the country of iraq is important to the region. i think that what we want and what we're working towards is a healthy, long-term relationship with the country of iraq. that relationship will be centered on a number of issues. economic issues, political issues, cultural issues, and certainly, in terms of a way forward, it is incumbent upon the government for leadership of iraq to engage the leadership of the united states. whatever our future will be will be worked out at that level. we in the military stand ready to support whatever decision is made. whatever we do, going forward, it should be a whole government approach. we should look to establish great relationship along a number of dimensions. . >> is important for us to know that they're doing that and making sure that we make sure that the iraqis get to decide what their government is and we do not allow extra 04 says to decide what the next iraqi government will be. i am, but that the iraqis are nationalists. they want iraq to run iraq. they will love be influenced by other

as in the case of iraq. often their limits put on the numbers of diplomatic staff that may be present in a foreign country. private security firms is a necessity in order to comply with the agreements the united states government has in place with foreign governments. are rigid determination that security is an inherently governmental function would likely limit the ability of united states government to carry out its diplomatic and military effectiveness. a more effective approach is to identify best methods for contracting security forces and the best tools for maintaining adequate oversight, control, and accountability. i believe that there have been improvements in oversight within iraq. but in my opinion, not enough has been done to manage the future and to establish a framework for success. all are for a few suggestions. the first suggestion is to emphasize -- emphasize the need for following the federal acquisition regulations and to provide better guidance on how private security procurements should b

iraq. they are still there. there still rockets that have been made in iran that are being launched in iraq. they are still training the sarah gets the come out of iraq. -- the sarah gets -- rrogates that come outf iraq. >> year withdrawal will involve -- your withdrawl involves reducing assets. how are you going to be able to hold on to the assets thatou need? >> we have a very good process where every month we review our needs in afghanistan iraq, and throughout central command. we determine where asss are needed. i have a lot of influence in at process. i have a lot of confidence in how that process is working. we will have enough helicopters in iraq. we had 175,000, we're now down to 88,000, and we will get down to 50,000. we have ground cleaace teams. we have to continue to work that. but i feel confident that the system we have -- the good part is, we continue to bring more and more isr into the fce. that has made it easier for us as we work our way thrrugh this. i am not saying -- i couldrgue that i could pro

it was kind of the key strategic decision he made in the last two years on the iraq war. his national security advir intervened, a very self effacing man, very unusual for him to intervene,e said that was worked out between me and the chairman of the jointhiefs of staff. you know what wtf means, do you not? where is the president? i turn to bush in this is what he said. ok, i do not know that. wtf moment two. then, he sd i am not at those meetings, you will be happy to hear. i was just delighted. [laughter] why shod the predent bother himself? then he said got other things to do. >> ride the bike. [laughter] right out of his own uth. right out of his own mouth is an acknowledgement that he disengaged from the presidency. i think peopl to not want to deal with that. he is going out of office. he was leaving. when i interviewed him he had seven months more in the office. i pt looking around his chair to see if he had a suitcase packed. [laughter] he was out of there. i am trying to connect this to the point that there are a lot of ways to find out what really went on. this i

petraeus helped us win the war in iraq. 've got an opportunity to apply those same principles to afghanistan. to say a lighter footprint is going to help our operations there, that's exactly what those who said the surge couldn't work said in 2007. instead, we upped our footprint, committed to protecting the population. and we did it right. now john is right in that a time line completely undercuts that. so if the obama administration's going to maintain this time line, then counterinsurgency is not going to work. if they're willing to be flexible on it. the one guy who can question them on that time line is petraeus. he has that credibility. they've kicked the can down the road on that. petraeus will put his input at the end of this year. we may see that deadline pushed. if that happens, then we can create the conditions in afghanistan where an afghani government can stand up. but that will not happen with a time line. it is a much tougher problem set than iraq. we'll see. we need to learn the lessons of the iraq insurgency

he has taken himself out of the political discourse in the r iraq. %+e longer he's there, the less influential he will become. is a proud state. they have limited affinity towards iran against whom they fought in a bitter ground war from 1980 until 1928. the longer that he is in iran, the less politically influenced he becomes. host: michael on our independent line. caller: my question -- you have worked in pakistan and work with the government'. at the time, we needed the government to crack down on the talbot coming in -- on the taliban coming in. what has been the tone of dialogue with the government that rose toopower in less than democratic fashion, you could say. our relations with pakistan -- is it aimed solely at fighting pakistan -- and fighting terrorism or about autocracy and nuclear non-proliferation, guest: that is a great question. i do believe that that relationship does have to be a broad one prick it cannot only be about fighting terror. hasted be -- it has to be a broad one. it cannot be only about fighting terror, the improvement of

