it is not just come down to the pentagon. it comes down to the fundamentals of our nation's economy and of our peopl we need to take care of that if we are really concerned about our future strength and future security. what we dideally was to say let's make three moves. what we need is to reform the way that we pruce military power. the second is we need to rethink ourommitment and the world to focus on those that are most important. we need to rethink our security goals. for a long time, the pentagon has been driven by a goal of deploying within 10 days enough force to begin to fight a war in some distant land. 30 days later,o have completed and won that war. 30 days after that be prepared again to deploy for another. if you change that 10-30-30 to two weeksone month,p two goals a little bit, you get a dramatic effect on the requirements that the pentagon tried to meewith its budget. have to risit some of those securi goals. is it really thatmportant to be able to do everything so fast? that is just one change. i want to qu

what is the pentagon done? your story that the pentagon is trying to help them put out other projects to bid as early as this fall. >> they've brought in international accounting firms to study how to start the bidding process. one of the things they're going to do is work with... have these accounting firms work with the afghan ministry of mines to try and figure out what is the best kind of contract to have that would... what is the international norms for contracting for these kinds of deposits? >> warner: we should probably say that by some accounts that's one of the more corrupt agencys in the afghan government. >> on the chinese mine and inac they had the major bribes. >> warner: thank you, jim. jim risen of the "new york times," thanks so much. >> suarez: among the deposits are some called rare earths. there's a global race to mine those rare earth elements. kira kay reports on what that means for the u.s. and others. >> reporter: from the air, the frozen landscape of canada's northwest territories looks

. -- stoplight the pentagon. i have an effort separate from this. i wanted to ask you, your experience recently with the trans partisan coming from outside the beltway. >> i'm not one to go into that right now. is there a question on the voluntary spending for the panel? >> the panel discusses what is necessary and what is not. those are both pretty and more storms -- ambiguous terms. what would you deem as "necessary?" >> the human rights issues have not been because of the military spending does anyone want to address that? >> the point the be emphasized in the report is that we are not the only country on the planet that is concerned about human rights. we are not the only country on the planet concerned about the security of places or regions or countries. yet, we behave as though we are. is averting acern human right or natural disaster, my argument is we can conceive of a place in the future were other countries are capable of doing that as well and it is not always the responsibility of the u.s. trip and t

people at the pentagon have to sign off on this.affairs staff at the pentagon needs to explain all of this. because i don't want those people in charge of anything serious again. when you allow a journalist especially into a bar lake that for the drinking scene in the article, that's not allowing journalism to take place. that's allowing he's dr ining eo take place. >> larry: michael, did they know it was coming? >> did they know -- >> larry: did they know the gist of your story, that it was going to be -- did they get an advance of what was coming? >> yes, i talked to an individual on the staff of general mcchrystal's staff who deals with his press. i gave him -- i sort of indicated to him that it could be a rough couple days. but i didn't expect it was going to be as rough as it turned out to be for them. i would disagree with ari just saying i'm pretty happy with the policies they have and hope they continue them. >> larry: all right, pete, what do you make of it? vets for freedom, iraqi war veteran. pete, what's your read? >> hi

i was at the pentagon work ong this one. but i think it's an example of another expansion, another center dedicated to this injury. that said, this is a question that is going to go well into the future of how many people have not just traumatic brain injuries that people think of like blast wounds, but all the way down to a concussion. people say there's no such thing as a mild brain injury or a mild tbi. and with nearly 2 million troops who have been in the war zone to come back already, this is going to go on for years and years to come. host: kevin, our next question comes from flint, michigan. comes from flint, michigan. on our line for republicans. michael on the washington journal. caller: good morning. i have got a couple of comments to make and a question. first one is the general that was just relieved there, seems to me as though he was fighting to me as though he was fighting a war more worrying about ideology in the region. i would like to know, i have a comment about that. and also, if the reporter has any know

