Skip to main content

tv   Key Capitol Hill Hearings  CSPAN  December 4, 2015 7:00pm-8:01pm EST

7:00 pm
insight into real the our political military leverage into baghdad. and as opposed to the prime minister maliki gives us more opportunities to be in military ways and political international assistance so we do have leverage in baghdad. >> i appreciate the comment but are we using metrics to sit side-by-side in clear with our communication and then to show project -- progress. >> that is what i am talking about the answer is yes.
7:01 pm
let's start with iraq. >> some of the ways that our different with metrics with one example henry work with the iraqi government and they know the support meeting certain conditions. but just to recapture what we spoke about today special operations forces the expeditionary target is in a different way that foreign fighter initiative taking place over the past couple of weeks with the state department and department of defense hohmann security and fbi is the different way to approach that challenge. and with though will to recognize our important it
7:02 pm
is as a more comprehensive approach to go after those revenue sources. >>. >> trying to piece it together to have the expeditionary targeting force without going into too much detail, what does this mean? a form of iraqi soldiers, as special forces, what is this? it was thrown on us today so what are reconditioning -- envisioning? >> i do want to avoid some detail but it is a force
7:03 pm
either american only or more likely a mixed force. to give you two examples examples, was the rescue of the individuals about to be hostages or prisoners. and it is achieved its objectives although there require the sacrifice to do that. and the killing in the capture and so those have been expose so remember when
7:04 pm
occasions a rise of intelligence to conduct a re baghdad in syria and iraq is of we are talking about. that the chairman says is a new way of achieving her objective and there will be more. >> what is the status on raimondi? but still but i work with iraqi soldiers they are just as good as leadership to take these two major cities some would love to have a
7:05 pm
status what is going on. >> i share your frustration as to the commanders on the ground this is something we get the update every day. real progress with on the ground progress to tighten the noose. but is not moving at the pace we want to see a move. we're prepared to provide more and support but theyƱ%3 have not moved as fast as we want so progress has been made although it isn't significant but right now the focus is on mahdi once that is taken, they have fallen and then the up dash maria are successful so then you cut the line of
7:06 pm
communication i would not put a date to wit but sometime months from now as opposed to weeks we would see operations in mosul. >> thank you for being here. if you tell me something i believe it is true. i know there are frustrations expressed up with those classified briefings the next 80 obama administration announced what they consider a strategy is 60 troops they do not have the opportunity to discuss that with our -- that was a lie by the
7:07 pm
administration we were in meetings the before and they withheld them from us. so it would be helpful if other people in the administration would be honest we take this job very seriously. with regard to isis from a secretary carter rebated clear we are out more. -- at war. i do think he has come around but the military lives are conflicting with the goals of the secretary of state. and i will submit the laundry realizes -- we let teeth to grow -- t to grow
7:08 pm
so to testify before the committee they have been working for years to undermine assad. has secretary kerry indicated whom he would like to replace assad? >> data want to speak for secretary kerry but in those negotiations dating back years, and united states and secretary kerry had discussed the other parties that have a stake and a voice how that is governed post assad. but most importantly the structures of the state not
7:09 pm
associated with the oppression of the people that can be part of responsible government is going forward are preserved under new leadership. so you bet it is difficult that is why civil war is raging there. but to get to the territory of syria there needs to be that political transition. >> so there is no plan to replace assad it is just as complex that iraq would be accepting of religious minorities? >> o lusby for the secretary but these are the talks he is having so there can be
7:10 pm
something there replaces. >> host: with decent governance. >> it would be wise to engage with the russians. if there is going to be an effort to remove assad that dialogue should be occurring among the highest levels. >> one-two switch gears obviously we are in a tremendous number of countries hough if we wait much longer because of the maintenance so i know our combat commanders that we
7:11 pm
can move forward with the recapitalization. >> of those discussions going on right now looking under the f-117 budget. >> i would ask you your credibility with the administration to be more open and honest with us. >> mr. secretary, if we are at war how do we know? that destruction of isil expulsion from any territory with the destruction else worked -- elsewhere around
7:12 pm
the world including the various branches. >> as long as isil is in iraq or syria we will still be at war? >> these threats are difficult to confined to one place that is why we have to go there to syria and iraq to strike at it. so mobility of information into radicalize people except on the keyboard it is important if we're at war with that clear precise
7:13 pm
terms what victory looks like to be often nonsense to thousand three to keep us out of perpetual war. with that objective and outcomes and that is to ourselves so i appreciate your knowledge importance of political and diplomatic components in iraq or syria in terms of conditionality if you cannot control said
7:14 pm
to control those outcomes but with that aid with the military presence do we really mean that? do we really walk away from iraq of fatal meet those conditions? that is an important question because if we will not that i wonder what the motivation is for the iraqi government to take a very important and difficult step to integrate to be decentralized or otherwise with. >> for the first part of your question, it gets back to the military going together. the only and state that has
7:15 pm
a lasting defeat of isil is there is local governments. that is why they go together that is a heart and strategy to make victory stick in the other part of the definition but the legend involves all three to withhold our support from those who were taking a different path. to find people who will act with those other dealing with their not capable.
