>> larry: that's a cute way -- >> -- mcchrystal -- people very close to general mcchrystal and confirmedh a number of people very close to him. so i am very confident in my sourcing there. >> larry: on the first one-on-one meeting, you say it was a ten-minute photo op. obama clearly didn't know anything about him who he was. here's the guy who's going to run this expletive war. doesn't seem very engaged. the boss was pretty disappointed. why were they revealing this to you? >> that's a great question. i think you'll have to ask them. these quotes that -- >> larry: -- asked them -- >> -- those i got -- i haven't had the time actually to reach out to too many members of his staff. but yeah, i mean, at the time it wasn't necessarily something that i was interested in asking, but i think it's, you know, what's important is that they obviously were so frustrated with the relationships they have with the white house that staffer after staffer was willing to describe that relationship. and the tense tensions there. if anyone wants to ask the general any other questions along those lines, ask ho

is mcchrystal on his way out? >> well, jim, i think it's important to note that this story hit washington this morning like an i.e.d. nobody could understand why general mcchrystal would say such things or his staff. it's important to point out that this isn't an argument about policy. it's not a general being insubordinate to a president. it has to do with personalities and somewhat sophomoreic comments that both he and some of his closest aides made to this reporter. the key question is the president might get a sense or a good feeling if he cans mcchrystal simply because this is the second time this has happened in less than a year. but on the cusp of the u.s. and nato effort toward taking over kandahar and taking it back from the taliban, it may be a decision he really can't aafford to make right now. >> lehrer: what's the best word on how in the world this happened. mcchrystal himself said this should not have happened. how did it? >> he spent close to 30 years in special forces. unlike other generals who hav

caller: mcchrystal is done. hello? host: we are listening. caller: mcchrystal is done.the time he gets done with the meeting with the present, he is over with. i cannot believe this guy is still a commander. you have to remember pat stiltilllman. -- tillman. he lied. guest: he was in the chain of command and the signed off on the award he was given. at one point, he sent up a letter that he knew that there was something not quite right with theecitation that said he was killed by enemy fire. he knew things that he was not saying. host: i saw that the president should be careful about referring to how pat stillmtilln died because it could be embarrassing. guest: he was killed by friendly fire. the family was critical of how that was handled. that was a strike against him. it did not stop him from being host: 1 viewer said he saw it lose one star. guest: you cannot cripple your general and send him back out there. you have to trust this guy to get the job done or you get rid of him. you cannot cripple him, knocking him down level. there is another three-star general in th

should the shock comments end mcchrystal's career? >> i want to talk to him directly. >> larry: then, can kevin costner rescue the gulf? the oscar winner is here to show us how a machine may clean up the mess invading the shores and the man that cut off his own life, trapped alone, freed himself the only way he could. prime time exclusive next on "larry king live." >> larry: good evening. general stanley mcchrystal is prepared to resign if the president has lost confidence in him. let's talk about today's bombshell with lieutenant colonel tony schafer, external communications director of the centers for advanced defense studies has more than two decades of field experience including two combat tours in afghanistan. and john soltz co-founder of vote vets.org. a "rolling stone" article portrays the general and staffers as being critical, even contempt wous of president obama and his administration. mcchrystal ordered back to washington, oval office meeting scheduled for tomorrow. president obama offered his first public comment on the c

all americans should be grateful for 10 mcchrystal -- for general mcchrystal's service in uniform. war is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general, or a president. as difficult as it is to lose him, i believe it is a right decision for our national security. the contract represented in the recently published article does not meet the standards that should be set by a commanding general. it undermines the stability and control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. it erodes the trust necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in afghanistan. multiple responsibilities as commander-in-chief led me to this decision. first, i have a responsibility to the extraordinary men and women who are fighting this war. and to the democrat institutions that i have been elected to lead. i have no greater honor than serving as commander in chief of our men and women in uniform. it is my duty to ensure that no diversion, but can't the vital mission there -- that nothing diverts this for the strength and greatness of our military is r

