chairman, welcome to admiral olson and general petraeus. and thank you, very much, for your leadership and distinguished service to our country and also thanks to the men and women that you lead and also their families for the support that they give our troops. we are really grateful. general petraeus, afghan forces are taking an important part in operations. many times lead and even in making up the bulk of forces involved. again soldiers and police force, must not only expand greatly in a short amount of time, but, they must be trained to a higher standard in order to -- for them to gain the trust and confidence of the people. i believe well trained and properly sized afghanistan national army and police forces are a prerequisite to america leaving afghanistan. my question to you, general, what are the most difficult obstacles to successfully building the afghan national army and police forces and how are we coping with these obstacles? >> senator, you are exactly right. this is a critical element, component of the overall strategy. among

what did petraeus do? i agree that the increase in troops was almost a sideshow in terms of the importance of events. i think the single most important thing was the change in american attitude in the surge. he sought a new modesty and american goals, quietly downsized. remember the united states went into iraq with the fantasy that we could go into one of the worlds oldest cultures, change at the point of a gun and leave in six months. the original u.s. plan was to be done with 30,000 troops in september 03. petraeus for really the quietly abandoned that fantasy of the book, what were trying to do here is get out of here with our shirts on our backs and leave behind a country that hopefully a stable with lots of democratic, but don't expect much more than not. i remember joking at the time that they should drop the name of kim victory for their headquarters and change it to camp accommodation. like many of my proposals, it was not accepted. the humility also was significant. i was recently at a central co

with regard to the training of the afghan military and police, general petraeus, your second tour, i guess, in iraq was to come back and train that. you spent, i guess, a year or so training a force -- and i'm sure you developed some ideas about how that all to be done. it seems to me that of if you've got a local defense force that's willing to defend their community against taliban or al-qaeda, perfect training -- if it's going to delay dramatically the ability of those people to be effective is a danger. and i recall the al anbar model where we quickly got sunni tribal leaders to empower their local young men to turn on al-qaeda. that was effective. i guess, my question is, i see there's some tension in the -- the state department or other people within the military about how -- how trained in kabul or in -- i'm talking in theory here -- how much tfaining by the central government before they can be allowed to defend their home territories. and with a little salary and support of a good tribal leader or mayor or community leader, much good can be done. where are we? are we demandi

what did petraeus do? i agree that the increase in troops was almost a side show in terms of the importance of defense. i think the single most important thing was a change in american attitude in the search. you saw new modesty in american goals quietly downsized. remember the united states wanted to iraq with a fantasy that we could go into one of the world's oldest, change appointed a gun and leave in six months. the original plan was to be done 30,000 troops by september 03. petraeus formerly but quietly abandoned that fantasy and said look what we are trying to do here is get out of here with our short on our backs and leave behind a country that hopefully is stable with democratic but don't expect much more than that. i remember joking at the time that they should drop the name of the camp victory for their headquarters and change it to the camp of accommodation. like many of my proposals it wasn't accepted. the shibley was also significant, i was conference of american officers, some american offici

last question, general petraeus. hugh indicated in the past and i think very reluctantly, that gitmo, the jail, is counterproductive to the war effort and if possible, should be closed. could you tell me why you believe that? >> it rightly or wrongly and probably wrongly, because i think that that facility, and many of you have have developsisted it, actually has conducted in an appropriate manner, but at the very least, it has a symbol attached to it, that is one that is used in our area of responsibility, against us. it in some cases is even lumped in to abu ghraib. completely different case, there's no reason to do it, but again, it has become april conic in certain -- iconic in certain respects. >> and one last very simple question. isn't it true that some of hour heals renews to turn prisoners over to us, if they believe they could work their way to gitmo? >> sir, i do not know the answer to that question. >> you've never had an ally tell you that we can't turn a prisoner hover to the americans if they're going

what i saw petraeus do is get several echelons down.ey would say, oh, yeah, petraeus spent several hours with me driving around in my humvee. he also had a political comisar to make sure they were not only talking a good game, but were executing a good game. there were some that talked a good game but seemed reflectionively -- reflexivel to operate in an old are fashion. by the time petraeus took over, they had a seasonned force behind them. they had tried it the hard way and were willing to listen and had enough knowledge of the streets to understand when something made more sense. i think this made a huge difference to understand what was being said to them in a way that never made sense to sanchez or to casey. i remember at the time one of petraeus' advisors saying to me, i said who do you listen to when you are out? he said i listen to the company commander. i said, what are you feeling out here? he said, when those guys started saying to me in may and june of 2007 that things are changing, he said that's when i really started think