7:16 pm
>> very quickly for general dunford what does isis want us to do? >> the above nothing more than a large presence on the ground to call for the jihad >>. >> thank you for being here today. it is a tremendous task with the diversity of what you try to accomplish provide thank you from heard from members year that they are concerned if they have the right strategy. but russia added a different
7:17 pm
dimension with those surface-to-air missiles. how does that change if you talk about a no-fly zone? how does that change that dimension for us? >> the fact he just spoke i will ask him to answer that. >> under current conditions that insurers our safety we're not complacent we don't take for granted but the russians have complied with it as i spoke to my counterparties yesterday that they reaffirmed the commitment but you have a hypothetical scenario so to declare war against syria
7:18 pm
because that is a lucky to with the ground forces to protect refugees and we could expect that to complicate the situation. that is the hypothetical. if we were at war against syria with a presence clearly complicates the situation doesn't mean we can deal with it but it complicates it. >> going back to president reagan under the policy a reporting cards then our hands with those political negotiations to support u.s. interest? we must create a better military balance of power on the ground and you testified
7:19 pm
in front of the staff you said i think the balance of forces are to assad the advantage does that still hold true? and what steps should retake to change the advantage to our in vantage? >> we didn't take any capable ground forces. but since that time we have developed a relationship we don't have any effective ground forces we have small numbers but to conduct offensive operations and since that time we have conducted successful
7:20 pm
offensive operations between three and 5,000 there probably runs north door of 5,924,000. >> does that change the balance? >> it does. but i would not say that coalition of forces that is the other part of the country. he has the capability with the support of russia and iran. >> most of us are concerned are we in the same position? if we pull out of iraq again are we in the same position
7:21 pm
today or will we keep a residual force to assist with the train in the current mission of the iraqi forces? can you see is doing that? >> cry to only talk about the recommendations and would make at this time and we do have interest in the region and to secure it and the recommendations i make would reflect that. >> i appreciate that. we have more members.
7:22 pm
>> times ra mr. chairman. but let's keep going. if i have to leave general dunford said he would stay a little longer. [laughter] he is taking one for the team. >> it is our policy to overthrow the syrian government that has brought us into a potential conflict with russia with important questions along this line approximately how many nuclear warheads has russia gained at the u.s.? >> congresswoman i will get you those precise numbers as best we know them.
7:23 pm
let me summarize by the fact i am confident we have a strong save secure reliable deterrent but it is also true that russia has a massive nuclear arsenal. >> that would be accurate to say that both countries have the capacity to launch these nuclear weapons within minutes. >> we do. >> i have seen pictures and films and images from nagasaki and hiroshima that i presume you would agree with me that nuclear war would be devastating to the american people. the amount of suffering that would cause to our children in communities and planet is difficult to imagine.