the year or early next year. so as we did province by province in iraq i suspect that is the way that will happen in afghanistan asell and i think however much people may debate how we got into iraq the outcome ended up at this point at least being more positive than anybody could have dreamed three years ago. >> thank you for a much. >> i'm c growing and needs to continue to be addressed. there is certainly a terrorist safe haven in somalia and in terms of stability, it is a country that is certainly if not a field state is a borderline phill state and in fact there are -- there are camps where terrorists are trained in somalia that we all need to be concerned about. so, and concerned about the fact that somalia continues to fester to use your word in a very negative way, a government that is struggling to control under assault from organizations that are terrorist based and continue to be the home for the piracy network clearly which is a challenge in that part of the world. so i am extremely concerned about that and its continued ability to continue to grow in the future. the other place where there is long ter

the real issue in iraq. the real issue in afghanistan. severe waste, billions of dollars wasted needlessly because of poor quality assurance programs, which are intended to ensure there are quality control programs which primes are supposed to implement to cover subcontractors. didn't get done enough. as a result, this serious waste occurred. second, the movement towards using local contractors understandably to build capital, to -- to improve employment, but you -- but in iraq, we don't know who those contractors are. we don't have a database. it's difficult to track. there was waste and corruption that ensued. on the transparency front, i think that if the congress wants to know who our subcontractors are, amending the far is a good way to do it. right now, the only way that -- that the contracts that chairman towns requested from d.o.d. will reveal who the subcontractors are, if the terms of the contract required it. however, if you so chose, you could amend the law to -- to require a minimal disclosure of subcontracting. i think that'

iraq. they are still training the sarah gets the come out of iraq. -- the sarah gets -- surrogates that comeut of iraq. >> year withdrawal will involve -- your withdrawl involves reducing assets. how are you going to be able to hold on to the assets that you need? >> we have a very good process where every month we review our needs in afghanistan, iraq, and throughout central command. we determine where assets are needed. i have a lot of influence in that process. i have a lot of confidence in how that process is working. we will have enough helicopters in iraq. we had 175,000, we're now down to 88,000, and we will get down to 50,000. we have ground cleaaance teams. we have to continue to work that. but i feel confident that the system we have -- the good part is, we continue to bring more and more isr into the force. that has made it easier for us as we work our way thrrugh this. i am not saying -- i could argue that i could probably use a little bit more than i have today, but i feel the risk has been negated. >> there is an e-mail scam going out purportedly from the command sergeant major

but the follow-on piece that. as you'll recall in iraqultimately, we ended up hiring on our payroll using cerp for fixed site security contracts, 103,000 iraqi -- largely iraqi men. by the way, aut 20,000 or more were shia, jt so the record understands there's a shia awakening and a sunni awakening. we do not envision doing the same thing there. there's not the prospect, even though the great mineral wealth it's found, that's not going to be exploited in substantial form, we wouldn't think, for some years. so we don't want to saddle afghanistan with a very costly program. rather, we want to enable much more local programs with the amount of cerp that the undeecretary talked about being part of that. >> you mentioned the newfound wealth of the minerals. i know on the 14th, "the new york times" reported that the -- this discovery of nearly a illion dollars in untapped mineral deposits. does this new mineral wealth have the ability to fundamentally alter the afghan economy, but does it also have the opportunity to amplify the existing proble

the theater. we are stuck in iraq. the bulk of your officers are air force personnel because they were the only deployable personnel that we had and we are now just beginning to see the fruits of the army's push to rapidly increase their contracting officer capability and some deployable capability. when you have a contract in officer turning every four to six months instead of spending a year or 18 months or two years on that job, we have a challenge. that is one of the lessons learned that we got from this operation. >> thank you both. we had a contractor that was performing well that was asked to stay on for half a month for 16 days in order to assure that there was adequate security. it is easy for people to say that if it was me, i am going to say that i might not make the decision that you can never work for the united states government again. i would say that is the performance consideration. realizing that all of these approvals are contractually required, if there was ever a case for the termination for default

