making sure that we have the capacity to respond to whatever situation may arise in which the use of military force may prove to be useful. one of the lessons we learned from libya was that a very precise application of airpower, the most precise application of airpower we've seen to date can have a major positive impact on the ability to protect civilians, particularly when those civilians are being attacked by their own government. not every situation will allow that. every situation will be unique. but it is something where nato does, as 28 democracies coming together, needs to be in and is thinking about how it can be in a position to act if it is desirable to do so. >> thank you. thank you very much. [ applause ] >>> on our companion network c-span later today, a look at lessons learned from japan's earthquake last year and the subsequent nuclear meltdown from the heritage foundation in washington live at noon eastern. then at 3:00 p.m., also on c-span, a member of russia's democratic opposition movement. she's talking about russia's presidential election and the future of democracy

making sure that we have the capacity to respond to whatever situation may arise in which the use of military force may prove to be useful. one of the lessons we learned from libya was that a very precise application of airpower, the most precise application of airpower we've seen to date can have a major positive impact on the ability to protect civilians, particularly when those civilians are being attacked by their own government. not every situation will allow that. every situation will be unique. it is something where nato does, as 28 democracies coming together, needs to be in and is thinking about how it can be in a position to act if it is desirable to do so. >> thank you. thank you very much. >>> c-span's congressional directory is your complete guide to the 112th congress. inside you'll find each member of the house and senate. their contact information, district maps, and committee information. plus, information about cabinet secretaries, supreme court justices,s and the nation's governors. pick up a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling. c-sp c-span.org/shop. >>> next a are forum o

>> i'm actually look at section 1033 where it says, nothing in the authorization for use of military force public law 107.40 or the national defense organization act 2091279 shall be con screwed to deny the availability of habeas corpus established under article 3 of the constitution for any person who's detained in the united states pursuant to the authorization for use of military force. so i'm not sure of the difference between the two, but looks like we've got it taken care of and i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. any other discussion? gentleman withdraws his amendment. any other discussion? any other amendments? >> yes, mr. chairman. i put an amendment at the desk. >> the clerk, please, distribute the amendment. without objection, the reading of the amendment will be dispensed with. and ranking member smith is recognized to explain and offer his amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm going to offer throughout this again, because we have a sequential referral problem. this debate will happen on the floor next we're, however, and this does deal with the indefinite detention is

regional conflict, wars, and terrorism depends as much on diplomacy and development as the use of military force. therefore we have increased the number of positions at difficult, hazardous posts that are vital to our foreign policy agenda. we now have close to 4,000 language designated positions in these posts as well as in other locations. it is challenging to uphold the department's high standard for foreign language capability with the increasing needs that we have faced over the past years. over the past decade, there has been significant shift and growth of positions in the near east, south asia and east asia bureaus require an increase in speakers of languages such as arabic, hindu, and chinese, over our portions have tripled in the bureau of south and central asia affairs where language-designated position requirements have increased tenfold and in the bureau of eastern affairs corresponding with arabic requirements. the foreign service institute has expanded the foreign language training capacity to meet these demands and raise proficiency of existing foreign language speakers. more tar

use all instruments of national power and authority to do that. the supreme court calls in a number of cases incidents of war. when you have an authorization to use military force as we do, you can use different tools. historical tools and i'll talk about it in terms of the supreme court, but this makes sense from probably a student in military theory too, you can target your enemy, those who are military objectives, your enemy. you can target them. you can surveil them, listen in on what they are doing. you can detain them. very important incident of war. supreme court agreed with this in the rumsfeld case. in 2004 they said even though you don't see the word detain in the towardsation for use of military force, detention is an important incident of war. also an incident of war is to hold somebody accountable by trial under the law of war. long standing incident of war. and to agree with you, with the thrust of your statement, oil say and thank you for asking that question because you're helping me put a finer point anthony is if you take away one of these incidents of war, one of these methods of trying to s subdue an enemy and in our case in modern conflicts

