and secretary clinton and admiral mullen.i was over in pakistan/afghanistan last fourth of july when the conditions were starting to deteriorate. and i remember coming back and visiting with president bush about this, and making the recommendation that we need more resources. by now the transition team, this is one of the recommendations that was made, was to do exactly what you are getting ready to do, and that is a surge in forces. in my view, we either get all in to win, or we get out. and i think that's how most americans feel about this issue. to secretary gates and admiral mullen, the way you turned the iraq war around anders others, there are lessons to be learned about that. the surge, the sunni awakening. many of these actually turned it around so we could say we have won that war. the president has announced an 18-month time line before withdrawal. i essentialed sensed a best of inconsistency between with drawing based on conditions on the ground and a withdrawal based upon an 18-month time line. my concern is the a

. >> and mullen, is it your understanding that it is possible -- admiral mullen, is it your understanding that it is possible not to withdraw in 2011? >> i reiterate that the president has choices as president. >> so his statement last night did not find him to start withdrawing in 2011. that is the understanding? >> i would say it was a clear and statement of his strong intent. >> i understand why he would want to let the american people know that we will not be there forever, but this is a critically important event. i think that the success of this operation depends on will and resolve. i don't want the july 2011 statement to be seen by fire in me, not one of the audiences that you mentioned, which i think are listening, that we have talked ourselves into leaving. have we locked ourselves into leaving in 2011, senator clinton? >> i do not believe we have locked ourselves into leaving. but what we have done, and it was inappropriate for the position -- for the president to take, to signal clearly to all audience that the united states is not interested in occupying ask cannot stand, we'

secretary and admiral mullen, is undoubtedly the center for terrorism in the world. i ask you, are you fully comfortable with the president's strategy, including the target date to begin redeploying troops out of afghanistan? i ask each of you. >> first of all, mr. chairman, i am very comfortable with the president's strategy. i believe that each of these conflicts that we're engaged in needs to be assessed individually. there are some parallels and there are some areas where they are different. i have been adamantly opposed and continue to be opposed to deadlines, but i regard the july, 2011 date as the beginning of a process and has required balancing between signalling our commitment, which certainly should be signaled by this president's approval of 52,000 more troops this year and lighting a fire under the afghans to give them a sense of urgency that they have to be prepared and preparing to take over responsibility for the security of their country. my hope is as that process goes forward and we draw down our troops, they can sustain the level of security that

admiral mullen, you pointed out again. and significantly different as a base for the greatest threat and satori gates, you mentioned how the mog red and where the sort of feed into the spiritual and intellectual what ever you want to call it leadership that is coming out of the situation. now, the problem i want to ask each of you to express is we have heard you say we believe that a strong and stable space pakistan must be a key partner for the united states and allied against violent extremism. of course that is correct. but a number of historians come before this committee and previous discussions of this and they made comments such as this fairly or not, that the al qaeda and afghanistan have sometimes been useful for pakistan. to at least influence if not control things over in afghanistan so that india would not have an influence when the indians were here visiting with you recently. they certainly have expressed some feeling of exclusion that came not only from pakistan but pakistan's use of the taliban in afghanist

>> i would have to look at the intelligence reports and get that back to you. >> admiral mullen? >> general mcchrystal's plan overall is to send the bulk of the u.s. forces to the east and to the south which are very contested. we've got forces out in the west where there well could be -- where there is not that significant of an insurgency, for instance, some forces out there and coalition forces as well. >> i think it's safe to say that we have very few troops where they are uncontested and i guess what i'm driving at is that 2011 -- it's going to be very difficult to find an area where our troops are going to be that's uncontested thereby beginning the withdrawal process. >> we see in helmand right now in some of the districts or provinces, you know, it's pretty quiet. a place where it was really tough before the marines showed up. now, we got to build and transfer after the clear and hold which is where we are right now. and buy quiet, i mean, the bazaars are open and there's a significant amount of economic activity there in a place that a few months ago there was virtually

