant attack that took place on the strategic border crossing. which proves that isil is a militarily capable force. it was a multiple-day assault. >> i think to your written testimony isil also generates $12 million a month through illicit business in mosul. that's a lot of money for terrorists. quite an economic engine. >> they're self-sustaining organization. what we had seen for quite a bit of the time of modis avendi is that they were in control at night, but not openly in control. that's why the assault into mosul did catch everybody off-guard. we saw some indications. but we did not envision the assault nor the collapse of the security forces up there. i will say i've had a number of conversations with the -- >> i'm out of time. i apologize. i threw a lot of questions to you so

, can you defeat isil without going after them? and then how do you prioritize that ha sad has lost legitimacy. defeating them could keep has sad keep power. >> first of all, i want to make sure everybody is clear on what we are doing now. our focus is to protect american personnel on the ground in iraq. protect our embassy, to protect our to make sure that -- critical infrastructure that could adversely effect our personnel is protected. where we see an opportunity, that allowed us with very modest risk, to help the humanitarian situation, there as we did. our core is to make sure that our folks are safe, and to do an effective assessment of iraqi and kurdish capabilities. >> as i said, i think in the last press conference. in order for us to be successful we have to have an iraqi government that is unified and inclusive. so we are continuing to push them to get that done, as soon as we have an iraqi government in place, the likelihood of the iraqi security forces being more effective in taking the fight to isil, significantly inc

>> the president said the goal is to contain isil. the secretary of state two days later said the goal was to destroy isil. which is it and how far and how long are we prepared to carry out which ever campaign it is? >> well, major, i think the president has spoken to the fact that our military objectives in iraq right now are limited to protecting our personnel and facilities and addressing this humanitarian crisis. we have to be clear that this is a deeply rooted organization. they have been there for ten years. when you go back to aqi. it is going to take time, a long time, to fully evict them from the communities where they operate. we can do things, though, in the immediate term to address the threat to the united states and our people and to push them back and to give space for these security forces who are taking the fight to them. we can create a coalition that can support iraqis and moderate syrian opposition and their efforts to squeeze isil. and that's what we're doing. but it's going to take time when you talk about an obj

>> the white house said the goal is to contain isil. secretary of state two days later said the goal was to destroy isil. which is it and how far and how long are we prepared to carry out whichever campaign it is? >> major, i think the president has spoken to the fact that our military objectives in iraq right now are limited to protecting our personnel and facilities and addressing this humanitarian crisis. we have to be clear that this is a deeply rooted organization. they have been there for ten years. when you go back to aqi, it's going to take time, a long time, to fully evict them from the communities where they operate. we can do things in the immediate term to address the threat to the united states and our people and to push them back and to give space for the security forces who are taking the fight to them. we can create a coalition that can support iraqis and moderate syrian operation and their efforts top squeeze isil. that's what we're doing. it's going to take time when you talk about an objective like the ultimate defeat

they share our deep concerns with the threat posed i isil -- by isil. with that, i will take questions. -- inukraine, could you terms of what the latest movement of the russian forces and ukraine, what numbers the degree to which represent that relation over there. the involvement and whether you consider this an invasion. i am not going to try to detail what the russian armed forces are doing. if for their defense ministry to speak to. it is their military. we don't have a perfect view of everything they're doing. that said, as i have said many times, we have continued to see the build up their capabilities along that border. we have continued to see them , somee weapons systems very sophisticated, into eastern ukraine in support of the separatists. , we have longeek believed that russian forces, military forces have been part of that movement. facilitated the movement and helped the separatists. we have seen this continue to build and build and build and now you see nato come up without an interview recently that has how in the last couple of weeks, t