the other point is general petraeus has said the fact that there's no israeli and palestinian agreemente, two states, means that it makes it more difficult for the united states in some of its relations with its arab neighbors >> i totally reject the notion that somehow our strategies and behavior kind of threaten american youngsters in the region. >> rose: you obviously read what general petraeus said. >> i don't know what exactly happened. i don't want to relate it to general petraeus but i reject the notion that somehow these are the policies and attitudes and as i mentioned, we are the party who wants to enter into direct negotiations or to put an end to it. that we somehow indirectly with americans... >> but you don't reject the ideas that the iranians use it everyday and support... they support hamas and hezbollah in part because of it. >> iranians are trying to work against us and against you. it's a vision of ahmadinejad expressed just a week ago in damascus to see a middle east free of zionists. that's not the point. the point i would make is not that america is hated because i

i also want to mention what general petraeus has said. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield an additional 30 seconds to mr. dent. mr. dent: and our very fine commander david petraeus, i melt with him in florida he said, quote, on january 5, it was in canned ha -- canned harr that 9/11 attacks were planned, it is important to recall the seriousness of the mission and why it is that we are in afghanistan in the first place and why we are still there after years and years of hard work and sacrifice have passed. again, i strongly urge we defeat this resolution. we owe it to our troops who are watching this debate as we speak. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. kucinich: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from georgia, mr. lewis for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia, mr. lewis, is recognized. for three minutes. mr. lewis: madam speaker, i want to thank my friend and colleague from ohio for bringing this resolution before us tod

general petraeus and the military venture in iraq. two questions, why do you use the word adventure and why is this important for the u.s.? >> because this was an adventure in the sense that it was a reckless, unnecessary war. war. i think i think invading iraq was probably the biggest mistake in american policy. one thing americans do not understand is that this thing is far from over. even if people american troops out, we will be involved in this situation even up to 30 years more. we will have american troops fighting and dying for some time to come. cohost: we keep hearing about a pullout. you talk about years to come. guest: i am an obama fan. but when he talks about getting the combat troops out, that worries me. with the means to the american people is that american troops will not be dying after november. everybody in the military carries a weapon and is prepared to fight. the soldiers we have thereafter august of this year will be more vulnerable than the big combat units. there will be advisers to iraqi units. the world be

general petraeus, iran's actions and lack of willingness to comply with u.n.rding their nuclear program, continues to undermine security in the region i believe that while stronger sanctions against iran are not only essential, but it is critically important that they be enforced. the president has rightly kept a military option to take against nuclear facilities in iran on the table, should they be used for production of nuclear weapons in violation of u.n. resolutions. i also believe that the possibility of a blockade or quarantine of iran's oil exports and refined petroleum product imports should also be on a list of possible options for action. can you comment on what actions you think might be successful in terms of sanctions against iran should they continue to violate u.n. resolutions relative to the nuclear program, but also as to whether we should keep those other options on the table? >> first of all, as you noted, the president has explicitly stated that he is not taken the military option off of the table. as you noted in your statement earlier, we

we do not want to overstretch as general petraeus said. we move, and we want t.we've cleared an area, we want to hold an area. we want to consolidate opposition. build area. restore the confidence of the people, and then move on. >> rose: how do you measure india's interest in afghanistan? >> they have relations. obviously, their interests cannot be the same as ours because we share a border. they do not share a border. we have been impacted. they have not been impacted to that extent because even today, we have three million refugees living in pakistan. afghanistan is a land-locked country. the bulk of their trade is carried through pakistan. practically our economies are one. culturally, linguistically ethnically, there are commonalities, which afghanistan shares more with pakistan than india. >> rose: drone strikes on the afghan-pakistan border, including north wazirstan, are seriously disrupting al qaeda. that from the american c.i.a. director. how do you see it? what is your appriseal of al qaeda's disruption? >> he's correct. they've seriously disrupted the