. >> lehrer: the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen, briefed soldiers and marines today. we'll talk to him about what he said. >> ifill: also tonight, as the climate change conference opened in copenhagen, new rules were announced in washington declaring greenhouse gases dangerous to public health. we get details from administrator lisa jackson at the environmental protection agency. >> lehrer: then, ray suarez begins a weeklong cross-country series about the u.s. economy. patchwork nation, tonight from philadelphia. >> they were too big to fail, i would say that cities are too important to fail. >> ifill: and jeffrey brown reports on new york's latest cultural struggle. >>> how can they survive and thrive, here at the metropolitan in new york we'll talk to the man in charge and opera star renee fleming. >> lehrer: that's all coming up, on tonight's "pbs newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by: >> what the world needs now is energy. the energy to get the economy humming again. the energy to tackle challenges like climate change. what if that en

let me just ask you a quick question, admiral mullen.most of the time, commanders talk about different options and courses of action. they talk about the risk involved and that the risk is either usually low, medium, or high. was there a risk level associated the general mcchrystal's 40,000 increase? >> broglie moderate, but the real critical path here is the development of the afghan security forces, which we all think was high risk, particularly on the police side. that is one of the reasons he shifted the partner in, and one of the reasons we are devoting our best people, best leaders, resources to accelerating that so that we can do what the secretary of defense -- >> i will pursue that in just a minute. i would assume that the number 30,000 would be a little higher risk than the moderate risks. >> what i said in my state is, general mcchrystal is going to get these forces this year, as fast as we can get in there. the biggest concern is to reverse the momentum. he thinks he can do it with these forces. >> i was privileged to be with

let me just ask you a quick question, admiral mullen. of the time, commanders talk about different options and courses of action. they talk about the risk involved and that the risk is either usually low, medium, or high. was there a risk level associated the general mcchrystal's 40,000 increase? >> broglie moderate, but the real critical path here is the development of the afghan security forces, which we all think was high risk, particularly on the police side. that is one of the reasons he shifted the partner in, and one of the reasons we are devoting our best people, best leaders, resources to accelerating that so that we can do what the secretary of defense -- >> i will pursue that in just a minute. i would assume that the number 30,000 would be a little higher risk than the moderate risks. >> what i said in my state is, general mcchrystal is going to get these forces this year, as fast as we can get in there. the biggest concern is to reverse the momentum. he thinks he can do it with these forces. >> i was privileged to be with gen

i've listened very carefully to you and to admiral mullen and to you and to admiral mullen and to secretary @ @ @ @ r >> moving to another subject which i find interesting and amazing has to do with what ar our hope for outcome is produced that we have the right strategy and the right resources. i was delighted to hear that. i have great confidence in you and have had since we met the first time in some remote corner in baghdad where you were doing a fantastic job. what is it we have the right strategy and the right resources to do? is that to win? >> i believe it is to let the afghan people win. >> ok, and is there an important difference there? we are asking our sons and daughters, literally in some cases, to fight, 30,000 more of them. are we asking them to win? ce there? we're asking our sons and daughter literally in some cases to go over there and fight, 30,000 more of them. are we asking them to go over and win? >> we're asking to go over and be on the winning team. the reason i parse this is because the afghans are the ultimate winners here. >> i understand that. i think the parsing

secretary clinton, secretary gates, and admiral mullen, we welcome you here today. thank you very much for joining us and we appreciate your coming to share more details about the president's plan and for consulting and partnering with congress on the decision obviously of enormous consequences for our soldiers, our security in their country. this is a decision that the president of the united states has made but ultimately the all of us share responsibility for its consequences. given the complexities of our challenge in the seriousness of the sacrifices the head and the absence of strategy over much of the last 80 years, i believe the president exercised importantly leadership by taking the time he needed to make the right decision even as political pressure mounted in different directions. his words in your testimony showed that the administration has confronted tough realities, carefully weighed all of the options and the right that a comprehensive consider a path forward. i believe that the president appropriately narrowed the mission in afghanistan when he pre

admiral mi mullen says that one of the reasons the talan as recruits and ny in afghanistan is they p better wages. if t afghan army started paying betr wages, you would have a biddi war. let pakistan's message be very clear -- if you want special treatment, that we are n going afterhem,ecause they ha been soft on goingfter al qaeda, giving safe enclaves to taliban,ust get yourself a nuclear weapon and you will be trted differently. >> no wonder iran wants nuclear weapon >> the psident'sessagen al qaeda is misleading. these toll the cogen guments against what would y ve -- it leadso all theode in arguments about why wou you have it infghanistan if there is aew al qaeda there? it is about radical islam. we cannot allow rical islam to succeed in that ea. it is nlear armed. it is unacptable to us than to any our allies. how do you d that? people have miakenly thought about pakistan as a refuge r the bad guys afgnistan. it is thother way aund. think of afghanian as the place of refe and the -- refuge for radical iam in pakistan. if they are attacking as they are the northern teitories, yo

