comparemela.com

Been tough on Prime Minister maliki here but Prime Minister maliki during the surge and the years after the surge hes the one that went off the shia militia very frankly impulsively as you may recall in march, we called it march madness in march of 2008. It was a very run close affair until we could get his elements supported that were on the ground. It was a resounding victory there in sauder city and set the conditions for a period of relative stability and reasonable harmony that lasted for several years after that. Tragically, he undid much of what was done during the surge, no longer honored agreements that were made with the sunny population and so forth. There has been a lot of academic and pundit discussion on why we hung with him especially because former Prime Minister got one more vote in the parliament but couldnt form a government. So there was as lot of wrangling back and forth. Without question, this is something in everyones mind and in everyones memory. And again, certainly the experience with kadafi. Although i think at the point at which we committed to support the upspring wellspring of citizens going afritericte afri kadafi, trying to carry out a disarmerment program for all the different militias. And trying to help form Security Forces as quickly as possible so when you got an inclusive government, that its supported whole heard dli and you may move forward. The Iran Nuclear Decision was probably the most difficulties for all of us. Not just in this committee but i think in the whole senate membership. I lean strongly towards supporting because i wanted to work with our allies and i could not explain to West Virginians basically when they would ask the question what happens at the end of 8 1 2 to 10 years because were put in the position to be stronger if they had not changed their ways and since we didnt hold them accountable, basically for their actions of terrorists, then how do you expect them to change their ways later on . So that was the one thing that stopped me from supporting it. What i would ask is how damaging to our allies would the u. S. Have been if it had been defeated, if we had not those who voted had not voted for it . Would it have damaged our relationships since our allies were saying were going to go without you . Absolutely. Sure. I think there are Big Questions about what would happen to the sanctions regime. Could you get it back together. What kept russia and china onboard. Does it all become unraveled and so forth. Look, i think the real question, this is a reality. Focusing forward. Taking the rearview mirrors off the bus. The biggest question is what happens after 15 years . Thats when virtually theres a few that linger but virtually all the restrictions of the agreement end and iran can move out quite smartly in a variety of different areas in building its enrichment capacity and other elements of the program. Thats why its so vitally important that the u. S. Be very, very Crystal Clear, ironclad why the white house and congress together should be very clear about what would happen if iran ever made a move towards weapons grade enrichment. That will also again not only hopefully deter iran but reassure our gulf allies. Thats another important consideration. Thank you. Thank you sir. General, thank you for your testimony. I think we could have gotten the status of forces agreement in iraq if we really, really tried. Do you agree with that . Actually let me put it to you another way. If it goes through the parliament, the problem was it was not probably going to be approved by the parliament. An interesting fact is i believe we now have 3,500 troops on the ground. We seem comfortable doing this now that we really have to and candidly, that was something i think we might have considered trying given that the Prime Minister was going to give his personal assurance and test it out. Theres no guarantee that having 10,000 troops on the ground would have given us the influence or prevented the Prime Minister maliki from taking the high actions that he did. But i would have like to have tested the proposition. Thank you for that. Im encouraged that youre so positive about Prime Minister abaddy and his reforms and the fact that he has the backing of iraqi citizens in the streets. I assume by that you mean kurdish iraqi no. I mean shia iraqi. What they very much want to see governance. Without this they have no source of revee. Those who say let iraq break up by the way, its one thing to now actually has pretty good oil and revenues coming in, although not enough. They are running a deficit and they still need what they can get, their 17 out of the oil revenues from iraq proper which means really the two southern provinces that produce the most. No oil or gas revenue going to be provided for the sunni areas. One of the really Serious Problems is how would they survive . The second is who draws the boundaries . If you have a state of politics thats so how in the world are you going to have an amicable divorce. It will be another civil war perhaps along the lines of syria. Great concern about that. A body wants to pursue inclusive politics but i dont think people picked up that there are huge demonstrations going on in the cities of iraq in the southern part of the country because of citizens who are outraged by insufficient services, particularly electricity during extraordinarily hot weather in recent weeks and corruption and they are just flat outraged. The grand ayatollah seeing this, issuing statements that really encouraged the kinds of reforms that a Prime Minister body has now pursue and they are now moving each week, her has purr sewer pursued more reforming and he knows the only way to combat isil is to get the people in the area where isis is located to turn against them and the same way that we did with reconciliation with the on bar awakening and the sons of iraq program. Citizens cant turn against a particularly barbaric force unless they have a sense of security. But to do that you have to have sunny arab iraqis who will not only clear burr then be able to hold these forces with the considerable assistance from us with the intelligence and precision strike assets. Let me make sure i understand. This sort of divorce you talk about is something really to be avoided in iraq and you have a different view about syria where you seem to suggest in your testimony it wouldnt be the end of the world if syria as we have known it does split up into three or four because they have had this horrific situation. Syria has gone through considerable you can call it cleansing. This would not have been the solution from syria four years ago. But we are where we are with syria and you see enormous displacement of different sets. But we can avoid that in iraq and we should make every effort . No guarantee we can at all. This is going to be a very close run affair but we should try to avoid it i think. There will be greater power and different political bargain between baghdad and sunni area provinces. And they dont agree. So you even have a situation among the various sunni leaders who all come through here or see you somewhere out in the region. So thats going to be difficult as well. There is nothingscy about this situation right now. But i dont think we should just say okay, well just let it go further. Because there are still mixed areas in baghdad and mixed areas in the baghdad belts. The province is still highly mixed. There have been efforts to reduce that amount of mixing and s secretarian displacement but the only way to prevent that kind of horrific civil war breaking out which is what the result will be if there is a determination to break it into sunni, shia and kurdis stand you once again have to give the sunnis they have taken the security. Thats what they came to feel in 20 06 and in the last couple of years as well. Well, your answers are very thorough and were way out of time. Let me just ask for something on the record. Because senator mccain mentioned it in his Opening Statement. I would hope that on the record you can give us your insight as to what lessons we might apply in afghanistan that we have learned from our experience in iraq . Chairman, can i make two quick points on afghanistan possibly . First of all, there have been reports recently that there was a policy or acceptance of what clearly is absolutely reprehensible, unacceptable behavior by certain afghans with using male essentially sex slaves and so forth. I was pleased to see campbell issue a statement who was a two star when i was the commander of the National Security systems and he stated very clearly that it has never been a policy, not a policy now and it certainly was not something that was acceptable or even discussed frankly when i was a commander of the security force. The first line that i put out is we have to be seen to be helping secure and serve the people and we have to help the Afghan Forces do the same. Theres no way that that kind of behavior would be seen as helping to serve the Afghan People and it is absolutely unacceptab unacceptable. Second, look, i do think we have to take a very hard look at our future plans for the footprint that we have in afghanistan, recognizing that now there is an Islamic State presence being established there. Recognizing there still is work to be done to continue the disruption. The further disruption of al qaeda Senior Leadership in the tribal areas of pakistan. That campaign has had considerable, considerable progress success indeed, not only on asam ma bin laden. And that is a very, very much dism dismin issued incapabilities but it has to continue to be disrupted because we dont own the ground and really nor does pakistan fully. Beyond that, were in a situation where a relatively modest number of u. S. Forces providing assistance to our afghan partners, we are able to continue to accomplish the mission that we went to afghanistan to achieve and we cannot forget why we went there and why we stayed. It was because afghanistan was where al qaeda planned the 9 11 attacks and our mission was to ensure never again would afghanistan be a sanctuary for al qaeda or other transnational extremists to do that again. That mission has been accomplished so far as you know senator and now being done with a relatively modest number of u. S. Forces. There still are casualties but way, way less for us. In the meantime, Afghan Forces are very much fighting and dying for their country to help achieve the mission that is so important to us and to them to not allow the force to retake their country, the taliban that did allow al qaeda to camp out on its soil and plan those attacks. Thank you very much. On behalf of the chairman, i recognize senator donnelly. Thank you, mr. Chairman. General, thank you and your family for your service to this country. It is good to have you back here with us today. We appreciate your ideas, your advice. A great deal. I want to ask you about is you emphasize the need to work with the kurds, turkey, israel and other allies to interdistrict. We have had the authority to cut off the shipments. What are the challenges and recommendations to help finish the job . The challenges have been that there has been fairly devious difficult Operational Security carried out by iran when it has provided weapons to different forces whether its hamas, whatever. We do have a unique situation with respect to hamas now that is quite extraordinary and that is that egypt for the