>> congressman john dingell, the serving member of congress in history, is retiring after serving more than 58 years house. that's next, on c-span. house armed services committee mckeon talks about the u.s. mission in afghanistan. later, more about the proposed pentagon budget cuts for 2015. an update on the ukraine. situation in c-span.org website makes it easier than ever for on washingtonbs d.c. and share your finds with through facebook, twitter and works.ocial met easy search functions let you access our daily coverage of it simplew tools make to create short video clips and share them with your friends via twitter and other social networks. or you can send links to your e-mail.ips via just find the share tools on our video player, or look for the icon links throughout our site. newh washington on the c-span.org, and if you see something of interest, click it friends. it with your >> representative john dingell, member oft serving congress announced he will retire at the end of this term. 87-year-old michigan democrat was first elected in a special election in 1955. taking the seat his father had held for more than two decades. thepoke to a reporter from detroit news about congressman dingell's retirement. >> marisa schultz is washington correspondent for the detroit longest serving member of congress, michigan democrat john dingell joined a growing list of members announcing that they are not running again, why quits decide to call it this fall? >> well, he has decided that step down,or him to he wants to spend more time with his family. but he has been suffering some mobility issues, a bad back, and hip surgery. and more recently, though, he's been way congressth the operates. whenoks back to the time there was bipartisanship and people got along in congress, and he really laments it. in fact, during the shutdown he took to the house floor and he so angry, he said the american people could get better representation from monkey island at the zoo. and that ignited cheers from the house. so there is a legal of well.ation from him as >> can you point out some of his major accomplishments during his time in office? had quite a few. he has been involved in major legislation, either authoring them or pushing them through. congress het got to held the gavel when medicare the clean was part of air act. the endangered species act. he was one oftly the regional authorize of the affordable care act. he replaced in congress was a huge advocate for and john health care, dingell made this his priority career,ut his entire culminating with the signing of the affordable care act. been called the dean of the house. why did he have that title and did it come with any house responsibilities? >> he was called the dean because he is the leader, the longest serving member of the house. and he did have a leadership responsibility with the energy and commerce committee, from until the 2000's he was earth the chairman or the ranking member of the energy and commerce committee. and he was very powerful. and he was able to use that in some of usher this legislation. >> now, he was first elected to and succeeded955, his dad who passed away. what impact did his parents have becoming a member of congress? >> oh, he talks about his dad often. his dad was a new deal democrat, believed in public service, and when john dingell seat her his father's carried that with him. and i mentioned earlier health care, his dad really wanted universal health care. dingell made that his legacy as well. >> again, with his leaving, has revealed what his plans might house?r he leaves the >> i believe he'll still be involved. many, many supporters in his district, and his wife, dingell, is interested in the seat. so i have a feeling he'll be much involved in politics and public service. >> he currently represents southeasternth district and that includes ann arbor and dearborn, and as you wrote in the you detroit news, his wife is expected to run to succeed him. what is theird political relationship like? >> they are a team. powerful,eally political couple. debbie dingell is always at john dingell's side, she's with him at events and fundraising, meeting with local community officials. and she is his confidant. expected that she is interested in the seat, i would imagine that she would run for seat, and john dingell would do everything in his power to seat.er win that >> marisa schultz covers washington for the detroit news, us.k you for joining >> thank you very much. >> we'd like to get your thoughts on the retirement of congressman john dingell. join the conversation on facebook. facebook.com/c-span. house armed services committee chairman buck mckeon talked the u.s. mission in afghanistan and the proposed cuts.entagon budget congressman mckeon spoke at the national press club and took reporters.rom and welcome.noon, my name is my ron bellkine, i'll an adjunct professor at the george washington university school of media and public internationalr bureau chief for the associated press, and the 107th president club. national press the national press club is the world's leading professional journalists for committed to our profession's future through our programming as this, whileh fostering a free press worldwide. information about the national press club, please atit our website www.press.org. to donate to programs offered to the public through our national press club journalism institute, please visit press.org/institute. on behalf of our members worldwide, i'd like to welcome our speaker and those of you attending today. our head table includes guests of our speaker as well as working journalists who are club members. audiencear plus in our i doubt that members of the general public are attending, so it's not necessarily evidence of of journalistic