general david petraeus announced the change today at a u.s.earing. in january, we asked general petraeus about the policy, and why so many soldiers were saying it was not working. he told us it was a personal concern of his, and this is what he told senator lindsey graham today at the committee hearing -- >> the secretary of defense has approved, in a sense, a u.s. caveat, if you will, that goes along with our transitioning of authority of u.s. forces to nato control, and it includes up to 14 days for interrogation, for analysis, and then in some cases, for those who need longer detention, that is also available as well. >> well, i want to thank you for leading that charge, because i think our war fighters will appreciate that, particularly the marines down south. and has that been well received by the force? >> it has, sir. and, again, as you know, if you want to live your values, you have to set conditions in which our troopers can do just that. >> well, thank you. thank you, yes. i'm glad you've been given some relief, because the old rule

that too. >> thank you, general petraeus, for that continuing effort in oversight. it's very important to this committee. i want to especially thank senator mccaskill for her special efforts in this regard. they're very, very important to the citizenry of our country. senator brown? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to first thank you for your warm welcome and i appreciate your recognition of my service. and just to correct the record a little bit, generals and admiral, i started out as an enlisted man and was qualified as an infantry officer at ft. benning and now i'm a quarter master and i have some knowledge that i don't think an average torn knows being a jag. one of the things senator gramm was commenting on because when i hear from the guardsmen serving throughout massachusetts they are confused how they treat folks how they're captured. i also want to kind of go along the same vein, what rights are they given and do we send them to afghanistan? do we keep them where they're captured? do we bring them to u.s. soil? do we get them to gitmo? i know i'm new here

petraeus pressured maliki to throw out this renewed de-baathification commission.what we should extract however it is a sign of influence and political cynicism that it's back now at this point in time and we do have to recognize to borrow the phrase that we are no longer necessarily the strong course the people want to ally themselves with because whether they like america, whether they like what we say diplomatically or not it seems increasingly people are going to make accommodation with the forces that might replace america after the eventual u.s. military withdrawal. i do want to see a couple of words about the shiite. i worry about iranian influence and have been writing about it since my first trip to southern iraq in 2003 when i was still inside the coalition provisional authority. my concerns were dismissed them and i've read about it as soon as i got out of government in 2004. i don't think anyone can accuse me of not being suspicious about why iranian intentions. that said it's wrong to secede iranian influence only with shia. and here i do want to point

we can't think that petraeus did it all. he was the commander at the top. john was the multinational division. baghdad, abc for maneuver. and he was the man who made this happen, going around to every given a day after day, working hand in glove with the iraqis in the baghdad operational command and be in the example of a mentor. he is now in charge of the 101st airborne division and he's headed to afghanistan. and i'm sure he's going to apply many of the practices that he learned and did so while there in a very different environment. and finally i'd like to do sympathize again what i've been saying and what i think is going to apply for the next panel. i'm very eager to hear them that we must have a small coin model in mind. i call a big coin and small point but for those who are really into the details, support to counterinsurgency is really what we've been doing. otherwise known as foreign internal defense, we should not be out there fighting these wars are the ones in charge. we should be supporting the host nation government enforces. thank you. >> ma

we just saw general petraeus. a little bit unusual i think public airing from a military leader to kind of tie the lack of progress, i think he said, it has an enormous effect is the quote on the larger region. what is he saying? what's he getting at? >> he's said what everybody who has served in the u.s. military or served in iraq or afghanistan has noted. which is that everybody in afghanistan, everybody in iraq, everybody in any area that the united states is operating in actually cares about palestinians as much as americans care about israelis. we don't have to say it's right or wrong. we care about israelis for a host of historical and religious reasons. and they do as well. the problem is, of course, that every time there's a conflict between the palestinians and the israelis, it has spillover effect. it has spillover effects everywhere. it's not a pan see a. solving the arab-israeli conflict won't make all of our problems go away in the middle east. it increases our leverage and political capital to addres

