Secretary Hagel with his old buddy Secretary Kerry are the two main artcitects of President Obama’s mistaken strategy to finance and train terrorist to fight in Syria has now blown up in their face.
On September 3rd, 2014 the Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel went to a special live event with CNN Correspondent Jim Sciutto. There he was interviewed by that reporter and talked a little bit about the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Given the fact that the US helped fund and train ISIS* in secret camps in Jordan as part of President Obama agenda to overthrow the government of Syria, the secretary’s views on ISIS were rather interesting to say the least.
What follows is part of that interview made for TV:
“JIM SCIUTTO: Thanks to our viewers for joining for this very special live event, a live interview with Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel during what can only be described as an extremely busy and challenging time for the Defense Department, for the administration, for the country. We appreciate the defense secretary taking the time with us.
We also are doing this at a very special venue. We’re here today in Newport, Rhode Island at the Naval War College. This is where America’s present and future military leaders are trained. There are more than 500 of them joining the audience today. And it’s not just American. There are some 63 countries represented here, and many of the countries that are right in the center of the stories that we are covering today: representatives from Estonia, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Israel. These are the decision-makers that are going to be dealing with these crises, just like the defense secretary, in the coming months and years.
Thank you Secretary Hagel for taking the time to speak with us.
ISIS is at the top of the minds of many Americans, and certainly the administration as well. The president traveling to Estonia, you heard his comments earlier today, when he described in more definitive terms than we’ve heard so far, what the American mission is when it comes to ISIS. And he used the terms “degrade and destroy,” that is the goal.
Vice President Joe Biden took it a step forward at least in rhetorical terms, a short time afterwards, saying in his words that, “we will follow them to the gates of hell because hell is where they reside.”
Now, soon after the president, moments in fact, after he uttered the terms, the words “degrade and destroy,” he went on to say that the goal may be to make ISIS “a more manageable threat,” which seems to imply contain rather than destroy. And I want to ask you, which is it? Is the mission goal to contain or destroy, and what mission have you in the Defense Department been tasked with?
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE CHUCK HAGEL: Well, first Jim, let me thank you and CNN for an opportunity to bring this group together and focus on the really pretty exceptional leadership and commitment to our country that’s represented here today, as well as our foreign partners.
I also want to thank the admiral for hosting us. My old friend and former Senate colleague, Senator Jack Reed is in the audience. He and Governor Linc Chafee gave me a visa to come into the state for — (Laughter.) — for a few hours. I shall get out before sundown. As I said.
But thank you for what you do Senator Reed and admiral, and to all of you. And I want to thank all of our men and women across the globe for their commitment to our country.
I also understand that your father is in the audience, who is a Navy veteran, so to your father, thank you.
To your question, I think the president’s statement, which I did read and aware of both he and the vice president’s news conference, was pretty clear, to degrade and destroy the capability of ISIL. To come after U.S. interests all over the world and our allies. However way he addressed that later in the news conference, I wasn’t aware of that.
But our mission, as you have asked us what that mission is, based on what the commander in chief has asked of us, is to provide him those options and those plans to accomplish the mission of destroy and degrade the capability of ISIS. We’re doing that as the president said, not just militarily, because that is but one component. The president has been very clear on that point.
But it also requires a stable, new, inclusive government in Iraq, which we are hopeful will be in place next week.
It is the people of Iraq, the people of the Middle East, that will make their ultimate decisions and determine their future. We can support them.
It’s also bringing a group with us of like-minded countries that appreciate the threat that ISIL represents to all of us. And I think you know many of the countries, France, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Albania, others, to bring that coalition with us, that’s another part.
Authorizations. Air strikes. Budget issues. The president’s been very clear he wants the Congress involved with him. We’ve been consulting with the Congress.
So, it’s all of those components, but the mission is, very clearly, and we’re providing the president with those options, to degrade and destroy ISIL’s capability.
MR. SCIUTTO: That’s the end-game? Degrade and destroy? Not contain?
SEC. HAGEL: No, it’s not contain. It’s exactly what the president said. Degrade and destroy.
MR. SCIUTTO: I want to talk about the threat to the U.S. homeland, in particular, from ISIS, because there have been mixed signals from the administration as to how imminent and severe that threat is.
Two weeks ago, you said ISIS is, quote, “an imminent threat to every interest we have,” and you went on to say, “It’s unlike any threat we’ve ever seen.”
After your comments, the administration seemed to pull back, somewhat. You had the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff describe is as a “regional threat,” something the president did later that same week, in fact, last Thursday, saying that ISIS poses an immediate threat to the people of Iraq and the people of the region. He did not say immediate threat to the U.S. homeland.