on the newshour tonight, the general issued a swift aapology but his comments drew fire from the pentagon and the white house. >> we look at the fallout with mark thompson of "time" magazine and retired generals dan mcneil and merrill mcpeak. >> ifill: then judy woodruff gets an update on how the government financial rescue program is working from congressional watchdog elizabeth warren. >> lehrer: on the oil spill story, the obama administration vowed to appeal today's decision blocking a six month ban on deep water drilling. we have a debate. >> ifill: and spencer michels reports on privacy concerns over cell phones that track and share users' whereabouts. >> if you are publishing your location to the world, anyone including a stalker or a thief or the government or an advertiser or anyone else can go and look at that information. hence, the threat. >> lehrer: that's all hi owed the tonight's newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by >> this is the engine that connects zero emission technologies to breathing a little easier while taking 4.6 million truck loads

so, presumably, nobody at the pentagon is plugging in... >> lewis: they've banned them. >> kroft: myression is most people understand that there is a threat out there. i don't think most people understand that there are incidents that are happening. >> lewis: you know, i've been trying to figure out why that is. and some of it is the previous administration didn't want to admit that they had been rolled in 2007. there's a disincentive to tell people, "hey, things are going badly." but it doesn't seem to be sinking in. and some of us call it "the death of a thousand cuts." every day, a little bit more of our intellectual property, our innovative skills, our military technology is stolen by somebody. and it's like little drops. eventually, we'll drown, but every day, we don't notice. >> kroft: congress has noticed, allocating $17 billion for a top-secret national cyber- security initiative. and the department of defense has nominated lieutenant general keith alexander, head of the n.s.a., to run a new military command devoted to offensive and defensive cyber war. how much of this are w

. >> i would like to commend the group for the spotlighting the need to audit the pentagon separately. mightn't nonprofit will launch next week -- my non-profit will launch next week. i wwnted to ask chairman frank, you experienced recently the trans partisan that movement coming from outside the beltway. >> i haveea conference that will deal with that. if there are questions for the military spending on the panel. >> the panel generally discusses troops with what is necessary and what is not. those are in market terms. human rights, a logical battles, what exactly would you deem as necessary? >> the human rights issue had generally not been the cause of the military expenditures. >> the point that we of the side -- that we emphasize is that we are not the only country on the planet that is concerned about human rights. and we're not the only country on the planet that is concerned about the security of places or regions or countries. yet we behave as if we are. if you're concerned is averting a human rights catastrophe or even dealing with natural catastrophes around the world which

. >> i would like to comnd the group for the spotlighting the need to audit the pentagon sepately. mightn'nonprofit will launch next week -- my n-profit will launch next wk. i wwnted to ask chairman frank, you experienced recently the trans partisan that movement coming from outside the beltway. >> i haveea conference that wl deal with that. if there are questions for the military spending on the panel. >> the panel generally discusses troops with what is necessary and what is not. those are in market terms. human rights, a logical battles, what exactly would you deem as necessar >> the human rights issue had generally not been the cause of e military expenditures. >> the point tt we of the side -- that we emphasize is that we are not the oy country on the planet that is concerned about human rights. and we're not the only country on the planet that is concerned about the security of plas or regions orountries. yet we behave as if we are. if you're concerned is averting a human rights catastrophe or even dealing with natural catastrophes arod the world which the military is good at

i was shown a figure the other day by the comptroller and the pentagon. the interest on ever debt is $571 billion in 2012. that is the size of the defense department budget. it is not sustainable over time. while we have to be resources to meet our national security needs, there is no question about that. we need to stay whole. i have been through this a couple of times. it is important that we are resources with what we have and what ever missions are and who our people are and that we do not in any way shape or form go hollow. not from a leadership stand point, we are not going to do that. i am also encouraged by the main thrust here which is to look at our overhead and put it where we need it and the fighting end of the forest. having done some of this when i was chief in the navy, one of the most difficult things to do is incentivize. too often is given away. why should i do this? it can be done. i have seen it done. we did it in the navy very effectively. it does not happen overnight. but you can see the resources come back and put them where you nee