objectivity. i'd also like to welcome our public radio audiences. you can follow the action on nccter using the hash tag lunch. speechur guest's conclude we'll have a question and answer period. i will ask as many questions as time permits. time to introduce our head tables. i'd ask each of you to stand briefly as your name is announced. from your right. chen, senior editor, air force magazine. ellen mitchell, associate inside the army. reporter, global security news wire. john newman, deputy director,ionings house armed services committee, and a guest of the speaker. jonathan salant, reporter, bloomberg news, and past national presse club. wife of mckeon, mckeon. jerry with the buffalo news and chairman of the speakers and past president of the national press club. skipping over the speaker for a moment, pat host, reporter, defense daily, and speakers committee member who organized today's events. bob simmons, staff director of the house armed services guest of the speaker. matt leatherrer, publisher of and stripes. westing, united states navy, retired. john don ollie, editor of c.q. roll call executive briefing defense and chair of the national press club, freedom of committee. [applause] congressman buck mckeon, chairman of the house armed guestes committee, is our today to discuss the u.s. effort in afghanistan. gallup poll says that for the first time in the nearly more americans, think the 2001 invasion was a think it was, than think it was the right action. the unitedsays states' duties in afghanistan are far from complete. obama has notent disclosed his true plan for focusedtan and has elsewhere. he's also been critical of president obama's role as in chief, saying that a president must better communicate with the troops and obama has.than chairman mckeon, a california has announced he will not seek a 12th term in congress. he cited in part, gridlock on capitol hill. in congress, years mckeon has been an advocate for increased spending for the pentagon. at a recent armed services saidttee meeting, mckeon defense department budget pressures have ham strung the to cuty, forcing leaders strength, readiness and can least when they afford it. please join me in welcoming to the national press club chairman become mckeon. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you for having me, thank you for being here this afternoon. and i'm glad to have my wife me. with she was introduced as my wife, she's also a mother of six and a of 30.ther [applause] and a great grandmother of one. thank you forgiving me the thingsnity to say a few today that i think need to be said, and i think they're very important. for nearly 13 years now the united states has been at war in afghanistan. we're there because afghanistan forused as a launch pad attacks that killed americans. for thea responsibility safety and security of our citizens. a responsibility and we thatnot abandon responsibility no matter how tough the fight is. if you, a few polls you'll hear the american support for afghanistan has dropped below 20%. listen to the news you'll hear about a hopeless campaign unwinnable, that if you hear about it at all. barometers, the american people know two things. they know that the war is going badly and they know that their there.rs oppose us being however, i'm sure you've heard know it just because i doesn't make it so. neither polls nor the press the full picture. they never tell the full story. that story is a hopeful one, not hopefulso, but nonetheless. traditionally it's right and stories comehese from the commander in chief. but he's talked about a half, only ay handful of types during his presidency. each time president obama exitraised his run for the or pitied or wounded, instead of accomplishments of our troops and the importance of the mission that they were given fight. so if the president of the united states won't give this i will. in 2001 after the worst attack soil since pearl harbor, the united states invaded afghanistan. act of toppling the taliban was stroo teejicly and technologically astounding. three months time america and her allies knocked down a regime in land lockedy mountainous terrain. we dropped soldiers into a combat zone with a brutal climate, with no support, other and a toughen my turf.ng on his home we asked them to establish logisticses that any officer would call impossible. we asked them to fight a war for indn't been trained a land that has burried the most world.l empires in the but not only did they succeed, iny kicked the taliban down three months. tot's less than a semester their colleagues back home. then we asked them to do even harder. make no mistake. insurgency is the hardest type of war a democracy can fight. holding a new country steady with insurgents hiding among innocents can take years. the british 12 years to put down the millennium communists. the insurgency in northern ireland took decades to resolve. last week i visited our colombian friend who have fought narco insurgency since the 60's. they're finally nearing the finish line. these fights can be won, but patience ande, treasure. and all those things usually within short supply voters. i won't sugar coat it. are sick andpeople tired of this war. not thes their will, enemy's, that will determine afghanistan's state. if the will of the american, it's the will of the american most importanthe weapon in this fight. not million dollar smart bombs carriers.t so here are the questions that ourselves.ask is afghanistan less than a thant to the united states it was 13 years ago? is it a better place than it was ago?ars is america safer than it was on september 10th, 2001? what'sgood, hard look at actually happening out there and backof those answers comes a resounding yes. for the life of me, i can't why the president