first time is cutting the tunnels and obliterating the tunnels that used to enable the Free Movement of goods including weapons and ammunition from the sinai into gaza. That is no longer a reality and that is a Major Development in that regard and a big help to us. Beyond that, i do this we make gains in a variety of different technologies and forms of intelligence whether its so called maritime big data or a variety other advances that can help us interdict that maritime flow first as it has to some degree limited the flow to the hue thees. Other countries are engaged in rolling back the action of the iranian support who as i mentioned earlier trying to get at the point of a gun what they couldnt get at the negotiating table. I see this as a critical part of the nuclear part that was just put together. What you were talking about the promise and guarantee that will stand with them to push back on the conventional side from corner to corner here. One of the areas is lebanon as well. How do you feel we can be most effective in interdikting . I think what we can most effectively do is assist our israeli allies with the provision of intelligence from a variety of different sources and they have not shrunk from taken action when there have been meaningful movements of military capabilities going from syria to lebanon for example. The concerns president netanyahu discussed with president putin yesterday undoubtedly included a discussion with israel saying we will continue to take action if hardware moves from damascus into the valley and lebanese us bull la. I wanted to follow up with a question about baghdad where you say so much has to be determined. When we were in iraq not too long ago it was pretty clear that the shia leadership in baghdad was not creating any confidence with the sunni leaders and the tribal belt. How do we change that mix . I though supporting a body is critical. But how do we change the mix of so many of the shia leaders who are tied to iran so closely in getting some understanding in them that its not going to work against isis unless we have our sunni tribal leaders with us and theyre not going to be with us until they start to feel that the leaders in baghdad understand that and give them ownership in the country. Whats important is the elected Prime Minister of the country recognizes the criticality of politics. That is hugely important. Its also important to recognize that the people right now are quite supportive of the actions the Prime Minister has taken because the people are outraged about the lack of basic services, the corruption and so forth. He has a real window now then . He has a window. This is a very tenuous situation because again opposing him are the very forces that arguably saved baghdad when Islamic State was threatening it on the belt and then these are the forces that some people are aligned with and they by the way at least a couple of these forces are led by individuals who were in detention during my time as the commander of the Multinational Force because of their involvement in the killing of our soldiers. They are now leading not only militias but parties in the parliament to give you some sense of how challenging this is. So were going to have to patiently, painstakingly day after day engage, use our authority, our support for the establishment of iraqi Security Forces, not be holding to a particular Political Party with iran in support and so forth. But this is going to be a closerun affair. Make no mistake about it. The Prime Minister has crossed the rubicon in the form of the reforms that he is pursuing. Keep in mind when he did away with the vice presidencies he did away with the jobs with the former Prime Minister maliki and considerable figures and i think it was the right move, a very strong move but he is going to have to be shored up in every way that is possible, not just by the United States but by the coalition and more importantly by forces within iraq that want to see their country move forward again as an inclusive country rather than one that practices exclusive politics that are carried out in many cases at the force of a gun. Keep in mind the outrageous activities taking place in baghdad where one of these militias just recently basically kidnapped i think it was 18 or so turkish workers and moved them without being stopped and is holding them ransom for some not particularly clear objective other than turkey stopping the flow of isis into iraq. There have been very, very public threats by some against serving leaders including the Prime Minister. So this is a moment of real consequence, a moment of considerable drama in baghdad. I think we have missed how significant it is to see this number of iraqi citizens in the streets expressing their outrage of whats going on in baghdad. A Prime Minister who is moving to take action in response to that. But very powerful elements that are going to oppose him. Thank you again for your service to the country. Thank you mr. Chairman. Isnt it true that the Major Political influence is iranian in baghdad . It is certainly an important one. I would have to think what may rival it but i cant come up with that. As you know, iraq has never wanted to be the 51st state of iran. And use that support like a crutch when its required. The problem is that when that support gets tentacles into parties its very hard to get it back out. Senator fisher. Thank you mr. Chairman and general for your service to this country but also for being here today so that you can provide us with i think some very important insights. Our approach in syria and iraq seems to be that were going to be relying on local partners to be the boots on the ground. Just how far do you think these local partners are going to be able to take us . Well, again, theyll go as far as is in their interest to do so which is why i mentioned earlier we have to be realistic about that. That is reality. Thats why i mentioned earlier we should not think that the kurdish can be pushed much farther below where it is they are in iraq right now or frankly the syrian. Again you might employee them for some specific operations, play a role in clearing parts in mosul. But they cant ultimately hold those areas. I think in that sense we have to be realistic. They have a stake however in doing what it is that we want done. Which is to defeat the extreme the most extreme of extremists, the Islamic State. And then also, of course, ultimately to create a context within which assad will be ushered from the scene in syria. Although its difficult to tell what ultimate shape syria will have at that point. General dempsey speaks about patience and risk and weighing the patience needed against how much risk were looking at. How much patience should we be exhibiting towards our local partners in iraq and syria . How long should we stick with them before we reach a point where we have assumed too much risk and there may be no options left that the United States can look at . When do we reach that point and as a tactical stalemate where we want to be . As i said we are not where we should be and the tactical stalemate is a fairly dynamic stalemate. This is not one that has world war i trenches and so forth. Theres a lot of movement. We are rolling back isis in certain places inflicting very heavy casualties on them. I would not want to be a leader in the Islamic State in iraq or syria. Because i think it would be very hard to get a Life Insurance policy if you were in those shoes. Having said that, theres a lot of reenforcements flowing in and yes, we have pushed them out of this area or that area and then they go into ramadi and in syria they sustained defeats and go into lightly defended pal m. Y. R. M palm. Y. R. A. Isis is on the defensive in certain areas without question but still has the freedom of action to exercise initiatives certainly in some places. The key with our partners is of course we should be impatient and push as hard as we can, but this is one of those where you cant rush to failure. Thats unfortunately what can happen if we push it just too hard. I believe in your opening you said that in the future what will be our relationship to the iranian power as we see this after the agreement. And that the United States used to be a counter to iran and now we may be looking at accommodating them. Can you tell me what you feel would be the challenges and if there are any opportunities to both of those positions if we find ourselves as or if we find ourselves as being there just to accommodate iran . And again, what i said was that there are concerns in the region that we might accommodate iran, that we might work with them and now russia and bashar. Now have challenged our creditability recently from the secretary of state in syria for example as well. It goes to our creditability in the region too. And creditability matters. I was just out in asia, and its all about u. S. Creditability and what does that mean for the south china sea. Does what happened in syria a few years ago have implication for that . The answer is yes, it does. At the end of the day, if irans Foreign Policy has continued to be dictated by the revolutionary force and enables proxies like lebanese and designated terrorist organization and hamas and with what theyre doing and shiailitia in iraq, then obviously we have to counter that activity. If on the other hand iran changes spots, whatever, changes its approach and so forth, by all means if the conditions change then we should be always alert for opportunities to work with what used to be a former enemy. We have done this throughout our history. I think the chances are not particularly high. But its not something one can rule out if something happens as a result perhaps of iran being reintegrated into the Global Economy and deciding it wants to be a responsible world citizen instead of trying to achieve regional hegemeny. Thank you for joining us today and for your decades of service. Thanks for your own service. For our country. In your testimony you broken your areas of focus down into iraq, syria and iran. I want to start with the section on iran where you emphasize that the nuclear deal, whatever its short term implication for the program cannot be seen as ushering in a new age of accommodation or conceal yags of irans interest. Given whats happening with syria with russia entering the picture. How do you think that our arab and israeli partners view our current posture towards irans influence in syria . I think theyre waiting to see right now frankly. I talked to a number of those individuals and on a quite regular basis and they have expressed concerns about the future. And they want to see us continue to counter activity by iran. If that continues. And we have to be very, very clear about that. Beyond that, i think again the very clear ironclad statement about what would happen if iran moves towards weapons grade uranium enrichment, that has to be very clear as well. That would speak volumes. You recommend in your testimony a few concrete suggestions for policy direction for each of iraq and iran. One related to iran that says quote, additional actions to demonstrate that the theater remains set with respect to our own capabilities to carry out military operations against Irans Nuclear program if necessary, end quote. Would you elaborate on what you mean by that. Thanks, senator. In fact when i was the commander, we developed a plan that would attack Irans Nuclear program. It was quite