>> once isil got into mosul, that posed a big problem. there was no doubt they were able to capture weapons and resources they have used to finance additional operations. at that stage, we immediately contacted the iraqi government. keep in mind, we have seen indications with the iraqi government for more than a year, indicating we saw significant problems in the sunni areas. prime minister maliki was not as responsive as we would like to some of the underlying political grievances that existed at the time. there's no doubt that in order for iraq security forces to be successful, they're going to need help. they are going to need help from us, from our international partners. they will need additional training, additional equipment. and we will be prepared to offer that support. there may be a role for an international coalition providing additional air support through the operation. but the reason it is so important an iraqi government be in place is that this is not simply a military problem. the problem we have had consistently is a su

air power being brought to bear against these isil targets and the regrouping and fighting isil, that provides a track on their advance. of course we'll always evaluate circumstances as they evolve, but the mission the president set out yesterday is very clear. top priority is the security of our people. if we see an advance, we'll hit. we have increased the flow of arms to the kurdish forces as well so that they're reinforced. >> let me ask you this. if our people are in danger in erbil, why not evacuate them? >> well, chuck, because we want to keep that facility open and we want to keep the joint operations center we have with the kurds open. we have an invitation from the iraqi government to take this action. we have an isr capability overhead so we can see what's going on on the ground and we have the military capability to hit these targets. all of that allows us to take this course of action, which allows us to again push back isil and protect erbil. >> do you believe the kurds have the military capability to push isis, and you call it isil, and we know there's different names f

against isil.ou all know that in the presence request for a $5 million anti-terrorism fund -- $500 million in there to assist an opposition. that's what we're looking at. that's what we're doing. and we will continue to stay focused, as i said, on what we're doing now and explore all options as we go forward. >> the options you refer to include air strikes across the border. >> we're looking at all options. barbara? >> i wanted to ask both of you specifically about the hostage rescue mission. you both have talked extensively over the years about protecting. even if you had -- were told the news media was going to publish an article, which is what the state department says, you repealed it because you thought the media was going to publish something. why specifically did both of you -- both of you answer -- why did you think it was a good idea to officially acknowledge in detail the classified information -- classified mission about a hostage rescue when there are still american hostages there? are

homeland from isil. wait a second.idn't you just hear rear admiral john kirby from the pentagon deferring to the department of homeland security, at the same time, josh earnest at the white house, when he was asked about this specific threat to the american people from isis, he said it is not dissimilar to one just identified in the u.k. they just identified that it is highly likely that they will see a terrorist threat. those are more mixed messages from the white house. how are the american people supposed to digest all of this when they're getting different answers from different sources within the administration? >> seems like david cameron is doing his homework and up to speed. our guy who stills have to develop a strategy is not, pete. >> major garrett spot on. called it minor league effort. that is what people sense. in the poll, number of people we're not being tough enough, 54%. 51% of american think we're too involved. president leaning on fact that america after 10 years of war and 9/11 and is war-weary. i t

and then work towards that ultimate goal of defeating isil.his is a cancer that has to be eradicated. that's how we look at this. we have to have our near-term goals that put the safety of americans front and certainty. then in the long term we'll work with our partners to defeat this organization. so, yes. as you're doing that, you need to make sure that if there is a threat to the american people that we have the ability to take action. that's what the president did, for instance, when they were bearing down on our facilities in narbil. we are already pushing them back. you saw after we began our air strikes, for instance, the kurdish forces with our support were able to make advances and retake a big piece of critical infrastructure in iraq. so that's the dynamic that we are seeking to foster. one that doesn't just contain but that allows those forces on the ground to go on the offense. >> [inaudible] >> necessary to deal with an outbreak like ebola that we have seen. we have prioritized getting people and resources on the grouped in places

can you defeat isil or isis and how do you prioritize?e said that assad has lost legitimacy to lead. defeating isis could help assad keep power. talk about how you prioritize those two pieces of your foreign policy? >> first of all, i want to make sure everybody is clear on what we're doing now because it is limited. our focus right now is to protect american personnel on the ground in iraq, to protect our embassy, to protect our consulates, to make sure that critical infrastructure that could adversely affect our personnel is protected. where we see an opportunity that allows us with very modest risk to help the humanitarian situation there as we did in sinjar mountain, we will take those opportunities after having consulted with congress and our priority is to make sure our folks are safe and to do an effective assessment of iraqi and kurdish capabilities. as i said in the last press conference, in order for us to be successful we have to have an iraqi government that is unified and inclusive so we are continuing to push them to get tha