characterized it's ok to give some here and here, but part of the strategy by secretary gates and admiral mullen, is a date to begin a transition. i think that's helpful in the terms of the strategic sense and to the american people at-large, this is not an open-ended commitment. and the response to the afghan's to take up the fight. one problem is that president karzai has not received this message but it's clear that he and his government has to lead. >> but the government did not give the tactics, do you support that idea or how do you pay for it? >> i support the idea of paying for it, we have gone now for eight plus years to wars that his contributed to where we are today. and that's the president's view. the specifics are always difficult. but there are only two ways to do it, one is to make savings in other accounts. i think some of that will be done. and then you have to consider raising revenue, and that's something we are doing now in the health care debate. it strikes me ironic that we have committed ourselves in the health care debate to pay for it and to make it the budget saving go

i think the strategy was embraced by secretary gates and admiral mullen as a date to begin a transition period in the sense of communicating to the american public at large that this is not an open-ended commitment. there are limits. it is the ultimate responsibility of the afghans to take up the fight themselves. president karzai has dealt we are there for our own reasons, not to help him, and therefore he has been in different. >> but the president did not give specifics on how this is going to be paid for. congressman obey is suggesting a war tax. do you support that idea? >> i support the idea of paying for it. i think we have gone now for a 8 plus years, two wars, close to $1 billion which has contributed to our deficit. i think that is the president's view, too. the specifics are always difficult, but there are only two ways to do it. one is to make savings in other accounts, expense accounts. some of that will be done. then you have to consider raising revenue. that is something we are doing right now on the health-care debate issue. it is ironic that we have committed ourselves

the violence came admiral mike mullen chairman of e u.s. joint chie was in kabul, meing with afghan president hamid kaai. mullen warnethe insurgent network is expanding. >> i remain deeplyoncerned about the growinlevel of cole useetween the afghan, taliban and al qda, and otheextremist groups taking ruge across the border in pakistan. tting at this network which is nowore entrenched wille a far more difficult task than it was just one year a >> sreenasan: also today, the second-ranking u.s. mmander in afghistan lieutenant general david rodriguez said dloying 30,000d mo u.s. troops could take 11 months. the obama adnistration originly said they'd be in place within six mons. italn premier silvio berlusconi remai hospitalized inilan, after being attacked on sunda he was hit in the face wita atuette as he signed autographs at a political lly. he suffered fractured nose and 2 brok teeth. police identified thattacker as massi tartaglia, a man with a history ofental problems. world stock marks rose today aftethe persian gulf sheikdom of abu dhabi

she'll be joined by secretary gates and admiral mullen as both of those briefings.l participate in the hearing at the senate foreign relations committee that starts at nine akaka. there will also be a hearing in the afternoon with the house armed service community with deputy secretary abu will participate in that one. secretary clinton tomorrow goes to, i'm sorry not tomorrow, thursday to brussels for meetings on december 4. there will be a meeting of the north atlantic council at the level of foreign ministers at nato headquarters. on the agenda, there will also be a meeting of nato foreign ministers with non-nato isaf contributing nations and a nato russia council working lunch. she of course will also meet with the nato secretary-general rasmussen as well as with the newly appointed belgian prime minister and foreign minister stephen do not care and eu leaders. and that's all i have at the top and i'll take your questions. >> presumably almost all these people are at least the leaders of these countries. i birdied then briefed about what the president plans to s

this builds on the hearing left week with secretary clinton and admiral mullen and explored not onlyhe prospects for success of the military campaign in afghanistan but also how the president's plan fits into our broader strategic objectives of preventing terrorist attacks and stabilizes the middle east and south asia. much of the debate in congress has focused on the president's stated intention to begin withdrawing some u.s. troops by july 2011. some members have voiced concerns that such a date undercuts impressions of the u.s. resolve, gives the taliban and al qaeda a target beyond which they can wait us out. other members with a very different view of the war worry that july 2011 date is so flexible it offers no assurance that troops will be withdrawn. this is a legitimate item for debate, but i am doubtful the success or failure hinges on this point nearly as much as it does on the counterinsurgency strategy employed by allied troops, the viability of afghan security forces and most importantly, how the united states engages with pakistan. i have confidence that the addition of

secretary clinton, secretary gates and admiral mullen we welcome you here today. thank you very much for joining us. and we appreciate your coming to share more details of the president's plan and for consulting and partnering with congress on the decision obviously of enormous consequences for our soldiers, our security and our country. this is a decision that the president of the united states has made but ultimately all of us share responsibility for its consequences. given the complexities of our challenge in the seriousness of the sacrifices the head and the absence of strategy over much of the last eight years, i believe the president exercised importantly leadership by taking the time he needed to make the right decision even as political pressure mounted in different directions. his words and your testimony showed that the administration has confronted tough realities, carefully weighed all of the options and a right that a comprehensive, considered path forward. i believe that the president appropriately narrowed the mission in afghanistan when he present