thoroughly developed, rehearsed. And the theater was set. In other words, as senator ernst would appreciate we had all the position, the fuel, everything is there so that if you need to conduct an attack like that on relatively short notice, you can do it. The theater has remained set by and large ever since. I think theres the possibility of adjustments now because some of the countries i think would be more accommodating to basing than they were at that time, saudi arabia foremost among them. I think its time to very publically lay out how we have postured our forces, again, not giving away major secrets here, Something Like that. But ensuring that the region knows and iran knows that if need be, we can do what is necessary with our military forces. What message does the absence of a United States Navy Aircraft Carrier Group send to iran, syria, russia on the one hand and the sunni gulf states on the other hand . There are limits to u. S. Military power. What i dont know is whether that means that theres none in not only the arabian gulf but also the arabian sea. In the past we have actually had two out there or at least a minimum of one. Although that one might sit off the coast sort of south of pakistan flying its aircraft up into afghanistan every day. If theres none in either locations, again, thats a statement that there are distinct limits to what it is were capable of doing and therefore, there are limits to what we can do to help the forces in the region. Moving to syria. You write, we could for example tell assad that the use of barrel bombs must end and if they continue we will stop the Syrian Air Force from flying. I suspect he will not listen to us if we tell him that so we must stop him if we want them to stop. Did you propose this policy to president obama while you were in government . Yeah. When syria started i was the director of the cia, not in uniform anymore and certainly didnt have any responsibility for military actions with respect to syria. Did you support that policy that others recommended . Is. I dont remember a recommendation or barrel bonds at that time. There was no lebanese, isis, no maybe limited with advisers on the ground. Theres russia with air missiles and fighter aircraft. Could you explain what exactly it would look like if we were to stop assad from using these barrel bombs given the presence of russia in such heavy numbers now . I think russia would get advanced warning once certain assets are in the air. This doesnt mean you have to penetrate into the sbintegrated air defense. You can do this with lots of different forms of cruise missiles coming off of ships, subs and planes. Thank you. My time expired. On behalf of the chairman ill recognize senator kane. This testimony has been quite helpful im going to go into areas where im confused an interested in your opinion. We have had a lot of testimony before this Committee Really over the last year and a half most recently, general austins Posture Hearing in march of this year that talks about the instability were seeing in the region as kind of a spiking of a longstanding sunni shia divide that is at some points relative live calm and at other points pretty significant. And yet ive also heard others say that might be overstated. It could be more arab persian or all of them together. But i just would like to ask your ask your opinion on this. Do you think the sunni shia divide is widening and is that a significant contributing factor to the challenges were seeing . I think that there has been a widening of the secretarian divide. I think what you see in syria is a civil war but i would also point out there are also ethnic overtones because in syria alone you have a kurdish element that clearly wants and has now achieved a degree of greater autonomy and in iraq and in other countries you have what might be more of a tribal or say an islamist versus nonislamist as is the case in libya with a real civil war but largely between sunni arabs or in tunisia where the leaders agree with each other or at least not to be opposed to the bitter end but actually reach some compromise. To the extent so multiple factors and thats my sense, too, from my limited experience. To the extent that some of the instability is caused by a sectarianty vied would you agree the union not plant our feet on one side versus the other. Its not the u. S. s issue and we need to be careful and just kind of be mindful of not giving the impression that were taking a side in the sectarian divide . I think thats accurate and when people say oh, youre on the side of the gulf countries, we would merely point out that we have supported the shia arabs in iraq and if it were not for our action, sunni arabs would still be ruling the country. Indeed. Another strategic challenge, it seems like the areas where we have done best in the battle against isil are the areas where we worked in close cooperation with the kurds. I was with senator donnelly at the joint operations in july i guess and then some of the activities of the u. S. And kurds working together in Northern Syria have had some succecessuc. Sadly no success doesnt create challenges and on the syrian side it struck me as odd that a long time trying to get turkey against isil, that turkey then decided okay now its time we really want to participate in this and then theres obviously been tension between turkey and some of the very elements that kurdish elements that are having success against isil. I would be interested your opinion on the turkish role here without them cutting the legs out of the kurds. Turkey has been an ally for decades, very, very important country in the defense first against the soviet and continues to play a very Important Role and very significant that again general allen and others did great work to get access into the air base and get pledges by turkey to make the movement of isil through their country into syria much more difficult. But clearly there are historic tensions between turkey and their kurdish population, very sadly, very tragically there is now much greater violence as a ceasefire and various explanations as to why this has happened and whether the blame lies in the capitol of turkey or out with the kurds themselves but this is another complicated factor without question. And i think we saw that the Kurdish Regional governor of iraq which saw turkey would be very, very supportive as exporting oil through turkey and so forth, when they tried to reenforce ka banny, found it very difficult to move that until the u. S. Again offered its convenient authority and brought people together and helped push that through. So theres some historic tensions there as well. So again, the bottom line if you very, very rightly identified there are sectarian divides that are important unless youre caught in the middle of an ethnic divide, when thats the most important and then theres also a tribal overlay in countries like again libya, t e tunisia and egypt. Thank you. Let me recognize senator browns. Thank you, sir. General, thank you very much for your service to our country. Over the last year or so Prime Minister of israel has come before us and expressed his concern with regard to what i would call a nuclear concession agreement which our administration has proposed. King abdullah has been before us and said on the day that it was announced that one of his pilots had been incinerated, he said thank you for the f16s but he says it would be very appropriate if we could also receive some of the armorments which we have been waiting on as a country for 24 months. Then in the spring of this year saudi arabia along with the coalition of kuwait, jordan, egypt and uae, when they began their campaign in support of or at least in their attempt to make headway we found out about it as a nation after it occurred. Seems to me that that does not suggest in any one of those occasions the deep degree of cooperation and trust with those traditional partner that is we have. You mentioned the need for coalition maintenance. Could you give us your assessment on what needs to be done right now to perhaps begin the process of building and maintaining that coalition that we have been relying on in the middle east for years . Sure. And some of the elements of course were in my ownipening statement and requests for weapon systems that have taken a long time to be approved and wouldnt seem to threaten any balances about which we are concerned. Thats particularly interesting now that there is a convergence of interest between israel and the gulf states as an example. The integration of Different Military capabilities of the countries themselves, take Ballistic Missile defense, Early Warning systems and so forth, again, this is something we have been pushing. Secretary carter has encouraged. Theres more we can do in those areas as well. Again, this is really coming down to a question of whether well be there when they need us most. Theres no question there have been strains and some of the episodes in recent years have generated some concern. We have to be careful not to overdo it because theres a desire for you know, the request never stop. But i think we do have to reassure these countries and ive laid out some ways in the Opening Statement on how we should go about that. I would like to go back to one of the thoughts and you indicated that we should make it Crystal Clear that we would not allow uranium enrichment to occur with regard to are the iranians activity. To weapons grade. Do you think thats missing in the or one of the items which was missing in the arrangement or the proposal that administration has brought forward . I think we can make it more clear and frankly, if congress and the white house were to do it together, if this was, you know, seen as ironclad, again, remember of course, its not members of this congress or this white house, it will be their successors successors, but establishing a u. S. Policy that becomes, again, very, very foundational, i think, would be a very important move. The president did in a letter to one of your house of representatives congressman laid this out but then theres a little qualification later on. Again, this is a time just to be absolutely clear straightforward and i think that that opportunity is there. I agree with you. I wish it would have been included in the proposal we saw. Finally, with regard to reconciliation, i noted one item about building and trying to find the coalitions. I just wanted to a clarification with regard to isis. Do you see any reconciliation ever available with those who we now term as isis . Certainly not with any of their leaders, middle leaders or probably the bulk of the rank in file. It is probably beyond redemption. I wouldnt rule out the possibility of a few misguided souls that want to come back to the fold. A fair amount was made that we should deal with the al qaeda affiliate in syria. I didnt say anything of the sort. What i did say is we should try to strip away the general has had a number of groups that probably would have been classified as moderate elements drift to it. It had resources and probably more importantly is fighting against the force that is we were supporting had to accept that they would not do that as a condition of our providing them weapons in training. I do think that theres a possibility that there might be some subelements and certainly some fighters that can be wooed back to the cause. We did this you know, it was not popular throughout the ranks in iraq in february 2007 when i said we were going to have to sit down with people who have our blood on their hands, al qaeda, iraq, that did not mean that we sat down with the leaders of al qaeda, iraq, we tried to capture them. It did mean there were a number of individuals below that. With whom we did deal. And did bring them in ultimately, you know there are 103,000 or so sons of iraq of which about 80,000 were sunni arab and there were shia as well. Ones that wanted to shed their ties with the militia particularly after the militia were defeated. Thank you, sir. