Congress Questions Defense Secretary on Kuwait Attack and Troop Protection

Thank you Mr. Chairman. We all just heard pretty powerful reporting, courtesy of Mr. Ryan, from

many of our wounded troops who were injured in the attack in Kuwait. Mr. Secretary, you heard

direct quotes from some of them via CBS's reporting. They were willing to talk to the press.

Things like they were unprepared to provide any defense for themselves in the unit.

Things like we were moved closer to Iran to a deeply unsafe area that was a known target.

Your spokesperson, Sean Parnell, in response to that reporting, said it was not true.

Do you agree with that? He's calling these guys liars?

I'm not calling our troops liars, and I don't know if what you're representing is

correct or not. I'll take you at your word on that. But all I know is that we took every

effort possible at the commencement of this campaign to ensure the defense of our troops,

to include moving them off of known bases to places that were not known and we had

intel where they were not known, and then those were fortified with bunkers and other fortifications

with theater air defenses. Was our concern that something could be true?

I'm going to pause you there. I'm going to give you a chance.

You're disparaging me that I don't care.

I'm asking you whether you think they're liars or not.

You and you are disparaging me that I don't care about the passing of our troops.

Nope. I asked if you thought they're liars.

That's disparaging and smearing in every way. Nobody cares more about the fate of our troops.

Nobody cares about the health of our troops. Nobody wants to bring them all hope more than I do.

I understand, but he controls the time. He controls the time.

You get to control your answer. And the gentleman's right.

If we're allowed to answer, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Secretary.

My question was clear whether you thought they were liars or not.

You don't seem to want to answer it. We can move on.

The other part of what your spokesman said, and you just reiterated here was that,

and I'm quoting your spokesman, every possible measure has been taken to safeguard our troops.

End quote. You're mean to tell us.

I'll give you a chance to clarify. There is not a single additional thing you could

have done to protect those troops who are now wounded, six of whom are dead.

I'm telling you that as a department, we did every conceivable thing at my level and every

echelon down to ensure the maximum force protection for our troops. We live in a dangerous world,

in a dangerous place against a determined enemy that can't have a nuclear weapon,

and that requires sacrifice and risk. And tragically, in this case, it meant six

Americans lost their lives and others were wounded. And we all know that. That's part of

the cost. But it does not mean we didn't care, and it doesn't mean we didn't do everything possible,

which we did. But let's be clear about what was done. There were T-walls there, essentially.

There was no overhead protection. The known threat in that environment,

and I think we all here understand it, is overhead drone strike.

There was no protection for overhead drone strike. So I'm struggling to understand

how your answer and your spokesman's answer is that every possible measure was taken.

We can move on. Mr. Chairman and Chairman Kane, I want to ask you something on a different topic.

Folks at home know you're the senior military officer in our armed services. They may not have

as much of an understanding of your role in the chain of command. You're outside the operational

chain of command, but you are the president's and the secretary's senior military advisor.

So I want to ask a very basic thing. What you would expect our commanders in the field,

our troops to do should the enemy lay down their weapons and try to surrender?

What would you expect commanders in the field to do?

Well, sir, I think I'll go back to something I said earlier with deep respect for your question,

but I think you're trying to take me to a partisan place here, and I can't let you do that.

General, as always, I respect your desire to avoid it. I'm not trying to put you in a partisan place.

No, no, and I know that. But our officers and enlisted service members always follow lawful

orders. There's a checklist for them to do that, and I'll stay in the middle.

Very good. Understood, General. Secretary, let me give you a chance, and you asked about this

earlier. You said in, I think, your press conference, essentially, and I'll quote you here,

no quarter, no mercy for our enemies. That's the end of the quote. Is your guidance that you expect

our troops in harm's way if there's a foreign enemy surrendering, laying down their arms,

they're supposed to provide no quarter and kill them?

You denied it, but you were indeed trying to take the chairman to a partisan place. That

was General Milley. That was the previous administration, which played politics.

We don't play that way. It's a simple question. I'm asking what you meant. We fight to win,

and we ensure the rules of engagements are such that our troops have every authority possible.

I'll give you another chance. In saying that, are you trying to tell commanders that that's

what you expect? You're in the chain of command. It's a simple question. I understand that. My

commanders know exactly what the guidance is with each and every mission, and they know every tool.

Secretary, in refusing to answer it, I think you speak volumes. I think that's a dangerous thing.

We all know the expectations. We know the law of war. We know what is lawful. I'd expect our

commanders to understand that as well. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.