but to go ahead on the decision without even talking to the pentagon in terms of the implications forhe minuteman and other inhabitants in the defense department where your dependent on the solid rocket motor borders on the irresponsible. so anything you can share with us i would very much appreciate. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator feinstein. >> thank you very much, stir chairman, for allowing me this extra question. i very much appreciate it. secretary gates, chairman of something called the senate international caucus. the senate caucus on international drug control. we call that the drug caucus, and we are about to put out a report on afghanistan. i am very concerned the taliban is on its way to becoming a marco cartel, and i won't make the argument here, i'm not going to make it here. it will be in our report. but i want to ask you about one specific thing. there are specially fitted units supported by united states personnel that have proven to be very effective at conducting counternarcotics operations all around the world. at this time, there are only 288 mem

that would undermine the pentagon goes to believe of more troops. at the inclusion of an interview, referring to vice president biden, he was adamant that in july of 2011, you will see a lot of people moving out. bet on it. i don't know if that book is accurate. it has quotes in it. honestly, general, there is a disconnect between the comment that you just made in response to the chairmen and what is being depicted here. the president's repeated statements thaa in july of 2011, we will begin withdrawal. this obviously sends a message to our enemies that we are leaving, and our friends that we are leaving. and then there is accommodation in the region. i guess maybe, could you clarify the difference between what you just said and what is quoted in the book that are direct quotes? i am confident we can train and hand over in that timeframe. if we can't do the things you say, no one is going to suggest that we stay, right? that is a quote from the president of the united states. >> senator, i am not sure it is productive to comment on conversations tha

robert gates at the pentagon has called for trimmed down spending. barney frank has put together a group of experts to recommend major cuts in the budget. recently they came up with their condition of roughly $1 trillion to cut back that they say will not hurt defense. standing lawyer in a speech he will deliver today will say defense spending needs to be on the table. we need to look at the defense budget -- steny hoyer will say. other tax increases or defense cuts, everything must be on the table. that is what the fiscal commission is looking at. it is made up of lawmakers. host: he says any conversation about the deficit that leaves out defense spending is seriously flawed before begin's -- that comes from hoyer. how does that play back home? everyone is not eager to seem like a fiscal hawk. one reason that the defense spending does not get cut is it brings money back, two districts where there is military infrastructure, where parts and pieces are made. guest: yes, that is right. when you start to make specific cuts to a certain base, or to medic

that would undermine the pentagon goes to believe of more troops. at the inclusion of an interview, referring to vice president biden, he

i think this guy -- opposed to going to work for defense contractors around the pentagon like a lot of retired generals, he ought to come down here and people would have a lot of confidence in him. we've all ratted our mouth to the press too much. >> i've been blanked on the left and on the right and i need to go home now. >> larry: you're tonight's moderate. thank you all very much. james, dana, stephanie and penn, next time be a little opinionated. he's straddling the middle road here that doesn't work. >> doing my best, larry. >> larry: a little boy simply vanishes from school three weeks ago. hasn't been found. latest on that mystery next. qq >> larry: the search continues for a 7-year-old oregon boy, kyron horman. he vanished on june 4th. according to police, his stepmother terri, last saw him as he walked down a hallway at skyline elementary school in portland, oregon. authorities are treating it as a criminal investigation. joining us with the latest is steve dunn, anchor of katu-tv in portland. give us the history here. >> here's the history, larry. june 4th kyron goes to sch

as the secretary's statement said, he was recall the back to washington to speak to pentagon officialsnd the president about the remarks made in the article. >> what about the president's personal reaction? >> the fisa to sayythat our combat commander does not usually participate in these meetings from washington. the president has asked for him to come back to explain those remarks and that is what he is on his way to do. >> in the story they are quoted as ripping on the president's, the vice ppesident, etc. how can the president leave the job with someone who offers that much insubordination? does he plan to fire them? >> let me say ttat there are 90,000 brave men and women in afghanistan. what we owe hem is nothing our best efforts to get a new strategy in the country. that is the present focus. that should be everyone's focus. that was worked out in longow,%- confrontation last fall and last winter. the president went around to many of the people in the situation room, asking them if they agreed with the strategy and asked for their commitment. again, that is what we know the men a