the expansion of isil is accelerating in the region. and isil's decapitation of an innocent journalist prompted president obama to take another pause in his two-week vacation to address the killing of james foley. here is the president speaking from martha's vineyard. >> the united states of america will continue to do what we must do to protect our people. we will be vigilant and we will be relentless. when people harm americans anywhere, we do what's necessary to see that justice is done. and we act against isil standing alongside others. >> the president went on to say the united states would continue its air strikes against isil despite its threat to kill another american held hostage. in fact, those air strikes today were ramped up, another 14 strikes near iraq's mosul dam, the dam that iraqi and kurdish forces have just recaptured from isil. the obama administration may send, we are told, another 300 of our troops to iraq, mainly to provide additional security at the u.s. embassy in baghdad. there's no final decision yet. but it w

let's listen. >> if isil has drones of their own? >> reporter: yeah. >> i have seen a press report, but i have nothing that would back that up at all. >> reporter: yesterday president obama said that some states in the region are ambivalent about dealing with isil. some of them are financial [ inaudible ]. could you elaborate on that? do you have more information. can you say some gulf states are from one hand facing isil and on the other hand financing them? >> no, i'm not going to elaborate on that. tom. >> reporter: the president said there is no strategy yet for isil. talk about the pentagon's process of developing that strategy. talk about the way ahead. what are the plans you are looking at? what do you hope to achieve. talk about trading moderate levels. does the pentagon have a greater role in that effort. and train and assist mission in iraq eventually presumably would be part of that kind of strategy. >> if i tried to answer that question in every aspect that you are asking, you are basically asking me to lay it all out rig

we continue to assess and monitor isil activities. that is one of the reasons we put assessment teams there in the first place, to get a situational awareness of what is going on there. as you know, we are engaged in supporting iraqi security forces, and not just only, but with air strikes, which we believe have had an effect. i am not going to get ahead of planning that hasn't been done or decisions that haven't been made. we don't telegraph our punches, but i think you can rest assured that the leadership here in the pentagon understands the threat posed by this group, understands the threat posed inside iraq, and we are gaining every day a better understanding of iraqi security force and kurdish force capability in meeting the threat inside iraq. two points i think are important to make. i am going to make these points, and i know i am not answering your questions. i am not going to talk about any future planning or operations. but it is important to remind everybody that what we are doing in there is in support of iraq and that ul

can we defeat isil or isis without going into syria? how do you you prioritize that assad has lost legitimacy, defeating isis could help assad keep power? talk about, how you prioritize those two pieces of your foreign policy. >> first of all i want to make sure everybody's clear on what we're doing now because it is limited. our focus right now is to protect american personnel on the ground in iraq. to protect our embassy, to protect our consulates. to make sure that critical infrastructure, that could adversely affect our personnel is protected. where we see an opportunity that, allows us with very modest risk to help the humanitarian situation there as we did, in sinjar mountain, we will take those opportunities. after after having consulted with congress. our core priority to make sure our folks are safe and to do an effective assessment of iraqi and kurdish capabilities. as i said, think in the last press conference, in order for to us be successful we have to have an iraqi government that unified and inclusive. so, we are continui

against isil. know that in the president's request for a $5 billion anti-terrorism fund there was $500 million in there to assist moderate opposition. so that's what we are looking at, that's what we're doing and we will continue to stay focused as i said on what we're doing now and exploring all options as we go forward. >> -- the options include airstrikes across the border? >> like i said, we're look at all options. >> i wanted to ask you both specifically on the rescue mission. you have talked extensively about protecting classified information. even if you had information -- were told that the news media was going to publish an article which is what the state department said you revealed it because you thought the media would publish something. why did -- both of you answer, why did you think it was a good idea to acknowledge in detail the classified mission about a hostage rescue when there are still american hostages there? are you worried that this risks other hostages' lives, we have a lea

an unholy aluns with isil. and we're working to split them off from isil.increasingly happening. and then some tribal groups that are interested in control in their local areas and there's a political compone tonight that which are actively engaged with. but the core threat is isil. and most of the tribes in iraq are not supporting isil. actually, they are trying fight isil. what we're seeing is tribes that try to fight isil lose. that's why it's important to remember that isil, isis -- it's called isil or isis depending on who you are talking to. isil fights anyone in its path. it has a clear strategic path to create a state. if the kurds are in its path it will fight the kurds. if shia are in its path, it will fight the shia. it is trying to annihilate all religious and ethnic minority groups in iraq. and it kills and destroys moderate sunni clerics. isil is a threat to all iraqis regardly of sunni, shia, kurd and many leaders in iraq are aware of this. they are asking for assistance and help from some of the iraqi security forces in their air component.