using law enforcement. information-sha information-sharing efforts. there are good examples of our use of military force when appropriate to free hostages. >> in the convenient of somalia. >> yeah. exactly. but the -- the initiative that we are undertaking to try and take the money out of kidnapping for ransom, take the incentive out of it, is hugely important, because these are -- this is the sort of the leading edge of terrorist financing today. it is, you know -- i sort of analogize it sow sort of the super pac of terrorist financing, because instead of the sort of the individual donations being bund maled up a delivered to terrorist groups you have these big chunk of monies coming in. >> interesting. shift gears and talk about iran. treasury, the pressure campaign has become a central component of the engagement with iran. the central hope, frankly, for the change of behavior on the iranian side, with some evidence, very good evidence, that the iranian economy has been hurt badly by the pressure. which i would say i think started in '0 5-06 and carried through and strengthened over time. can you tal

said: it would be preferable to resolve this diplomatically and through the use of pressure rather than use of military force but that doesn't mean that option is not fully available. and it's not just available, but it is ready. the necessary planning has been done to ensure that it is ready. what do you make of this, the u.s. ambassador says everything is ready for potential military strike. >> two things. one, our military has plans for almost everything. thank goodness, i'm glad they do including the strike on iran, and, if those plans were being updated and finalized the last people on earth to be told about them would be american ambassadors serving overseas and a lot of people read significance into that statement and honestly may have overinterpreted what he said. i did not see that as a ratcheting up of the administration's willingness to use military force, in fact nobody else in the administration said anything about it. after that statement. >> eric: finally, what do you think will happen this week? >> well, i'll go out on a limb. i think there will be a quote-unquote deal, i think the deal will

we use as you know, there are good examples of our use of military force when appropriate to free hostages. >> event in somalia. >> exactly. >> but the nishtive that we are undertaking to try and take the money out of kidnapping for ransom, take the incentive out of it, is hugely important because these are, this is the leading edge of terrorist financing today. sort of analogized it to the sup superpac of terrorist financing. you have these big chunks of money coming in all at once. >> interesting. let's talk about iran where treasury, treasury's financial pressure campaign has become a central component of the engagement with iran the central hope for the change of behavior on the ukrainirai iranian evidee economy has been hurt, which started in '05, '06 and has strengthened over time. can can you talk to us about and the first instance, where you see the financial pressure takinging us and i think the fundamental question being whether or not financial pressure at the time you've helped fashion will change iranian behavior at

translator: the united nations security council should adopt a resolution that allows the use of military force against the assad regime if it fails to comply with the cease-fire. >> ghalioun also acknowledged the need to overcome divisions among opposition groups. >>> u.s. officials say they're ready to pursue a security council resolution that would eninclude an arms embargo against the syrian government if the cease-fire fails. >> any and all violence that results in the indiscriminate killing and injury of civilians is reprehensible and cannot be justified. >> the state department spokesperson said the tactics employed in the damascus bombings are different from those used by opposition forces. she singled out potential third elements who seek to derail the transition process. russia's foreign minister has reiterated his country's opposition to foreign interference in syria. sergey lavrov said russia will not vote for a u.n. security council resolution to approve intervention. he said only syrian government and opposition forces can end the violence. >>> after four years as russian prime mi

key indicators is that congress in 2001 passed an authorization for use of military force that made it clear that al qaeda and associated forces and those immediately harboring it are enemies. you got this overlap in jurisdiction. the unnecessary criticism is hey why don't you just trial those people by civilian court. and the response to this is that although i believe that is in our interest most of the time to do it, there's a narrow category of cases where the best choice is a military commission and there's a variety of different arguments oi'll give you on tha basis but some boil down how should the crime characterized. what's the best way to try and punish that conduct, whether war conduct or civilian conduct. sometimes it's better to character characterize it as a violation of war. this is sort of an inverse version of the unsettled. they have not tried these kinds of cases. they have not traditionally been used. others might emphasize the difference in the jury. we want our civilian jurors to handle international terrorism cases. if the jury is one. ways our society gets skin