hasn't taken credit for these victories. the game -- gains since 2009 are three-fold. strategic, diplomatic, and moral. at's talk about strategy for moment. i think it was the height of announce a surge and in the very same breath the surge.e for the i think the idea of military strategy being done by white house staffers, rather than military planners as some suggested, is worthy of a head examination. i think that when our generation's sharpest eny minds,rge general petraeus, asked for more troops, then give him more troops. but even though the way this white house has run this war has with whiteeous, house staffers telling four-star generals their business, there has been unmistakable progress. come on thes has back of our troops. carter woke up one night to find his outpost being by 300 enemy fighters. he not only stood his ground, he over 100 meters through enemy fire to save a wounded soldier. 100-meters, that's longer than a football field. friend,reached his shouldered him and carried him back. him back, through and 300 feet of grenades bullets, a man shrunk on his shoulders. au know here we think it's big deal when somebody returns a skin 100 yards for a touchdown. when 11 men are trying to tackle him. compare that. sergeant dakota meyer was in southernpatrol afghanistan. he learned that four americans and afghan soldiers were cut off. he joined with a fellow marine ambush, just the two of them, bringing his comrades back to safety and knocking down anyone who stood in their way. an afghanwary, interpreter, was quacking down the road with an american officer, when two taliban fighters snuck up on quickly.et acted he killed the two taliban before they killed his american friends. taliban marked him for but us was luckier than survived and was reunited with his american friends at reagan national last october as one of america's newest residents. disgrace.ional that anational disgrace traitor like edward snowden is a and ty carter, janus chenwaryd are not. those men are the muscle and iser of a strategy that working. those men did what some would impossible. their stories should be told and and over again. heroes, but our troops as well. have09, coalition forces lost entire sections of the map taliban.rge ent every day they were attacked, populated areas had become pools of enemy activity, the taliban were back. deadly enemy that would burn their entire country to the aound if it meant keeping woman out of school. the taliban came back, but so did our coalition. when the enemy's annual summer in 2012 weicked off were ready for them. they threw everything they had we stopped them cold. the taliban were dug into the ticks.ke we booted them out. the enemy failed in every regard achieve its military objectives during their last offenses. here is the tectonic shift that since 2009. the blossoming afghan national security forces. or the ansf. inn i went to afghanistan 2010, i had a long talk with the trainingn charge of afghanistan security forces. he told me a story. sergeant who was training his afghan counterparts four roundso put into their weapons. knowfghan soldiers didn't what four was. wereweren't dumb, they illiterate. they hadn't had the opportunity that we have to get an education. education was just one of the infinite problems we faced a new army and a new police force. instructors expressed outright hopelessness that the afghans would survive contact with the enemy. for what a difference a couple of years makes. that same year i visited we educated 70,000 afghans up to level.rd grade they know what four is, they now can communicate before better. school books,ir they're happy with the opportunity to get some education. ansf has nearly doubled 2009.e, since today 95% of conventional 98% of special operations are done by the ansf. they have nearly 370,000 people uniform. there to beat back an enemy that's smaller, geographically constrained, and still smarting from the clobbering that our gave them.s during the 2013 fighting season lead.sf took the combat they made gains, they built on those gains, and they secured gains. these guys were taking their not five years ago. today they are holding onto territory that took a 50-nation coalition to win. i've met with the afghan capable.s, they're they can take the fight to our shared enemy and they're ready for that fight. the taliban can attack, but it.'s about they're not trying to capture well defended targets because they can't hold them. forces haveecurity a numerical edge. the taliban doesn't try to hold onto territory for long periods any more. because the afghans make it hurt they try. here's what it all means. uncertainties we faced in afghanistan are no longer military. are diplomatic and they are moral. the hard to understate diplomatic excesses of the past several years. in may of 2012, president obama signed adent karzai strategic partnership agreement. nonnatored them a major ally. and the afghans ratified the agreement with both houses of parliament. also in may of 2012, the community got behind the effort in chicago supportdged to afghanistan through 2017. at a conference, the wider international community declared its support for a promise ofith $16 billion worth of assistance. tougher nuts to crack has been pakistan. the no secret that pakistanis and the taliban have some shared history. need for rose colored glasses here. u.s.,ons between the pakistan, and afghanistan are a knot.n yet we're finally starting to take some progress leads. and afghanistan have both acknowledged that stability countries is symbiotic. problems in one means problems the other. relations between the two are refined, that starts with prime minister sharif last september. official state visits are well and good. watch ig is really the military to military