>> well, once isil got into mosul, that posed a big problem. there is no doubt they were able to capture weapons and resources they then used to finance additional operations. and at that stage, we immediately contacted the iraqi government. keep in mind, we have been in communicationes withis with the government for more than a year, indicating we saw problems in the sunni areas. president malachi might not have been as responsive as we would have liked at the time. there is no doubt that that in order for iraq's security forces to be successful, they will need help. they will need help from us. they need help from our international partners. they are going to need additional training. need additional equipment. and we are go tock prepared to offer that support. there will be a role for additional air support for their operations. but the reason it's so important that an iraqi government be in place, is this is not simply a military problem. the problem we have had consistently is a sunni population that feels alienated from baghdad and does n

can you defeat isis or isil without going after them in syria? and how do you prioritize that assad has lost legitimacy to lead defeating isis cos help assad keep power? talking about how you prioritize those two pieces of your foreign policy. >> first of all, i want to make sure who everybody's clear on what we're doing now because it is limited. our focus right now is to protect american personnel on the ground in iraq, to protect our embassy, to protect our consulates. to make sure that critical infrastructure that could adversely affect our personnel is protected. where we see an opportunity that allows us with very modest risk to help the humanitarian situation there as we did in sinjar mountain, we will take those opportunities. after having consulted with congress, but our core priority right now is just to make sure that our folks are safe. and to do an effective assessment of iraqi and kurdish capabilities. as i said, i think in the last press conference, in order for us to be successful, we've got to have an iraqi government na is unifi

isil is not fighting on behalf of sunnies. isil is not fighting for a stronger iraq. isil is fighting to destroy iraq, and it's fighting to create a state of its own brutal on res, a place where chaos and ruthless brutality governs. >> we know that he spoke to king abdullah in saudi, arabia, and great britain has promised humanitarian aid, and they're getting involved in that respect. but at this point, they're not getting involved militarily. and the uk also facing fatigue over the war in iraq, david. >> all right, libby casey in iraq, and we want to bring all of our viewers up-to-date on the other big story overseas, and that is what's going on in gaza. the ceasefire has ended after palestinian rockets into israel this morning, and israel responded with airstrikes so, the conflict is back and ratcheting up again in gaza. joining us now from gaza, the latest on the situation, and what's the latest and what are you seeing and hearing now? >> reporter: i can confirm that five people have been killed in this latest fighting since the expiration of the ceasefire. around

>> first to the threat posed by isil, we've been very clear about the threat of isil forces to iraq ando the region. our principle task to date, and what we are doing right now, is to protect the u.s. facilities and the citizens -- american citizens at those facilities, to protect u.s. aircraft that are supporting humanitarian assistance in and around mount sinjar, and to target those isil positions that are laying siege to mount sinjar. there are no plans to expand the current air campaign beyond the current self-defense activities. >> it's been reported the u.s. government is directly arming the kurds. is the dod playing a role in that operation or will it at some point? >> yeah, i saw that report in the media and an open source as well. over the weekend it was the government of iraq and iraqi security forces that actually provided immediate resupplies to kurdish forces. we are looking at how we can help them and studying the challenges that they have. with the team that we have in baghdad providing some assistance, we are looking at plans at how we can expand that support. >> general