one class of military action and other classes where congress authorizes the use of military force, but often authorizes it in really broad ways and so, this has led a number of scholars to conclude that congress is all together ab di kate its authority to an executive which is unbound. that strikes me as overstating matters quite considerly. but it's the, it's a striking feature of the modern era. that congress is not out in front defining military policy. >> book review, looking at rachel maddow's book, drift, about american military power, wrote this on war powers. said especially the last half century, the decision to go to war has become too easy. congress' institutional prerogative has been ignored. only a tiny fraction of the american population serves, sends a family member to war, permitting a majority to remain on oblivious. for congress to abdicate what the president called the shots? >> yeah, at the front end. that doesn't mean at the front end, deliberations about whether to initiate force. that doesn't mean that congress isn't an important player in shaping decision making

and there are other classes where congress authorizes the use of military force. but often authorizes it and really in broad ways. so this has led a number of scholars to conclude that congress has altogether abdicated the war making as unbound. that's overstating the matters quite considerably and it ignores a lot of the interesting politics that occur across the various branches of government about war. but it's the -- it's a striking feature of the modern era. that congress is not out in front defining military policy. in ways that it once was. >> a book reviewer looking at rachel maddow's book "drift" about military american power wrote this on war powers. especially in the last half century the decision to go to war has become too easy. congress's constitutional prerogative to declare war has been routinely ignored. only a tiny fraction sends a family member to war, permitting them to remain oblivious to the grisly human price. does that make it easier for congress to advocate and call the shots? >> at the front end -- in determining whether or not to initiate

out a clandestine operation and cyberspace that's a part of a military operates that operation pursuant to the authorization for use of military force. goes on there bear a first of all what is what is a clandestine operation anyway as well the ones on the where of. the best example going to steam venus and some of the things that were posed by the several companies that do this kind of work all the government. private entities and. that is that they have no will have no ethics they think they're planning to do. some of these groups and done things. i think is a good indicator. of what's going to happen what's going to be very possible widespread first of all as a mentality. these things are all right to do the same thing as you can really incubated in this private sector that has no you don't let oversight in the private public so now what it sounds like there in the language there amending this this law is giving giving the government broad powers to conduct military operations on my and if they see fit is that essentially what it does. well they have those big buildings anyway that's for voting systems which actually build those

to carry out a clandestine operation and cyberspace in support of a military operation pursuant to the authorization for use of military force our plan to die and what is clear what does that mean anyway as well what is a clandestine operation. well. unfortunately it will take a pass and when i did see the language in enough in the legislation i think the committee approved it a congressional committee approved it a day or two ago but i'm actually on vacation this weekend so i haven't looked into it in detail but my guess is that what happened is that someone from the n.s.a. in d.o.d. because n.s.a. is a national security agency is part of the department of defense came to congress and said hey we want to explicit authorization before we can do certain things and what these certain things are i don't know it would just be speculation all right well so we've seen many many forms of legislation we see right now with this but with so pippa before now we're seeing this effort by the f.b.i. so definitely there is this effort to expand this government control or are monitoring at some level at least of the internet so we do the li

resolution is in no way intended and in no way can it be interpreted as an authorization for the use of military force. it is a nonbinding resolution that endorses a diplomatic resolution to the iranian nuclear program. it includes no operative authorizations regarding the use of force. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. edwards: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield myself such time as i may consume. some may put forth the argument that this resolution undermines and threatens the ongoing p-5 plus one negotiations. well, the truth is, mr. speaker, that the iranian regime is using these negotiations as a way to buy time and continue enrichment without any additional sanctions. time and again, the united states has come to the table with iran, made concessions -- made concession after concession and left with nothing in return. in one example last month, the los angeles times reported that u.s. officials are now wil

s sensually just reaffirms a law that already exists that lobbying the authorization for use of military force is a two thousand and one law but neither you nor the judges buy this argument why not a right that's an excellent question you've really done your homework as a question the judge would have none of that argument because the authorization for military force was passed right after nine eleven and it was specifically targeted to members of al-qaeda or people who participated in the nine eleven attacks. this law of the end goes so far beyond that as to make a completely different and indistinguishable effort it goes so far beyond that anyone who gives quote substantial support and that could include a writer and journalist etc could be caught up on it so really the day you have half was a total and there are lot directed at people who committed violent acts and were involved in nine eleven attack and in fact in the court were judge forrest cross-examined the lawyers for the government and it is plainly can you assure the journalists here that you will not be subject to the n.p.a. and th