as general petraeus has warned, and i quote, i was in kandahar, it was in kandahar that the 9/11 attacks were planned. it was in the training camps in eastern afghanistan where the initial preparation of the attackers was carried out before they went to hamburg and flight schools in the u.s. it is important to recall the seriousness of the mission and why it is that we are in afghanistan in the first place and why we are still there after years and years of hard work and sacrifice that have passed, end quote. one of the principled reasons we have been spared the repeat of those attacks is that u.s. forces quickly toppled the taliban regime that was protecting the terrorists and drove it and its al qaeda allies out of their safety zone and into the remote mountains. years of constant u.s. military pressure have forced them to turn their attention from planning more attacks against our homeland to fighting for their own survival. to leave afghanistan now would pave the way for the re-establishment of a vast and secure base from which al qaeda and other deadly enemies could strike americans

we can't think that petraeus did it all. he was the commander at the top. john was the multinational division, baghdad, a d.c. for maneuver. and he was the man who made this happen. going around to every unit day after day, working hand in glove with the iraqi's in the baghdad operational command, and being the example and mentor. he is now ahead in charge of the 101st airborne division, and he is headed to afghanistan. and i'm sure he's going to apply many of the practices that the learned and did so well there in a very different environment. and finally, i would like to just emphasize again what i have been saying and what i think is going to apply for the next panel. very eager to hear them, but we must have a small coin model in my. i call it big coin and small coin but those were really into the details, support to counter insurgencies is really what we have been doing. and otherwise known as foreign and to the fans. we should not be out there fighting these wars as the ones in charge. we should be supporting the host nation government enforces. thank

do have a take on that general petraeus? to whether or not the military takes a look at their contractors and whether or not we do business with the wrong people. >> i honestly don't i don't know what it takes to get somebody on the blacklist that they cannot compete for a contract and what the process is and why for example, we have done something and iran is not on that list. my apologies. >> maybe that is the reason iran does not take as seriously as they should because we talk about the character and the stick but i don't think frankly we have used to the stick very effectively with a lot on our books talking about the size of the military i had a chance to talk after i got back from afghanistan but to put this on the record, mr. chairman, the size of the army beer building so if you are over there the afghans say they wanted 400,000 we are at the 300,000 there is no indication we will have an army above 300,000 but even if we keep it, a general caldwell briefed me that will be somewhere around 5.5 billion dollars. to su

general petraeus has already admitted that al qaeda has literally no presence in afghanistan. we have to be careful about branding al qaeda and taliban as a single terrorist movement. al qaeda is an international organization and, yes, they're a threat to the united states. taliban is only a threat to us as long as we continue a military occupation of afghanistan. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. does the gentlewoman from florida wish to be recognized? who seeks recognition? mr. berman: could i ask the gentlelady how much time we have remaining on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio has four minutes remaining, the gentleman from california has three minutes remaining and the gentlewoman from florida has 30 secretaries remaining. -- seconds remaining. who seeks recognition? mr. kucinich: i will. i yield to the gentlelady from california, congresswoman barbara lee, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much, madam

. >> general david petraeus testified and he said that so-called 96 hour rule has now all of sun andays to 14 days, maybe even longer. >> right. >> that's how long u.s. military personnel can detain suspected insurgents or terrorists without letting them go. i know you worked hard to get that change and you were pleased. >> oh, man. let me tell you, i don't want to violate etiquette here and give you a compliment, but cnn reporting on the 96 hour rule was the best in the business. and this is a good day for service members and their families and the afghan people. the 96 hour rule was a disaster t became a camp and release program it wasn't enough time to gather evidence and determine if the insurgent was truly dangerous. this two-week period is better for the troops on the ground and protects the afghan people and can be longer if necessary. cnn's reporting did a good job exposinging how how bad the 96 hour rule was. >> abby woodrow did an outstanding job with that investigation. that one soldier who got gaut a general discharge because he had only four day, 96 hours and had to take

clash will die down temporarily, but it's going to come back because general petraeus and the pentagoncerned about the united states being perceived as israel's poodle. >> quickly, eleanor. >> once health care passes and if the congress keeps performing and passes a series of jobs bills, president obama's approval rating in the next several weeks will surpass the 50% mark and that will help his party in the fall. >>> luck with that. the federal reserve left rates unchanged this week, but i predict they will start raising rates in the third quarter by a quarter point. >> good idea? >> yes. >> arianna? >> i predict senator ted cough mn will emerge as a major leader in the senate challenging chris dodd over the details of his bill and looking for something really substantive. >> mm-hmm. president obama will choose solicitor general elena kagan to replace a supreme court justice john paul stevens. remember, you can friend us on facebook and follow us on twitter. bye-bye. the miracle of high-speed internet is changing our lives in ways we never thought possible. helping us to connect, and l