against isil. >> isil -- >> a lot of terms about isil's vision. >> isil. when the administration and the pentagon talk about who they're bombing in iraq right now, and who they may want to bomb inside syria as well, they call the group isil. everybody else calls the group isis. why are there these two different names. the group in question speaks arabic, and what they would prefer to be called in english, the islamic state, so that would be i.s. frankly i think nobody cares what they would prefer to be called. there is this difference in how they are described in terms of english language acronyms. when they are called isis, that is sometimes translated as an acronym for the islamic state in iraq and syria. that's not where it came from. it's a related term, it started off as an islamic state of iraq and alsham. it means greater syria, what we think of as the nation of syria plus what they believe to be additional territory that should be part of that same state. the difference of opinion in terms of calling them isis as opposed to isil, some people look a

seems to be a potential turning point only in dealing with isil but the future of iraq. the fighters who are fighting right now to raid the dish rid the northern part of iraq are the peshmerga and they may have the opportunity to regain facility, the dam in mosul, electrical facilities. what i'm curious about is the united states going to say, no, no, don't do that, we won't help you with that even though it's crucial to iraq's future because it's not mount sinjar. what's the overall interaction with the peshmerga going to be if they do get back in the fight and start rolling isil back. >> we have seen that the peshmerga are prepared to get back into the fight. let me -- i first want to dispute the premise of your question related to iraq security force. we do believe there's an important role for them to play in this broader fight. that's why iraq security forces are included in the joint operating centers innerbill and baby and the united states parents the coordination that existed. but the reasoning, according to assessments of our analysts, the reason we saw a -- a

airstrikes against isil in iraq. military force is one element of what we can do and we need a wider approach working with neighbors in the region and addressing not just security but politics, too. we know terrorist organizations thrive where there is political instability and week or dysfunctional political institutions. we must support the building blocks of democracy, the rights of minorities, freed media, preassociation, a proper place in so tight for the army and we must show perseverance. not because these building blocks takes time to put in place, but because we are in the middle of a generational struggle against a poisonous and extremist ideology i believe we'll be fighting for years and probably decades. we will take whatever action is necessary to keep the british people safe here at home. britain as some of the finest and most security and intelligence services anywhere in the world. we'll always act with urgency where needed as we did with the emergency data attention which is yielding results. and we

air strikes in iraq, the expansion of isil, is accelerateing in the region, and isil's decaptation of an innocent journalist prompted president obama to take another pause in his two week vacation to address the killing of james foley. >> the united states of america will continue to do what we must do to protect our people. we will be vigilant, and we will be relentless, when people harm americans anywhere, we do what is necessary to see that justice is done. and we act against -- iselle isil stapbging along others. lou: u.s. will continue its air attacks against isil. despite its threat to kill another wh-rp american hostage. obama administration may send 300 troops to iraq. there is no final decision yet, but it would bridge total number of american troops to more than 1100. at issue, whether president has underestimateed both al qaeda, and isil. the group he once dismissed, as a quote, jv team, of terrorists. after the president expressed his condolences to family, he went to play here round of golf, his searchth ground in -- 7th grounthround in 10 days. in contrast to prime minis

we should expect isil to regroup and stage new offenses. and the u.s. military's involvement is not over. president obama has been very clear on this point. our objectives remain clear and limited to protect american citizens in facilities, to provide assistance to iraqi forces as they confront isil and address the humanitarian crisis. with that, i'll ask for general dempsey's comments and then we'll take questions. thank you. >> thank you, mr. secretary. as most of you know, i just returned on sunday from a trip to vietnam and today i have my counterpart from singapore visiting. it was quite remarkable to be in vietnam 40 years after our departure from vietnam to discuss opportunities for a new relationship building on our historical investment and incredible sacrifices of those who serve there. my engagements in the region reinforce that we have our shoulder behind the rebounds to the asia pacific, even as our military confronts challenges in other parts of the world. in fact, on sunday i'll depart for afghanistan, which brings me to iraq under the co

there's not going to be a military solution here to the threat that isil poses. it's got to be a more comprehensive regional -- it's got to factor in other elements of power than just military. while we certainly for our part have to work on what those options could look like, there are other parts of our government that are working as well. on options that they might need to pursue in the future going forward. >> how contingent are your options, on overflights for syria, for gathering intelligence -- >> requires knowledge of the situation on the ground as the best you can get it. i mean, we always want to have as much information as you can possibly have. i think you can expect, tony, without getting into talking about specific hypothetical or future operations that whatever options we prepare and what -- are prepared to conduct will be reliant upon getting and obtaining and analyzing the best information as you can on the ground. >> point here, back in june, when the congress and a lot of the public was asking what the united states can to blunt the momentum of