that there is no reason at this point for the united states to use or to contemplate the use of military force against iran as long as iran does not make a move indicating that it is moving to a breakout capability that is to say kicking out the i.a.e.a. inspection. the inspection mechanism inside iran which continues to operate and as long as that's the case the obama administration clearly is not contemplating the use of force regardless of what happens in these talks so it's really quite it's quite misleading for him to say that i transcend to meet with the u.s. and its allies indeed about its nuclear program just a few days now how is the ambassador statement got to affect that meeting and the the way the talks developed you think. i wouldn't expect it to have any impact at all i don't think the iranians like the specter or the spectacle of the us ambassador to israel making those sorts of statements but it's nothing new and i think that they would write it off essentially as political posturing as it precisely is the case and the iranians are going to go into those talks with a very caref

use of force against members of al qaeda is authorized under both international and u.s. law, including both the inherent right of national self-defense and the 2001 authorization for use of militaryce which courts have held extends to those who are part of al qaeda, the @booktv, and associated forces. if after a legal review we determined that the individual is not unlawful target, in the discussion. we are a nation of laws, and we will always act within the bounds of the law. of course, the lot is only establishing the outer limits of the authority in which counter-terrorism professionals can operate. even if we determine that it is lawful to pursue the terrorist in question with lethal force delayed is not necessarily mean that we should. there are, after all, literally thousands of individuals who are part of al qaeda, the taliban, or a seceded forces. even if it were possible, going after every single one of these individuals with lethal force would not be wise, nor an effective use of our intelligence and counter-terrorism resources. as a result we have to be strategic. even if it is lawful to pursue a specific number of al qaeda we ask ourselves whether that individual's ac

is that there is nothing in this resolution that is intended to bening authorization of the use of military force in iran by the president or government military of the united states of america. this resolution's main focus is to essentially back up with a congressional statement the position that president obama has articulated that no matter what happens containment of a nuclear iran is not an acceptable policy from the point of view of the security of the united states. that our policy is to prevent the government of the islamic republic of iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. and that's exactly why clause six was put in there to say that we do not accept containment, that our policy is prevention of islamic republic of iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. but i want to be really clear that there's nothing in that language that senator graham or i and senator casey see as the authorization of the use of military force. if at any point circumstances in iran require the judgment of the commander of the military action, i suspect particularly p it lasts a period of time,

democrat and republican, could not even bring itself to have a former debate on whether the use of military force was appropriate, and this use of military force went on for months and was never proved. the administration which spent well over a billion dollars of taxpayer funds dropped thousands of bombs on the country, operate our military offshore for months, claimed that combat was not occurring, rejected the notion that the war powers act applied to the situation. i am not here to debate the war powers act, madam president. i am suggesting that other statutory language that covers these kind of situations must be enacted. the legislation that i will be introducing today will address this loophole in the interpretation of our constitution. it will serve as a necessary safety net to protect the integrity and the intent of the constitution itself. it will ensure that congress lives up not only to its prerogatives which were so carefully laid out by our founding fathers, but also to its responsibilities. and with that, i yield the floor and would suggest the absence of a quorum. i yield the floo

military force. there is new thinking within nato. there is an increasing emphasis on making sure we have the capacity to respond to whatever situation may arise in which the use of military force may prove to be useful. one of the lessons we learned from libya was backed a precise -- was that the most precise operation of air power we have seen to date can have a positive impact on the ability to protect civilians window civilians are being attacked by their own government. every situation will be unique. it is something nato does as 28 democracies coming together. they need to be in a position to act if it is desirable to do so. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> monday, the british-american society, george washington's school of international affairs host a forum on the emerging security challenges and nato's response to piracy and cyber attacks. live at 1:30 p.m. eastern on c- span 3. >> cutting back in an age where crime is global in ways it was not 10 years ago. by that, i mean whether it be organized crime, cyber crime, white-co