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you general for being here today. The middle east is an area that is very complicated and theres a lot of incidence stability there to say the least. So how would you rank the most destabilizing forces in the middle east if you were to look at assad, isil, iran and its activities in the region, al qaeda . Well, i mean theyre all sources of enormous instability and really again problems that extend beyond the region. Would you be able to rank them . I dont think i can, no. On a given day we might be more concerned with the plot by Islamic State. Which might actually do enormous damage in europe to one of our allies or per harps inspire something in the United States. On another day it might be the actions of iran and providing lethal objects on israel. In the ten years that you served in the middle east, has it always can thus there, it could have been the taliban, you know, there was always just the whole range of entities who created tremendous instability in that area . Has it always been that way in the middle east . Oh, no. I think the instability in the middle east is much greater now than it was, say, when i was the commander of u. S. Central command from 2008 through 2010. I mean, for one thing weve had the arab spring, its not just a result of extremist elements, Bashar Al Assad or iran. It is the throwing over of longtime dictators who did achieve a degree of stability in their countries. But obviously at such great expense that ultimately the people rejected them. So, i think thats probably the single biggest cause of the instability. And what you see then is groups like the Islamic State and indeed in some degree to some degree iran and others that are taking advantage of ungoverned or inadequately governed spaces. I think one of the lessons of the postarab spring is that if an area is ungoverned or inadequately governed extremists may well seek activities in those locations. Hence your caution about assad, and if he were to be toppled, then who would come in to take his place . There are some who have said that we ought to support the partitions of iraq, turning to iraq, so that the kurds, the shia, the sunnis would have their areas. And i believe you said today that that would be a bad idea. Did you say that . I did. And do you see any kind of scenario where partitioning iraq in some way would actually lead to some level of stability in allowing that country to go forward . Its a wonderful question. I have no intellectual objection to the concept of a shiastan, sunnistan and kurdistan. I have never had anyone explain adequately to me, though, how you get to particularly the sunnistan and the shiastan. Who is it that draws the boundaries. What happens in terms of oil revenue for sunnistan which has no Oil Production in the footprint that it now occupies. So, again, this is a there is very serious practical issues here, which if not resolved result in a civil war and youll have syria part two except in iraq. So, again, intellectually, academically, okay, but tell me how youre going to get there in a country in which the politics are so tracfractious that the s arabs feel so alienated from baghdad. This will be a civil war. Tragically there has been further sectarian displacement during the latest violence, as there was, in fact, in the 20052006 time frame to a considerable degree. But certainly by no means divided and, again, the concept for how the sunnis would survive, how theyd generate revenue, how all of this would work i think are quite problematic. So, would you say that any kind of Movement Toward that that kind of partitioning should come from within . It certainly shouldnt be imposed upon them from very, very good point. We have not had much luck doing things that way. Well, i mean, the boundaries were drawn by outsiders yes. And you see them be obliterated now to some degree. No, i think you have raised a very, very important point. And that is that whatever the future is, its going to have to be egrow agreed upon or its go be fought over. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i have one more question, im running out of time, but would you mind . Please go ahead. Thank you. Over the weekend the u. S. Began militarytomilitary talks with russia following the arrival of additional Russian Military equipment including tanks and fighters already in aircraft in syria. I just wondered what would your primary objectives be if you were holding these talks with russia . Make sure that nothing goes bump in the night. That theres not an operation carried out by either side that is misconstrued by the other, is misinterpreted and ends up in shooting where there doesnt need to be shooting. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The same as we actually have shiptoship conversations with iranians. We had shiptoship conversations with chinese in the counterpiracy mission off somalia, we had ship to ship with iranian ships that were actually helping with the counterpiracy mission. Thank you, mr. Chair. General petraeus, i apologize for having to step out. Ive been to two Committee Meetings since then. I was here to listen to your Opening Statements. I have to agree with the chair, i think you did an extraordinary job in kind of setting the stage for the discussion and some of the concerns we should have in the region. I did want to go back, and i do apologize if others asked you to expand on this. If you did, just let me know and ill go back to the record. But when you were talking about proposing enclaves as eventual safe havens within syria, could you give me an idea of what that would look like . Over what reasonable time frame could be do it . To what extent could that potentially have a positive impact on the on the refugee situation in the region . Just give me a little bit better idea of how that would play out. I dont think i can give you a timeline. It will start with us actually making a declaration that the barrel bombs are going to stop and well defend whatever is in that enclave. What strategic positions are we taking to end the barrel bomb . What would the u. S. And potentially Coalition Partners be doing to make sure that just ceases . You have a policy decision and a policy statement that says the barrel bombs stop and if they dont, your air force stops flying. Our military can figure out how to stop bashars air force from flying. I have another question could i on the enclave, senator . Please. The enclave is hugely important when it comes to refugees. I mean, whats happening is the refugees are just just giving up. And so they are very much they would want to go back i think still now if theres any hope, and an enclave gives them hope. Without that over time youre just going to see a continued exodus and it is already overwhelming obviously borders in countries in europe. You know, once you create an enclave, it could on the one hand be a safe haven, on the other hand be a huge target. So, then, how do we you know, weve attempted to train these Free Syrian Army as a potential the original thought was not to put them in an offensive posture but to put them in some sort of defensive posture so they themselves could create i guess enclaves around the areas that they maybe came from, and thats not working. But how do we, then, make sure that we have the presence on the ground to ensure the security of these so that they would be perceived as a safe haven in the region versus the mass exodus that were seeing now . Well, first, again, theres a policy decision that says were going to protect you against all ene enemies, not just the Islamic State. And i think if they understand that and if you put a sufficient constellation of assets over them, that you could do a reasonably good job with that and equip them with some radios and other Communications Devices so that we can be alerted if theyre experiencing pressure. Again, i dont want to make light of this. This is very complicated military activity. But it is doable. And at a certain point im not, you know, at all against having some of our forces in an enclave assuming its in a guide and assist role. Thats right. Shifting to a different direction, iran. Last week the president doubled down on his position to not allow Petroleum Exports from the United States, while at the same time the iran deal was going to allow iran to export oil. I think some estimates after the sanctions are lifted as many as a Million Barrels a day. Its my understanding they need a price point of about 130 a barrel for them to really start balancing their books. No, i dont think so at all, senator. Not iran. So you think its lower than that. I think its a good bit lower than that. I may have my facts wrong they wouldnt sell the extra Million Barrels if they didnt youre saying for their budget . I think theyre okay. Let me finish the thought process, then. Based on your military and intelligence experience, do you believe that the United States, being able to also participate in the Global Markets, and being able to export oil and other Energy Products to other nations who may become dependent on iran is also a strategic weapon that we should be looking at . The look, this is not just based on my military intelligence, im a partner in kkr, one of the Global Investment firms big private equity firms in our country. And first of all, by the way, the analysis on crude oil exports shows not only would the price of wti west texas intermediate go up slightly so the prices would be better off, it would have an impact on brent crude prices which would come down the global price which is a lot of what we were finding. And the price at the pump probably would go down. So, its a very interesting if you look at i think its the cbo that did the analysis of this. One of our analytical organizations here, i think on capitol hill, has looked at this. And its a very interesting dynamic. Beyond that, i dont think we should get involved in markets as a country unless we want to do Something Like sanctions. So, again, you wouldnt do it if you want to use sanctions or economic tools as a weapon, fine. But otherwise i think you have to be very careful about intervention on the global market. Mr. Chair, i apologize. Ill be brief. The 130 number i think was the kind of profit they would have to throw off to also fix their fiscal problems versus the actual market price. Or maybe to do investment in the fields in the future. Theres something there but, again thats what i was referring to. But i guess finally, i want to make sure i understand the answer to your question. Do you believe that the United States, being able to extract more energy from the regions under our jurisdiction and provide that energy, is a part of a strategic play to hedge against irans ability to go out, make more money, fund more malign activities, do more of the bad things theyre already doing . We ought to produce all