relations. and afghanistan have gotten the ball rolling there. improved,tionship has but slowly. i was happy to see the three-way talks between the senior pakistani and afghan leaders, happy to see the same at lower levels. long ways to go. but these baby steps have paved theway for giant leaps down road. with that progress in mind we real problem heading our way with the by lateral security agreement. the legalment is framework we need to continue the mission there, until the finished. i told you that ansf had made gains, that'se true. but i also said this was a force old.s only five years but plainly, without our support includessupport present -- presents and money, the afghan forces can't execute. their remaining gaps aren't a 5-year-oldfor force. they need help with logistics, pay, andnistration, leave, with air support, with intelligence. gaps doesn'these mean that america's sons and daughters will be stuck on the forever.es president karzai has refused to sign the agreement that allows that support. that's a problem. afghan people have been amazing allies. has not. karzai but let's not pin our hope on one man. one man who is packing his bags in a few months. the loyal -- 2500 leaders from all around the have overwhelmingly supported the b.s.a. show that 70% of afghans want us to stay. haven't forgotten how quickly we left after the soviet endedtion, and how that up. there's also an election coming up, and most of the presidential candidates support a long-term agreement with the united states. need to look past baghdad to see how quickly gains unravel. we went into afghanistan to do a job. starting don't like things we don't intend to finish. be.atter how hard it may locking down that b.s.a. is the diplomatic step towards getting that job done permanently. vital to keep the coalition going. i'm sure the lack of a b.s.a. subject of intense mini,sion at the nato minute steerl meetings this week. ourselves owe it to to have a frank discussion about responsibilities to afghanistan. the taliban are brutal. cruel, barbaric hoard and their time has no place in the 21st century. we abandoned afghanistan for the before and both the united states and the people passed a buck, afghanistan paid the price. america leads the world. leadership has responsibility. a democracymes when must take a look inward. must are times when we come to terms with the burden of our values. is one of those moments. do we step back >> afghanistan is one of those moments. do we step back and abandon afghanistan to the wolves? do we still have a moral responsibility to the people does our humanity still compel us to help us help people of war -- help people who know nothing but war for four decades. the market people are prudent people. they know we have problems here at home. they know we are buried under a mountain of debt. but they are also a compassionate people. we have not just made strategic and diplomatic gains of about moral gains as well. it is worth asking, is there anything in afghanistan that gives us hope? you are darn right there is. [applause] the improvements in social development made over the past decade have finally even these good people a chance. afghanistan has made the largest percentage gain of any country in the world in basic health and development indicators. for example, in the year 2000, male life expectancy was 37 years old. today, it is 56. in 2000, fewer than five percent of afghans have cell phones, now over 60% do. including 48% of the women. in 2003, there were just 450 health facilities in all of afghanistan including hospitals. now there are more than 1800. only the privileged few had internet a decade ago, today over 65% of the population has access to an internet connection. nearly half -- .5 million of them have facebook accounts. when the taliban ruled, only to international airlines dared to fly in. now there are 12 that service most major cities. i visited afghanistan many years ago before the surge really kicked in. i could not go to the city in the south of it was a taliban stronghold. i went back after the surge, and the city was in radley hands. the marines had done their job. while we're there we help to open is cool. not a school like our kids get to go to here, but build out of adobe and tents, with i've hundred excited children -- 500 excited children, about a third of them girls. that is a memory i will hold onto it for the rest of my life. nearly 8 million children are attending school. that is up from one million when we went in. today there are over 13,000 general education schools. the taliban and beliefs always dependent on low education, particularly in the rural areas. the old afghanistan, the one the taliban ruled is crumbling. in 2002, there were only 32 miles of paved road, now there is around 7500 miles. in 2001, the voice of sharia was the only news source. now there are 70 tv stations, with most of the population within rod castro range. illiteracy, isolation, and poverty are the chains the taliban uses to bind the people in submission. but afghanistan is starting to break those chains. extraction of oil and precious metals account for 45% of their gdp within a decade. their rural population is gaining access to roads, electricity, and your geisha networks. let's -- what is changing slowly in afghanistan itself. afghans do not want what the taliban is selling. their ineptitude and governance, their heavy hand, their brutal treatment of the afghan people only quickens their slow arc to the grave. one progress that gives hope this women's rights. they can attest to how things used to be. she was forced to marry at 14. she fled that marriage so the taliban and made an example of her. her nose and ears were cut off. she was left in the mountains to die, but was rescued by