it doesn't excuse what mcchrystal did. that larger context say team at the top that does not work it's commander, the ambassador , his personal-- special representative of the president. the strategy review that they went through, the state. a deadline, which has had really unnerving consequences for everybody in the theater, our troops, the afghans. so i think he really has to use this as a way of not rethinking the whole venture, but really taking ownership of it and redirecting it, balls a lot of the chaos he created. >> ifill: david, i'm curious of what you think about the overall change of command but also respond to elliot cohen's question, which is there's more than just the changing at the head here. >> i think obama did take ownership today of what has been a troubled afghanistan policy, and by appointing general petraeus, a man who knows what it is to be coming in, in a campaign that looks like it's failing-- which was the case for him in iraq-- and turn it around by his own leadership, by a very creative strateg

he was mcchrystal's boss. he has the trust a pretty much the entire washington establishment, republicans and the hill to think tanks to the general public. he is also very well known internationally because of his role at centcom. he flew all over the middle east, country to country, seeking -- shaking hands. i can't imagine anyone else who comes in with not only the trust, but authority. host: has there been discussion in your news room about the longer-term impact of the training of generals and the need for increased political and media skills? guest: not in our newsroom. the talk overnight was, well, there goes our access for a while. host: no more reporters anywhere. guest: don't expect to get an energy -- exhibit any time soon. last night general petraeus said he will not be doing media engagements for a full 30 days. we will see if that holds. one report this morning says there will be in a presser -- there will be a presser later this afternoon. we will see if they will go forward with that. media tra

general mcchrystal has responsibility for this. to lead its impact the relationship i have with the press would be a mistake. i have communicated the message ever since i got to this job to both civilian and military leaders that the press is not the enemy. when there is a story that is critical, the first thing is to go out and find if it is true. if it is, do something. it is not coming gather the data to show is not true. do not get into a defensive crouch. i hope the people will not do that. i think people clearly need to make smart decisions about how they engaged the circumstances. there is, in my view, and need for greater discipline. someone giving an interview in europe may not understand something they are saying will have an impact in asia. we need to be a little smarter how we approach this. i would say those are improvements that are needed on our part. >> he said that this episode had virtually nothing to do with strategy. some people have suggested the tension that came out from this episode may have something to do

i trust general mcchrystal's judgment on the timing. his right that when you go to protect people, the people have to want you to protect them. i would rather delay a few more months and have more afghan forces in the lead when the security presence is exppnded and operations begin more forcefully. our top priority is the training, mentoring, and partnering in the field with afghan troops and placing them in the lead in operations according to isaf, the growth of the afghhn security forces is on track. the nato training mission- afghanistan under lieutenant general bill caldwell reports that recruitment for the afghan army and police now actually exceedd monthly recruitment goals. these forces lord above -- these forces are above where they need to be to meet the end strength goals for october 2010. what is disturbing and hard to comprehend is that the training mission still does not have enough trainers to process all the afghan recruits signing up. figures show that of the more than 5200 trainers that we need, onny 2600 are on the gro

the president has not called general mcchrystal. the president as the general mcchrystal, and they will get an opportunity to talk about the article face to face some time tomorrow. >> you want to wait? >> he is cominn back here to have that face to face . >> will they be alone? >> i anticipate that. >> he says that the disagreement is not over policies. he says it is over the personality and it would have a negative impact. does the president make a distinction? believes and i think most believe that personality differences asiie, we are here to implement a new strategy and put together over the course of three months in the situation room. it is our job to implement it. the president does not believe that personalities whenever the disagreement are forward should distract from the strategy to get afghanistan right. the president talkeddfear out the campaign and time we created this strategy that the war effort in afghanistan is under resource. now there are four times the number of troops in afghanistan or will be on a pace laid o

i have enormous respect for general mcchrystal.his is a critical moment in afghanistan, and as far as i am concerned personally, the top priority is our mission in afghanistan and our ability to proceed forward confidently. it will be up to the president of the united states as commander-in-chief to make the decision as to whether or not he and his national security staff will be able to do that. my impression is that all of us would be best served by backing off and staying cool and call, and not sort of succumbing to the normal washington twitter about this for the next 24 hhurs. we have troops on the front lines. we have a major mission that we're in the middle of, and the prioritiee are best serveddby letting the president and his top general have their conversation and make a decision how we proceed forward. >> p.j. crowley says general stanley mcchrystal has apologized to call eikenberry for his negative comments. this is five minutes. >> richard holbrooke is and kabul today. he had meetings with u.s. and afghan officials as