the oil and gas we can if were making a profit. If we can enable countries like iraq to revive their oil industry as we did, it helps iraq. It funds their government by the way, theyre running a fiscal deficit now. But, again, this is really about Market Forces i think much more than getting involved in this as a country. The fact is, that the Energy Markets right now because of the u. S. Shale, the u. S. Oil Energy Revolution so far, most significant with crude oil in the Global Markets and the next big disruption is going to be in the liquefied gas markets because of the approval of six or seven lng plants for the United States, theyll be and thats going to be a huge challenge for president putin. As i mentioned earlier, putins hand is getting weaker. Hes running enormous deficits. Hes carrying out very costly adventures outside his country. Hes got a limited amount of foreign reserves left to fund this. And he doesnt have access to the Global Markets because of the sanctions on him and on the major many of his major banks. So i think hes got problems down the road, and, oh, by the way, when our lng hits european markets just like australian lng is hitting asian markets youll see a compression of Natural Gas Prices even though hes selling off the pipeline and theyll have to liquefy and reship and gasify. General petraeus, thank you for being here and for your insights into whats happening in the middle east. I know last week general austin was here, and he got questioned by a number of members of this committee about the training equipment mission, and unfortunately what he had to say about that mission suggests to me, and i think to others on the committee, that it has not accomplished what it was supposed to. And my recollection is that you advocated for a similar kind of mission early, before it actually started. And i wonder if you have thoughts about what can be done at this point . What should we be doing . Is there any way to right it . Should we just abandon it and go on to other areas . First of all, you cant abandon it because anything we want to accomplish in syria has to be enabled by a sunni arab force on the ground, whether its the defeat of the Islamic State or creating a context within which the Bashar Al Assad regime might be willing to go to the negotiating table. Or stemming the flow, the exodus, of refugees from syria that is overflowing european countries. So how do we make i think the central the central issue is that we have to pledge and then take action to support these fighters against anybody who comes at them. Whether its isis, which we want them to fight, or Bashar Al Assad or Jabhat Al Nusra or even other elements. So, again, were going to have to support them against all of these. They want to fight bashar. Weve at least got to enable them to fight bashars forces in a local way without, as i mentioned in my statement, creating the conditions where bashar goes before we have a sense of what it is that we want to see follow him, or what will follow him. Thank you. In your testimony, you talked about establishing enclaves in syria that would be protected, which i interpreted as whats normally described as safe zones. Is what you were suggesting by the enclaves you were talking about . Sa safe havens, i think. They could be in the south as well as the north. In fact, theres a reasonable one in the south i think arguably contiguous to jordan. Last week we heard at the Foreign Relations committee from michael powers of mercy corps which has done a lot of work, humanitarian work, in syria. And he expressed grave concerns about establishing safe zones. He suggested that it would be very difficult to keep them actually safe without a lot of investment of Additional Air power and troops. He also thought they could become a target for extremists and that they could be used by some countries as an excuse to reject refugees. So, how does your proposal suggest we address those issues . Well, were going to defend it. I mean, what hes saying, you just cant declare something a safe zone and expect everybody to honor that. We would have to again, this is the key. The forces that we support arent going to stay supportable, they wont even stay alive as we have seen, if we dont take very active measures, have a credible campaign for them to pursue. And part of that campaign should be establishing enclaves. I dont really like the word safe zones. Theres nothing safe about a safe zone, unless youre going to defend it. And the people on the ground will judge whether or not youre doing that and theyll theyll vote with their feet whether theyre willing to stay or even come back or depart with all a number of the others. So, would we would have to invest in supporting that zone. It doesnt mean, i dont think, that you have to have our boots on the ground in that enclave although, again, at some point securitys adequate, i would be comfortable doing that, just as we were comfortable doing it in iraq. Finally, one of the things that i think we have not done as successfully as we need to, to counter the isil propaganda. Do you have thoughts about how we could be better responding . This is a really, really difficult problem because of the magnitude of it, the sheer number, the way that machines are used to amplify, to magnify. I think weve got to get smarter about that. Ive talked to people at google ideas, for example, about various techniques that could be used on our side in the same way that theyre used on their side. We did have a program at centcom during part of the time that i was the commander where we had what we termed credible voices. These were native speakers, sometimes dialect speakers, with academic training in various religious disciplines and so forth. And they were quite effective. The problem is, its very costly. And, again, whether that effect is really measurable is something that could be debated. So, i think we do have to partner more effectively with those that really understand the technology and then we have to activate those who are willing to engage in this. I dont know that it can by any means be all government. I just dont think we can generate the Critical Mass that would be sufficient for this task. My time is up. But should it be spearheaded by centcom or by state department or coordinated effort . The problem with it being spearheaded by state department can be best explained by an episode when i was a centcom commander and the undersecretary of state, highranking government official, came to centcom to ask i think for 1 ml million to 2 million from us to help them with their program. The state department has never been adequately funded. I dont know if senator graham is here, hes the subcommittee chair i think still of the Key Committee and has generally agreed with that. But we have always called for state and a. I. D. To do more and more and more, and yet we have not given them the appropriations nor in some cases the authorization to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Admiral mccain. General petraeus, thank you for appearing in front of the committee today. And i think you can see from the attendance at this committee today that your opinions and your thoughts are very highly valued, so thank you for sharing with us today thank you. Your thoughts. I would like to go back to the kurds a little bit. I think weve talked a lot about it, and everybodys asked questions but maybe not in all manners. The kurds have been a great ally to us and ive heard that from many of the men and women that have served in that region. Theyve been a great partner for 25 years or so. And they have a healthy respect for the rule of law. Theyve been very help fful wita number of minorities, ethnic minorities, religious minorities. And what can we do to better provide support for the Kurdish Regional government, the kurdish peshmurga . I believe we need to double down in this effort regardless of whether they may push beyond their regional boundaries, but they do provide an area, whether we can engage them in shaping operations, whether it is to provide an area for us to base. Can you give us some thoughts on the advantages on this . I can. The fact is we based there. As you know. We have headquarters. We have operational headquarters. We have very Close Relationships in both military and intel lives. We are very, very closely linked. I think the single biggest issues are the provision of weapons and other supplies to streamline that, you know, ive said we have to support Prime Minister abadi. We need to strengthen him. That means we cant bypass him on these issues, but we need to figure out how to get this so ideally it doesnt have to touch down in baghdad, it can go directly to them. Some members are doing that with at least our tacit approval if not applause. I think thats the single biggest step we can take. Theres additional items, again, i happened to be there for a conference in the earlier part of this year and had a lot of people come and plea that particular case. The other is to determine the krg, the Kurdish Regional government, is in very, very difficult Financial Times right now because of the price of oil going down by 55 , not only reduced what they get, but its reduced the amount from which the 17 that they get from the Central Government is. And so theyre having a very difficult time. Theyre supporting hundreds of thousands of refugees on their soil. Anybody who goes up there and flies over this will see a camp every few kilometers. And indeed theyre fighting a war. And, again, if we could provide additional assistance to them that would be of support, i think that would be very valuable also. We have very much enabled them. We helped them hold off had it not been for Decisive Action actually at a critical moment last year, its very possible that the Islamic State might have gotten closer to the capital of erbil. That held that off. And then has really retaken most of the area around the Kurdish Regional government. And candidly there are no more disputed internal boundary areas in iraq. They are generally by the Kurdish Regional government as a result of the operations that have taken place with our support. Very good. I appreciate those thoughts very much. I would tend to agree. I would love to see more assistance going to the krg, of course, in consultation with the iraqi government. I applaud you on that as well. If we could turn to turkey just very briefly. Weve talked a little bit about the fact that they have mobilized. And unfortunately what we have seen is that through their mobilization of resources, whether its political, military, instead of really pushing back against isis, we see theres been a turn to mobilize against pkk. And what do you see the impact is to those Coalition Forces . The antiisis Coalition Forces . What are the greater implications of that and thoughts maybe from some of those Coalition Members . I dont know that this has a huge effect on u. S. Or Coalition Forces. Theyre not being diverted to assist. Theres a certain slight degree of support that weve provided in the past in the intelligence realm that i dont imagine has changed a great deal. What i think is very significant is whats happening within turkey as a result of this. The sheer escalation of the violence, a situation that was relatively calm and seemed to be heading toward one in which there was greater and greater reconciliation between the government in ankara and the sizable part of their population in turkey