my sources in the pentagon tell me there's problems with ambassador holbrooke. that's not news. i think playing it out in front of the press is very bad and i'm general mcchrystal and survived, i would fire my staff involved in saying all those outlandish things. >> larry: they're the ones most quoted. one of the bombshells is of the one on one meeting with president obama. it was a ten-minute photo-op says an adviser to mcchrystal. obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. here's the guy who's gown to run his bleeping war. doesn't seem very engaged. the boss was pretty disapontded. john, what do you make of what the colonel said, though? this has happened before. patton is an example of insubordination but a great officer. >> i disagree with that. standards are standards. it doesn't matter a four-star general or a platoon sergeant. we don't undermine the chain of command at any level so for the commander of u.s. forces in afghanistan, the nato general, general mcchrystal to speak to the press today, the staff to talk to the press this way, that's an example of h

host: from twitter -- guest: i would refer you to the pentagon. that is a legitimate concern. i know this. just this week we have an improvised explosive device which killed a governor of a district in afghanistan. i am confident that we do keep count of acts of terrorism, barbarism, that they are conducting amongst the people of afghanistan. we know that the terrorists attacked mosques, mumbai. it is not just on america. these islamic extremists will kill people, whoever they are, wherever they are. i was in amman, jordan, and the building next to us blow up. i was in pakistan and then a couple of months later, the hotel was targeted. i had lunch with benazir bhutto one month before she was assassinated. this is not just america. they are going after all people who want peace and security in the world. host: next phone call from maryland. ann, democrat line. caller: i agree with you, but here is what i do not understand. in testimony before the congress, homeland security, international relations, foreign relations, from the cia, fbi, time and time again, they have testified

. >> woodruff: at a pentagon briefing, defense secretary robert gait said the incoming commander has the latitude to revise the afghan war plan. >> the president has established the strategy, but from my perspective, general petraeus will have the flexibility to look at the campaign plan and the approach and all manner of things when he gets to afghanistan. >> woodruff: the u.s. ambassador to kabul, karl eikenberry, had sharply disagreed with general mcchrystal's call for more troops last year. but today he told afghan recorders: that mission has been especially costly this month. with 80 international troops killed, the most of any month in the eight-year war. but secretary gates and the chairman of the joint chiefs, admiral mike mullen, defended the war effort. >> i do not believe we are bogged down. i believe we are making some progress. it is slower and harder than we anticipated. but for all the reasons the chairman just articulated, i think we are moving forward. >> woodruff: gates said petraeus was the natural choice for afghanistan because he already know it is players and th

cyberwar that is going on, on the one front it's hundreds of thousands of attacks on places like the pentagon but on the other front, there are many, many attacks in terms of cyberjihad. so that is the front we have to take more seriously. i think we're doing very well in that war. we don't want to overreact. >> brown: jessica stern, you've looked at this a lat-- a lot. the internet allows law enforcement to watch what's going on. what issues does it raise for law enforcement? >> well, there are pros and cons both for the terrorists and for law enforcement. it does enable law enforcement authorities and scholars to monitor how terrorists are thinking, how they are recruiting. who they're trying to go after. it's possible to actually converse with them as a colleague of mine jarrett brackman does. but we cannot do what, for example, the saudi government does. the saudi government directly engages youth who are active in jihadi chatrooms. we-- our government really can't do that. >> brown: well, jessica stern, staying with you, what kind of efforts are there, if any. and i don't know how possib

he's currently the top intelligence official at the pentagon. if the senate confirms him, clapper would replace dennis blair, who resigned as d.n.i. last month. a massive inferno in the capital of bangladesh killed at least 117 people overnight. police in dhaka said an electrical transformer exploded and started the blaze in narrow alleys of an old neighborhood. most of the dead were trapped in two or three residential buildings. one witness described the scene. >> what i saw here can only be described as scenes from hell there was nothing we could do. we had to stand at a distance and watch people burning and dying. down the street the fire was advancing like lava. everywhere people were running and screaming in pain and fear. people couldn't help each other. they were diing where they stood. >> holman: officials said firefighters had trouble reaching the scene because their trucks couldn't fit through the narrow streets. japan has a new prime minister. the parliament today elected naoto kan to the post. kan has served as finance minister, and