7:24 pm
so has there been an assessment space as would be lost for damage done with this nuclear war could occur >> congresswoman i have been doing this for a long time since the cold war since the beginning of my career. there has been estimates made right along it is a simple story. nuclear war would be absolutely unprecedented catastrophic destruction that is why deterrence is so important improvements by leaders all over the world is the central. >> so the fact that we now have our f-16s patrolling
7:25 pm
the border with primary air-to-air combat operation, there is no air-to-air combat against isis. i can only presume the purpose is to target russian planes? is that accurate? >> congresswoman i will answer the larger point that you begin with. we have a very different view of russia about what would be constructive for them to do in syria. we have that disagreement we cannot a minor souls with what they're doing we want them to change what they're doing in syria. that is not the same as united states and russia clashing think they just talked yesterday about making sure we did not by
7:26 pm
accident have been the incident involving u.s. and russian forces we do have differences that is not the same as blundering into a situation. >> but that sharp disagreement with two diametrically opposed objectives as the u.s. seeks to overthrow the you -- syrian government russia seeks to uphold that creates that strong potential for the head-to-head combat or military conflict and russia's installation of their defense system increases that possibility if it is intentional or accidental of one side may shoot down the other side's planning and that is where the potential is for this devastating that could blow
7:27 pm
up into something much larger. >> i have to correct something. i would characterize rushes perspective differently. by the way what they say and what they do were two different things they said they would fight isil and not support assad but instead pursue a political solution but what they have done supports assad no question they have gone after moderates not isil that is the source of disagreement we have that and trying to get them to come around to more reasonable position but at the same time we are intent upon avoiding an accidental situation in the air over
7:28 pm
syria. >> thank you for the sacrifices that you make it is appreciated. you said we will win or defeat isis. so what is the center of gravity really? >> in my assessment the existence of the caliphate critical capabilities include the narrative than the manpower with three primary sources if the existence of the caliphate's is there but there was this discussion earlier to ensure that isil does not have the capability to conduct an external operations at present a risk to the american people or our allies senator reid going
7:29 pm
after those factors? >> we are to include their center of gravity that is the existence of the caliphate that they have a narrative and foreign fighters manning we keep them to have the manpower to fight. >> talk about the coalition with 60 nations france has been a part of it but they have stepped up. 60 nations summer just contributing but do you feel we do enough diplomatically to have these nations engaged of good versus evil? would like to see the middle eastern allies if we see victory. >> we need more contributions from the
7:30 pm
members of the coalition. you are right it is good to have political support and widespread political support as a ready recognizes isil is evil and a threat to them but they're not backing up words with deeds we're swinging we need more there with us. and in my mind that applies to those countries the resided in the country itself we are a long wyatt -- railway and we're concerned and they're right there. >> i do think we need to put more pressure on the state department to get more support physically from our allies. a quick question s far as the congressional
7:31 pm
notification of the transfer decisions have they not concurred with any of those? >> they only had two cases and i concurred with both. >> general dempsey? >> i believe he may have. i was not there. >> we were waiting on a plan is that delay anything to do with the cost of closing guantanamo or transferring patients? >> does omb have a meeting tuesday? >> cost is a consideration of the proposal. i just don't relate the whole story. reworking together to put together a proposal to submit to congress. omb has worked with us.
7:32 pm
>> what did they come up with? >> there is a range depending weather permits detention facility would be in its nature. there is a lot of work. the objective will let me start at the beginning to talk about transfers but there are people in guantanamo bay who will not be transferred there are not safe to transfer. those that we talk about a lot of attention and we would like to do in a way that cost less and omb has been helping with that. >> trying to determine the cost holding in the u.s. forces guantanamo. >> exactly the. that is part of the proposal
7:33 pm
>> i yield back. >> thank you for your patience. mr. secretary you said in your comments that president obama is committed to doing what it takes as the opportunities arise as the enemy adapts. billing commander in chief under our constitutional form of government but this president said he -- they are the junior varsity team and city before the attacks said they are contained. you believe every word pro when i go to the middle east to talk to leaders they say there is a lack of american leadership. they think they have roll and they need to step up but you made those comments and to people like me to believe
7:34 pm
the president is not committed what would do say to people like me to have doubts he truly is committed ? >> the only thing i can say is to repeat what i have said before. president obama has given his approval to all of the accelerations steps that i described to you today, many of which were recommended buying the chairman or send, or military leadership said retiree turnover for isil we have the president's approval purple with leadership i agree it is critical but we need followers but it is still important and it is critical
7:35 pm
to have the best fighting force but we have values people find attractive that is what we have so many friends and allies alongside our excellent and and women who were in the fight. >> in response to other questions about having a discussion then he had his attorney may want to refer to yours provoked at what is out there i run a military person but i am aware i can understand the base should not have to be a lawyer so now we are sending special operations forces into syria , can you tell me where in the emf is the authorization to do that? >> i am not a lawyer but i have read them so that