the army. today she is a grim reminder of what these men do when they run things. the taliban and through women out of schools and out of work, around one quarter of government employees work within in 1996. that was until the taliban decreed it was immoral for women to work. today they are constitutionally protected, and have seats in parliament. many presidential appointees are required to be female, and women have crept back up to 20% of the workforce. there are now 40,000 young women attending public and private universities, technical institutes with more and rolling each year. we have had women from our congress, most of them from the armed services to midi that have gone to afghanistan and met with the same women, and seen the progress. they have seen the stories that these women are scared of the taliban coming up as they would be the first was killed. there are still huge cultural challenges here. afghanistan is not going to turn into sweden overnight. when i visited recently, the general made a point to stick with me. he said his visit -- it is absolutely essential to make the taliban carry the baggage of their history. you cannot bridge the gap between the taliban and the civil society. that civil society is beginning to bear fruit, and the taliban are running out of time. the americans have the clock the mother he has the time -- that he has the time. and now the afghans have the time, and that is why you're seeing a desperate taliban flirting with political settlement. at some point, a decade of opportunity in afghanistan is going to catch up the taliban. it will catch them, it will blow right past them, and the taliban will be left in the dost. -- dust. there is a moral charge here, and the american people have answered it. we should be proud that we have answered it. i do not want to sound like i am feeding silver linings, especially when they are one warranted -- unwarranted. there's no question that afghanistan is still a monumental challenge. when i find astounding is that the president will not acknowledge these big areas. i'm astounded he will not give this speech. why on earth will you not take credit for his own strategy, his own success tories -- success stories? you will get a timeline praising the end of the iraq war, they take credit for leaving iraq. you can ask iraqis how that has been going for them. in startling contrast, there is nothing special or prominent about what our troops have achieved in afghanistan. what president once referred to as the good war. go to whitehouse.gov/afghanistan. you will see a notice saying sorry, the page you're looking for is not found. does the white house really think they cannot have -- pretend a war is not happening. less than 30% of americans thought it was a mistake. just last week, and for the first time ever, gallup found the majority of americans now believe the war was in error. counterinsurgency is have two fronts, the one out there, the one right here. the troops have held their line out there, the president has not held the line here. by letting the public support for the war in road, the president has caused himself political capital that could have been used to solve a number of points. there were even times when the president openly campaigned against his own strategy. he floated trial balloons about abandoning afghanistan, and sent his political operatives out to so fatigue and hopelessness. our troops have sweat and blood to bring the fight to a finish. so has a multinational coalition, so have the afghan people. some have suffered, some have conquered, some have felt lost, some have felt victory, and some have the incredible odds. it is not much to ask that every once in a while we hear about these accomplishments from our commander in chief. we deserve to hear about the steps forward, we deserve to hear and understand why we fight. i spent 20 years in congress, i understand that politics can affect the judgment. but placing politics above duty is tragic. it is tragic, and it is unforgivable. the american people and their armed forces deserve better. if the troops fight for the mission abroad, the president better fight for their mission here at home. anything less is a dereliction of duty. this country was built on the backs of great challenges. things we did not want to experience, things we did not want to do. afghanistan is one of those challenges, but let's look at the results. the president has sustained international support for this new democracy. he went out and found billions in aid to help lift them out of despair. he kept the coalition of countries willing to send troops to fight with us, and as a direct result of this military strategy, afghanistan is freer, and america is safer. that should be a source of right, of these -- a piece of president obama's legacy. not some shameful burden never to be spoken of. mr. president, you may have stumbled there. but a safe and secure afghanistan is within our grasp, do not let it slip away. [applause] thank you. >> thank you chairman mckeon. what can congress do to ensure that afghanistan stays secure? what can you do legislatively to challenge the president's -- withdrawal plan? >> those are things that we're working on every year. we pass a nice little defense authorization act of and we will be addressing those issues i am sure in that bill this year. we have the secretary of defense going to the nato meeting this week. he is going with a number of troops we would leave behind to continue on the mission of supporting the afghan troops. i think it would have been much better if the president had made the decision, and given that number. i visit with many of our nato allies, they ask me where do we go from here? they have already made commitments, they need to have that