neil: we are againsting from the defense department briefing, they say no confirmed reports of civilian casualty because of coalition operations in libya. the reports you have seen from the state-run media and government, when they do show charred bodies, blaming it on the united states and coalition forces, obviously this does not jibe. what is your sense of what the coalition leadership is saying? steve: there lab a a has been a dispute. they claim over 100 civilians have been claimed but you have defense secretary gates making the counterclaim that libyan government officials might actually be placing bodies of libyan civilians killed by the government if places where attacks have taken place. so bizarre charges and counter charges. so for, the bodies shown on state television have all been
shepard: and republicans and some democrats in congress say the united states military role in libya is unclear. maybe that say that because the united states military role is unclear. the defense secretary gates and secretary of state, hillary clinton, stressed the message that the role and the mission will shrink. it may. tonight the white house reports that the president will explain that in an address to the membership during fox report. with us now from washington, retired air force colonel and former united states assistant secretary of state for public affairs with us. good to see you. p.j. recently left the state department. but, first, one thing i have learned covering from the anchor desk and the field about there war thing we do so often, you need to have a mission, you need to state it, and you need to have a plan and an exit game. if we have all that stuff, it is hard to figure it out. guest: starting from top-to-bottom, the president articulated the administration s
president ordered u.s. military involvement in this mission, will be days, not weeks. first that is true? and second, is it realistic. when i talked earlier about getting into a support role, and, expectations are that we will continue to support the mission, particularly with unique capabilities, that we have which would include intelligence support, jamming capabilities, and, focus on the continued enforcement of the no fly zone and the mission overall, but i don t have an exact date in mind and i don t have i haven t been given a date by the president, where u.s. military participation here would end. chris: there are reports that defense secretary gates and the top military command, i assume includes you, did not favor the mission, but the president sided with the sided with the foreign policy problem, putting secretary of state hillary clinton, u.n. ambassador susan rice and samantha powers of the
military involvement in this mission will be days, not weeks. first, is that true and second, is it realistic? when i talked earlier about getting in to a support role and expectations are that we will continue to support the mission particular whether i unique capabilities that we have, which would include intelligence, support, jamming capabilities and focus on the continued enforcement of the no-fly zone and the mission overall. but i don t have an exact date in mind and i haven t been given a date by the president where u.s. military participation here would end. chris: there are reports that defense secretary gates and the top military command, i assume includes you, did not favor this mission but the president obama sided with the foreign policy crowd, including secretary of state clinton, u.n. ambassador susan rice and samantha powers
don t really want, for argument s sake. and the reason i put this to you is we had defense secretary gates who said any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big american land army into asia or the middle east or africa should have his head examined. as general macarthur delicately put it. blunt stuff. i think he s right. no country does anything like that lightly. and i am i wasn t the president, and but i m sure it was a terribly difficult decision for him. and the process went on over a period of many, many years, in the 1990s the congress voted for a regime change and plot signed it. it went back to the congress and voted overwhelming went to the united nations, 17 resolutions. you absolutely do not do anything like that lightly. it s a very, very serious, important step.