general petraeus had started that.ave petraeus would go around and say, you know, we can do the military piece, security piece. if nobody else else is improving the lives of the iraqi people, if we're not turning this around and demonstrating hope and he took it upon himself to change it. creating things that i believe along with the surge of the troops that get all attention, maybe more importantly begin to turn things around.Ñt that ability to see outside your normal paradigm or your normal box that you operate in. and that kind of creative thinking, that kind of open-mindedness, i think is extremely valuable and where you see the exception to the rule today especially in industries and in places where the norm is failure or mediocrity. the other part is how decisions are made. you know, we now work on training leaders how to make decisions. how to take that analytical process and to work it into the ability to arrive at the right decision. to find the problem. get it done. there are three kinds of decision-makers i

happy that we were in a position -- they had been dealing with the sunni insurgency, so, general petraeus was dealing with that insurgency with new tactics in baghdad and the surrounding areas and the province, where al qaeda had made progress, he was dealing with this... with the efforts they made. and we were a different area, at basra, and we had a local insurgency and some of it was inspired by iran, and, we wanted to set the conditions in which the iraqis would have more control and that is why we left basra palace in the autumn of 2007 and why we made sure that we were training enough iraqi troops so the control of law and order in basra would gradually move to the iraqis. >> one more focus on july, 2007. in your discussions and contacts with prime minister maliki, what did he ask for, in terms of our continuing presence, generally, in iraq and, in particular, in basra and the southeast, and, was this something you felt you could do in terms of what he wanted you to do. >> well, i think having become prime minister of iraq, he was quite legitimately and understandably wanting to ass

petraeus pressured maliki to throw out this renewed de-baathification commission. what we should extract however it is a sign of influence and political cynicism that it's back now at this point in time and we do have to recognize to borrow the phrase that we are no longer necessarily the strong course the people want to ally themselves with because whether they like america, whether they like what we say diplomatically or not it seems increasingly people are going to make accommodation with the forces that might replace america after the eventual u.s. military withdrawal. i do want to see a couple of words about the shiite. i worry about iranian influence and have been writing about it since my first trip to southern iraq in 2003 when i was still inside the coalition provisional authority. my concerns were dismissed them and i've read about it as soon as i got out of government in 2004. i don't think anyone can accuse me of not being suspicious about why iranian intentions. that said it's wrong to secede iranian influence only with shia. and here i do want to poin

this offensive is what general david petraeus, the commander of the united states central command, has described as the initial salvo in a 12 to 18-month campaign to defeat the taliban. now, i have had and i continue to have, mr. speaker, disagreements with policies of president obama, but i have said privately and i said publicly and i reiterate here today that in the case of afghanistan president obama has demonstrated great responsibility and a sense of the national security interest of the united states. he deserves our support. just as our military is making tangible progress like the offensive demonstrates, just as this is occurring, many of our colleagues in the majority party now feel that it is time to withdraw from afghanistan. the resolution we are set to debate today would require the president to withdraw our troops in 30 days. i believe that that would be precipitous. i believe that precipitously withdrawing our troops would be reckless. i believe it would allow the taliban to regain control of afghanistan and thereby provide criminal groups such as al qaeda with carte bl

general petraeus said, we got to show that we are in this. that we are going to provide sustained substantial commitment. make no mistake about it, mr. speaker, the troops and their families are watching this debate today to see what we shall do here in congress. they are looking for who will support them and who will not. we must defeat this resolution and the taliban and the al qaeda and support our military. last saturday, march 6, was the anniversary, the 174th anniversary of a battle at the alamo where those people walked across that line rather than give in to the enemy and they -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i thank the lady. they were led by a 27-year-old individual from south carolina by way of alabama. he said at the alamo, i shall never surrender or retreat. and they did not surrender or retreat because war was hard then. and it cost them all their lives. but victory was attained later. and freedom was obtained. war is hard. it is always hard. and we shall not give in. we shall not you surrender or r