lastly, the other guys were here and testified, secretary gates and then, also, admiral mullen.and i think that i know in my district, i think throughout the country, there really is a great concern of the four guys that are under indictment or whatever you call that in the military. and i think the concern is, is that somehow we're being caught up in political correctness. i wanted to tell secretary gates i didn't get a chance to ask a question of him but arkansas played texas a&m, you know, earlier in the year and beat them in texas stadium. but, you know, in the heat of that battle, you know, if somebody hit somebody in the mouth, they'd be suspended for a game. and i know it's different, you know, the situation, but it's not that different. and i guess what i would like from you is just your reassurance. i know through the years, you know, people have stood up for me. your reassurance that you are looking into that, you know, and shepherding that process. i know you can't get involved directly at the point it is now. admiral mullen indicated that he had confidence with the p

this builds on the hearing left week with secretary clinton and admiral mullen and explored not onlyhe prospects for success of the military campaign in afghanistan but also how the president's plan fits into our broader strategic objectives of preventing terrorist attacks and stabilizes the middle east and south asia. much of the debate in congress has focused on the president's stated intention to begin withdrawing some u.s. troops by july 2011. some members have voiced concerns that such a date undercuts impressions of the u.s. resolve, gives the taliban and al qaeda a target beyond which they can wait us out. other members with a very different view of the war worry that july 2011 date is so flexible it offers no assurance that troops will be withdrawn. this is a legitimate item for debate, but i am doubtful the success or failure hinges on this point nearly as much as it does on the counterinsurgency strategy employed by allied troops, the viability of afghan security forces and most importantly, how the united states engages with pakistan. i have confidence that the addition of

>> i have listened to his speech and secretary clinton and secretary gates, admiral mullen, and our commanderin the field, general mcchrystal. i think they presented a plausible plan for success in afghanistan i think there is enough flexibility with the so- called withdrawal date. it will be based on conditions on the ground. i am comfortable with a plan that has a reasonable chance of success. >> would you be comfortable with a supplemental that spends $40 billion and is not paid for ta? have you talk to anyone in the white house about implementing a strategy for getting legislation through? >> not being in the majority, i don't bring bills to the floor. i don't design and legislative strategy. no one has talked to me about it. i believe a supplemental spending bill bus supports our troops in the field is vital and i will be there to support it. >> merry christmas. >> it never stops, does it? i thought you were on vacation or had a new job. [laughter] yes, sir. >> the major factor in the recession was irresponsible spending and lending for mortgages that people could not afford. then the bi

be with you today and on behalf of my boss, the chairman of joint chiefs of staff, admiral michael mullen, i am deeply honored to be here at this important event. the fact that it comes on the heels of the largest snowstorm this city has ever experienced is a testament to how much more special this event is. it is fitting that we gather up the wall to dedicate a christmas tree and cards that our next generation of patriots from across the land have been made for this occasion. as these school children have so aptly help commemorate christmas for our be among veterans, i recall two christmases that my father spent in vietnam while i was in elementary school in hawaii. an enlisted soldier and member of the 25th infantry division, my dad was assigned in 1965 and came in in 1969. like the other holidays of the special season, christmas is a time when americans cherish per as it enables more focus on our families and friends. being a nation at war, we can also dwelt on the soldiers, marines, sailors, airmen, and coastguardsman who served in harm's way throughout the special season. this moral

admiral mullen indicated that he had confidence with the people that were taking care that.meback to that is i know he had confidence in the people at fort hood, and yet a third grader could have told that there was something going on there that was not right. and i think again, the american people are concerned that that is due to political correctness. >> congressman, i am not familiar because the incident that happened in iraq with the current one that you mention, although the specifics of that case, but i will tell you we stress to all of our people, the importance of how to act. but there's also an absolute loyalty. so i think the balance is about particularly we have learned a lot over these years as we go through this. >> i know that is in review, is an iraqi situation. but it does make a difference, and since your guys now, when they are deciding whether or not to do an action, the easiest thing to do is not good. it does make a difference as far as decision-making, and so i would hope that you would work with your cohorts. i know you have got tremendous influence