are you asking about vice president biden, mcchrystal says with laugh? who's that?iden suggesting a top adviser. did you say bite me? what is the rub, john, in it million tear against john? >> there is no rub in the military. i think there's a lot of people that support the vice president and people in the military upset with the counter insurgency, large amounts of troops, long-term deployment operations and the vice president said let's have a global strategy and he went head to head against general mcchrystal in this debate and, frankly, lost to the president. the president was the one support that general mcchrystal had and there's absolutely nobody upset with the vice president. his son just returned from iraq who had served with the delaware national guard and he has a tremendous amount of support in the military and there's a rift with the vice president and general mcchrystal because they don't agree on what our strategy moving forward was supposed to be prior to the president's decision. >> larry: control knell schafer, what would you bet will happen tomorr

mcchrystal had the main relationship there and mcchrystal and karzai had a very warm relationship. you know, the petraeus/karzai relationship may not be as warm. i think petraeus may use his influence to push karzai to do things that may not be as comfortable for him. i think... you know, petraeus is very savvy in managing that relationship. so it may not be as smooth from the outside but it may be more productive . >> woodruff: kimberly kagan, picking up on what you started to bring up a moment ago, the skills that served him well in iraq. because people look at the two wars and say they aren't necessarily at all the same kind of war. so what skills that were useful in iraq do transfer to afghanistan? >> although afghanistan and iraq are different conflicts, the truth is that counterinsurgency fight has certain shapes. you have to take care of the problem in a very specific way. as general petraeus was quoted as saying in the opening segment, you actually have to defeat the enemy in the sanctuaries and safe havens he has established. you have to work to establish government that i

president obama has named david petreaus as mcchrystal's replacement. here is the president's announcement at the white house. >> good afternoon. today accepted general stanley mcchrystal resignation as commander of the international security assistance force in afghanistan. i did so with considerable regret, all -- but also with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission in afghanistan, for our military, and for our country. i am also pleased to nominate general david petreaus to take command in afghanistan, which will allow us to maintain the momentum and leadership that we need to succeed. i do not make this decision based on any difference in policy with general mcchrystal, as we are in full agreement about our strategy. nor do i make this decision at any sense of personal insult. stan mcchrystal has always shown great courtesy and carried out my orders faithfully. i have got great admiration for him and for as long record of service in uniform. over the last nine years, with americans fighting wars in iraq and afghanistan, he has earned a

host: a member of mcchrystal's team who was president for celebration of mcchrystal's 33rd wedding anniversary said, "it was clearly off the record." aides made it very clear to michael that it was private time. back to the phones. savannah, georgia. sam on our line for republicans, you are on the "washington journal," and we are always on the record. caller: do you think we are in a police action or in a war and there is no sympathy for mcchrystal when these comments come out and he had shown poor judgment all along, but if we are not over there to win, then we need would -- need to withdraw. and what is winning in your opinion? >> winning is a word that you do not hear around the pentagon any more. the word is "success." success for the mission. as i mentioned, there are no front lines. this is not a massive army on one side and another on the other and off they go here it is it a police action or a war? police action refers to something before my time. i will not try to define it, but before iraq started, people wondered if it was going to be nation-building. were we going in to turn a deve

stan mcchrystal as always carried out on orders fatefully. i have got great admiration for him and for his long record of service in uniform. over the last nine years, with america fighting wars in iraq and afghanistan, he has earned a reputation as one of our nation's finest soldiers. that reputation is founded on his extraordinary dedication, his deep intelligence, and his love of country. i have relied on his service, particularly in helping to design and lead the new strategy in afghanistan, so all americans should be grateful for general mcchrystal's career in uniform, but war is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a general, and private, or a president. as difficult as it is to lose jenna mcchrystal, i believe it is the right thing to do. the conduct in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by commanding general. it undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system, and it erodes the trust that is necessary for our team to work together, and my multi