i did not hear them complaining about taxpayer dollars paying for the iraq war so that the bush family could have their own little oil field in iraq. if the cut all the spending, then there will not be any revenues coming in for taxes, so i say vote rich and live poor. host: john boehner has more on the oil spill in another piece of legislation being debated, all the questionable how far will go in the house and senate. the oil spill may spur action on energy, probably not on climate. images of the gushing oil and dine pelicans and the gulf of mexico have stirred anger and aaony in washington, but are they enough to prod the senate to act on the long-delayed clean energy and climate change legislation? in the words of senator lindsey graham who worked closely with senator kerrey on the initial climate change energy legislation, he said republicans to work on the bill for months, there is "no where near the 60 votes to save the polar bear to get from the new orleans newspaper, what about the local seafood? the headline, as the local seafood supplies dwindle, restaurants are forced to ge

the topic is iraq, afghanistan, and the middle east. ambassador, you served as ambassador to iraq. this morning, the headlines are on more insurgent terrorist attacks in baghdad, coordinated attacks which killed dozens. we asked earlier on this program how our guest view the progress or lack thereof. what is your view? guest: there were today. one was the terrorist attacks+ that you mentioned -- there were two big stories today. one was a terrorist attacks hat you mentioned. -pthere was also the yin and ya. the backdrop of terrorist violence along with the unique political process. these bombings have been part of a landscape for quite some time. there are tragic. their evil. i do not think there want to affect the -- they are evil. i do not think they are going to affect the process. the process will continue. host: how do look at the administration's approach to iraq, the drawdown of troops, and there ramping up of the efforts -- the grabbing up of the efforts in the kandahar reggon. what is your view? guest: they are very much engaged in iraq. the vice-president has made numerous

at the federal and local levels, police are increasingly capable, making iraq safer for the citizens f iraq so they can participate in the democratic process, something more than 62 percent of eligible iraqi voters did just three months ago. but there's a deeper story here that goes beyond these statistics. not only are iraqi security forces better trained and equipped, but they are changing their approach to the security mission in fundamental ways -- true paradigm shifts that are unique in this region. while still developing, rule of law and democratic policing are becoming the norm, with a focus on protecting the population. counterterrorism operations are all warrant-based. and the iraqi judicial system is evolving from reliance on confessions for convictions to one that relies on hard evidence and forensic science. and we are starting the initial steps to integrate the forces of the kurdish regional governnent into the iraqi security forces. security forces have also embraced institutional training and have fully acknowledged the importance of sustainment. in the defense forces,

but the follow-on piece that. as you'll recall in iraq, ultimately, we ended up hiring on our payroll using cerp for fixed site security contracts, 103,000 iraqi -- largely iraqi men. by the way, about 20,000 or more were shia, just so the record understands there's a shia awakening and a sunni awakening. we do not envision doing the same thing there. there's not the prospect, even though the great mineral wealth it's found, that's not going to be exploited in substantial form, we wouldn't think, for some years. so we don't want to saddle afghanistan with a very costly program. rather, we want to enable much more local programs with the amount of cerp that the undersecretary talked about being part of that. >> you mentioned the newfound wealth of the minerals. i know on the 14th, "the new york times" reported that the -- this discovery of nearly a trillion dollars in untapped mineral deposits. does this new mineral wealth have the ability to fundamentally alter the afghan economy, but does it also have the opportunity to amplify the exist

retired army colonel peter mansoor was his executive officer in 2007 and 2008 during the surge in iraq. he's now professor of military history at ohio state university. kimberly kagan is the president of the institute for the study of war, a washington think tank. she was last in afghanistan in march. and greg jaffe is a military reporter for the "washington post." he's also co-author a book that profiled general petraeus: "the fourth star: four generals and the epic struggle for the future of the united states army." thank you all three for being with us. greg jaffe, to you first. remind us what general petraeus' leadership style is. >> well, you know, he's very good politically. i mean, one of the things i think he did a great job with and i think pete mansoor can talk about this in depth is establish a relationship with p.m. maliki that wasn't always a comfortable and happy relationship. but i think he was able to push maliki, along with the u.s. ambassador there, ryan rocker, to really do things that were both in the iraqis interest and in the broader u.s. interest. so that's criti

iraq is a mitropoulos compared to afghanistan. changing theearts and minds of people in iraq was a lot different. they will basically do what they need to survive. i think that is the problem. i just do not see what the actual end -- i do not think we will ever be able to leave. will we build bases there? permanent basis? the thing about afghanistan as we spend so much money over there, and if you want to raise my taxes to make sure our troops have the best equipment available, then raise them. i do not want to see another american life lost to poor technology or lack of proper equipment, but the fact that the chinese won the copper beeid, tt could have been done without the bid. afghanistan should start to pay the u.s. to help support our troops effort there. maybe the minerals would have been a good start. and if the american people knew we were not pumping so much money into this, then maybe we could stomach it a little bit more. guest: thanks for your comments. you are right on the money on a lot of what you said. regarding the basis, we h