:00 eastern on c-span and c-span radio, the house armed services committee will hear from admiral mullen and secretary gates. more on afghanistan on capitol hill live tomorrow on the c-span networks. while we wait for the house to return, a portion of today's "washington journal" when we heard from montana's governor. the democratic governors association is meeting in washington today, and their chair, government -- gov. brian schweitzer, is sitting on the table. what is on the agenda? guest: we will talk about the elections, lessons learned in the last few cycles. governors are responsible for something. in washington, d.c., there is a lot of talk but very little action. but in state houses, we educate, medicate, incarcerate -- that is 87% of our budgets. we have to balance budgets every single year. we keep that people in prison, could teachers in front of students, -- bad people in prison, good teachers-of students, and it sure that the last and least half health care. host: with two defeats for democrats running for governor in virginia and new jersey, what lessons have you learned f

we have very frequent visits by admiral mullen, the chairman of the joint chiefs.e's been to islamabad more than a dozen times in the last recent hillary clinton was just there. on the other hand, pakistan is probably one of the most anti-american countries in the world. consistently the united states polls are in the below 20% range. we have some clout. there's a great deal of suspicion in the united states. if you ask pakistanis who's the biggest threat to your security? 58% say the united states. only about 10% say the taliban. even though it's the taliban killing thousands of pakistani civilian. >> larry: that doesn't make sense. >> it doesn't make sense. it's somewhat prone to conspiracy theoriesp this they believe blackwater is deeply engaged this their country, even though there's little or no evidence of that.

copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> secretary of state clinton, robert gates, and mike mullenn two congressional hearings. at 9:00 a.m. eastern, the senate armed services committee and it 1:30 p.m., the house foreign affairs committee. you can watch both hearings live on c-span 3 and c- span.org. >> the 2010 studentcam contest is here. $30,000 in prizes with the top prize, $5,000. create a video on one of our country's greatest strengths or challenges the country is facing. it must incorporate cspan programming and the deadline is january 20. credit camera and get started go to studentscam.org. next on c-span, it is "washington journal," live with your phone calls which is followed by live coverage in the u.s. house. .

i think anyone who looks seriously at the united states military today like bob gates or admiral mullenuld say to the president if he said let's start a third war, to president, you want to do that, it's your nickle, but here's my resignation. i'm not going with you. thank you very much. [applause] >> bruce will be available -- [applause] >> bruce will be tivel sign the copies of his book. we'll break for ten minutes and then begin the next session. but bruce will be available outside. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> next, a discussion on future threats to the united states. after that, a special presentation of our documentary, the blare house, the president ds guest house. and later, a look at a former british ambassador to the u.s. testifying on british involvement in the war in iraq. >> look at some of the possible threats to the u.s. in the future. part of a university of virginia forum marking 20 years since the fall of the berlin wall. this portion is an hour and 45 minutes. >> panel three of when

business of doing that after the fact, and going back and effectively guaranteeing transactions with mullen bank institutions -- >> we feel the same way -- suggests winder stand do you feel the same way about the fdic guarantees pimply september? because, because the guarantees -- again, you would never, ever want a country in a position you have to guarantees, temporary, whenever the price because, because of the moral hazard risk. but in a financial panic there is often no other way to stem the risk of much greater damage to the innocent. >> mr. geithner, there are consequences to doing that because now markets understand that you may at any point decide that anyone is large enough and that their debt should therefore be backed up by the u.s. taxpayer. >> well said, and no one feels more strongly about that, and that is why even in the midst of the steep crisis we propose sweeping reform that would give a better choice is in the future. i could not feel more strongly about that. >> thank you. i apologize to my fellow panelists. mr. atkins. >> no, it was a very fruitful discussion i though

this builds on the hearing left week with secretary clinton and admiral mullen and explored not only the prospects for success of the military campaign in afghanistan but also how the president's plan fits into our broader strategic objectives of preventing terrorist attacks and stabilizes the middle east and south asia. much of the debate in congress has focused on the president's stated intention to begin withdrawing some u.s. troops by july 2011. some members have voiced concerns that such a date undercuts impressions of the u.s. resolve, gives the taliban and al qaeda a target beyond which they can wait us out. other members with a very different view of the war worry that july 2011 date is so flexible it offers no assurance that troops will be withdrawn. this is a legitimate item for debate, but i am doubtful the success or failure hinges on this point nearly as much as it does on the counterinsurgency strategy employed by allied troops, the viability of afghan security forces and most importantly, how the united states engages with pakistan. i have confidence that the addition

court specifically rejected the proposition that the commerce clause allowed congress to regulate mullen economic activities merely because through a chain of causal effect they might have an economic impact. these decisions reflect judicial recognition that the commerce clause is not infinitely elastic and that by enumerated its powers of the framers denied conagra's the type of general police power that is exercised by states. mr. president, i would ask consent after the senator from illinois that my statement in the record what appeared as if i have given it continually. >> without objection it will be shown in the record. >> i would yield to the democrat side of the aisle. >> senator from illinois. >> mr. president, thank you. and i'd like to thank the senator from nevada for that courtesy. thank you, mr. president. as this debate draws to a close and my colleagues and i prepare to vote on a health care reform bill i recognize the long hours and the negotiation have left some nerves and tempers frayed. that's why i come to the floor today. although our work keeps us away from our fam