that is kurdish, with the allowance of certain meeting certain desires of that kurdish population. And all of a sudden the wheels have come off the bus, and whether this is connected with a future election in turkey or something else, it is very distressing to see. Because, again, the violence on both sides now has escalated very, very rapidly and quite considerably. Great, thank you. My time has expired. Thank you, general. Thank you, admiral. General, first, courage is an element of character. And courage to admit mistakes particularly in an open forum such as you did at the beginning of your testimony today to me is a huge indicator of character, which i think is the essential quality of leadership, and i want to compliment and acknowledge that you did something that wasnt easy this morning. And its very meaningful. Question about russia and syria. The recent buildup of russian troops, of course, is very worrisome. On the other hand, russia was you should pardon the expression, an ally when it came to getting rid of the chemical weapons. Is there a geopolitical opportunity where russia may recognize the danger of isis to them to their ideology and common cause not to dump aside precipitously but to work on a negotiated agreement where assad would be moved aside . Because assad is isis evil twin. He brought them into being. Exactly. And continues to inspire the recruiting and its a magnetic attraction. Exactly. So talk to me about the possibility of talks with the russians, seeing i believe countries act in their interests. And in this case they have an interest in not seeing isis m a metamorse in their country . Is there an opportunity to work in concert with the russians to move assad aside, perhaps guaranteeing their presence . You mentioned the bases on the mediterranean. This is not something id rule out at all, senator. I think, again, theres no question they have an interest. Theyre worried about the effect in the caucasuses. There are chechens that are down fighting without question in syria. Theres a worry, of course, theyll go back presumably and be more effective. In life. They could have contacted the coalition of more than 60 countries and said where could you bed down our aircraft. How can you integrate us into the air tasking order, wed like to drop bombs on isis, just like you guys. It appears that these recent moves theyve simply said were going to shore up assad no matter what. Its really, again, youre right, this is about National Interests. And their National Interest is to preserve the naval base that they have at tartuse down on the coast and then the air base. Perhaps theres a way to assure that without necessarily guaranteeing the presence of assad. There could be at some point. Again, if there are serious negotiations. Its not the kind of thing that you would just rule out unequivocally. This is real complicated right now. If they really enter the fight on the side of assad rather than protecting, again, this coastal enclave that matters to them strategically, geostrategically well see some complications and you dont want to be in direct conflict. Look, russia is an important power. It has carried out very provocative actions. It doesnt mean that we need to be provocative in return. But we do need to be firm in return. We do need to establish what is unacceptable, actions, ukraine as an example. And we have to do that here, but weve got to see this develop a bit further. Recognizing, again, that there is a very clear way for them if they just wanted to attack isis, and that would be to join the coalition. Changing the subject, you talked about barrel bombs and air power. Is there an alternative and im keenly im very aware of the problems, but an alternative of providing closely vetted Syrian Opposition with man pads or similar weapons which could neutralize Assads Air Force without mobilizing a major air war and coordinated strikes and essentially escalating the conflict . In other words, you can take care of barrel bombers from the ground or from the air. This has been an issue in virtually any of these kinds of endeavors since afghanistan. Exactly. And the concern, of course, is that one gets out of hands and drifts over somewhere else and takes down a civil airliner. And so the risk in this has to be very, very carefully measured and mitigated. There are some techniques, some technologies, some other things, that can be employed. Im not sure that we have not done that or that other countries have not done that. But its a very risky proposition. And we would we have to do exercise enormous caution if we employ that. And those mitigation factors would be crucial. Yes. Final question, do people wake up in iraq and think of themselves as iraqis or as sunnis and shias or as kurds . Sadly, i think in recent times it is more their sectarian or ethnic identity rather than iraqi. Having said that, i remember when the iraqi soccer team won the i think it was the asia cup, and that night there were cheers all the way from basra through baghdad to erbil. So, there can be unifying features. And lets never forget the most important seforce is the oil revenues to the provinces and ministries and so forth including the Kurdish Regional government. Thank you. Thank you, general. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And general, good to see you again. I also want to echo what senator kane said about your comments earlier, very much appreciate you being here and what you did, what youve done for the country. I wanted to just talk a little bit i know theres ben a lot written on the surge and what you did and what the chairman and others did with regard to that important strategy. To me its an example of where you have a strategy, you have rhetoric, and then you actually have action. What i mean by rhetoric, you know, the president and others announced what were going to do and then we took action. I think one of the broader strategic failures right now that certainly were seeing with all the chaos in the world is that we, in many ways as a country at the high levels whether its the president or the secretary of defense or others, were talking about things, red lines in syria, Bashar Al Assads got to go, even secretary carter gave what i thought was a very powerful speech at the shangrila dialogue when we were out there right. On the builtup violence in the south china sea. But none of these statements have been followed up by action. Unlike what you did with the surge. What happens when as a country we talk a lot but dont act . Well, first of all, i think we have taken action. And i have to be somebody who sits here and says that where have we those three examples . We killed osama bin laden, took out i gave three examples. Well, no, but i was merely going to say that this is not a record of unmitigated lack of action. But in my statement i said that inaction in some cases inaction has consequences, and i think that is the case with some of the cases that were dealing with in syria, without question. So, what do you think happens when we dont take action . Well, if you do not act, if youre others may. Others will question. Again, you know, the art of this is figuring out when to take action and, of course, what action to take. This is not an argument that you should always take action everywhere all the time but should you take action to solve all the problems. Should you take action if youre actually what im talking about is not just random action, im talking about action to implement stated policies that you already announced as a country. Are you hearing in your travels throughout the world that the United States is losing credibility in terms of our National Security and Foreign Policy . Look, there are some questions out there. And what i was going to do is point out where there have been actions, because there this is not, again, a record of no action. There have been some very, very courageous actions. I took very tough issues to this president , and he took action. There have also been some on which there was not action. And if those in which theres not action taken really matter, then obviously, again, there are consequences. They accumulate. I do think that the the syrian red line that was not a red line, which had a decent outcome in the end as was pointed out, 90 or so of the chemical weapons gone, but the way we got to that was quite a circuitous path and to be bailed out by president putin is a very interesting outcome. It is not the kind of case, i dont think, that instills, you know, and, again, a great sense of confidence in the United States. Let me ask another in terms of actions, you know, in another area of the world, in the artic, were seeing a lot of Strategic Interests from the russians and other nations for reasons of natural resources, transportation routes, youre seeing a really pretty dramatic aggressive move by the russians in terms of a new artic military command, four new bcts there, 40 ice breakers, a lot of heated rhetoric there. And then in terms of the u. S. Action if we were to remove our substantial arctic forces, say, the only airborne bct in the entire arctic or asiapacific, what do you think that would do in terms of additional russian reactions in that part of the world . Its not i have expertise in a reasonable number of places in the world but ill defer to you on the arctic im afraid. Okay, let me ask one final question, general, i think theres a bit of a strategic irony going on where some of us think in certain parts of the world were withdrawing and yet when you look at and you and i have talked about the instruments of american power, not only the military, but things like energy that weve talked about, the ability in terms of finance, the ability resurgence of manufacturing in the United States, best universities in the world by far, i mean, the list agriculture, the list is very, very strong, where we have so many advantages over other countries, whether its china, whether its russia, longterm advantages. How do we utilize those in a way that show that we still are the Country Holding all the cards on so many different instruments of power that countries measure power by . Well, first of all, we dont own all the cards, but rum efls of americas demise have been greatly exaggerated to paraphrase mark twain. I teach a course called the coming north american decade at the honors college. Ive done a monograph in harvard on the great new emerging economy north america. When i was asked a year or so ago in london after the american century, what, and i thinkthy expected me to say the asian century or the chinese century, i said the north american decades. The bottom line is our economy is fundamentally its got lots of challenges and theres a lot of issues that we need to resolve some with the help of this body working together with the other body, all that notwithstanding, at a time when the number two economy is slowing down quite significantly, we dont yet see the rise of india, the euro zone has got a very differentiated recovery, the u. S. Has continued we may be in the longest recovery in our history. It has not achieved escape velocity. Theres aspects of it, again, that are not great. But when you look at the rest of the world, and when you look at the fundamentals of the United States, whether its demography compared to the others, whether it is the values that we share with our two neighbors, you dont see mexico asking china to pivot to north america to help them balance against the United States the way every country that has a maritime boundary with china is doing to us. So, there are enormous strengths here in this country. You enumerated a number of them. Ive laid them out elsewhere. There are a number of actions that this body, again, could take to address issues that are really head winds to us capitalizing on this tremendous opportunity because of the Energy Revolution, foremost, but also the i. T. Revolution which enables all the others, the manufacturing revolution thats now beginning to gather steam and the Life Sciences revolution which is starting to gather momentum as well. We are the leaders or among the leaders in every one of these areas, and we have a number of really great, again, fundamentals here that are going to keep this country and north america writ large in a very enviable position. I would not want to be in any other economy than this one right here. And i now get paid to analyze those kinds of factors and elements. Thank you, general. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Okay. General, thank you very much for a lifetime of Extraordinary Service under difficult circumstances. Thanks to you for yours. As i noted in a response to a local newspaper article here, you served nine stints under my command in iraq centcom and afghanistan alone. Each of those as a week or a bit longer. I was very skeptical before the first one. I didnt appreciate the great opportunity we were going to have we can understand the skepticism. Yes. And under duress, i accepted colonel Lindsay Graham of the judge advocate general corps of the u. S. Air force reserve, and i must say that after every single one of those visits you came and provided a real nugget in one of these big ideas that helped us come to grips with one of the serious issues we were confronting, starting wish issues that we had at camp buka as you recall in iraq and carrying all the way through various legal conundrums that we had with president karzai in afghanistan. Thank you. You certainly made my day, and it was a very small contribution. And i am nonpartisan, by the way, mr. Chairman. Really, honestly. But i really appreciate that. The bottom line is i enjoyed the heck out of it and i learned a lot under your command and working with people in the region. So, lets try to see if we can make some sense out of the world as it is. Theres two things going on at once i think in the mideast, a fight for the heart and soul of islam, and a demand for social justice particularly by young people and women. Do you agree with that the . Certainly among the two biggest issues. I dont know if i would put some economic issues, that might be in the social justice category, but that would be another element. The only reason i mention it, i just want the American People to understand that young people are not going to live in dictatorships for our convenience any longer. Do you agree with that . Theyre not doing it for our convenience to begin with. But i think what the real point here is that the age of the yes. Dictators is certainly under a certain degree of strain, and weve seen it boil over in libya, tunisia, egypt, syria, some degree yemen. Would you agree that america should take sides in this struggle and side with young people and say, yes, youre right to demand a larger voice about your children if youre a mother, youre right to want more Economic Opportunity . We should embrace what theyre asking for. I dont know that i would do this as a universal declaration, but i would certainly have that in the back of my mind as i looked at each and every case. Well, im going to do it as a universal declaration. Thats just me, though. Now, on the on the other side of islam, theres a do you agree that most muslims reject radical islam . Yes. And that is a to suggest otherwise, you really dont understand the region. That the biggest victim of radical islam is other people in the faith. Its generally muslims. Yeah. And you have been there more than anyone i know. Dont you agree with me that the good news for all of us is that we can partner with people in the faith who are willing to partner with us and destroy this radical ideology and its going to require these partnerships . Correct. We have sought to do that. We have done that. We are doing it in our own country. To say people are all the same, they dont know what theyre talking about im a presbyterian. I dont think all presbyterians are the same frankly. Good, good. Nor do i, general. The point im trying to make for people to look at the mideast everybody is the same, and everybody is radical, they miss the boat. Most fathers and mothers dont want to give their daughters to isil. Correct. So, that is something we need to build upon. In terms of iraq, the president has said the goal is to degrade and destroy isil. That is the right idea, do you agree . Destroy is a very high bar in the military lexky son and its been lowered slightly to defeat which is adequate. I would love to destroy them as well. We did destroy al qaeda in iraq and sadly they were able to resurrect and gain strength in syria and come back to iraq. We are where we are and the surge did work and it was a marvelous thing to witness. Do you agree more american Ground Forces would help lead to the defeat of isil in iraq . What ive laid out here today is indeed a requirement for additional forces. Not Ground Combat forces. Additional advisers at Brigade Headquarters level. Probably augmentation. Whats going to happen is, you know, you will get a Critical Mass at some point of sunni forces, and it will start off set off a chain reaction, as we did when we had the anbar awakens where it rippled up and down the Euphrates River and ultimately it goes up the tigriss. I expect well have more training locations and more locations where well have advisers and assistants. But would a couple aviation battalions help, Army Aviation battali battalions . It would help. Youre going to incur greater risk obviously. Definitely. And youre now getting in to this in a way we have obviously attack helicopters which we have employed. Right. Now youre starting to add numbers quite considerably. And id be concerned about possible ramifications of that. And im over, but i do want to talk about syria. Is there anyone left to train in syria that would have the capability to both destroy isil and push assad out . Is there an indigenous force left to train . I think there are forces that if we pledged to support them against everybody, not just fight the Islamic State, and start off by actually allowing them to solidify control over an enclave right. Before we launch them or push them into an offensive what about a Regional Force . Would you support the the creation of a Regional Force with two goals in mind, to destroy isil and push assad out . Id have id have concerns about that. What concerns . I think to have neighbors go into one of the countries in this region, again, every countrys different. And but to go into a country that is as already fractured as is syria, i think there are some complications with that. Finally, assad should go, he must go . He has to go ultimately. But the key word there is ultimately underscored in bold letters, because until we have a sense of what will replace him, we need to be very careful not to push him out. Because what comes after could actually be even worse. How many people do you think are left that would be willing to fight both isil and assad . And how long would it take to train this indigenous force . And would you have american boots on the ground as part of that training . I id put them certainly in the ground first in turkey and jordan. Id certainly be willing to put them into an enclave when its solidified, secure, and youre not going to put people in jeopardy of ending up in an orange jumpsuit in a cage. But how long do you think it will take i dont know, senator. You give me the assumptions and i could give you a timeline, but, again, theres a host of assumptions that would have to make before we could get any precision on that. Thank you very much. Thank you, senator. General, on behalf of chairman mccain, let thank you for your extraordinary testimony, insightful and thought provoking as always. And also for your Incredible Service to the country. And one thing that always impressed me about you is your dedication to the men and women you led was unshakeable, and everything you did was about those young soldiers and sailors and marine and airmen, thank you, sir. Thank you, senator. The hearing is adjourned. The popes visit to the u. S. , cspan has live coverage from washington, d. C. , the stop on the popes tour, thursday morning at 8 30 cspans live coverage begins from capitol hill as pope francis makes history becoming the first pontiff to address a joint meeting of congress. And friday morning at 10 00, live coverage from new york as the pope speaks to the United Nations General Assembly on cspan3, cspan radio and cspan. Org and later at 11 30 the pontiff will hold a multireligious service at the 9 11 memorial and museum world trade center, follow our coverage of the popes historic trip to the u. S. Live on tv or online at cspan. Org. A signature feature of booktv is your allday coverage of book fairs and festivals from across the country with top nonfiction authors. Heres our schedule. In early october its the southern festival of books in nashville. The weekend after that, were live from austin for the texas book festival. And near the end of the month, well be covering two book festivals on the same weekend. From our nations heartland its the wisconsin book festival in madison and back on the east coast the boston book festival. At the start of november well be in portland, oregon, for wordstock followed by the National Book awards from new york city and at the end of november were live for the 18th year in a row from florida for the Miami Book Fair international. Thats a few of the fairs and festivals this fall on cspan2s booktv. More from the road to the white house now with vermont independent senator and democratic president ial candidate Bernie Sanders. He hosted a town hall meeting. This runs just over an hour, 20 minutes. Thank you. Thank you, all, very much for coming out on a beautiful sunday morning to do something very, very radical. You ready for radical activity . Were going to practice democracy. Hows that . Let me begin by taking off my jacket. Let me thank melanie for her kind introduction, and let me thank shawn, who is with the sheet metalworkers union. What shawn understands and what i understand is that we do not grow the middleclass of this country without a strong trade union movement, and i am pledged to do everything that i can to make sure that happens. And let me thank jeff. Jeff is one of the millions of Unsung Heroes who every day goes to work as a teacher. And i know we talk a lot about the great Football Players and the great basketball and Baseball Players of this country. We pay them huge amounts of money. Do you know what, we do not pay enough attention, and we do not thank people like jeff for the work that they do. We announced our candidacy 4 1 2 months ago. And when i announced it, folks were very polite and very nice, but nobody thought we had a chance to do anything. But a lot has happened in the last 4 1 2 months. And i think the reason for that is that the issues that we are talking about are issues that are resonating with the American People. Needless to say, having gone