you served as the former ambassador to iraq. and the headlines are on more insurgent attacks in baghdad. discorded attack killed dozens in baghdad. we spoke to one man about how he viewed the lack of progress in iraq. >> there were two big stories out of iraq today. the terrorist attacks that you mentioned, and the convening of the parliament to begin the process of government formation. this is the yen and the gang. the backdrop of terrorist violence, at the same time that the people of iraq did along with their unique political process. these bombings have been part of the landscape for some time. they are tragic, they are evil, but i do not believe that they will affect the political process. they will get on with their business in a unique way. >> how have you looked at the approach to the rack and a drawdown of soldiers, and the wrapping up of the efforts in canada are -- in khandahar. >> the administration is engaged in iraq. he has made numerous trips out there, and the leaders are regularly in washington. there is no ques

whenever a view we took about the iraq conflict -- whatever we took about the iraq conflict, iraq does have some chance of stability and democracy. where there is progress -- i had a meeting this morning with general petraeus. one of the reasons and that our- brave servicemen and women have fought and died in iraq was to try to make that a more stable country and a country that people who have fled it would be able to rettrn to. of course, i will look at the particular issue he raises. if we help to make their country save, they should be able to go home. -- country safe, they should be able to go home. >> could he give me his personal assurance that he will do everything in his power to support the people of cumbria >> i can certainly give the hon. gentleman that assurance. working in coverage to bring people together after this appalling tragedy. -- working in cumbria to bring people together after this appalling trageey. they have a very compassionate and caring and strong community. they have shown that in the wake of these terribbe events. we will need after question time to discu

the topic is iraq, iran, and afghanistan. the numbers are on yyur screen. we will get to calls in a moment. ambassador, you served as an ambassador to iraq. this morning, headlines are on more in certain terrorist attacks in baghdad coordinated that have killed cousins. we asked john negroponte how he viewed this earlier. what is your view? guest: there are twoobig stories. one ii the terrorist attacks. the other is the convening of the iraqi parliament today to begin the process of governnent formation. it is a yen and yenn-- it is a yin and yang. there is silence at the same time they get on with, shall we say, their unique political process. these bombings have been part of the landscape for quite some time. they are evil. i do not think they will effect the politicaa process. i think the iraqis wwll get on with business in their own unique way. host: how you look at the ramping up of the efforts in the can a heart region? what are your views? -- in the kandahar region? guest: we are very much eegaged in irrq. the vice president has made numerous trips ou

the joint staff study which was to look at reliance on contractors in iraq. i think there's efforts to put planners out to the different combatant commands to help them prepare and do the annex ws, but it's been slow. there needs to be more forceful effort at the highest levels to implement and do the things that are already on the books. there's a lot of guidance. there's work force planning guidance out there. that includes not only contractors, but military, the whole force structure of what you need to conduct your military operations. >> the slowness of activity borders on inbordination. it's frustrating from the policy and the legislation is in place. it's just the actual execution. we've got to think of strategy from our end and the white house to get this thing in gear. i want to wrap things up. we didn't really talk a lot about background screening, tracking of local personnel, which did come up during our last hearing on the trucking situation. was an important factor. witnesses came up to us after to reiterate how important it was to identify the su

at the federal and local levels, police are increasingly capable, making iraq safer for the citizens of iraq so they can participate in the democtic process, something more than 62 percent of eligible iraqi voters did just three months ago. but there's a deeper story here that goes beyond these statiscs. not only are iraqi security forces better trained and equipped, but they are changing their approach to the security mission in fundamental ways -- true paradigm shifts that are unique in this region. while still developing, rule of law and demratic policing are becoming the norm, with a focus on protecting the population. counterterrorism operations are all warrant-based. and the iraqi judicial system is evolving from reliance on confessions for convictions to one that relies on hard evidence and forensic science. and we are starting the initial steps to integrate the forces of the kurdish regional governnent into the iraqi security forces. security forces have also embraced institutional training and have fully acknowledged the importance of sustainment. in the defense forces, we ar

we talk about the different clocks that are out there when i was in iraq. you would be at the baghdad clock to see why it was going backwards, or to get it going forward. in the meantime, you were aware of other clocks, including perhaps the one up here that may be moving a little bit more rapidly. this, i think, is common to counterinsurgency efforts. they are tough and they are not quick. >> in 2004, aracoma 45th was over there. they had -- our coloma for if it was over there.+ they have the responsibility of training themselves. i weet over there. i am not sure if you were there. you certainly have people there. when i looked at the faces of these guys, they were very proud that they were taking over. -pin that sense of pride was obvious. i was there for quite awhile because the 45th had been training for a time frame. i got nothing but glowing reports. then we get reports like the one that has been referred to here that was written up yesterday "new york times" where they talk about the united states talked about it was not working. general caldwell was