my question is secretary gates admiral mullens will testify today about the afghanistan strategy.r tractor makes the 8 truck 802. the guest can talk a little bit about the air trucks and a little bit about the abilities and how it might help emerging partners like afghan air corporation and the counter surgency fight? guest: he is correct. that is a new model we're trying develop. it's an experimental model we're working on so at this point in time i have no comment. we're still in research and development. host: how did he find out about it? guest: there's m been news for military purposes about that. host: ken from houston. caller: i was concerned with the housing here in houston with the right to work law. the unions are so weak here in the neighborhood i'm in, i've seen these big housing corporations come in and they have built thousands of thousands of homes and it's all been done by illegals from over the border and - every home and i don't understand, you know, and the unions really are not capable of doing anything because of the right to work law here in texas. i don't kn

instead, admiral mullen spoke of taking it year by year. again, i don't recall your assessment recommending incrementalism. i'm interested to hear how your headquarters will interpret last week's guidance from washington. finally, there's the critical question of resources. first, are 30,000 additional forces enough to win decisively? as you wrote in the assessment, resources will not win this war, but underresourcing could lose it. given the many leagues you requested at a minimum 40,000 additional forces. please explain why the president is not underresourcing his own strategy. will you have to cut the scope of the mission because you did not receive 60,000 to 80,000 more forces? and next year, you determine that additional -- if next year you determine that additional forces are required, do you have the flexibility to ask for more? while we've heard about top line numbers, we've not heard discussion about the composition of these forces. how many combat brigades will deploy? how many will be trainers? will each combat brigade receive al

the election was postponed from january but admiral mullen said that will not change u.s. plants. it would wind down saab operations after talks of a deal collapsed. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span rating. >> "washington journal" continues. host: "healthcare half-truths'" is the book and carolyn engelhard is the author. she joins us from charlottesville, virginia. how do you define medical malpractice? guest: good morning. well, medical malpractice has to do with the practice of medicine, and when there is a medicalÑi error, when there is n injury, when there is a misfortune, that it ultimately becomes litigated so it has to do with medicine as well as our judicial system. host: could you walk us through perhaps a typical case or a case of medical malpractice that might give us an idea of how it has developed and how it works? guest: welcome i am not a lawyer. i teach health policy so i tend to look at these things in a more global view. but certainly if you read the literature there are lots of cases where a patient has been given the wrong dosage of the right dr

secretary gates and chairman mullen will return to the hill on thursday to testify before the senate foreign relations committee and the house armed services committee. tom ricks, what will you be listening for out of those hearings? >> guest: i'll be -- if i were covering them as a reporter, and i've done this sort of thing a lot in the past, at that point you're listening as much to what the members of congress are saying as to what the witnesses are saying. the witnesses will basically be following what the president says in his speech and maybe elaborating on it a little bit. but what i really want to hear is what the congressional democrats have to say. are they simply going to say, president obama, sorry, we're not going along with you, or are they going to say, okay, we're going to give you 12 months and then we're out of here, which is another problem, or are they going to say tell us how this works and at least give the notion a chance. i think the president has a real problem with his own party here, and it's going to be very interesting to watch this week. >> host: go to o

will result in far fewer casualties than if we were not able to reverse them in the end. >> admiral mullen, going back to jim's question when you said we are not winning, what struck some as a motive is that you use the word when it all. have you noticed any reluctance on the part of some administration officials to use the word when or victory in afghanistan? >> i'll let some administration officials speak for themselves. i intend to be very clear with respect to that because i believe we are not in this strategy can put this in a place where we can turn this thing around in 60. having an intellectual debate about winning and losing and other words like that sometimes can move into a direction that is, that i just don't think is very helpful. i certainly noted secretary gates said the other day we are in this thing to win and that is certainly where i am, understand that. but i also don't want to ever under state or in any way not speak to the significance of the challenge based on where we are right now. as general mcchrystal found when he went over there, and as all of us including the

and david goodrich and mike mullen and stanley mcchrystal and i have been focused on. we have changed the articulation of our present very substantially, in both countries, but particularly in afghanistan because we have to explain it better. i hear you loud and clear. every one of my colleagues and i worry about this every day. and that's why -- that's why we stopped destroying poppies, pam. you know that. you have come to the. i could not understand why we were spending more money destroying poppy crops than we were building of agriculture, driving farmers into the hands of the taliban. and instead, with the general mcchrystal's strong support, we ended that program. we are building up the agriculture, and we will issue a paper on this in the next day or two. and at the same time, we put heavy emphasis and interjection in destroying the drug czar's. some of you may have seen on television during the fighting season these mammoth explosion of drug paraphernalia, opium, we have done tremendous damage to there. we know from information we received through various source