7:36 pm
common sense meaning the only one that i am familiar with with the president submitted and one of the reasons it was important to me why i but it was the central. >> i'm talking about the ones signed by the president cpac i apologize i cannot speak to them. >> can you get you -- can you get your lawyers to respond? if they have a basis for that those two aumf that have been passed i would like to give you that authorization and whatever you need. >> i will get back to you. >> i completely agree we need local forces and help from the region and should not let anybody off the hook
7:37 pm
are we getting the support we should from turkey? >> i have been urging since i got this job for turkey to do more. they need to do more. within its own territory so it controls its border which it has not done effectively. and that it goes after the facilitators and enablers and the other tentacles of isil that intrude into turkey. we will like them to operate more in the year and on the ground most of the air operations are not directed at isil but at the pkk we do understand their concern but we like to see them do more
7:38 pm
against isil. the president has spoken about this recently the last few days so it is at the top of carlist their geography they are right there. so they could be a source at the same time as they're not doing enough it is a serious matter that is what the president is talking to them. >> thank you for your service and for being here today. >> thank you for your time today we talked in june and my concern is not having airpower we sort of disagree on that but it seems there has been a slight change since then but the strength is their weakness but part
7:39 pm
of the challenger the counterinsurgency mindsets we need to have a force on the ground after to take the matter is a state but as the counter insurgency and the discussion to study the oil infrastructure reminds me of air campaign planning when i was a young officer the critical capabilities the new unleash the air power that overwhelmingly goes after them to defeat them so i don't understand why that study was done 17 months ago when they declared a caliphate? we're just now realizing when it has been reported from the beginning a million dollars a day putting into their coffers swell deeply conservative using american air power averaging 15
7:40 pm
strikes a day we hear about the cumbersome approval process and high rules of engagement where pilots go home and not hitting legitimate targets because we want no casualty's i period say something has changed but you mention in the snowball effect it has been going in their direction the last 17 months 200,000 pro isis social media post we have been in all 50 states they're winning and that has added to their propaganda and the romantic approach of recruiting people to join the fight the only thing worse is to engage weekly we
7:41 pm
add to that being weak on the military side but addition to the change to read changing the process? we'll be unleashed american air power not be impotent mindset? >> congresswoman to the extent if we will unleash air power we will that is where refined those processes the with regard to collateral damage and no think we should apologize for bringing our values to the fight so while we should be aggressive to attack isil resources, a command-and-control, fighters , we shouldn't be killing innocent people that feeds the narrative that the same
7:42 pm
time so the strategic approaches rigo after the turbulence within the american way to bring the values to the fight with us. >> that is always collateral damage that is what we do. >> we have the right balance today and our threshold increases with the value of the target we go after. a share you regard to the critical network it will be as aggressive as necessary to make sure we are succeeding. >> but we are not striking the oil trucks because we don't want to hurt the truck drivers and dropping leaflets first i have been involved all levels of your driving a terrorist truck you are a combatant can you clarify? >> we did reassessed majority were people trying
7:43 pm
to make a living in the region. ceramics you don't consider them combatants? >> we don't separate them from the vehicles and destroy the truck. >> is it your assessment the hn is critical to the fight with the trucks in the combat for domestic capability? >> that has been invaluable platform. >> weld despite the one for a while? >> i do. >> i yield back. >> thank you mr. chairman and mr. secretary. i have a lot of the same concerns as my colleagues with operation enduring freedom within the southern watching an iraqi freedom.
7:44 pm
i would like to follow-up on this question about the drivers of the tracts in the leaflets dropped by a salmon tells them how to surrender? >> the first round. >> first of all, the doctor in the front in the back of a column considers you don't get away you will be bombed. that was the message. >> so there was no effort to capture the truck drivers or to get intelligence? >> we don't have forces on the ground. >> is that a problem? >> if you want to capture them someone has to be on the ground. >> is that a problem that we
7:45 pm
don't? >> the lack of human intelligence inhibits the campaign for scheerer. >> is that part of what we do going forward? i adjusted to read on this issue hominy combatants have recaptured? >> i have to get back to you. >> is that not a critical part? >> it is for a bottle have a number. >> a couple hundred? a couple thousand? from a handful. >> i will get back to we have not been involved in combat operations severe not in a position to capture isil. >> one of the reasons for targeting for says precisely to get intelligence but one person recaptured was the
7:46 pm
wife. >> where she now? commission is detained. >> by whom? to read the government of iraq. >> of course, so what intelligence to be get from that? american one dash considerable. >> does that not demonstrate the value? >> it does. >> so we start capturing them? period one of the reasons is precisely for that and it will be a valuable source of intelligence. and it is critical with the deployment of air power with forces to enable on the ground. >> how long did we know about them before we destroy them? "the new york times" is reporting actually the treasury department reported
7:47 pm
$10 million to fund isis? how long did we know before we did anything? >> we knew there were oil trucks from the beginning of course, what we could not do is distinguish of there being directly used to finance isil now we have the intelligence to do that now we can isolate and target them we may change our tactics. >> that truckdriver that ran away because he told them to where are they now? are they now farmers? this is critically important we're trying to win a war.