This is key. We have many folks back home wondering what threat it poses to them and their families.
Is it an imminent threat to the U.S. homeland or to the region?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, first of all, I didn’t say homeland. I said to U.S. interests.
(CROSSTALK)
MR. SCIUTTO: But you said an imminent threat to every interest we have.
SEC. HAGEL: That’s right. I didn’t say homeland. I said to all of our interests.
Look at — look at what just happened 24 hours ago on the latest video of another citizen, as to what ISIL did. It is a threat. ISIL is a threat to this country, to our interests.
Obviously, Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain made that pretty clear a couple of days ago. The president of the United States has said they are a threat. The attorney general of the United States has said it in similar language. The secretary of homeland security, director of national intelligence.
So these are very real threats. Or, if they weren’t real threats, then the president wouldn’t be saying, giving us the mission, to go out and degrade and destroy the capabilities…
MR. SCIUTTO: No question. I’m not denying that officials have said it’s a threat. The specific question is, is it a threat to the U.S. homeland at this stage, or is that a distant potential threat, and for now, ISIS is focused largely on gains in Iraq and Syria?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, I think, Jim, part of that answer is, as we have acknowledged publicly, we are aware of over 100 U.S. citizens who have U.S. passports who are fighting in the Middle East with ISIL forces. There may be more; we don’t know.
We can’t take a chance, Jim, on saying, well, let’s technically define this, is it a real threat today or tomorrow, or is it going to be in six months? That’s the way the threats don’t work in little, neat boxes and emanate on our time frame. They emanate on their time frame.
And the president’s point being to degrade and destroy their capability, so that it doesn’t get to your question.
We know they’re a threat. We know they’re brutal. We know that they are, as I’ve said, as others have said, something that we’ve never seen before. They’re better organized. They’re better funded. They have more capability. They’re better structured. There’s a dangerous, dangerous ideology of a brutality, a barbaric nature, that we’ve not seen before.
So my job as secretary of defense is not to second-guess what may be or what’s going to be, but we’ve got to protect, do everything we can to protect our country, our interests, at this — at the — at the command of our commander in chief as to what he needs in order to do his job.
MR. SCIUTTO: So it sounds to me like you’re operating, that this, to some degree, is not knowable, that there’s a potential threat — and I’ve had many intelligence briefings where intelligence officials have told me, that is the concern: Americans or Europeans returning home with those passports possibly carrying out attacks. While they may not have a credible threat, where they know the date and the time and the target, that’s a potential threat.
But it sounds to me like you’re operating, as defense secretary, that that threat could be immediate. And, therefore, you’re reacting so that you could prevent that from happening.
SEC. HAGEL: That is part of our mission. And that’s, again, not only my mission, my responsibility as secretary of defense, but, as you know, from our other Cabinet members, the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security, the director of national intelligence, all our intelligence agencies, all of us together, working — law enforcement — on this. But there are capabilities we have, missions that we can perform just as the president has instructed us to perform those missions, giving him the options, that we have to take seriously.
And I can’t second-guess what may come or what may not come. This crowd is as dangerous a group of people beyond just terrorists. They are an army, marrying this with an ideology and capacity to do things. They — they control half of Iraq today. They control half of Syria today. We better be taking them serious.
MR. SCIUTTO: So, if you are taking them seriously, and I hear urgency in your voice, why isn’t there an urgency in articulating and defining to the American people what the strategy is to react to the threat from ISIS, whether in the region or at home?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, I think the president has made that very clear. First, as he has said, we need to concentrate on, and we have been — in Secretary Kerry’s area of responsibility, but we all have this, is doing everything we can to support the Iraqi people as they come together, forming a new, inclusive government.
MR. SCIUTTO: But as you know, Iraqi politics move very slowly. And frankly, the terror threat is and is likely to move more quickly than the Iraqi political process.
SEC. HAGEL: Jim, if you’ll let me finish answering the question, that’s but one component, but we’re working on that.
What the president has talked about, bringing a group of countries together. Secretary Kerry will be doing this right after the NATO conference. I’ll be involved in this, we have been, so has our CENTCOM commander, others, in bringing a group together that together, can help support forces in Iraq and Syria, in the Middle East, who respect freedom and dignity and the choices that people will make. Military is part of that. Planning is part of that. Working with the Congress is part of that. Resources are part of that.