number established. i think congress can address that in our bill, and i think we can continue to apply pressure. we want the same and, we want the same goal, we want the safe, secure, free afghanistan. we are just whining over -- fighting over the strategies of how that happens. >> your speech doesn't advocate or described a clear u.s. mission in afghanistan posed 2014. do you call for a continued counterinsurgency mission, a larger footprint, or a smaller force to do the narrow missions envisioned by president obama? >> the president is the commander in chief, and it is up to him to make the final determination. i have talked to the general, there is a very clear plan, and all he is asking for is sufficient number of u.s. and nato troops to remain behind to support the areas that i mentioned in the speech. the intel, the logistics, and angst that the afghans are not yet able to do them for -- for themselves. for the next couple of years, to provide those things so that when we leave, we do not do what happened in a rock, and leave the country to falter and have all of the problems that we see coming from them on a daily basis. it is just a matter of a limited number of troops behind to support, and to sustain that effort. i think we have that all outlined, and the general has that, i know yes talk to the president about that. -- he has talked to the president about that. that is what i hope for going forward. >> you went and -- mentioned white house staffers telling the generals their business. can you cite some examples that concern you? >> i said it has been reported, or stated, and i am reading a book that mentions that. [laughter] by secretary gates. >> i guess secretary gates is a good source. >> i wasn't in those briefings, but he was. read the book. [laughter] >> what do you feel the united states learned most about warfare, and about how to employ the might of the u.s. military in the service of national objectives in well over a decade of fighting in afghanistan? >> i have been asked a few times, what have we gotten for our money? we have made tremendous advances in many different ways. we have learned how to fight a counter urgency fight -- counterinsurgency fight. we have made terrific gains in saving our wounded warrior's lives. in wars before this one, many people would have died that are now living. we made great gains in making their lives more full and complete. the country has really rallied around our wounded warriors and their families and loved ones. in many different ways we have shown tremendous growth in the medical field. also, in intelligence gathering, in the ability to use drones to keep our people out of harm's way, we have drones in the air, we have them on the ground, we're are able to discover and disable and dismantle ied's. there are a lot of things that have been very tough for us that we have made great gains in. ied's continue to be a problem around the world. it is a great source for terrorists, and what we have learned in this time has been very beneficial in helping us around the world. >> you mentioned drones. american reliance on battlefield drones has become highly controversial. what would you say to those who say that the cost in civilian casualties has been so high that the overreliance on drones has harmed u.s. national security by turning civilian populations against us? >> there is no question there have been civilians killed, but there have been civilian skilled in every war that has ever been fought on this planet. and i would say probably fewer in this war, all you have to do is look at what is happening in syria, egypt, india, and the ukraine, places were civilians are being killed. all of that focuses on one type of drug, there are many drones that are being used. there are small ones that troops can carry that will help them to see over the next hill and no one to expect. -- know what to expect. there are some that help them take the enemy on the next field. we would rather have our enemies die than our troops. anything that helps carry out that mission is something we should be happy that we have. i never want to send our troops into a fair fight, that doesn't make sense. >> as a backer of the iraq war, do you think that conflict diverted attention away from afghanistan, and gave the taliban the chance to regroup? >> i think it probably did. it is very difficult to fight two wars at the same time. but i think another thing that secretary gates mentions in his book as we probably should not concentrate so much on the negative, but on establishing the fact that we are where we are, and what are we going to do going forward? i think barack was helped to be -- iraq was felt to be an important mission by the president. we carried out that mission, and i believe that we won the war, and on the -- have not done well with the peace. i am hopeful we do not make the same mistakes in ending iraqi involvement -- in afghanistan, that we made in iraq. >> why is it worth even one more u.s. service member dying in afghanistan to stay there, when we are working with the government that at times seems to be our enemy, in fighting an insurgency that almost certainly will not be vanquished on the battlefield? >> i think i talked about that a little bit in the speech. i think that is the problem. our young people out there need to be told what their mission is, why they are fighting, why they are risking their lives over there. the cause is just. to think that we are doing all of this with the afghan government, we're talking about one guy, president karzai. the loyal leaders that represent all of the people the nation strongly want us to be there. karzai has political problems, and vision, goals, whatever. we cannot hide the everything -- tie everything to one man. this