and in the beginning, remember we first went in to protect libyanian civilians. but the logic from the beginning is that gadhafi had to go. and i think the innovation here is that the president and his military team found a way to use the predator drones to use our intelligence assets to use that sort of, if it's not soft power but not boots on the ground, but to use that power and toward the end of regime change. which we kind of denied at first but that was the only way we were going to protect civilian says getting rid of gadhafi. >> andrea mitchell, american presidents are frequently accused of going into military situations or going into war without saying fully what they really intend to do or why they are really going. has gene just touched on the possible version after liberal president going to war, not really turning over all of his cards when he is doing it? >> i do think that there is clear ambiguity, deliberate ambiguity, of the whole motion of letting gadhafi out, letting him become an exile. i think everyone knew, especially with the role of the