use of military force. this time to stop the slaughter in syria. the it laest outrage over the weekend, a massacre, the total number of deaths 108. the chilling part is that 49 of those were children. this happened in a syrian town and u.n. and air negotiator kofi annan called it, quote, an appalling crime as he arrived in the capital city of damascus trying to revooif his peace plans. tonight she joins us from new york. arwa, we talked about this before. when you hear this number, 49 children, it is chilling. it is horrific. do we know what caused this? has anyone claimed responsibility? >> well what, we have, brooke, is the same scenario where both sides are blaming each other for the violence and the marines are saying these were caused by aurmd terrorist gangs and the opposition is saying that this was a slaughter carried out by the regime. u.n. mob tors on the ground did say a number of wounds they saw appear to be sustained by artillery and weapons that the syrian government has at its disposal. from what we have been able to piece together, t

of organizing collective action. including military action. collective action using force isn't a military action. it's a diplomatic one. there's use of force and then that's military. i take your point. we don't know which of the two presidents would be more likely to do this. but i think the congressional point is real here. i would say there are a lot of people around romney who understand this point, who understand the need for serious investment in diplomacy and there are some people around him who clearly don't. >> just if you want to take up that or the exceptionalism question. >> yeah, i agree with you the whole exceptionalism issue has gotten goofy. you know, president obama gets off the helicopter and he's caught red handed reading fareed zakarius. and then he says, no, we're reading bob kagan. we like fareed too. the two terrific books are not diametrically opposed. i noticed in the speech that president obama gave at the air force academy i guess it was a couple of days ago, he went out of his way to do two things. one was to say this is an exceptional country. i guess he's covered hims

put this idea of using military force aside put its day out of the the ingredients or there is stumble was more successful than people let out and i don't blame them because this is a very very contentious process it's very difficult and getting to some success is going to take really exquisite diplomacy but the ingredients are there and our policy is not like the ending the hard side expresses our policy is iran can enrich as long as she's under the. under rigorous safeguards and i don't think that the policy but that's not israel's policy i who cares what israel's policy us care and i stated i'm going to united states is the negotiator here and the people so you want plus five so we're we're looking at a possibility here they could do on iran needs in order to feel safe about what it's doing in terms of giving in and let us feel safe in terms of our on nuclear capability now and in the future and come to some motives for the indies so we can settle a range of the issues that arguably are more important than the nuclear issue to include sponsorship of terrorism to include human rights

it is a question of managing alie yaa aala acollective action, using force is not diplomatic. our use of force is military. i absolutely take your point. we don't know which of the two presidents would be more likely. i think the congressional point is real here. i would say there are a lot of people around romney who understand this point. who understand the need for serious investment in diplomacy. there are also some around him who clearly don't. >> if you want to take up that or american exceptionalism question? >> i agree with you, the whole exceptionalism issue has gotten a little goofy. i mean, you know -- president obama gets off a helicopter and he is caught red-handed, he is a declinist. and then, you know, a couple months go by. he says, no, no, i'm not, i'm reading, we are at brookings, are delighted the we look to read him too. he has been on the podium many times. by the way, these two, terrific books, are not die met ametrica opposed in their prescriptive implications. i notice in the speech, president obama gave at the air force academy, i guess a couple days ago, he went out of his way to

use of force against members of al qaeda is authorized under both international and u.s. law, including both of the inherent right of national self-defense and the 2001 authorization for use of military force, which courts have held extends to those who are part of al qaeda, the taliban, and associated forces. if, after a legal review, we determined that the individual is not a lawful target, end of discussion. we are a nation of laws, and we will always act within the bounds of the law. of course, the law only establishes the outer limits of the authority to which counterterrorism officials can operate. even if we determine it is lawful to pursue the terrorist and a questio -- in question, it doesn't necessarily mean we should. there are, after all, literally thousands of individuals who are part of al qaeda and the taliban and associated forces. thousands upon thousands. even if it were possible to go after every single one of these individuals with a gleeful force would need to be a -- i snore andwith -- with lethal force would neither be a wise nor effective use of our resources. we asked ourselves whether the individual's activities rise to a certain threshold for action, and wh