7:48 pm
>> how was that essentials? >> the idea is you believe they did not know their rand paul to fund isis? ltd. they didn't before. >> a new in their enemy combatants? >> chairman explained that they are people who are making a buck so we gave them every opportunity to survive. >> i am astonished we need to learn more why we did not destroy the trucks along time ago why we drop leaflets to tell them to run away with it is astonishing if we're trying to win. >> they give four years' service and dedication. i am somewhat concerned about putting forces on the
7:49 pm
ground that whenever ripa forces on the ground we want to make sure we have adequate support with particular medevac my experience in northern iraq you cannot rely on air all the time so the ground crew with armor is a good idea. day you concur that having a sufficient force package would incorporate in theater for security? >> so then we looked at the threats. so emerging china and russia? >> where would you rather
7:50 pm
than stack global warming with the list? >> i think that strategy of geography you mentioned china and russia and have the privilege of speaking before the conference with that nuclear deterrence has been raised and tarascan of global warming or climate change because of those military conditions to be a department that looks ahead. so how that will change the operations. >> the immelt threat to the
7:51 pm
5-meter threat the most emerging threat facing us today is isis and al qaeda and the nine nations to a terrorist activity. >> mr. chairman think fee-for-service by greatly appreciated. god bless. >> much more we can talk about you have been patient thank you for answering our questions and next time i will suggest we start on the bottom two rows because setting some of the best questions come from the more junior members. recharger and. -- we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations]
7:52 pm
moi [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
7:53 pm
events dictate that the president rams things up somewhat but never enough to make a difference. nizolek is responding to events we're always a step behind. i have a lot of confidence in these guys but the other thing as was very explicit the u.n. to go from 320-0500 up at 320-0520 iraqi have to get the president's approval so as i mentioned the micromanagement on the military continues to be very concerning. >> are these changes indicative? >> no. i didn't say that they have a free and but the idea that you sent folks in there to
7:54 pm
help target air strikes that is a change the president has not allow that. after paris now he allows that. but again this seems like we're one step behind in responding than what does it take and let's go do that. i don't get that. >> what do we need on the ground? >> you need the military to tell us this is what it takes. again the consensus of opinion from most of the people who have spoken about this, is more special operations, more forward controllers comair strikes and the peace he saw that we had more airstrikes in the first two months of of in a stand and 16 months of afghanistan and syria.
7:55 pm
i am still concerned how you develop a ground force in syria and general dunford was trying to be careful but if we have the exclusive government in iraq but is there any chance of that happening with the iranians calling the shots? no. >> describing the special operations troops to carry out raids to capture leaders are those the things you are okay with? >> just to back up, i am okay with it as part of a greater strategy for success against isil i am not a pale little more of this sort of little of this. i don't get the president
7:56 pm
allows there to be a strategy for success. that has a deterrent effect up and down the chain of command if you have to go all the way to the president himself to get 25 more people does that not discourage the commander? that is a big deal to say i need 25 more people in so that micromanagement has a dampening effect on the military saddam if it does seem to be with secretary carter said they're doing a are you worried they will take that approach in syria without a larger or better strategy? >> i am concerned about the. and people you put in harm's
7:57 pm
way with logistics' and medevac, they cannot go into those details in the open session of this some concerns we will express or ask about moving forward but the broader point that i am trying to agree with, other needs to be a strategy for success the whatever number of troops comair strikes to accomplish that is rigo you don't say 10 more planes or 20 more people. and everyone of those have to be approved by the president? that is concerning. >> what about changing the rules of engagement? >> said something that was included.
7:58 pm
>> dell thank you will see congress set a cap. we had hearings in here with the authorization of use of military force and nobody could define the offensive ground combat operation slow go back to ask some of those questions river over three hours but to send out a proposal then nobody could defend and a still think we should have the aumf and the new speaker is looking at that's been accused the the president changing the rules ? >> somebody else will have to tell you what the president is considering. it seems to me he has been a step behind the events in
7:59 pm
several steps behind the threat and they think general dunford talked about the threat growing beyond iraq in syria and libya in egypt afghanistan, yemen afghanistan, yemen, boko haram so it is growing and we're still behind. >> senators mccain and gramm called 20,000 more troops you're not willing to put a number on it? >> no. i want a strategy to succeed. 20,000 troops with restrictive rules of engagement will not be effective. it isn't just numbers it is was authorized. thank you. [inaudible conversations]
8:00 pm
. .


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on