all over this country and talked to a zillion people, you know, i hear a lot of remarks, and people are very kind and generous, but theres one remark that stands in stays in my mind is a young man, we were out on the west coast. And he came up to me, and he said, bernie, thank you, you are treating us like we are intelligent human beings and i so, you know, what a lot of politics passes for in this day and age and encouraged by the media, unfortunately, is a game of calling people names and attacking people every day and, you know, if i trip leaving the stage, it will be a front page story. The picture of me being face down on the ground. Or if i were to start viciously attacking hillary clinton, it would be all over the front pages of the paper, but i dont do that. I dont do that because i think that as a nation weve got a lot of work in front of us in order to focus on the most important issues facing our country. And what democracy is about is laying those issues on the table, understanding that honest people can differ with us, have different points of view. But debating those issues and seeing how we go forward in order to resolve them. It aint more complicated than that, and thats what ive been trying to do in this campaign. So, the campaign is not about how i am standing in the polls although, thank you, New Hampshire, were doing pretty well here. But, you know, but polls go up and polls go down, and whether its iowa or any place else, the real issue is let me take it a step further. Its not whether i win or not its whether we transform america in the direction that we think it needs to go. So, let me just start off by telling you something that i have full confidence that no other president ial candidate will tell you. And this is sometimes hard for people to grasp or to feel good about, but it is the simple truth. If Bernie Sanders it doesnt matter in a certain sense who is elected president , unless there is a Political Revolution in this country of many, many millions of people who are coming together, standing up and saying loudly and clearly, enough is enough. And im beginning to hear that all over this country. People saying, wait a second, you know . This country belongs to all of us and not just a handful of billionaires who can make Huge Campaign contributions. Now, the point that i make is that no president , not Bernie Sanders or anybody else, can do it alone is because of the following reasons wall street, Corporate America, the koch brothers, Huge Campaign contributors have enormous power. And if you think that any president you send me to the oval office, you think i can say to wall street, well, guys, i think its important that you start paying a tax on wall street speculation so that all of our kids will have the opportunity to go to public colleges and universities, tuition free, and theyre going to say, hey, damn it, bernie, its a great idea. Why didnt we think of that . You got it, man. Were going to spend millions lobbying to make sure that we have a tax on wall street speculation. And when i go to Corporate America and i say, hey, guys, you know, maybe its a good idea that youre not continue to shut down manufacturing plants in New Hampshire and vermont and all over this country and send our jobs to lowwage countries aboard, they say, why didnt we think of that, bernie . Fantastic idea. Thats what well do tomorrow. It doesnt happen like that. It doesnt happen like that. As everybody in this room knows, the only way that real change takes place is when millions of people at the Grassroots Level come together and fight back. You know, the fact that we have an africanamerican as president of the United States today, it didnt occur just because barack obama was a very strong and good candidate. It occurred because for 100 years africanamericans and their white allies fought courageously and some died in the struggle to say we will end racism in the United States of america. Thats how it happened. Obviously obviously we still have a long way to go in combatting racism. But thats how progress is made. We have made enormous steps forward in terms of fighting sexism in this country, because women for over 100 years have stood up with their male allies and say, we are not going to judge people based on their gender. Were going to try to break down sexism in america and give all of our people equal opportunity. Didnt happen because we had a couple of good senators. It happened because millions of people said, enough is enough. America is not about sexist policies. And if you if you look at what has happened and about years ago, look at whats happened in terms of gay rights in america in the last ten years, it is extraordinary. And that happened because people in the Gay Community stood up. They got arrested. They got beaten. And they worked with their straight allies and said, hey, in the United States of america, were going to judge people on their character and not based on their sexual orientation. Weve made huge progress in that area. So my point is that if you look at history, in general, american history, world history, that is how change takes place. So what this campaign is about, kind of uniquely, yeah, of course, im here today to ask for your support in the New Hampshire primary. Yes, im here to ask for your support to help me win the democratic nomination. And im asking for your support to help me make me president of the United States. But what i am also asking you is to be with me not just before the election, youve got to be with me the day after the election. And that is because no president can do it alone. The powers that be are just too powerful. But at the end of the day, when millions of people stand up and fight back, we win. Because while they may have the money, they may have the power, we have the people. And when people stand together, we win. Now, what id like to do is to take a few minutes well, actually, longer than a few minutes. To go over some of the issues that to my mind are the issues that are on the minds of the American People. Then well stop, well take your questions and your comments. To my mind, it is important for all of us to understand that we live in the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. Thats where we are today. Most people dont know that. Why dont they know that . Well, theyre too busy working two or three jobs. Theyre too busy being one of the 45 Million People living in poverty to really know that. They dont know it because almost all of the new income and wealth being created is going to the top 1 . Now, income and wealth inequality is an issue that can no longer be shoved underneath the rug. Its got to be brought out into the open, and together we are going to address this issue. And here is the simple truth. The United States today has more income and wealth inequality than any other major industrialized nation on earth, and it is worse today in america than at any time since 1928. In america today, the top 1 10th of 1 not 1 1 10th of 1 owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 . In america today, 58 of all new income being created, youve got people working crazy hours, long jobs, working seven days a week, 58 of all new income created is going to the top 1 . In america today, youve got one family. The Walton Family of walmart owning more wealth than the bottom 40 of the American People. In my view, that is a rigged economy, not an economy that works for american workers. It has got to change. And this campaign is sending a message to the billionaire class. Its a simple message. It is a straightforward message. And that is you cannot have it all. You are not going to continue to get huge tax breaks when children in america are going hungry. You cannot continue to send our jobs to china and other lowwage countries when millions of americans desperately need decent paying jobs. You are not going to continue to give the ceos of large corporations huge compensation packages at the same time as you cut the wages and the Health Care Benefits and the pensions of your employees. Your greed is going to end. And were going to end it for you. But it is not only the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality that we have got to address. There is another economic reality out there. And again, weve got to put these issues on the table because if were not discussing them, were not going to resolve them. And heres the issue. I think everybody who is fairminded understands that the Economy Today is far, far better than it was when george bush left office. All right, thats a fact. You know, i saw the republican debate, painfully for three hours. It was really quite amazing to me, the kind of amnesia these guys have. Every problem in the world, its cold, its raining, its not raining, its all Barack Obamas fault. Unbelievable. I never knew that one person had so much power to cause so many problems. They seem to have forgotten. I dont know why it is. Maybe they suffer shortterm amnesia. I dont know what it is. Seemed to have forgotten that when obama came into office, we were losing 800,000 jobs a month. 800,000 jobs and these guys say, well, yeah, were growing 175,000 jobs a month. Not enough. Yeah, its true. It is not enough. But its a hell of a lot better than losing 800,000 jobs a month. These guys worry about the deficit. Serious issue. But they forgot to tell us, i just dont know why they forgot it, that when bush left office, we had the largest deficit in the history of the country, 1. 4 trillion. Much lower today than it was then. Forgot to tell us that when bush left office, after all of the trickledown economics, after all of the deregulation, the american and worlds Financial System is on the verge of collapse, and economists were worried that youre going to stick your credit card into an atm machine and nothing would come out. That is the economy that obama inherited, and we should not forget that. But lets also be honest and acknowledge that for the last 40 years, 40, 40 years, under Republican Leadership and democratic leadership, what we have seen in this country is the disappearance of the american middle class. Now, young people dont know that because they live in the world today. They dont see the long picture. But many of us who are old do. And what we know today is that median Family Income is almost 5,000 less than it was in 1999. We know that male workers, the guy right in the middle of the economy, is making some 700 less in inflationadjusted income than he was 42 years ago. Women are making 1300 less today than they made in 2007. So the question that we have to ask ourselves is how does it happen when you have an explosion of technology which makes every worker in america more productive that despite all of that, people are working longer hours for lower wages . And my answer is that we are going to create an economy not designed to make the rich richer but to expand the middle class. I started off with a jacket, got rid of that. Sleeves are going up. Probably take my shirt off in a few minutes, and it will be quite the show here. No, i dont want to do that. I dont want to embarrass the other guys here. It wouldnt be a good thing for them. Let me talk about another issue that doesnt get the kind of full discussion that it deserves. And that is the issue of unemployment. Now, when every month the government comes out with a bunch of statistics on unemployment, the one you

© 2025 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.