they talk about, well the surge was successful in iraq. the surge, however, in iraq, we had ended up wit close to 165,000 troops. in a period of time of 18 months. now we're looking at a surge that might be about 100,000 troops, and talking about nine months. now, considering that afghanistan is about twice the si of iraq, this disparity is hard for me to describe to people why this number will work in afghanistan when it took so much more in iraq. general petraeus, any thoughts i can share with these people? >> i do, senator. thank you. first of all with respect on the timing of the actual surge in iraq, we had all of the surge forces on the ground by end of june, july i therend we actually began to draw down of the first brigade in december. we then did lengthen it out over the course of the next spring, but in this case we will actually have all of our u.s. surge forces, all of our tactical units, certainly again less the one headquarters that's not ruired until the month after august, but on the ground by the end of august. and again, t

we included the cost of the iraq war in the budget, unlike the republicans who pretenn year to year that we weren't go to go have that expense. . we have been trying to be responsible, trying to get things back on track. %% we can establish some parameters we can be -- governments, unfortunately, are are -- our colleagues on the other side of the aisle think government is always an obstacle. government is never -- can never be a solution. i don't think government is the be-all, end-all solution to the world's problems either, but what government certainly can be part of the solution. governments can help make sure that we can establish some fairness and some balance and also make sure that there's someone minding the store. that there's not unchecked industry. we have almost 60,000 barrels a day gushing out of the ocean floor right now because no one was paying attention. mr. boccieri: i think mismanagement and bad -- mr. tonko: i think mismanagement and bad government are totally unacceptable but sound investing, where you're trying to grow back the economy, creating the discipline that

serving as ambassador in five countries in the mide east includg lebanon a syria and also iraq. where we -- one of the first times i had a chance to meet him he's a dn and executive professorf the george bush school of government and pli rvice at texas a&m university. second, dr. augustus ricrd norton, professor of internationalelations in anthropology at bosn university is re with us as well. an expert onlebanon'shi community and as well hezbolh. filly, daniell pletka. she's a ve presidt of foreign and defense policy studies at the amerin enterprise instute. and is an alyst on the region'smplex politics and al a former senate foreign relas staffer. am i corrt? that's correct. okay. lcome back. we thank our witnessesnd w look forward to their insights. ani -- at thi time i would like to turn to senatororker if he has any opening comments. >> i'm far more iereste in our witnesses and thank you for being here thank yor your service, too. >> i want to thank senator corker for being wit us. 'll have oths joining us as th hearing proceeds. we'lturn to the oning stat from our witnesse

the massive drawdown of u.s. forces in iraq aims at cutting our military presence to less than 50,000 by the end of august this year, and the zero by the end of 2011, obviously next year most of the security duties currently executed by the u.s. military and dod contractors are being handed off to the department of state. state will need more security contractors, many of them with special skills, and we will explore that today. the drawdown in the security function hand off will put increased rain on our systems for planning, acquiring, overseeing contracts, and program management. and evaluating performance -- we're going to talk about a fair amount -- related to psc work. let me give you some specifics to clarify the foundations and implications of these facts. commissioner green and i accompanied by his staff experts were in iraq last month to prepare for this hearing. we met with defense, state, and usaid people involved in security issues. and we got out into the country. we visited four court operating bases, or as we al

the questions. carl talks about common sense. it was ingrained there are wmd's in iraq. t it. i agree with that. that does not mean the cia and white house did not screw up. >> there is a larger point here. once the war started to go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency by a good number of reporters, partly by bob but reporting by the "new york times" and other news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presidency, was an awful lot of mendacity. a real dislike for the press. it is almost everything we know for about the bush presidency is we know from the press. we do not note from congressional hearings. we do not know from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it from the press. i think the reporting on the bush presidency after the first six months of the war is a pretty hon. history of washington reporting. >> you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model. i am wondering what your thoughts are on what that might be. " how old are you? >> 22. >> i am 67. you figure