you know from from different factions there's still plenty of time before you know yes plans are in place yes we're prepared to use military force on iran if need be but there's still time i guess i just learned from your experience what does this mean plenty of time are we talking a few months are we talking after the election we're probably talking if you really took the doris prediction we're probably talking two to three years and that's before you could actually have a nuclear warhead and something with which to deliver a nuclear warhead i would say more like five years remember people have been predicting that iran would have a nuclear capability ever since the show and they haven't done that yet i know you and i have talked about this before that this is nothing new and i fear mongering and the idea is that iran is our biggest threat is nothing new and what is the possibility now for the deal we had in two thousand and nine but had to back away from the brazilians and the turks orchestrated essentially we have the opportunity to make that really work now to take the twenty percent out to give them and then in exchange for

us revealed its plans for a new military base in the chance of italy just a few miles away from the city's historical center. already hosts a us military base. home to the southern european task force and one of ten major u.s. bases in italy the area designated for the new base is the ex of billion put. the plans for the new base include forty eight buildings over twenty acres of land i couldn't give a damn about the chance of because it's been said you have four people. three of whom are over the age of ninety and the base is a nothing of a base it doesn't generate smoke noise there are no planes landing so anybody a complacent big from my point of view is a dirty commie ok but why because the italian government to reach and the authorities have decided yes and they want to make a noise even though these are entirely harmless people it's like having tourists they don't have tanks they don't have the helicopters they don't crash airplanes on your side so it's purely ideological and negativism by a bunch of zero people who don't do anything in a worthless. in april two thousand a key live and yet is elected mayor of beach and so the promise of holding a referendum on the new base. i

the secretary of state wanted to use military force. let's just go in there and remove this fellow, he is an embarrassment. we can easily get rid of him. the reagan administration rejected that, and instead said let's negotiate, let's send someone down to panama a deal, if you step down, we'll drop the indictments in florida and promise that you won't have to suffer threats from american law. but george bush was then vice president. took the very unusual step of criticizing what the president of the united states had proposed. that became a minor issue in the 1988 presidential campaign. as a result, nothing came of those negotiations, and panama was a real issue when bush became president in 1989. tim has correctly told you that throughout that year, panama is not an important issue on the president's agenda. the changes taking place in europe, the end of the cold war, are far more complicated, far more consequential, and they are occupying most of the president's time. but there are two things that happen in that first year that are wor

whole bunch of armed citizens going up against, you know, a fullly organized and equipped modern military are not much of an opposition if the military, you know, is willing to use crushing force why in these cases, libya, syria and others, you have to get the military involved. it's not enough to get hundreds of thousands small arms and light weapons. >> so our viewers and listeners understand, if we were talking about military intervention in syria, we are not talking about 10,000 troops. right? we would be talking about a massive effort, a massive operation. >> you know, maybe not >> it would have to be. >> maybe not on the scale of iraq but certainly, you know, much more than what we did in libya. we probably couldn't get away with just a bombing campaign and giving the rebels. >> no. we would have the boots on the ground is what we are talking about. >> boots on the ground and that's the first step toward ownership of the country. look, we are still, you know, we claim we are out of iraq but we still kind of sort of own iraq. >> right. >> trying to get out of afghanistan. we still kind of sort of own afghanistan. i don't think we can own yet another country in the middle

sanctions will not get us to where we want to go, everything's on the table, including the use of military force, because this country, republican, democrat, are not going to allow the iranian regime to develop a nuclear capability that will put the world into darkness. so to everybody who negotiated this outcome, thank you very much. i yield. the presiding officer: hearing no objection, so ordered. the clerk will read the bill for the third time. the clerk: h.r. 1905, an act to strengthen iran sanctions laws for the purpose of compelling iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons and other threatening activities and for other purposes. the presiding officer: the question is on passage of the bill, as amended. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. mr. reid: madam president, i ask unanimous consent -- the presiding officer: the bill as amended is passed. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, that any statements related to this matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as i