i disagree with david on general mcchrystal. i think what -- first of all, the president had to act. he didn't have a choice. he looked unable to act in the gulf, and understandably so, to cap that well. so he had to act here. and general mcchrystal left him no alternative. this was an act of suburb insubordination. i disagree, in the sense, judy, to me it was a terrible indictment of general mcchrystal and his closest aides, these remarks. what they reflected was, a., a sense of their own indispensibility. secondly, it reflected incredible obturks obliviousness to how those remarks were going to be received in the civilian life. i mean, i think it showed an insularity --. >> woodruff: how is that different from what david said? >> i think it's different in the sense that general mcchrystal crippled himself as a general his -- tarnished his own reputation, credentials and credibility, by -- by allowing an environment to develop around him where his star felt totally when he said the president looked uncomfortable, and ill at eas

general mcchrystal is a friend. he has served his country nobly and with great distinction for more than three decades, much of that last decade at war. he led men in places the rest of us could not follow and he thought man in always the rest of us could not fathom. i was proud one year ago to support him for the afghanistan command and i think it is worth noting his strong leadership and the foundation he has laid for future success there. i cannot excuse his lack of judgment with respect to the "rolling stone"article. the climate was disrespectful of civilian authority. we do not have that luxury, those of us in uniform. we do not have the right nor should we assume the prerogative to cast doubt on the motives of our civilian leaders. we are and must remain a neutral estimate of the state, accountable to and respectful of those leaders. no matter which party holds sway or which personals a given office. i think it is vital for us to remember that if we lose their trust and confidence for any reason, it is time to

general stanley mcchrystal removed last week is the top u.s.ilitary commander in afghanistan has told the army he will retire, according to an army spokesperson yesterday. no date set for the retirement of general stanley mcchrystal. meanwhile, the head of britain's inquiry into the iraq war said the panel has held a private meeting with general petraeus. john chillcote, appointed by the government to examine the case made for the war and errors in planning for a pose conflict reconstruction. he says his panel held a meeting with general petraeus in london earlier this month. more on afghanistannand general petraeus and mcchrystal coming up on washington journal. those are some of the latest >> the confirmation hearings of supreme court nominee elena kagan goes into the second day. senate judiciary committee members will begin questioning the nominee this morning in office on capitol hill. live coverage begins at 9:00 eastern on c-span3, seized and radio, and at c-span.org. -- cspan radio and at c- span.org. the senate armed services committee

general mcchrystal. >> former president clinton has been cheering the team on. he tries to remain on the opposite side of the world as hillary at all times. >>> kellogg's is recovering 28 million boxes of cereal. in a statement kellogg's said "they're not great!" >> thanks for joining us. "larry king live" starts right now. >> larry: tonight, supreme court nominee elena kagan on the hot seat highly partisan highly little hearings under way. >> i will do my best to consider every case impartially. >> larry: plus a landmark decision from the high court. gun owners win it. then, 7-year-old vanishes from school three weeks and thousands of it tips later his disappearance still a mystery. does the second graders stepmom know something that could help find him? next on "larry king live." good evening. today's confirmation hearings were devoted to opening statements by committee members and nominee elena kagan. herself, if confirmed, kagan will succeed justice john paul stevens retiring after 35 years on the court. here to talk about is james carville, cnn political co

i just met with general mcchrystal in brussels last week and i would tell you the general view of all of the alliance defense ministers was that we are moving in the right direction. we do now have all of the elements for success in place. this is going to be a long and a hard fight in general mcchrystal is condensed, confident that he will be able to show that we have got the right strategy and we we are making progress by the end of this year. but this is not something where week to week or month to month you can be able to say we are moving the front forward. that is not the kind of fight this is. >> progress in marjah bam is slow and steady and we see indicators all the time where bazaars aruba and where there were none before and as the secretary said this was a place run by the taliban for the last several years. they are still there and intimidating and they recognize that, but they are fundamentally, they have been displaced, but they certainly haven't been defeated in that particular area. we see an increase in the number of teachers who are there. there are some 80 plus teac

general mcchrystal has been a great military leader. he is a great man and military office that ordaz -- military officer that i had the privilege of visiting in theater when he was under your command, and i note the great work that he did there and i know it was recognized by you. i also know the great respect he had a of the men and women that served under him. where life takes in now, we all wish him the best and thank him for his service. general, i want to make sure that you appreciate the seriousness of this issue of the deadline, as well as the issue of the rules of engagement. i will not really get into that because i think you have had the opportunity, and you have, adequately addressed those two issues. but if we are going to have military success in afghanistan, and there is no other option -- i know in our minds as well as yours. it is imperative that you have the tools with which you need to work, and as you review the situation on the ground leading up to july 1, 2011, i know we will hear more from you on that issue. i wan