right on the wake of that we had chairman of the joint chiefs admiral mike mullen, he went into the media along with secretary of defense robert gates. both of them saying this is a crisis. this is a result of too many redeployments. this is a result of not enough time at home in between deployments. this is a result of soldiers not getting the psychological care and tested and spot on. could not agree with them more. the problem was this said this and talk about changing policy. aside from a few minor tweaks they have basically not changed policy. so we have situations like fort hood like major nidal hasan where he did not serve in iraq or afghanistan has spent a lot of time in walter reed hospital counseling giving psychiatric counseling to soldiers coming back from both occupations. so there have actually been a lot of people in the military already calling for pst treatment for for soldiers themselves. then we need pstd treatment for the counselors. when you hear one traumatic story after another, day after day after day you are going to need to talk to somebody about that. so major h

july 2011 comes from the pentagon and admiral mullen.the pentagon gave as part of the process to the security team a number of things including the july 2011 security date. as most recently as this morning, as the commander-in- chief, he is clear about what july 2011 mean spirit that as -- that is the point at which we will transition, and in the security responsibility for afghanistan to the afghans, understanding that as the president said all little under weeks ago at west point that the troop jet to read that that transition will happen will be based on appropriate conditions on the ground as it happened in iraq. >> why did general john say yes today -- say yesterday? general petreaus says that it is not. >> i think it is a difference -- no, no. having been in these meetings, maybe the word wrap has stripped people out. -- ramp has tripped people up. the ramp george jones was discussing, i talked to general petreaus about this on air force one, but to and from the area. the one we are all referring is from july 2011 that the presiden

. >> ladies and gentleman, a couple more speakers and a couple songs. 3 summerlin --teresa mullen ishe mother of a 9/11 firefighter. he perished in the world trade center on 9/11. let me introduce to you along with other 9/11 mothers who lost loved ones, firefighters. threesome molleresa mullin. >> good afternoon. standing with me today are a group of mothers who lost their sons on 9/11. how old does a mother get up here and talk in two minutes about her beautiful son? i will do my best. michael had basketball, bowling, swimming team, boy scouts, music lessons, with daily games of or fall on jordan street. it seems michael had a knack for sending his schoolmates into laughter and his teacher's hair to turn permanently greg. michael was a very repentant face and would tell me, "mom, i'm sorry, i will neverhe do it will had a kind and thoughtful maj. he was always helping the neighbors and he had his own paper route, earning his own money. at the age of 16, summer jobs were tough to come by. michael's signed up for as a repro palsy cerebral palsey cam. hthey needed the thibathing and e

i want to stress that the improvements that secretary gates and admiral mullen have talked about in theomes primarily through what the pakistanis have done themselves. what we do has been to assist. and if you're looking for more specifics we'll see if we can set up something for you with people who are more intimately familiar with the detail of operations. >> you were at hearings where you were grilled over the coals over why are you selling an airplane for counterinsurgency. marine gunners made the case. the point is, are they doing night attacks with those f-16's? that was one of the markers of improvement for the pakistani military that you were laying out. have these plans -- precise night attack. are they able to do that now? >> in term of whether they're able to do that right now, i'm going to have to defer on that and i'll get back to you with whether i can answer that question. but are they acquiring that capability, yes. and certainly in terms of their overall use of the f-16's -- and i want to be careful because we talk too much about operational details and that can tell th

robert gates, as well as mike mullen, will be testifying. stanley mcchrystal, the top u.s. commander in afghanistan, republicans have wanted him to testify on his recommendations. he has not yet, but he is expected to testify next week. all of these major players in the obama administration will be making their case and there will probably be some tense moments with members that do not want this war to continue or at least once a timeline for getting out. earlier this year nancy pelosi did not embrace timetables, which the appropriations committee chairman was pushing for. i think that there will be more of a push for an exit strategy. the white house has indicated that the u.s. is not going to be in afghanistan forever. there are sticking points that will come up. host: we will look for coverage of that here on c-span, go to c- span.org for the schedule. what should the viewers be looking for in these hearings? guest: how they handle the questions and how they pinpoint but cost and how the u.s. will continue to fight and wage two wars when we are in record deficits and une