such as regional conflicteds wars and terrorism depends on diplomacy and development as the use of military force. therefore, we have increased the number of positions difficult hazards post that will vital to the foreign policy agenda. we have close to 4,000 lang wang designatedded positions in the posts as well as in other locations. it is challenging to uphold the department's high standards for foreign language cape wbility the increasing needs we have faced over the past years. over the past decade, there has been significant shift in growth of positions in the near east, south asia, and east asia bureaux requiring an increase of speaks of languages hin i did within chinese, -- south and central asia affairs where language designated position requirements have been increased tenfold and in the bureau of eastern affairs has doubled with arabic requirements. the foreign service substitute has expanded the foreign language training capacity to meet these demands and to raise proficiency of existing foreign language speakers. more targeted retirement can help to address the current challenges an

such as regional conflict and terrorism depends as much on diplomacy and development as the use of military force. therefore we've increased the number of positions as difficult that are vital to the foreign policy agenda we now have closed for thousand language designated positions in these posts as well as other locations. it's challenging to uphold the tube with the increasing needs that we have faced over the past years. over the past decade there has been significant shift and growth the positions in southeastern asia requiring an increase in the speakers of languages such as credit, barney and chinese. the affairs for the position the requirements have increased tenfold and in the bureau of near eastern affairs has doubled regular positions corresponding with arabic requirements. the foreign service institute expanded its language training capacity to meet these demands and raise the proficiency of existing foreign-language speakers to get more targeted recruitment can help the current challenges and we are recruiting aggressively for certain pretty language proficiency skills to address in

right now where you have the united states is very upset with russia over its veto of the attempt to use military force against syria and also the tension over the installation of the so-called anti missile was system in western and even eastern europe the united states may very well be behind this. well the sports still ahead fear the football season reaches climax and year of the twists and turns as last weekend i got the latest on my feet this morning before that as well in a couple of minutes we talked to dmitri medvedev his presidential aide about the future development of russia's that's how the next pans out here on our team from moscow it's now coming up to twenty seven minutes past eight moscow time. thanks. for. wealthy british. markets. find out what's really happening to the global economy. global financial headline news. reports. eight thirty am in the morning here kevin i mean these are our top stories. marty putin's making a comeback as head of state as he prepares to take the oath to become russia's president the first time the lakes today opinions were heated on moscow streets though a

right now where you have the united states is very upset with russia over its veto of the attempt to use military force against syria and also the tension over the installation of the so-called anti missile was system in western and even eastern europe the united states may very well be behind this. but a smaller still ahead fear of the football season reaching its climax and year of the twists and turns as last weekend i got the latest on that for you this morning before that as well in a couple of minutes we talked to me to be very presidential aide about the future development of russia's that's how the next stuff pans out you know now team from moscow it's now coming up to twenty seven minutes past eight moscow time.

of 1979. we will use military force if necessary. >> i respectfully disagree. we did not hear this kind of clear, forceful statement from president obama from his inauguration until march of this year. i heard it and read it in the apec speech in the interview with jeff goldberg and in the president conference the president gave, all in the space of three or four days. i think he has made a clear statement, he is willing, he's got israel's back. >> what does that mean, i've got your back? it doesn't mean anything. >> and he said, he is willing to use force, should diplomacy fail. i'm not sure how he could be more clear about this. >> i think he could be as clear as oddly enough the vice president was on "meet the press." >> well -- >> i suspect the vice president's statement was -- >> this time what's clear? >> the vice president's statement was a statement of american policy and the administration's policy. >> i wonder if there is somebody in the audience, since we have a group of very distinguished analysts, and journalists who might want to ask a question. jo

it turns out force has to be used, force has to be seen as a product of the iranians having brought this on themselves. partly because the end of the day, there is no military solution to this. the use of force can set the iranian program back. they have the know-how, the engineering capability, to reconstitute. we need to put them in a position if force is used where it's hard for them to be able to reconstitute because they're isolated and contained afterward. indeed, they have to see the cost of them is very high of having to reconstitute. because that then gives us some chance of succeeding over time. so you do have to reconcile these two kinds of competing realities, if, in fact, you want to achieve the net -- the basic objective that we're after. >> so on the general theory that experience is what enables you to recognize a mistake when you do it again, what mistakes should we avoid if we're trying to get an agreement with iran and what can we do now in a very short run, because you have, as we all know, a much shorter fuse in the israeli public policy than you have in the american policy. why don't you start with that. >> well, i do think there is a