general mcchrystal did refine the tactical directive.lso did issue counterinsurgency guidance as well. again, same intent. let me state up front, though, that we will drop a bomb or use attack helicopters or any other enabler, any time at any place if our troopers' lives are in jeopardy, if their safety and well-being is in jeopardy. if they are pinned down and cannot get out, we will do what is necessary. but there are a number of cases in which that is not necessary. where you are being engaged from a house. just to give you one example, and there are many of these. you are being engaged from a house. it may not be completely effective fire. you can break contact. you know, our predisposition is to close the infantry. to take the fight to the enemy. buthere are cases in which you have to balance that with the recognition that if you don't know who is in that house and taking the fight to the enemy ultimately means blowing up the house, which is sometimes what has to result if you are going to take out those bad guys that are shooting a

mcchrystal told the army today he's going to retire. what did you make of it all, dana? >> i talked about this at length on air and online as well. he should have, i think, resigned or stepped down. i believe there's protocol that you follow within the military. i also think that if the administration had perhaps maybe been stepped into more, he wouldn't have felt the need to fall on his sword in "rolling stone." let's not forget that this is a guy who was so unbelievably well trained he won't forget who he's speaking with when discussing something with a "rolling stone" reporter. it was purposeful. he did what he did to bring greater attention to afghanistan and get more action with it. before that the president hardly met with the guy. he met with them twice and second time was over this. >> larry: stephanie, he and the president were in agreement on afghanistan policy. >> yes. that's why i was tries to pars everything dana just said. that's not how you do it if you disagree with strategy. you don't go drinking with a "rolling stone" reporter in a bar and get chatty. t

general mcchrystal has been a great military leader. he is a great mannd military office that ordaz -- military officer that i had the privilege of visiting in theater when he was under your command, and i note the great work that he did there and i know it was recognized by you. i also know the great respect he had a of the men and women that served under him. where life takes in now, we all wish him the best and thank him for his service. general, i want to make sure that you appreate the seriousness of this issue of the deadline, as well as the issue of the rules of engagement. i will not really get into that because i think you have had the opportunity, and you have, adequaty addressed those two issues. but if we are going to have military success in afghanistan, and there is no other option -- i know in our minds as well as yours. it is imperative that you have the tools with which you need to work, and as you review the situation on the ground leading up to july 1, 2011, i know we will hear more from you on that issue. i want to a

on wednesday. >> general mcchrystal is on his way here. i am going to meet with him. secretary gates will be meeting with him as well. i think it is clear that the article in which he and his team appeared showed poor judgment. i also want to make sure that i talk to him directly before i make aay final decisions. that is, but let me make one last point about thhs. even as general mcchrystal is on his way here, i want everyone to keep in mind what our central focus is, and that is success in making sure that al qaeda and its affiliates cannot attack the united states and its allies. and we've got young men and women there who are making enormous sacrifices, families back home who are making enormous sacrifices. and so whatever decision i make with respect to general mcchrystal or any other aspect of afghan policy is determined entirely on how to make sure3 justifies the enormous courage and sacrifice that those men and women are making over there and ultimately make. i know secretary gates feels the exact same way. all right? thank you. >>

special representative for afghanistan and pakistan about the firing of general stanley mcchrystal and about the war. >> brown: kwame holman takes us through day three of the confirmation hearing for supreme court nominee elena kagan and judy woodruff gets analysis from marcia coyle of the "national law journal." >> ifill: tom bearden reports from florida on scientists going deep underwater to explore the damage caused by the gushing oil well. >> the whole idea about oil impacting known delicate ecosystems is really a new one. toxicity studies done in the lab do not come close to replicating the impact this might have. >> brown: and poet benjamin saenz talks of living and writing amid the violence of the u.s./mexico border. >> this is the place that really defines me, because it is such a difficult terrain to negotiate. it's not a comfortable place to live and if you want to be a writer, you don't want to live in a comfortable place. >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: this is the engine that connects zero emissio