you had the hard core al qaeda in iraq. very strands of insurgent elements. >> in the thousands >> certainly. our policy of withdrawing in july of 2011, as i under it, we're going to begin to withdraw in july of 2011. the only thing to question is the pace of the withdrawal, is that fair? >> indeed, senator, as i described it -- i want to get you a copy of the statement i made this morning because i tried to provide a very precise description. >> july 2011 begins a process, a responsible draw down of the surge force and includes the beginning of a process of transition of some tasks to afghan officials and forces based on conditions and, again, all of this based on conditions. >> i want to make sure i do understand because you told senator kauffman it doesn't matter if we leave just a matter of how quick we leave. is that not true? >> based on conditions. given current projections. again, senator, i want you to read the statement i gave at the outset. >> as of june 2012 do you anticipate us having more or less than 50,000 am

it was given to the government of iraq. it talked about the need for air defense, and the need to develop air capability moving forward. they have submitted to us a letter saying that they're interested in purchasing f-16's. we are going through our own process. this will be evolving. >> will there be something to be there by the time u.s. combat troops complete their withdrawal? are you saying that the u.s. will not be able to meet that request at this akes years? >> they will have some air force capability. they continue to build some capability, not fighter aircraft. that will come sometime after 2011, likely do in many other countries as we sell them aircraft. >> will they be new ones? >> we are working on that, but i think they will be nil. we have to go through congress. there are many states that have to be gone through yet before we come to a final decision. >> the 50,000, but does that include troops that will be in the process of redeploying as of september 1? >> my goal is that we will be at 50,000 in side of iraq

they talk about, well the surge was successful in iraq. the surge, howeve in iraq, we had ended up with close to 165,000 troops. in a period of time of 18 months. now we're looking at a surge that might be about 100,000 troops, and talking about nine months. now, considering that afghanistan is about twice the size of iraq, this disparity is hard for me to describe to people why this number will work in afghanistan when it took so much more in iraq. general petraeus, any thoughts i can share with these people? >> i do, senator. thank you. first of all with respect on the timing of the actual surge in iraq, we had all of the surge forces on the ground by end of june, july in there and we actually began to draw down of the rst brigade in december. we then did lengthen it out over the course of the next spng, but in this case we will actually have all of our u.s. surge forces, all of our tactical units, certainly again less the one headquarters that's not requiredntil the month after august, but on the ground by the end of august. and again, t

forces across the middle east, and previously led american troops in iraq. lawmakers from both parties applauded the choice of petraeus and predicted swift confirmation. >> if there's ever been an example of somebody putting national interest ahead of personal interest , it is general david petraeus' willingness to accept a command of our forces in afghanistan. >> ifill: but some said the mcchrystal firing raised questions about overall administration war policy. >> the issue that will be raised in general petraeus' confirmation hearings is exactly what is meant by withdrawal in the middle of the 2011, whether that is-- quote-- etched in stone as the president's spokesperson, mr. gibbs, stated, or whether it will be conditions-based. obviously, we feel very strongly that it needs to be condition-based. >> ifill: mcchrystal, who has been on the job only a year, had been entrusted with crafting a counter-insurgency policy designed to reduce the u.s. footprint in afghanistan but there has been periodic friction. last fall, the president berated mcchrystal for be

cr>> what the differences in the field in iraq and can stand? i would give you two or three reasons. general petraeus no counterinsurgency strategy better than anybody. he wrote the book on it. it is a counterinsurgency strategy that has been put into effect in afghanistan. secondly, he has proven that he can successfully carried out a strategy in a different situation than afghanistan. it is still a counter insurgency strategy which depends less on force and less on so-called kinetic force than it does on winning the support of the people and protecting the people and to do that not just with security forces but by winning their support through governments, as well he is a proven enter state -- -- through governance, as well he ha. he is a proven entity. you don't want one general to leave without the next one ready to take over. >> republicans were very complimentary of the president's decision. they continue to say that the date certain for withdrawal will undermine the entire effort. the taliban will simply wait it out. >> they took that pos

the questions. carl talks about common sense. it was ingrained there are wmd's in iraq. asserted i had some clues abouit. i agree with that. that does not mean the cia and white house did not screw up. >> there is a larger point here. once the war started to go badly, i believe that the reporting on the bush presidency by a good number of reporters, partly by bob but reporting by the "new york times" and other news organizations, the reporting on the bush presidency, which was a highly secretive presidency,as an awful lot of mendacity. a real dislike for the press. it is almost everything we know for about the bush presidency is we know from the press. we do not note from congressional hearings. we do not kw from anything candid that the bush white house ever put out. we know it from the press. i think the reporting on the bush presidey after the first six months of the war is a pretty hon. history of washington reporting. >> you mentioned there needs to be an adjusted business model. i am wondering what your thoughts are on what that might be. " how old are you? >> 22.