afghanistan led by major general bob livingston i know we must trust our military leaders, led by general petraeus and general mcchrystal. these leaders will fight for victory to protect american families by defeating terrorists overseas. even liberal "newsweek," highlights the surge in the march 8 edition with the subtile "all signs point america's way." though the taliban is entrenched in the province, its grip is slipping in the rest of afghanistan. this undercuts the common believe that america is doom to fail. the military situation and politics all favor obama's counterinsurgency strategy. if the taliban can't gain populous support it can't win. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for one minute. ms. slaughter: mr. spea

and we should remember, madam speaker, that even general petraeus said we should never forget that afghanistan has been known as the graveyard of empires. our constitution does not give us the power or the right to run another country. and that's what we've been doing. it should have come as no surprise, madam speaker, that president karzai of afghanistan told abs recently that the -- abc news recently that the u.s. needs to stay there 10 or 20 years. he needs our money and he wants to stay in power. but listen to what columnist george will has said. he has changed his position and written about afghanistan that the budget will not support an expansion there, the military, quote, will be hard pressed to execute it and america's patience will not be commensurate with afghanistan's limitless demands. this will not end well. those were not my words. those are the words of george will. a very small but very powerful neoconservatives who are not conservative at all have almost controlled u.s. foreign policy for years. they are supported by very large u.s. companies who benefit from war and the bill

and if you don't believe that you can listen to general petraeus who said a year ago that al qaeda isn't in afghanistan anymore. i have more good news about iraq. the news is we won. we won the war in iraq years and years ago facing the fourth largest army in the entire world. we swept through iraq and we got the sdamsdam out. we won and now -- saddam hussein out. we won and now we can go home. we should have left a long time ago. what's happening in afghanistan and iraq is not a war. it's a foreign occupation. you can read the constitution from beginning to end and you find nothing in the constitution that permits a foreign occupation, much less one that goes on for almost a decade. with you simply can't afford these wars anymore, both in the price of money and in the price of blood. i'd like to call your attention to a report in "the new england journal of medicine" dated january 31, 2008. this report says that 15% of all the troops that serve in iraq return with permanent brain damage. that's right, permanent brain damage. here's some of the symptoms described. a loss of consciousness

general petraeus said, we got to show that we are in this. that we are going to provide sustained substantial commitment. make no mistake about it, mr. speaker, the troops and their families are watching this debate today to see what we shall do here in congress. they are looking for who will support them and who will not. we must defeat this resolution and the taliban and the al qaeda and support our military. last saturday, march 6, was the anniversary, the 174th anniversary of a battle at the alamo where those people walked across that line rather than give in to the enemy and they -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i thank the lady. they were led by a 27-year-old individual from south carolina by way of alabama. he said at the alamo, i shall never surrender or retreat. and they did not surrender or retreat because war was hard then. and it cost them all their lives. but victory was attained later. and freedom was obtained. war is hard. it is always hard. and we shall not give in. we shall not you surrender or r

i asked them something yesterday, they didn't have an answer that i asked general petraeus this morning, didn't have an answer. and it's this. do we own any road in afghanistan's be? do we own 20 clobbers? to we own 5 kilometers? do we say we have persistent coverage of any road at all, any certain amount when we have isr, whether it is man or unmanned, watching that road? . .@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n extreme peril of operating. especially in the east and the extreme falloffs on either side. twice as large country from iraq. >> but less road than iraq? less asrs, less msrs. only one quart of the ring road got it covered? >> obviously less paved road. i couldn't give you a answer how much we control day-to-day, sir. >> thank you, mr. chair. >> the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from maryland, miss tsongas. >> massachusetts. >> massachusetts my apologize. >> i know general fuller is from massachusetts as well and we're proud of it. first i'd like to thank all of our witnesses for being here. i appreciate all the time and effort you've not only put into this hearing but that you put

a fact that has now also been confirmed, i understand, by general petraeus.come the second largest insurgent group in afghanistan today has its main bases across the border in iran. these diverse groups with their differing goals of strategies share a common characteristic. they are trained and equipped above all for warfare fought from within the civilian population. in conflicts in lebanon, iraq, and in towns and villages in southern afghanistan, the civilian population come are routinely exploited in deliberate and fragrant violation of international laws and reasonable norms of civilized behavior. and in gaza last year, during operation cast led, civilians became a strategic weapon in the hands of hamas, were deliberately putting their own people's lives on the line, those people that they proclaimed they were in place to protect. they use the noncombat and population of gaza as human shields, relying on the israeli military's adherence to international law and its own moral codes to protect them from harm. hamas, of course, deployed suicide attackers, in