time line set by the unrealistic.on is simply again, i would echo general mcchrystal. it is more important that we get it right then we get it fast. that goes for kandahar and the war itself. it is time for the president to state unequivocally that we will stay in afghanistan until we succeed. we need to begin our realistic debate about what it will take and how long it will take to achieve our goals. and i look forward to having that discussion with our witnesses. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator mccain. >> thank you very much for inviting me here to testify today. i like to give yyu an update on recent progress and remaining challenges in afghanistan. as you know, president obama announced a number of key refinements to our strategy last september, including the deployment of additional u.s. servicemen and women. today, over 18,000 are deployed and the remainder will be in place by the end of the summer. our own troops will be joinedby over 9000 international troops, approximately 60% in place in afghanistan and more will come in the coming mo

i trust general mcchrystal's judgment on the timing. he is right. it is important to get it right and get it fast. and he's also saying correctly that when you go to protect people, the people have to want you to protect them. so i would rather delay a few months and have a few more afghan forces in the lead when the security presence is expanded in operations begin more forcefully than to have and i said dominated force attempt to secure kandahar few months earlier. our top priority is training, mentoring, and partner in the field with afghan troops and placing them into the lead in operations against insurgents backed by u.s. and coalition suppprt. currently, the growth of the afghan security forces is on track. nato training commission afghanistan, under the lieutenant general, reports that requirement for an afghan police and army now actually exceed monthly recruitment goals. these forces are above r they need to be to meet the and strength goals for october 2010 of 134,000 army and 109,000 police personnel. what is disturbing and hard to compr

. >> general mcchrystal is ncerned of the rollback o merips next year. he expects otherllied countries to hav similar plans and that it isealistic. do you share that assessment? do you eect others to start growing back troops next year? >> this statement is not a new statement or a newssessment. it has been clear for quite some time that 2011 will be a year for evaluation of the troop surge. weave decided on a troop surge. in this interview, general mcchrystal has ssed that the transition will be contion based. it will not cendar driven. if we are in a pition to ange the role oficef troops during 2011, it will be because conditions permit and the capacity of the afghan security forces has been so well developedhat the afghan army and the afghan police can take on these responsibities. >> how can they insist the country? what reeorms must takehe future? >> speaking abou reforms, in georgia, i think foc should be on reforms of the defense in sick. the defense and security sector. we crossed a more broader reform agenda. we discusshis sector rorms. we go be

general mcchrystal said he was going to slow down a little bit. karzai did go there recently, very recently. he hadn't done that enough, in my opinion. but he went, had a meeting with the kandahar leaders, senator levin and i did a couple of years ago, met with a lot of their people, and they all are serious individuals, respected in their local areas, and he called on them for support and a majority of the audience raised their hands when he asked for their support. i think general mcchrystal saw that as a strong, clear call for unity and that karzai displayed extraordinary ownership of the operation. how would you evaluate that and does that indicate that we're not doomed in kandahar, but actually maybe laying the ground work for successful operations? >> that was, indeed, one of the most important of the political shaping operation. there was also another shia counsel that president karzai held about 15,000 to 20,000 of local elders and leaders. it was so inclusive a number of them felt no reluctance in standing up with the tv cameras rolling a

general mcchrystal did refine the tactical directive. also did issue counterinsurgency guidance as well. again, same intent. let me state up front, though, that we will drop a bomb or use attack helicopters or any other enabler, any time at any place if our troopers' lives are in jeopardy, if their safety and well-being is in jeopardy. if they are pinned down and cannot get out, we will do what is necessary. but there are a number of cases in which that is not necessary. where you are being engaged from a house. just to give you one example, and there are many of these. you are being engaged from a house. it may not be completely effective fire. you can break contact. you know, our predisposition is to close the infantry. to take the fight to the enemy. but there are cases in which you have to balance that with the recognition that if you don't know who is in that house and taking the fight to the enemy ultimately means blowing up the house, which is sometimes what has to result if you are going to take out those bad guys that are shooti