speaker, the wars in iraq and afghanistan will burden our children and grandchildren with the debt the republicans created. the wars have cost over $1 trillion, and it's mind-boggling to hear that the minority leader wants senior citizens to pay for these wars. he wants the increase in social security retirement age for 70 for people that have at least 20 years until retirement and wants to tie it to the consumer price index. boy, i tell you. instead of the wage inflation index. and wants it only to those who need them. several years ago the republicans -- let me remind you -- they wanted to privatize social security. democrats said no. can you imagine what would have happened to seniors had their retirements been given to wall street, given wall street their greed and their irresponsibility, their lives would be shattered. so democrats say no to republican ideas to slash social security to pay for the wars in iraq and afghanistan. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the

so then he seems to have been set off also by the invasion of iraq ad now you have the air strikes inhagaman so his list of grievances and list f approved the u.s. is the long suspected openly at war with islam now is a long one and so i think that he reveled in his understanding of not only the language with the sort of american political viewpoint and in the recent statement he said jihad is now as americanas apple pie and british as afternoon tea and he's tauning this country and what is intriguing about the most recent lengthy pronouncement which was an expert in al jazeera and the full text video recently came out and it is a long talk with one of the things kind of fascinatg to see is his analysis of what the u.s. wants versus what he wants is not that different from our analysis. he says what they want is an american democratic liberal passivand civil islam and in a typical no showing o his sort of knowledge of thenemy he cites a rand report, and corporati report. so that i think is far too late to fairly the beat of your description of what the states are seeking and he's comp

when i did the second book on bush, it was about how he decided to go to war in iraq. he's standing in the oval office and the has his hands in his pocket and i just passed, how do you think history will judge this iraq war? he kind of takes his hands out and shrugs and says, history, we will not know. we will all be dead. >> and with that, we want to thank you for having us. >> i knew he was not done. i did that for effect. >> you took me seriously? >> no. we have to get you on to your warm newspaper. -- home to your warm newspaper. [laughter] the really good news is that i have the ending to the buck. the indians to the book are hard to find. -- endings to the book are hard to find. i was giving a talk in washington and the subject of your great biography, a woman in charge, hillary clinton was the other speaker. afterwards, she came up to me and said, i quote from your book all the time. i " so often, i think i should give you royalties. >> i stupidly said, no, no. i should have said, how much? she said she quotes the book -- the end of the book when you ask about hi

the hope. look at what he did in iraq. look at what he accomplished in terms of finding jobs and believing in industry. this is the guy who worked with these bureaucracies. all these minerals were discovered. i believe he had something to do with that. there is hope and we have to look to those folks who can make this change and we need to support them. it might not be the most bureaucratic way to go about doing things. there are people making it happen. i hope history gives him a place in our history books because it tells you what one man can do. host: what is your background? guest: i work on capitol hill for lynn woolsey and i spent time at west point teaching. i was a research fellow at the combating terrorism department. it was a great place. it was a pleasure and honor for me as a civilian to be in that environment you cannot help but fall in love with the place and fall in love with cadets who are great and crazy and the ways you want them to be. they made this choice when they were 17 or 18 years old of not going o

the field manual for it. manual for it. after heffs a commander in iraq and before he went back to become the overall commander of the wwr. i think mcchrystal is a guy wwo is a public face, a diplomat. he has been a centcom commander all over the middle east. his job was to hand shake the world leaders in the country and win support in the mission not just in afghanistan, but across the region, getting countries to allow more covert military operations, which lots of people think is kind of the wave of the future in hunting and finding terrorists, more than a big counter insurgency war like we had in iraq, like we're having in afghanistan. training and deployment, training is always being modified. there are these huge mock, you see these huge centers out west and the east as well where troops go, to where it looks like you're right in the middle of the middle east right down to the last detail. i've been in some of them where they have even high definition video of your walking in and they have the steps leading into each room are a little cricketty like

about the need to take on principal responsibility for their country's security. we saw in iraq the importance of setting dates as a way of spurring action. general petraeus has said that he agrees with the president's policy, setting that july 2011 date, and indeed he told me if he ceases to agree that he would so advise his commander in chief which of course he has a responsibility to do as a military commander. >> ifill: but republican senator lindsey graham said the administration has sent mixed messages. >> the vice president has been quoted as saying about this particular topic, come july, we're going to begin leave in large numbers. you can bet on it. is his view of the policy correct? >> secretary gates has said, i believe in testimony, that he never heard vice president biden say that remark either. for what it's worth. >> well, it's worth a lot because he's saying one thing to one person allegedly and he's saying another thing to you. they don't reconcile themselves. that is exactly my point. it depends on who you seem to be talking to. because a lot of liberal people