general david petraeus says a controversial 96-hour rule is changing in afghanistan. the policy gave troops four days to question suspected insurgents before they were required to release them or hand them over to the afghan government. petraeus told a senate committee troops will now have up to 14 days to question suspects. there was a big concern four days simply wasn't enough time to collect evidence to keep suspects behind bars. >>> u.s. attorney general eric holder doubts those rules will ever apply to the world's most wanted terrorist. testifying before congress tuesday, holder predicted it's very unlikely osama bin laden would ever be captured and face trial, speculating he more probably would be killed by u.s. troops or his own people. bin laden is wanted in connection with the august 1998 deadly bombings of two u.s. embassies in africa. >>> a shift in funds is in the works for the bush administration's highly praised plan to secure the country's southern border and keep illegal immigrants from entering the u.s. at issue, the so-called virtual wall technology.

if we're too easy, petraeus says it threatens our troops.the knife's edge. >> that's why we'll stay on top of this story. john will be back right at the top of the hour, "john king, usa." he's got a big guest at the top of the hour. >> treasury secretary, tim geithner, and a fascinating conversation we'll have about the economy, about the china challenge, many other issues. >> right at the top of the hour, "john king, usa." thank you. >>> jack cafferty camming up next with the "cafferty file." >>> and then terrorists plotting suicide attacks on oil facilities. we have details of a mass arrest. >>> also, disturbing threats against u.s. lawmakers because of their vote for health care reform. the house democratic whip, james clyburn, is among those who have been targeted. someone faxed a picture of a noose to his office. he's here to talk about it. >>> and the raw numbers on your favorite restaurant foods. they'll soon be staring you in the face, thanks to health care reform. key lime pie, pineapple upside down cake, raspberry cheesecake... ...

general david petraeus announced the change at a u.s.ttee and we asked him about the policy and why so many soldiers were saying it wasn't working. he told us it was a personal concern of his and this is what he told senator lindsay graham at the committee hearing. >> the secretary of defense has approv approved, in a sense, a u.s. caveat, if you will, that goes along with our transitioning of authority of u.s. forces to nato control and it includes up to 14 days for interrogation, for analysis and then in some cases for those who need longer detention, that is also available as well. >> well, i want to thank you for leading that charge because i think our war fighters will appreciate that, particularly the marines down south and has that been well received by the force? >> it has, sir. again, if you know, if you want to live your values you have to set conditions in which our troopers can do just that. >> well, thank you. yes. i'm glad that you've been given some relief because the old rule just didn't make a whole lot of sense, and i t

today general david petraeus was questioned whether the policy was going to be changed.n thewhich gives soldiers up weeks or more in some cases to detain suspects in afghanistan. we're told all u.s. troops will follow the new 14-day rule. anderson, a pentagon spokesman said he does not anticipate most suspects being held for the full 14 days. he says the new rule will also help secure information from high-valued targets which are the biggest threat to u.s. troops. anderson? >> thanks for the original reporting and the update. thanks. we are following other stories tonight. candy crowley? >> eric holder said osama bin laen will never face trial in the united states. they argued it's too dangerous to putter ror suspects on trial in civilian courts. holder's reaction? bin laden will not be captured alive. >> we will be reading miranda rights to a corpse. that's a reality. >> the federal reserve is sticking with its pledge to hold rates at record lows for an extended period. it left its key interest rate near 0%. and new proof that we are born to dance. researchers at the u

more recently, a general petraeus made a counter banning statement in which he said we have plans for everything and we can carry out those plans. that i think is a much more sensible message to be sending to the ayatollah. third, syria and lebanon a subject very close to our hearts, and the book is not 100% clear to me on the outside there is a great deal of continuity but it is not meant to be a heartwarming remark because the bush and administration policy became too soft or was too soft on syria and i think the obama administration policy is as well. to put a different way this syrians have been pursuing a policy of repression, at home, interfering in iraq and within the last six months in general odierno saying passing to jihadis through into iraq and the are being of hezbollah and the keeping of the palestinian headquarters in damascus and after that killing the united states imposed a certain additional sanctions on and syria and we removed our ambassador but since then there has just been no price that syria has paid for continuing these policies. the israeli government is con

