Department of Defense Press Briefing by Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Director for Operations Rear Adm. Andrew L. Lewis in the Pentagon Briefing Room

PETER COOK:  Good morning, everyone.  Glad everyone could be here.  And today, pleased to welcome to the podium Rear Admiral Andy Lewis.  He's the Joint Staff vice director for operations, Call sign Woody.  And he's here to give us our latest counter-ISIL campaign update.  

If you could, do us a favor and identify yourself when you ask a question for the benefit of Admiral Lewis.  And again, we'll take as many questions as we can.  We'd like to keep this focused on the counter-ISIL campaign.  

And without further ado, sir, the podium is all yours.  

REAR ADMIRAL ANDREW LEWIS:  Thanks.  Well, good morning.  My name is Andy Lewis, and as the vice director for operations on the Joint Staff, I play a role and am responsible for overseeing the U.S. military's daily operations around the world.  This includes the global fight against ISIL, and today, I will brief you on the progress our coalition has made in the counter-iSIL campaign, particularly in Iraq and Syria.  

As has been stated by the chairman and secretary recently, the military coalition fighting ISIL has momentum.  Broadly, the coalition has degraded ISIL's ability to move freely on the battlefield, has regained significant territory in both Iraq and Syria, and has degraded ISIL's leadership and resources.  

There are more than 60 nations participating in the coalition, and more than 20 of our partners contribute combat troops and equipment.  Although there is certainly still a long road ahead, there's been significant progress.  

Iraqi security forces have begun shaping an isolation operation for re-taking Mosul, with U.S. and coalition partner supporting them with air power and other enabling capabilities.  We have seen steady progress as the ISF continues to re-capture territory, to include HIIT and Makhmur.  These are vital nodes in ISIL's communication networks both in Iraq and Syria, and are important stepping stones in isolating Mosul.  The ISF's capabilities continue to grow, and their newly-trained troops are having a positive impact.  

In Syria, coalition partners seized Shadadi and closed off nearly 6,000 square kilometers of ISIL-held territory.  They have cut off key lines of communication between Iraq and Syria.  Additionally, we've continued to target senior ISIL leadership, and our successes are degrading their ability to govern and control their forces and territory.  

Coalition air power has had significant impacts on ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and as our intelligence continues to improve, so has our ability to target ISIL leadership and other high priority targets.  This weakens ISIL and makes them desperate.  In fact, we assess the attacks in Paris and Brussels are not signs of ISIL's strength, but rather a reflection of their distorted attempts to maintain the ability to recruit in the face of their failures on the battlefield.  

We do not assess that there is a direct correlation, but they do demonstrate the twisted lengths to which ISIL will go as it attempts to survive as an organization.  

Rest assured we remain focused and postured across the globe to degrade, defeat and destroy ISIL and to deny them safe havens from which they can operate.  There is no hole deep enough in which they can hide, and time is not on their side.  

Finally, and before I finish, I'd like to say I come to work each day honored to wear this uniform and serve the tremendous soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who serve our great country all over the globe.  The sacrifices these young Americans make are significant, but they willingly do so with humility and dignity.  They execute the mission precisely and violent when necessary, always maintaining their values.  It is truly eye-watering to be a part of it.  

Thank you for being here today and for helping tell the story to the American public.  With that said, I'll take any questions you may have.  Yes, ma'am?  

Q:  Admiral, Lolita Baldor with the Associated Press.  Thanks for doing this.  One quick question on your map and then a broader question.  

We've heard some varying percentages over time.  Can you say what -- based on this ISIL area of influence map -- what percentage of territory has ISIS either lost or gained in Iraq and in Syria, you know, over the past year or so.  We've heard varying numbers, I'm wondering if you can maybe clear that up a little bit.

And then my broader question is about Russia's bombing and inciting activities in Syria.  Can you give us a picture of what you're seeing from Russia?  We know that some fighters have left, but are -- is -- are the bombing activities by Russia starting to make it more difficult for the U.S. to conduct any operations there?  Does this call for greater confliction?  And what are you seeing what Russia do over the last couple of weeks?  

ADM. LEWIS:  Yes, ma'am.  First of all, in regards to the percentages of territory re-gained by -- you know, as I -- as I mentioned at the outset, the momentum has with the coalition, it's -- it has shifted.  So a year ago, 18 months ago, the area in which was ISIL control was much larger.  

I would not come to a percentage decrease, but it is -- it is significant.  It's a significant.  I mean, we're talking 6,000 square kilometers in Syria alone, that's a lot of -- that's a lot of space regained by coalition forces fighting in Syria and coalition forces fighting in Iraq.  And as the -- and Iraqi forces fighting in Iraq that are re-taking ISIL territory.  

It has restricted their movement, their ability to -- lines of communication among -- you know, between Iraq and Syria but also within Iraq and within Syria.  So they can't move freely around the battlefield.  So not really a percentage, but it's significantly reduced.  I mean, if you look at comparisons side-by-side, it's significant.  Less bad colors on there.  