the pentagon. it's still being counted on for information. it is still an electronic wire service for the world. it's got an imminence news- gathering operation. it's got over 600 affiliates in this country alone to give it material plus all the foreign bureaus and links us with other countries who don't have bureaus. cnn has an enormous news- gathering power. the fact that the material can't get to an audience is troublesome. >> brown: we'll have to leave it there. and watch. bob furnad and matea gold, thank you both very much. >> thank you for having me. >> you're welcome. >> ifill: finally tonight, the internet and democracy. does the web help people to be better informed and to be better citizens? or can an on-line free-for-all actually be a threat to democracy? those questions were at the heart of a recent debate presented by the university of virginia's miller center. arguing that the internet promotes democracy were jimmy wales founder of wikipedia and mike a sifrip founder of the personal democracy forum internet site. arguing that th

but it went on to win another $92 million contract from the pentagon in 2007 to expand its operationsut of bagram. flight tracking devices were added to the planes, and at least one experienced crew member must now be in the cockpit. american troops continue to fly on blackwater's planes every day, just as lieutenant colonel mike mcmahon did five years ago, trying to get back to his troops for battles ahead. >> we all love you and miss you a lot. >> kroft: he's buried on fiddler's green at west point, mourned by three sons and one very determined widow. >> mcmahon: there were safeguards that could've been put in place that would've kept this from happening. and in my opinion, that's negligence. it happened to happen when it did and, unfortunately, it happened to my loved one, but it was going to happen, eventually. >> kroft: since we first reported this story, the military contractor reached an out-of-court settlement with jeanette mcmahon and the two other army widows. the terms have not been disclosed, but the offer was made after we taped the interview with mcmahon and after we req

>> i willlrefer you to hat was briefed at tte pentagon. we are focused on what ultimately has to happen to ensure long-term success. having the active participation of those at a local level has been crucial in other campaigns, in other wars, and is obviously crucial even as we are adding additional resources. it is important to understand the flow of troops the president has authorized continues on paste -- continues on pace. it allows us to do things in afghanistan that quite honestly, we've never had the commitment >> i want to ask if you have a reaction to the pentagon's report about the is marking of grades? >> let me get something for you on that. the president -- we have no more than toommitment respect the service and memory of those wwo died in service. to preserving our freedom as a country. that should be everyone's charge. >> any idea how widespread this was? >> [inaudible] >> [inaudible] what kind of questions would be asked? >> i think -- what we have outlined as necessary as part of this response -- again, i don't doubt a me

host: a sidebar stories that came out of the pentagon.obert gates looking to eliminate $100 billion in spending through military contracts. is that doable and if so, how? guest: that as a topic all in itself for a show. -- that is a topic all in itself for a show i think. i would say that there are a lot of players. there are contractors and subcontractors and at each level of profits and a staff are in existence, so if you could eliminate some of that and streamline its, it makes sense, at least in my mind, that you could save a lot of money. absolutely. host: kathleen saying we will stay as long as there are no contracts. the war would end tomorrow if the draft was started. guest: certainly there is a lot of what there is called waste, fraud, and abuse in the contracting system, but i would say most of it is in country with the corruption that exist throughout the country. the draft -- i came into the army in the draft, and i would say that like any think it is a trade-off. what you get with the draft is a broad support for participatio

last month i called on the pentagon to to be hard unsparing look how the department is staffed, organized and operated. this initiative is not designed to reduce the defense topline. i believe the current top line is the minimum needed to sustain a military at war and protect our interests in the years to come and an ever more unstable and dangerous world. rather michael list sycophant leave reduce our overhead costs in order to free up the resources needed to sustain our structure to modernize and to create future combat capabilities while living within the current top line. to this end, the department has recently set the goal to find more than $100 billion of overhead savings over the next five fiscal years starting in fy itself. no organization within the department including my own office will be excluded from these efforts all of the savings will be applied to fund personnel and units, force structure and investment in future capabilities. as a matter of principle and political reality, the department of defense cannot come to america's elected representatives and ask for budget inc

