Page 18 - Combat Role News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

U.s. forces in a combat role, absolutely, that means that you are accepting the risk of not just additional resources to apply, but casualties to american troops. >> why is that not off of the record now? wouldn't the president want that out, because he is not doing enough to capture isil, and why wou wouldn't the president shout that from the are rooftop, this could cost us 500 people every six months, you know. >> well, the details in off of the record setting, but the president has been clear as commander in chief how he wants this war prosecuted. it is a strategy. it is making success or h...

Going to kill isis? >> right. you could take one thing from each candidate and put together a strategy. i liked what carly fiorina said about brake bringing back the warrior class. a lot of generals were fired that warned -- >> the petraeus -- >> right. allen matis both kind of exited based on these types of warnings about iran and isis. this warrior class is out of the milita military. in iraq we have a generational gap. most americans in iraq training iraqis haven't been there in a combat role. they don't know the forces they're working with. we already have a generational gap not only in ou...

Administration's lack of recently critical of the administration's lack of strategy. you are now calling for ground troops in combat roles, specifically what are you looking for with this authorization? >> i'm not calling for ground troops in a combat role. but what i am suggesting to break the impasse here on the hill, which has largely been about whether ground troops would or would not be authorized is a resolution that would repeal all prior resolutions both -- it would authorize force against not only isis but al qaeda and the taliban and would provide that if the president made the decis...

Harm's way and are there for longer terms and in larger numbers? essentially are members of congress feeling guilty that they haven't weighed in? >> absolutely. and i think people are feeling it increasingly untenable that we're sending troops into harm's way in increasing numbers and yet we don't have the courage to take up a resolution ourselves. i think there is a way to get this done, rachel, a way to draft it that can get bipartisan support. i am kicking around an idea that i have been vetting with people, just starting to, that would authorize use of force against both al qaeda and isis ...

Troops committed in more permanent and more dangerous ways, does that create more political, i guess, sense of ownership in the congress, as more american troops are in harm's way and are there for longer terms and in larger numbers? essentially are members of congress feeling guilty that they haven't weighed in? >> absolutely. and i think people are feeling it increasingly untenable that we're sending troops into harm's way in increasing numbers and yet we don't have the courage to take up a resolution ourselves. i think there is a way to get this done, rachel, a way to draft it that can get ...