this board of various is significantly different, admiral mullen, you pointed out again.d significantly different as a base for the greatest threats. secretary deeds, you just mentioned how they sort of feed into either spiritual /intellectual, whatever you want to call it. leadership is coming out of this situation. the problem that i want to ask of each of you to express is back we have heard you say we believe in a strong, stable democratic pakistan must be a key partner for the united states and allied against violent extremism -- and allied -- ally against violent extremism. that is correct, but a number of people have come before the board in previous discussions of this, and they have made comments such as this -- that the al qaeda in afghanistan is actually useful for pakistan. to at least influence is not controlled things over in afghanistan so that india would not have an influence. when the indians were here visiting with you recently, they've sort of expressed some feeling of this exclusion that came not only from pakistan, but pakistan's use of the taliban i

and he said, along with senator clinton and chief of staff -- chief of operations mullens, that under no conditions will we send additional troops after this deployment. the fourth question is: do we have enough qualified u.s. civilians in afganistan to partner with the afghan people in promoting governance and economic development? we must send even more. an ensure that the civilian surge extends to all 34 provinces so they can partner with the afghans in the field. madam president, as you know, i visited afganistan in april and september and had opportunity to speak with our military and civilian leaders, president karzai, and numerous afghan ministers, i traveled and met with the local government officials and tribal elders and the community council. what i heard from the afghan people was frustration with our government's inability to provide security and administer justice and deliver the very basic services. they welcomed international assistance in the short term, but sought improved security and governance. more importantly, they want to control transfer to afghan security for

robert gates, as well as mike mullen, will be testifying. stanley mcchrystal, the top u.s. commander in afghanistan, republicans have wanted him to testify on his recommendations. he has not yet, but he is expected to testify next week. all of these major players in the obama administration will be making their case and there will probably be some tense moments with members that do not want this war to continue or at least once a timeline for getting out. earlier this year nancy pelosi did not embrace timetables, which the appropriations committee chairman was pushing for. i think that there will be more of a push for an exit strategy. the white house has indicated that the u.s. is not going to be in afghanistan forever. there are sticking points that will come up. host: we will look for coverage of that here on c-span, go to c- span.org for the schedule. what should the viewers be looking for in these hearings? guest: how they handle the questions and how they pinpoint but cost and how the u.s. will continue to fight and wage two wars when we are in record deficits and une

>> as mike mullen said it once upon a time -- we do what we must in iraq.we do what we can and afghanistan. we have boot at that point now -- we are at that point now where afghanistan has moved from being an economy of force function to our main effort. so in the process, we are looking at expanding the capacity that we have had there. nimroz province is a big enigma to us at this point. barack, on by the italians, but they probably don't have enough -- farah, owned by the italians, but they probably don't have enough forces there to do what needs to be done routinely. we're expanding that way a little bit as well. you start to stress the command- and-control capacity of the established headquarters. and when these headquarters were established, it was about nation building not about fighting a counterinsurgency. this goes back to 2002 or 2003. the nations of nato were simply dividing up the country for pr teas and that type of thing. -- prt's, and that type of thing. and we're going to put 20,000 marines into an area of operations -- that is bigger than a

last week, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mullen said that there are not that many afghan soldiers that are in the liege. there are very few. i wonder if they can give us the ground truth as to how many are present and how many are partnered with u.s. troops and how many units are in the lead in combat operations inland. in addition to the national security forces, there is a community defense initiative and which appears to be an african version of the sons of iraq. i hope our witnesses will describe this initiative to discuss the strengths and weaknesses. i understand the press and has corrected his military commanders not to begin clearing an area and as our troops will be able to turn that area over to african security forces. what they could clarify is at what point in the "claire transfer" -- clear transferred" they will take over for area security. it is a plan that we hold, the afghans hole, and we hold together. it is not nearly as effective to have u.s. marines standing on street corners in afghan villages as it is to have an afghan policeman or a soldier.

i listened to secretary clinton, to secretary gates, admiral mollen -- mullen, and general the krystleystle. i think there's enough flexibility with the so-called it withdraw. it will be based on -- i am comfortable that we're building a plan that has a reasonable chance of success. >> [unintelligible] are you comfortable paying for this if it is not paid for? have you talked to anybody in the white house about strategy, planning? getting the legislation moving? >> iÑi do not bring bills to the floor. i do not design a legislative strategy. no one has talked to meçó about kt. but i believeçó a spending bill that supports our troops in the field is vital and i will be there to support it. >> [unintelligible] >> merry christmas. >> it never stops, does it? >> never stops. >> just when i thought you were on vacation. or had a new job. [laughter] all right. yes, sir. >> a major factor in your decision was irresponsible spending from people who could not afford when the bills came due. is raising the federal debt ceiling to $12.4ÑzÑitrillion basically the same thing in your mind? ñror do yo