the field. havergument i let's n any more iraq or afghanistan. you have the air power and sea power to go to the defense of people in trouble because they are thatened by somebody else. the answero that is let's not get into those things in the future unnecessarily. but nothingn what we're talkg about would uercut iraq and afghanistan. i think that makes it possible to get support. >> in respoe to two of those questions, we are doing sothing very different here. we are moving outside of the process. the deficit reduction commission in a sense is outside of the process. when we lk at what is happening in this coury today, some of the difficulties and particulars that we face inside the beltway are not really compelling people outside of the beltway. we're looking at is the congressional elections coming up if it is a perfect political orm. that is what we areacing. a perfect political storm based on a need to get our financial housin order different people to find thatn different ys. someocus on e deficit but i think thats a gain tinter. the way in

this morning in "politico," petreaus to the rest go, obama turns the bush's iraq general. petreaus to inherit the board divisions. dr. oz bipartisan praise. inside -- restarts debate. before the mcchrystal meltdown, or funding has been stalled -- carl levin announced in a press briefing yesterday that he will move quickly on confirmation, probably as early as tuesday of next week. next week is going to be a big week for confirmation hearings because 12:30 p.m. on monday, the supreme court pick, elena kagan, also goes before the panel. we will have live coverage. like astaire, south carolina. mary, democrats line. what do you think? caller: i think it is long overdue. i hated to see general petraeus replaced by anyone younger and less experience. i think the respect follows the line, somebody greater than all mankind. then the president and the people will work together with him. he does not say that he has to walk in front of him but at least walk beside him and don't put yourself in front of him. we need to utilize all of these people who need jobs in defense of our countr

and third you need to know the necessary footprint in iraq after the department of defense leaves. it doesn't take a rocket scientist know where national security budgets are going to go. particularly as we phase out of iraq and afghanistan, assuming that happens on the timetable that's been suggested. secretary gates has already levied on the services, each service cuts for the next five years that will be taken out of structure, oust modernization, having sat at state for fr years i know what problems they have ever lie year with budgets. defense is going to put whatever savings they accrue into the tooth side of things. so this is not going to be important. they are not going to put mon against private security contractors and private security details. so, my question to you is, how do you in source this? how do you train? how do you assess them? and how -- what do you do with them when it's over? mr. soloway. i think it's a wonderful wayo frame the question and gets back to part of the broader issue. to dr. stanger's point, there's a lot of different ways to moving security. let

the first time more u.s. troops are serving in afghanistan than iraq. this month marks one year since general stanley mcchrystal took command of the naked-let international security assistance force. the news from afghanistan recent weeks has been largely negative. the increase in casualties among u.s., coalition, and afghan security forces.

it has been my honor over the past two decades to visit our troops from bosnia to xhosa vote, to iraqrs are bring high in the announced of afghanistan -- in the mountains of afghanistan to a mess hall in iraq. d every time i can say without fear or contradiction i come away impressed with the intelligence, the grit, they resolved and the patriotism of these young women and men. this is the finest mitary the world has ever produced, period. [applause] if anyone ever had any doubt about that, they should have been with me three days ago when that conviction was reinforced when i have the great privilege and honor of addressing this year's graduating class at the naval academy. as part of that service, there was an award given to some young marine showing the qualities that will make him a future leader of the marine corps. the award was named for marine named doug tock zembick. he was a captain in 2004 and because of his heroism in the early ground assault he became known as the line of fallujah -- lion of fallujah. three years ago, this month, doug was shot and killed leading the iraqi

iraq. does the strategy in iraq translate at all to the operation in afghanistan? for you, admiral, you said the change in leadership signaled no change in strategy, but given the fact that the operations already under way have been bogged down and the offensive in qana are has been put off, should there be a change in strategy? -- the offensive in kandahar has been put off. >> strategy has not changed in any way, nor has policy. we clearly are at an enormously difficult time in the execution of the strategy. at the same time and, one for the forces approved are not there yet. we have made some progress and it has not been unopposed. we recognize that. there are things going on there that were not going on there chervil years ago. local leaders are coming out. that does not mean they are not being intimidated, but this is classic counterinsurgency. we have not tough the operation in kandahar. those shipping of there, it is an enormous the complex operation. we understand that. we need to make sure we get the forces there in which a significant part of his last 10,0