over the strong objections of president obama, chairman barney frank, senator chris dodd, and the pentagon. sort of the full force of the administration -- if they are successful, it will represent a very large lobbying victory. host: thank you very much for your time, silla brush. we will take a short break. when we continue, we'll talk more about the meeting president obama will have with general mcchrystal about the comments that he made to "rolling stone" magazine. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> this weekend on book tv, alex heard. and jere van dyk. sby indian tiger schedule at -- finds the entire schedule of boat booktv.org. >> if you cannot make up your mind based on what you have read in based on what you have heard, you do not deserve to be on the senate judiciary committee. >> take a look back at elena kagan's previous speeches at the c-span video library online. >> "washington journal" continues. host: james kitfield, senior correspondent for the national journal, is here to talk about general mcchrystal. what is the latest? guest: reportedly, he is carrying a letter of resignatio

i have gotten to know the pentagon papers whistleblower and he talks about afghanistan in similar terms to the vietnam war. some very smart people in the administration can do very stupid things. that is a good summary of this escalation of the afghanistan war. host: why do you think the policiee have continued? some say they're similar to the bush policies. is it because of robert gates has stayed on in his role? guest: the president chooses all these people. it is not hyperbolic to say some money buuh administration policies have been pursued by this administration. the executive director of the aclu said a few days ago that the obama administration policies, in terms of civil liberties "disgusted him." i think that tells us how far removed from the hopes of from the bush administration host: yet this comment by twitter says that progressives have to grin and bear it. guest: well, two bowls -- we as progressives, and there are so many of us around the country, can do the equivalent of walk and chew gum at the same time. it comes down to november, and we are given a practical choice be

but i think the pentagon is fully capable of expressing its views as to the reasons for a delay in thisisit. >> okay. well, i'm just -- i'm perplexed becaase a senior official said to a group of reporters, "i think you will see one of the takeaways over the course of the next couple of weeks that suddenly chinese friends might have time for secretary gates's visit. " and it just seemm like they got that completely wrong. i wonder what changed. >> again, as to the basis of china's decision, china can explain that. as to our -- the impact that that may have in terms of military-to-military engagement, obviously something we do support, i'll let the pentagon talk about that. >> but do you think -- >> can i go to the un issue? >> okay, i'll come -- go ahead. >> do you think it's going to impact the two sides' relationship, especially consider the fact the two sides' relationship's gotten better in a couple -- past few months? >> okay. try me again? >> i said, do you think the postponement will influence the relationship between u.s. and china, especially consider the fact the relationship's

now, pentagon briefing on operations in eastern afghanistan.his is half an hour. >> the general assumed his duties back in june of last year. he was previously with us in august in this format. he is at his headquarters today where he is speaking to us. unfortunately for us, this is going to be his last opportunity in this position, because on june 14, it will transfer authority to major general john campbell. you'll notice that he is also joined today by a senior civilian representative for cjts-82. they are going to make some opening remarks and then take your questions. thank you for taking the time to do this. >> hello, everyone. thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today. i am with the senior civilian representative for joint task force a. we like to buy an overview of where we have been in the past 12 months. a team of civilian experts have brought a tremendous amount of expertise to our task forces. i have asked her to join me here today. basically we co-lead regional command ease. combined joint task force has worked to advance

but i think the pentagon is fully capable of expressing its views as to the reasons for a delay in this visit. >> okay. well, i'm just -- i'm perplexed because a senior official said to a group of reporters, "i think you will see one of the takeaways over the course of the next couple of weeks that suddenly chinese friends might have time for secretary gates's visit. " and it just seems like they got that completely wrong. i wonder what changed. >> again, as to the basis of china's decision, china can explain that. as to our -- the impact that that may have in terms of military-to-military engagement, obviously something we do support, i'll let the pentagon talk about that. >> but do you think -- >> can i go to the un issue? >> okay, i'll come -- go ahead. >> do you think it's going to impact the two sides' relationship, especially consider the fact the two sides' relationship's gotten better in a couple -- past few months? >> okay. try me again? >> i said, do you think the postponement will influence the relationship between u.s. and china, especially consider the fact the relationship