obviously, by -- i knew stan mcchrystal for one-year and i knew about the combat in iraq. i understood what his focus was. this is the reason i recommended him, strongly. and certainly, as i have said earlier, to have responsibility in that regard as well and to understand -- when selected input in this position, there is the expectation in terms of execution across the board and responsibility. i think that he certainly understood all of this and he understands this. and again, this is back to a significant error in judgment, and as far as i am concerned, the appropriate action and the appropriate outcome. >> a couple of big things. what does this say about the strength -- that you could only demote him because he is the only one capable of doing this job. and now you have these men who have been out there in the field for many years, continuously, for more than anyone else. do you need to strengthen the bench, and does he have any flexibility to make any changes

of course, we have the tragedy of the firing of mcchrystal, a tragedy for mcchrystal, and for the effort, but fortunately, the general petraeus has been put in place. he had his hearing yesterday. i think the senate will confirm him right after the fourth of july break and he will hit the ground running. host: the papers expect that to happen today. guest: really? that is even better than i had heard. the senate is an interesting place. sometimes they can move quickly, sometimes very slowly. host: do you have concerns about the strategy? guest: you can have concerns and you can second-guess everything, but realistically, we ought to give it a chance. fine do not have concerns. i have some concerns about the rules of engagement. -- i do not have concerns. i have heard that, but that is pretty broad. in the article, in the "rolling stone" article, it went into that in good detail and it told how general mcchrystal understood the strategy, rules of engagement. by the time it got to the troops in the field, it had so many iterations, it was probably not the way that the general wanted it, pr

so is mcchrystal, by the way. i know that his comments in the "rolling stone" were inappropriate or whenever. i am not a fan of our policy in afghanistan. it bothered me that if i like mcchrystal who literally does more before 9:00 and i do all day, when they say that slogan, that pertains to me. he does more before 9:00 a.m. that i do all month. he has to go because he fought off the record, maybe he does not have time to follow as we do what goes on in the culture, and the civilian culture. and what i read was that part of the reason why they got so much access was because of the volcano and they were stuck in the airport and they could not leave. they had nothing to do but talk to each other. that here is a guide, and they do not agree with the policy but that is not his job. he is a soldier. he is doing incredible things before 9:00 a.m. and he has to leave that job because of some gossipy level the yes. it bothers me. he and the president agree on a policy you disagree with. and everybody off the record talks

i have enormous respect for general mcchrystal. i think he's a terrific soldier. this is a critical moment in afghanistan. as far as i'm concerned -ppersonally the top priority i our mission in afghanistan and our ability to proceed forward competently. it will be up tt the president of the united states as commander in chief to make the decision as to whether or not he and his national security staff feel that they can do that. but my impression is that all of us would be best served by just backing off and staying cool and calm and, you know, not sort of succumbing to the normal washington twitter about this for the next 24 hours. we have troops on the front lines. we have a major mission that we are in the middle of, and i think the priorities of that mission are best served by letting the ppesident and his top general have their conversation and make a determination as to how we proceed forward. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satelliteecorp. 2010] >> and defense secretary robert gates had an article w

so is mcchrystal, by the way. i mean, i know that his comments, i guess in "rolling stone," are inappropriate and whatever. listen, i'm not a fan of our policy in afghanistan. it kind of bothered me that a guy like mcchrystal, who literally does more before 9:00 than i do all day. that's just -- when they say that thing, that slogan that actually pertains to me. he probably does more before 9 a.m. than i do all month, but he has to go because he was just, i guess he thought off the record. maybe he doesn't have time to follow, as we do what goes on in the culture, in the civilian culture that when you talk to a reporter. what i read was that part of the reason why they got so much access was because the volcano and they were stuck in the airport and they couldn't leave. so, they had nothing to do but talk to each other for a week. >> larry: they knew a reporter was there. >> yeah, but, okay, here is a guy, and as i said, i don't really agree with the poll shake is not his job, he's soldier, he is doing incredible

instead general mcchrystal won the day. but now he's gone. now i understand that the president has said this does not mean a change in policy. i think that he should step back from that remark, consult again with all his best security advisors and the vice president and look at the results so far, find out what those critical comments were mentioned in that article, where basically the pentagon is saying, hey, this is ppgoing to be years and years a a much bigger force and maybe there have -- there will have to be a second surge into afghanistan. sound like vietnam to anyone here? we prop up a government that has no relationship to the rest of the country with huge amounts of money and they have huge corruption and they don't have support in the countryside and that government falls, another one comes in, this echoes that failure. so, in the strongest terms possible, i would urge the president to reconsider, to reconvene his advisors now that general mcchrystal is gone and think very carefully about a much less expensive, much less troop-inte