Asking the follow-up questions, if you do this, if you take this action, what will that lead to? Is this the right action to take? So there’s a strategy to this. As the president said in his reference last week, putting the cart before the horse, you can’t do that. We’ve gotta bring a coalition together and do the other things that we are building, we are doing, with a sense of urgency.
There’s no — I think there’s little question in my mind that there’s a sense of urgency. I think the president has been pretty clear about that.
MR. SCIUTTO: Is part of the strategy military strikes inside of Syria?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, that’s an option. And we are looking at all those options.
MR. SCIUTTO: Have you prepared those options for the president?
SEC. HAGEL: The president has asked us for different options, and we have prepared them for him.
MR. SCIUTTO: And Syria airstrikes are among them?
SEC. HAGEL: All these things are options that the president wants to see, and we’ve been working with the White House, not just starting working with the White House. Been working with the White House for weeks. The president talks to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Ambassador Rice, national security advisor, talks to all of us. The president talks to me, talks to Lloyd Austin, the commanding general of CENTCOM. So, this isn’t something that just popped up the last week or two. We’ve been working this for the last few weeks.
MR. SCIUTTO: To accomplish that mission, as you described it, degrade and destroy, can you in your view, as defense secretary, accomplish that without military action inside Syria, in light of the fact that ISIS controls territory on both sides of what is effectively a non-existent border?
SEC. HAGEL: Well, as I said, it’s a number of options. And you plan for all those options, but one thing that we — I hope we can accomplish with the Congress is the Congress going forward and funding the president’s request for $500 million in funds to help support the Syrian moderate opposition. This is a part of the counter-terrorism partnership fund that the president put forward. The Congress has not acted on that yet. I would hope the Congress would.
But we look at all options. You have to look at all the options.
MR. SCIUTTO: There was a moment last week when the White House Spokesman Josh Earnest seemed to imply that the Pentagon had not yet completed the options to present to the president. Have you placed options on his desk already for military action inside Syria?
SEC. HAGEL: Jim, options are constantly being defined and refined. This is a dynamic process. It isn’t just start with five days ago, the president asked for an option. We’re constantly providing different options and contingency plans for different things. So, the missions or whatever the commander in chief requests of a specific mission, wants from us, then we tailor our responses and our options to whatever that mission is, as he had just clearly defined it today, degrade and destroy.
MR. SCIUTTO: So the president has on his desk an option for attacking Syria?
SEC. HAGEL: He has options all the time. But we’re refining. We in fact — yesterday, we just — we were in touch again, and two or three times a day before she left with the president, with Ambassador Rice.
MR. SCIUTTO: Do you think it’s a mistake for the president to have ruled out boots on the ground to contribute to this action? Because you talked to generals former and present who will say air power is limited in what it can accomplish.
SEC. HAGEL: Well, the president has been very clear about we’re not going to go back into Iraq the same way we came out of Iraq a few years ago. That means a combat action, so-called boots on the ground combat action for American troops. We’re not going to do that. I support that decision. I think it’s the — the right decision.
Now, to your — your bigger point about just airstrikes. No, just airstrikes alone won’t fulfill — accomplish, what the — the mission is. This is why I go back with an earlier answer I gave on this is a larger dimension of many pieces. One is — is a functioning, credible, trustworthy, inclusive Iraqi government is being formed now. Coalition partners, building coalitions in that area, so everybody has a role. Everybody can participate. And we’re making good progress on that.
It’s what are our military options? It’s many of these different dynamics that flood into one. Airstrikes is one. We’ve seen airstrikes that work pretty well. So far, in the limited missions that the president has given us to use airstrikes, and they have been pretty effective.”
Source: Pentagon
*Note: US trained ISIS. See video: Rand Paul: Obama’s plans means siding with Islamic terrorists http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xjc-ToK7AQ
See video: US funding terrorists in Syria http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3wunzGveRM
See video: US funding terrorists organizations in Syria http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbIRGbeipbw
Source: US was responsible for training ISIS in Jordan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuo7-U7mOo
See report: See report: Has the Obama administration ever armed ISIS with lethal weapons? Inquiring minds would like to know! https://groundreport.com/has-the-obama-administration-ever-armed-isis-with-lethal-weapons-inquiring-minds-would-like-to-know/
Obama’s strategy in Syria to prolong the war in that country by supporting terrorists has uprooted some 6.5 million people from their homes, forced 2.7 million to flee the country, laid waste to cities and towns alike, and unleashed sectarian hatreds that have rippled across the region. The US is playing a major part in the chaos along with its allies and partners within the Saudi government…
Read more: Is President Obama freaking insane? https://groundreport.com/is-president-obama-freaking-insane/