isis or isil is not a new problem.ng that has been emerging now for months, so the very fact that the president doesn't have a very clear ability to tell the american people exactly what our objectives are and exactly the actions that he hopes to take, whether it is -- and we don't know what the strategy is, so we don't know whether he hopes to contain it or hopes to eliminate it. we just don't have a better sense after that press conference or even after the last six months of hearing this administration try to lay out a policy on it. >> paul, do i want to ask you about his style, about the president's style because this is what frustrates his critics. american craves decisiveness and leadership, and perhaps he was being honest in his answer yesterday, but we don't have a strategy yet doesn't sound like those things. >> to bomb syria. >> yes. >> he was asked a question. >> to deal with isis in syria. >> in syria. >> yes. >> the question was are you going to go to congress to attack syria, to bomb syria? he said we don

for president obama, the isil problem is still a regional problem and although u.s. officials have said that isil has aspirations and perhaps capabilities to attack the u.s. homeland, the problem still has not come home for us here yet as far as president obama is concerned. prime minister cameron can't afford to make those distinctions. there are many more british jihadis than there are american. the threat is much more immediate to britain than they are to the u.s. this has forced the u.k. government to take a more comprehensive approach combatting this problem on the extremist level, on the radicalization level, on the home front, on the homeland security level. they seem to be a little bit ahead of us in dealing with how it affects them. right now in the u.s., obama is dealing with how it affects the region. >> i was going to ask michelle kosinski this question. while might the prime minister's news conference cause obama to come back out and speak again? >> he has said on a couple of occasions, each country needs to handle this in their own way. keep in mind, th

>> not only surrounded certain villages the isis or isil but they have also pushed them up in to the mountains, they were at least putting pressure at that time on those tribes up in to the mountains. some escaped, some were still there. just shows you the breadth and depth of the problem and just how brutal isil is in their governing of their version. >> schieffer: mr. chairman, the talk also this morning apparently we've opened new phase of the air war there where attacking the isil people around this dam in mosul. explain to us what that is all about and the significance of this dam. >> sure. the group before they had retreated from the area prematurely, they were disappointing in their fight. the problem was they were outgunned. isil now is a terrorist organization with an army, that's what makes them so dangerous, tanks, helicopters, heavy artillery, money, all of those equate to pretty dangerous situation. so the group had strategic withdraw, were armed up now have air support from the iraqi air force and the u.s. air force have made real progress around that dam. fighting stil

is willing to go to work with the syrian government in combatting isil?don't think it is willing at this point to work hand in hand with the syrian government at all in terms of battling isil. the fact that the united states has gone into syrian air space without seeking permission tells me that there is no linkage between the syrian government and u.s. government on this point. >> mark, the secretary -- the u.s. secretary chuck hagel, and the chairman martin dempsey have both said a military solution is not going to be enough to combat isil. so do you think any potential u.s. strikes will make any difference to halt the group's expansion and threat? >> let's be clear, what the chairman and secretary of defense said is there would be and necessarily must be strikes on isil inside of syria if we're going to try to take actions. those are necessary but not sufficient conditions to defeat them in the long run. not simply defeating the forces, but also going against those elements, those contextual elements that created isil in the first place. >> so how much

clearly, as you say we have a problem isil in iraq. we have a problem with foreign fighters traveling from britain and iraq. we've had the problem, as i said, not just of isil but also other al qaeda franchises in the area. but clearly joint terrorism center's view is that the problem has become more intense and syria. it's right to lift from substantial to severe. it's their decision, it's their assessment. it's important. politicians don't make the assessment. it's independently made and given. and we have the responsibility working with all the agencies, security, intelligence, police, british transport police. how do we make sure we put everything in place to keep our country safe. >> prime minister, is the decision to raise the threat level in response to a specific threat. is this any evidence that any part of the isil organization would actually want to target the u.k. is there anything to suggest that? and it's been a difficult couple of days for you after the even s yesterday. there is unrest in your party over europe and dunc