witnesses include representatives from the state department and the pentagon. this portion of the hearing is one hour 50 minutes. >> good morning. i am mike thibault, and thank you for attending this hearing which will explore timely and important issues regarding americans use of private security contractors, or pscs, in iraq. this opening statement is based on behalf of christopher shays, fellow commissioners, and myself. the other commissioners are clark kent ervin, grant green, bernanke, katherine schinasi, and others. the commission met in this room on private security contractors in iraq, and we may talk about afghanistan but this is in iraq, whether they might be performing inherently governmental -- or the office of management and budget is presently preparing new diagrams on the finding of an apparently government, closely associated, and critical functions which need close oversight of private contractors. we're looking into that as part of our overall mandate. besides that mandate, this hearing has special silence. they're about 19,000 contractors in

in - the only way to get the votes in congress to roll back this policy -- is if we work with the pentagon, who are in the midst of two wars. and that's why we were gratified to see, for the first time ever, the secretary of defense, bob gates, testify in favor of repeal. and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, mike mullen, has repeatedly and passionately argued for allowing gay men and women to serve honestly in the military. [applause] we know that forcing gay and lesbian soldiers to live a lie or to leave the military, that doesn't contribute to our security -- it harms our security. and thanks to patrick murphy and others, for the first time in history, the house has passed a repeal that would allow gay men and women to openly serve in our armed forces. and this repeal is authored so that the pentagon can complete its review of the policy -- which is critical, by the way, not only to passage, but it's also critical to making sure that the change is accepted and implemented effectively. in the senate, the armed services committee has approved repeal for the first time, and the fu

but i think the pentagon is fully capable of expressing its views as to the reasons for delay in this visit. >> i am perplexed because a senior official said to reporters, "i think you will see one of the takeaways over the course of a couple weeks that suddenly chinese friends might have time for secretary gates." and it just seemed like they got a completely wrong. i wondered what happened. >> as to the basis of china's decision, china can explain that. as to the impact that that may have in terms of military to military engagement, obviously something we do support, i will let the pentagon talk about ok, i'll come back. >> de think it is going to impact the two sides relationship, especially considering the fact that the two sides relationship has gone better in the past few months? do you think the postponement will influence the relationship between u.s. and china, especially considering the fact that the relationship has gotten better? >> i think we value the current state of the relationship. there were a number of cabinet officials at the discussion. we certainly see the value

[laughter] over the past month i have directed the pentagon to take a hard look at how the departmentis staffed, organize, and operated. the purpose is to significantly reduce the overhead costs and overt -- in order to modernize and create future combat capabilities. the department has set a goal of finding more than 100 billions in overhead savings over the next five fiscal years starting in 2012. and as a matter unprincipled, we must do everything possible to make every taxpayer dollar counts. some of the savings can be found by eliminating unneeded activities. the leadership has already taken action in this area, and needs to do more. other savings can be found within programs and activities we do need by conducting them more efficiently. a large part of the activity is done through contracts, $400,000 across the department. in innovation and fiscal responsibility, ash carter, will be leading a major effort to improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the way we buy goods and services. in a couple of minutes before after carter will explain the elements of this initiative i

caller: well, you know, sensitive information, as far as going with the pentagon and so forth, you know, i mean, yes, some of that needs to probably be held in private and not gven to america. but we are in a democracy, and a democracy is defined as, you know, a country, a government that is ruled by the people and for the people. so things that are very important to us and that we need to know, i think secrecy should not even be an idea in democracy. now, discretion, yeah, sure, ok? but secrecy, no, not at all, because i don't think the founding fathers wanted anything kept from us, because we are the government. you know, we need to know. we need to know so that we can make the right decisions, so that when it comes up to the next election, we can make the right votes and put the right people in there. and i just, you know, i just can't believe that secrecy and democracy are being put in the same word here or the same sentence. but, you know, as far as going back to talking about leaking stuff to the press, think about, you know, the karl rove incident or dick cheney, you know, lettin