is a nation of any people, and we need to concentrate on the good things that we have been able to accomplish there. i do not want to see one person -- i attended three funerals in one week, and i can tell you the stories about each of those young men. i will just say one thing, their families felt like what they were doing was worthwhile. if they heard some good things from our commander-in-chief, they would feel a little bit better about the loss of their loved ones then never hearing anything about why we are there, and what we are there for. it is in our interest, in addition to the afghan people, remember that i said at the outset that was the launchpad where they attack us -- attacked us in new york on 9/11. >> as we speak, decide -- defense secretary hagel is unveiling a budget proposal to shrink the army to the smaller size 2002 -- to a smaller size, and to shrink our attack aircraft program. what do you think of this? >> we had a meeting this morning, and he went over those thanks. -- things. i'm surprised you're here, i thought you would be listening to his speech. [laughter] i have been talking about these cuts for several years now. there is no secret that if you cut $1 trillion out of the fence you're going to be cutting manpower, programs, and these things that are important. in the last few years we have changed our strategy that has served us well since world war ii. that we should be equipped, ready to go, two major contingency that one time. we have cut that back to fight one and hold one. people have not heard the speech that the president gave where we cut our strategy back. in another beachy gave -- speech he gave we looked to the pacific. we are also cutting the navy back to the small it has been since world war i. they are much more powerful, but we have not learned how to have a ship in two places at the one -- same time. when we go to one that is fast approaching 300 and 200, instead of 600, i a question that. what we're trying to do is solve our financial problems on the backs of our military. that cannot be done. if it could be done, it should not be done, but it cannot be done. if we cut the whole military budget, the whole discretionary budget, everything that we vote on annually as a congress, eliminate all of that, we was no be running -- we would still be running a deficit of $.5 trillion a year. the real problem -- the big animal in the room -- [laughter] that everyone is avoiding is the mandatory spending. alas we address that -- unless we address that, weirds going to keep digging ourselves further and further in the hole. that is the real problem, and we are trying to solve it on the backs of our military. it cannot be done. >> what are your priorities for marking up the fiscal year 2015 defense spending bill? >> getting it done by october 1. [laughter] that is my main -- and that is all i am going to be talking about between now and october. i'm really concerned, and i brought that up in the meeting this morning with the big eight. it is incumbent upon us to get that done. last year we got the defense authorization bill done on the lasted a the senate was in session. or we would have missed it. we have passed that will every year for 51 years, and some people think we have to do it for 52 years because we have done for -- done it for 51 years. we have to do it because there are certain authorities in there that help the authority -- the military and the defense contractors do their job. if we had not passed that bill when we did on january 1, the construction of our aircraft carrier that takes five years down in regina to build -- five years, down in virginia, would have come to a stop. it would've ended up costing us more money, and it is not a way to do business. it is very important that we get that bill done. we are on a timeline to get our build on in the house -- bill done in the house, through committee, and to be floor by june. we could have immediately -- if they could have gone to the floor, we could've had our bill done in july. as it was, they never did get their bill pass on the floor. they got it done in the senate on the last day of the session. if that happens this year, think of the scenario. everyone who is wanting for reelection goes home october 1 two campaign, they come back after the election, and then what happens? what happens if the republicans win the senate? what is the incentive to finish anything? the republicans wanted to push it off to january, and i wanted to know why they couldn't do it in june, july, october, november, december? january is when you have people coming back with a new congress. that is not the way to do business. the number one priority is to get the bill done. if we do not get it done by the time we leave in october, it will be very difficult to buy and there will be a lot of momentum to say we can do it next year. not everybody understands the consequent as of not getting it done. it is the only bill --congress doesn't do anything else anyway. that is the deal would get done every year. we will get that done october 1. >> it has been over a year since the repeal of don't ask, don't tell. what is your thoughts on how well the transition the gone -- has gone for openly gay soldiers and sailors to be able to serve alongside the colleagues? >> i do not really know. i know that it is something, when i go to the troops, i do not ask questions about it, but maybe i should very maybe i will as we go around with more traveling this year. we have not done the lot of traveling the past few years. we used to do that to visit troops and leaders of nations, and that is something i should probably ask about. the leadership seems to think that it is moving ok. i think in our bill we put that there would be automatic reviews of this of r