. >> yeah, first to the threat posed by isil, we have been clear about the threat of isil forces to iraqthe region. our principle task to date, and what we are doing right now, is to protect the u.s. facilities and the citizens -- american citizens at those facilities. to protect u.s. aircraft that are supporting h.a., humanitarian, assistance around mt. sinjar. and to target those isil positions that are lay in siege to mt. sinjar. there are no plans to expand the current air campaign beyond the current self defense activities. >> arming the kurds. it's been reported the u.s. government is directly arming the kurds. is the dod playing in a role in that operation or will it at some point? >> yeah, i saw that report in the media and open source, as well. over the weekend, it was the government of iraq and iraqi security forces that actually provided immediate resupplies to kurdish forces. we are looking at how we can help them. and studying the challenges they have, and with the team that we have in baghdad, providing some assistance. we are looking at plans at how we can expand that supp

there are security forces confronting isil forces. can tip are forces that the balance, we will certainly look for an opportunity to do that. isil forces away from the air and then they would impact your a those civilians. >> the customer got have been operating in this area -- the peshmorga has been operating in this area for some time. president has authorized that kind of action in hopes ge would bei alleviated. offeringited states is air support. the goal, rely on ground morga, retakee pesh land and facilities from isil with the added benefit of air support? > >> legitimately speaking, i would say yes. is we dotant thing have confidence in the kurdish fighting forces. there demonstrated a willingness to fight as evidenced by several counterattacks that have been launched over the past several days. it is true in some locations kurdish forces have withdrawn in the face of more better equipped forces. while the kurdish withdrawal appears to be orderly, it continues to face challenges about regrouping and redistributing forces.

what happened with isil is that it is actually raised the alarm bell. not only could the sunni areas be out of control, but the area itself could be overtaken. more than that, bag bad is affected. this has been the kurds, the shia and other iraqis and other sunnies. yesterday kurdish leadership announced clearly they were surprised by the isil quick movement. today president obama declared the surprise of the quickness of isil. this hopefully will concentrate the mind how to deal with it. step number one is to replace al maliki. there is no doubt he is the commander and the army is in bad shape, corrupt position, dysfunctional, all these terms. the question is now it's not enough to replace him, but we need a new approach to the whole future of iraq. the future of iraq cannot continue based on the president process. >> no, no, no, but you're talking about a long-term solution replacing al maliki and changing the policies in iraq, that will take a long time. what happens in the meantime? does this mean that there will be a requirement for international t

because of our strikes, the terrorists of isil are losing arms and equipment. in some areas, iraqi government and kurdish forces have begun to push them back and we continue to be proud and grateful to our extraordinary personnel serving in this mission. now, isil poses an immediate threat to the people of iraq and the people throughout the region and that's why our military action in iraq has to be part of a broader, comprehensive strategy to protect our people and to support our partners who are taking the fight to isil. and that starts with iraq's leaders building on the progress they have made so far and forming an inclusive government that will unite their country and strengthen their security forces to confront isil. any successful strategy though also needs strong regional partners. i'm encouraged so far that countries in the region, countries that don't always agree on many things increasingly recognize the primacy of the threat that isil poses to all of them. and i have asked secretary kerry to travel to the region to continue to build the coalition th

officials refer to them as isil. we're saying isis.s two different translations for the same group. they call themselves the islamic state. >>> the other breaking story of huge interest, the cease-fire almost over but israel and hamas seen no closer to reaching a long-term peace deal. we'll look at the significance of israel's blockade of gaza to these negotiations. you're watching cnn's global resources at work. stay with us. [ female announcer ] we help make secure financial tomorrows a reality for over 19 million people. [ alex ] transamerica helped provide a lifetime of retirement income. so i can focus on what matters most. [ female announcer ] everyone has a moment when tomorrow becomes real. transamerica. purina dog chow light & healthy everyone has a moment when tomorrow becomes real. is a deliciously tender and crunchy kibble blend. with 20% fewer calories than purina dog chow. isn't it time you discovered the lighter side of dog chow. purina dog chow light & healthy. >>> take a look here. everyone waiting to see if israel wil