now, more recently general petraeus, most recently general petraeus made a kind of countervailing statement in which, cent come commander, in which he said, you know, we have plans for everything, and we can carry out those plans, too, when it comes to iran. that is a much more sensible message to be sending to the ayatollahs. third, syria and lebanon, a subject very close to jeff's heart as it is to lee's and to mine. the policy is not 100% clear to me, again, sitting on the outside. there is, i think, a great dual of continuity here. it isn't necessarily, that's not meant to be a heart warming remark because i think bush administration policy became too soft or was too soft on syria, and i think obama administration policy is as well. to put it a different way, the syrians have been pursuing for years now a policy of repression , vicious repression at home, interfering in iraq and we have within the last six months general odierno reminding us that interference continues, the alliance with iran and the arms of hezbollah, the keeping of the palestinian terrorist group headquarters in damas

dave petraeus would say we can do the military security piece.of nobody else improves, if we're not hearing it this around your neck demonstrating hope then took it upon himself to do it. creatively getting into things i believe with the surgeon may be more importantly began to turn things around. to see than normal paradigm or the boxy operate and that creative thinking and open mindedness i think is extremely valuable especially in industries and where enormous failure or mediocrity. the other is how decisions are made. we now work on how to make decisions and take the analytical process to work into the ability to arrive at the right decision and find the problem and get it done. there are three decision-makers in my view. first is the analytical decision maker who works hard at breaking things down to analyzing the parts and putting them back together in the right decision the second is the recognition. that leader has been around long enough and experience these days and the third is the intuitive decision maker almost having a sixth cents.

one of the interesting stretches around i think general petraeus effort in iraq, and i was listening to them about a year ago give a briefing. and for someone who spent a little time and get none, i took a look at and said i we who have applied those in the '60s and early '70s when he talked about the need to have a strong military presence, but they also need to build up and indigenously to building within a particular country to monitor its own affairs. so that's why you go after entering the army. that's what you train the police. but simultaneously you have to do build infrastructure of a civil society. roads and bridges and schools. suddenly you have that at the center of authority, but you also have a certain degree of empathy, sympathy and support from the committee. suddenly they have something they want to protect. it is about keeping all those tools available to you. i think it requires the foundation for international understanding, we need to communicate. let's be serious. up until recently, the most, one of the most difficult both in washington, one of the most favorite

this is what general petraeus learned when -- from the work he did in 2006 and 2007, that you have to have economic projects that allow people to feel they have a stake in the future, and you have to get the security and armed forces of iraq in such a way that they can be responsible for security, and that involves non-corrupt police. we have applied this in bo asara. we have learned a lesson there that are applicable to afghanistan and other countries. this new world has to have some international organization that is responsible not just for peacekeeping and not just humanitarian aid, but for stabilization and reconstruction. >> you can onlit would only offp where there is consensus, cooperation. >> the united nations was prepared to come =iin, in the end. the united nations mission led to a tragedy in baghdad and there was with a drawl that mission. the world bank mission personnel, imf had to be withdrawn. we had treasury people there working in very difficult circumstances, bravely organizing the new currency of iraq, organizing the new financial budgeting system of iraq from an

support the troops may be not the mission but i think the extraordinary things we saw in the gulf war, petraeus and the surge, with our folks were able to do is going into afghanistan, and i noted the other day it's very hard to get into these officer training programs for the young man at yale and harvard and princeton because they are oversubscribed. that is a very interesting fact >> host: if you're right that the 60's and 70's had a strange pogo in which the military was polarizing and attacking the military was done. later we got into a problem which was what i would call the patriotism where people would question each other's patriotism on both sides. when we talk about how things are going more and more partisan and tautological this is a good swing a which is we've gotten away from that. there's not quite as much questioning of the military or patriotism or whether joe biden's less patriotic than cheney even though they disagree fundamentally. discoing with you on that. i parted from some of my colleagues on the right on this that when people said we shouldn't -- you shouldn't ask quest