we're six months into the crystal -- mcchrystal-obama strategy of political and military surge. we want to see that through pure there's continuity there. i am very clear that we must be absolutely clear in our purpose for the national security. it is not to say that development and building of schools and hospitals is not important. we just nned our priorities straight. in the end, our route home and for successful afghanistan is to put security firss. that needs to be very clear. pn terms of a question about the development aid -- the two and a million pounds is additional to the work we're doing already -- the 200 million pounds is aaditional to the work we're doing already. i agree with backing the wivess partners, and families of those who served in our armed forces. these families. pressure on we need to do more to help them. i know the very severe pressures we put on people. it is all those issues, whether the schools, the chhldren, the health centers, the time for lead, all of those issues around we want to do more to help them. we want to give a real focus to that. fina

regarding the situation on the ground, as general mcchrystal has said, this is tough business. it will take some time before we see the results we want. >> is the plan to start withdrawing troops june 2011? >> there is no change in the president's time frame. >> answering the question on iran -- did you call the the consider president ahmadinejad the legitimate leader of iran? there was a long pause, but they finally recognized -- >> the government is what it is , but i think we have all come to the conclusion that the results of the election did not reflect the will of the iranian people. >> if i understand correctly, this has a documentary dimension. >> i am not equipped to talk about a document signed in 1984. >> the government in india approaches the u.s. again this week. what will be done? >> all i will say -- i will repeat it one more time -- is we have an extradition treaty with india. if india makes an extradition request of us we will give it fair consideration. beyond that, i am not going to go through any kind of -- and our lawyers here have pounded into me that all

general mcchrystal, admiral mullen and i have met with general kiani in a recent meeting. we have shared information with him about links of the leadership of the hakani network located in north waziristan that had a -- that clearly commanded controlled the operation against bagram air base and the attack in kabul among others. and again, the challenge for the pakistani military, because i think it is important again to note what they have done over the course of the last year because it is significant, the challenge is a situation which they have a lot of short sticks and a lot of hornets nests and they have to figure out how to consolidate those to get through -- they've done good clearance operations. they've got to get further along in the hold, build and transition phases as well so that they can deal with more and more. they do realize, i believe, senator, that you cannot allow poisonous snakes to build a nest in your backyard with the understanding that those snakes will only bite the neighbor's kids. because sooner or later, they turn around and bite your kids. and

in i eyes, i think general mcchrystal is a winner -- in my eyes, i think general mcchrystal is the winner and he won the war and he could still win the war if he was there. if we answer the question should we get out, the answer is, no. these are different times. i hear so many people calling and saying things that they are inside the box, like they are living inside a box. we are not in vietnam. we are in afghanistan. afghanistan, this is a different era. we now have the internet, we have other types of explosives, terrorism -- criminals, the taliban, everything is different. and our lives, it is a very dangerous, precarious ball to world as it is. and i hear people saying, yes, we are down on wall street -- like jobs, etcetera, etcetera -- but this has something to do with war -- the mortgage and the banks cause people to be unemployed in the united states. and i wish to general mcchrystal of the fortune in the world and general petraeus is going to need a lot of help. host: from page of "the washington times." again, that is the front page of "the washington times" this morning. on the

secretary greagates and admiral mullen exn why they agree with the decision to replace general mcchrystal>> of course, the lottery is prescribed by law. if demand are basis supply you have to do a lottery. >> i think this is the civil rights issue of today and it is not just about race. it is about class. >> tonight, the market -- the lottery producer madeleine sackler on the family that she hosted for the lottery, and the anti-charter schools and demand. >> mr. chairman, we are pleased to have you here of the g-20 leaders are gathering for the same debate as we are having on capitol hill, which is, what is a hybrid of a love spending -- what is the bright club level of spending in a weak economy. walter, let's start with you. >> house democrats said this week that they are not going to propose a traditional budget resolution. >> we're going to propose a budget resolution, chiefly enter merrilee for, discretionary spending. -- chiefly and primarily for discretionary spending. that will be the number that determines how much discretionary spending there will be. the president has requested