let's be clear about isil.ve rampaged across cities and villages, killing innocent, unarmed civilians in cowardly acts of violence. they abduct women and children and subject them to torture and rape, and slavery. they have murdered muslims, both sunni and shia, by the thousands. they target christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them when they can, for no other reason than they practice a different religion. they declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people. so isil speaks for no religion. they're victims are overwhelmingly muslim and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. no just god would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. isil has no ideology of any value to human beings. their ideology is bankrupt. they may claim out of expediency they are at war with the united states or the west, but the fact is they terrorized their neighbors and offer them nothing but an endless slavery to their empty vision. and th

we have a baseline assumption , it isis, isil interchangeable, isil is better equipped, better manned, better resourced come a better fighters, better trained than the al qaeda in iraq that our forces faced. atyou accept that and look the capacity of the iraqi security forces or tribal networks, you start to see the big gap that is going to have to be filled. it is a tremendous challenge. when you look at isil's, the establish a goal that -- they are trying to establish a state. they do it by attacking the shia civilian population centers. what they are trying to do is provoke a reaction by shia initias which zarqawi wrote 2004. make the shia show their fangs and unite the sunni ranks behind our masses. that is what he is trying to do. at the same time, they attack and kill any sunni tribal leaders in their way in syria and iraq. as we have seen in the last 10 days, they will take on the kurds to establish what they need to establish their state. what we need to do is harness the forces of all these groups. there is a common enemy here. the cooperation we are seeing among the iraqi go

we are pursuing a long-term strategy against isil because isil clearly poses a long-term threat. we should expect isis to regroup . the u.s. military's involvement is not over. president obama has been clear at this point. our objectives remain clear and limited. to protect american citizens and its facilities, to provide and to join with international partners to address the humanitarian crisis. with that i will ask chairman dempsey for his comments. >> thank you, as most of you know i just returned from a trip to vietnam. today i had my counterpart from singapore visiting. it was remarkable to be in vietnam 40 years after our departure. and to discuss opportunities for new relationship. building on the incredible sacrifices of those who served there. we have our shoulder behind the rebounds to the asia pacific. even as there are challenges in other parts of the world. in sunday i will depart for afghanistan. iraq, under into the command of general lloyd our efforts in iraq have included seven humanitarian airdrop missions, delivering 636 bundles of food, water, and medical supp

we've never seen a socially sophisticated group like isil. social media fission, the execution of foley was unfortunately in h.d. voice-over, facebook. >> and it was tweeted out. >> westerners are going over there. the men that executed foley had a british accent, now the british government is really worried about their citizens going over. >> i think they've identified who he is, too. >> they're working on it, yeah, and i think the development is really scary, that we are going to see more executions happening. we've still got steve sotloff missing from florida, and on thursday there was a tweet out by isil saying we're going to deliver his body by courier to the americans. >> this use of technology, is there a difference, i wonder, off the top of my head, whether women advice men are watching the beheading video or should people be watching the video at all? >> the use of technology? i don't think it affects who is watching the videotape i think it affects the number of people that are watching the video. i thinken women and men are sexuall

we heard the private and ambassador hill say isil. isil is the islamic state of iraq and lavant. which is their chosen name. in the media, it's frequently referred to as the islamic state of iraq and syria. david, we have these people on top of a hill who are surrounded by people who want to murder them if they come down. the president is trying to solve that problem, but they have to come down some time presumably. >> excellent question. that's the problem. so he's framed this to me very interestingly in terms of genocide. he's not talking about going to war against the islamic state because they're a terrorist threat to the united states. he's saying we're going to save these people. how do you save them with no boots on the ground? clearly, the iraqi forces aren't strong enough to get them out. he's being very careful and he's restricting this effort, and that's smart. but i think -- i'm not sure most americans can understand the end goal here and how we get there. because he's framed it this way. people are tired of the war on terror. but they kind of -- is this genocide argu