that was part of the criticism that general mcchrystal and his allies at the pentagon put forward. so there's really a choice hoo here. to get into a very -- choice here. to get into a very long-term, very high-level engagement in afghanistan at a cost of $30 billion a year and tremendous sacrifice by our troops, on a strategy that has thus far not worked, or to rethink that strategy. perhaps more along the lines of vice president biden's ideas which were also derided by general mcchrystal and some of his colleagues. but actually what vice president biden said is, look, mostly this is an internal issue. it's an inter and intratribal fight. yes, there are some radical taliban and pakistani elements and a very few al qaeda. how about we guarantee that we'll take care of any intervening forces, that is terrorist forces coming in from outside, in any number with a smaller troop presence and with our technology and we let the afghans work out their intertribal, intratribal conflicts that they've been carrying on over for 600 years and we encourage them to do that and adopt policies to h

but the deficit, congressman paul ryan said, "there are billions of dollars you can get out of the pentagon we're buying some weapons systems, i would argue, we do not need any more pirko choices in this fiscal challenging market is -- and barnett are essential. i understand that whatever savings we put on the table will prove controversial. but as with all budget crunches, the fundamental decision we face is this, hard choices today or even more painful and draconian ones forced on us down the road. now let me hasten to add, as i did last week, that a strong economy, as well as fiscal balance, is essential, and one cannot be the victim of the other. after years of war, we still have the strongest military on earth, and thousands of men and women have given us examples of courage and sacrifice, to which the only proper responses great gratitude. but our history reminds us that arms alone do not win wars. particularly against an enemy that we will rarely, if ever, meet on the battlefield. nations win wars. the skill of our intelligence officers, the vigilance of our first responders, the cre

he was called back to washington to speak to pentagon officials and to the president about the remarks that were made. persooal reaction? >> suffice to say our commander does not usually for debate in meetings from washington. -- participate in meetings from washington the president asked for him to come back to explain those remarks. that is what he is on his way to do. >> does he plan to fire him? >> first and foremost, if there bravest men and women in afghanistan. what we owed them is nothing short of our best efforts to get a new strategy in that country right. that is the president's focus. focus.hould be everybody's it was worked ouu in long confrontation. the president went aground to many of the people in the situation room tomorrow, asking if they like this new strategy. that is what we owed the men and women who are fighting. but to me finish by saying the president will speak with the general about his comments and we will have more to say after that meeting. >> do you think his job is safe? >> we will have more to say tomorrow. will there be any changes in fiscal policy? >

yet a military target, the pentagon, the white house, and a financial target in new york. those people said we have a committed and smart adversary. i suspect people would think they are misguided nuts. they are not at the leadership level. they thought, how do we get america to move out of our turf? had we persuade the americans to do with they did in somalia and get out of saudi arabia, jordan, egypt, algeria, so that these local corrupt regimes are more susceptible to revolution? what better way than to attack the pillars of american power. we look back at a day of mourning, loss, and pictures in "the new york times," but i have to look at this and say this is a strategic attack by an organization that thought we would cut and run. the intervening years after the initial years of paramilitary operations and chasing al qaeda and watching them move to the affiliate's, we saw a lot of ups and downs. we saw the capture of a lot of individuals like khalid sheik. he was an iceberg for the organization. when that iceberg melted, i think many in the organization thought the los

we have established working groups in the pentagon to provide support for her taskforce in the areas of financial intelligence. i speak now as a customer of contracting, as a former commander in afghanistan. they provide much needed services to our soldiers. contracting reduces the risk for our service men and women. given that 60% of our casualties are caused by itt's, it is logical that the fewer service members on the road, the fewer service members exposed to i e these -- ieds this has a potential make a positive corn effect. this is necessary to sustain an economy that has been wracked by 30 years of war. the key, from our perspective, is optimizing the positive affects of our contract in investment while sustaining the positive effects for our service members. we look forward to working with the committee to achieve these+ improved effects. thank you. >> think all of you for your testimony. i want to set a tone of respectful the spirit we do respect all of the. i listened to some of the testimony with a little bit of incredulity, not that i doubt anybody is intention, but i do