In regards to the Russians, what we are seeing is they have a number of fighters, fighter aircraft and other combat capability that has gone back to Russia.  There is still some there and they are still operating.  The ceasefire operations are ongoing.  There are -- there are still hiccups in the -- in the ceasefire that are happening from day to day.  We are not seeing them move further east at present, east of Palmyra.  And we're not seeing that as being a problem to our operations.  Where we're operationally, where they are fighting against ISIL, where they have an effect against ISIL.  We like that.

Outside of that, operationally, what they're intent is?  I'm not qualified to even address that.

Q:  Can I just get a clarification?  You said 6,000 square kilometers.  Is that the number of kilometers in Syria that you believe ISIS has lost?

ADM. LEWIS:  As that as -- that coalition forces have regained.

Q:  Regained.  Do you have a similar number for Iraq?

ADM. LEWIS:  I do not have that off the top of my head.

Yes sir.

Q:  Tom Bowman with NPR.  You talked about 20 countries providing combat troops and equipment, but not one of those countries is a Sunni country.  Two months ago, Secretary Carter said, he was confident that the Saudis and UAE would provide special forces to this fight.  That hasn't happened yet.

Also, I understand, no trainers from the Sunni countries are in Iraq.  They're all from European countries, Australia, U.S. and Canada.  So, I guess, are you still hopeful that these countries will still send special forces, and why haven't you been able to attract any trainers from any of these Sunni countries?

ADM. LEWIS:  The dialogue is ongoing with our leadership, U.S. leadership and the leadership of Sunni countries, to try to get participation and those forces to be trainers, to have special forces operators.  

But at my level and what I've been involved with and what those -- that dialogue continues.  But I can't speak to where it is as far as, you know, where we are as far as the training.

Q:  One trainer from the Sunni countries.  I mean, you have Norway, Finland, Australia, New Zealand.  Not one from an Arab speaking country?

ADM. LEWIS:  The -- I would -- I will say that my understanding and that dialogue that's ongoing with the leadership, with our leadership.  I'm not privy to most of the discussions.  And I'll leave it at that.

Q:  One more question.  There was a strike in Idlib.  Can you talk about that because it's kind of rare for you guys to be bombing that far west.

ADM. LEWIS:  I'm not going to talk about that at this point.

Yes ma'am.

Q:  Sir, Jennifer Griffin, Fox News.  General Votel testified to Congress that there was no operational plan to retake Raqqa.  Is that still the case and if so, why not?  And secondly, can you talk about the Sinai?  

There have been some reports that there are plans under foot to remove U.S. forces from the Sinai, because of concern about ISIS in that area and the ability to protect those troops.  

Where does that stand?  Are you planning to pull U.S. troops out of the Sinai?

ADM. LEWIS:  In regards to your first question ma'am, in Raqqa.  I think that -- well, first of all, the campaign, the counter-ISIL campaign, the military component of the counter-ISIL campaign in Iraq and Syria, if you look at it less as a sequential campaign and more of a simultaneous campaign and the Iraqi and coalition forces on the ground.

They are making the determination on what they are going to isolate and what they are going to take in accordance with the ebb and flow of activity on the ground and what we are supporting and what we are training forces to help support and in support of their overall campaign objectives.

To -- and it's going.  We have the flexibility to shift focus as directed, by the forces that are doing the fighting.  So, to -- so it maybe that Raqqa becomes the focused effort, maybe Mosul becomes the focused effort.  And that uncertainty that we have against the enemy -- or that the coalition has against the enemy, makes it a much more advantageous situation for us on the ground.

Q:  So are you waiting for the local forces to come up with a plan for Raqqa?

ADM. LEWIS:  We are -- nothing has changed in our overall strategy and support of the coalition in the fight.  And we are supporting their military plan to execute. 

Q:  But isn't it a little strange that a year and a half into this conflict, there's still no plan to retake the capital of the so-called Islamic State?  A little bit -- slow going?

ADM. LEWIS:  I don't think I -- I'm not really qualified to answer that question frankly.  In regards to your Sinai question, that operationally, we have people there that are committed to the mission.  And my focus is making sure that they have the force protection measures in place and we have increased the force protection measures in the -- in MFO Sinai, to ensure their maximum safety.

Q:  Are there plans to pull them out?

ADM. LEWIS:  Those discussions are happening with the -- with -- not the plans to whether to pull them out or not, but to what that looks like with our -- within the U.S. government and within the governments of Israel and Egypt.  And on those discussions are happening at the very highest levels.

Q:  Can I quickly follow-up on that?  I was told that two outposts outside of north camp in the Sinai has been closed.  Is that accurate?

ADM. LEWIS:  No sir.  They have not been closed.  There's -- yes sir?

Q:  Jim Sciutto from CNN.  Just to follow-up on the Russian presence there.  You say that there are still hiccups.  The Russians have withdrawn some assets, but there's still assets, they're still doing bombing runs.

I just wonder if you would characterize this as a substantive withdrawal, or is this is just a symbolic withdrawal?  The Russians seem to still have a major military presence there.  Is there any operational difference from your perspective?  And I just have one to follow.

ADM. LEWIS:  Operationally, there is a difference because their focus of effort is very refined and -- but, as far as their intent, the Russian intent overall, you'd have to ask the president of Russia that.

Q:  If you could arrange that, I would appreciate it.  Just on another topic, and I know it's not in Iraq and Syria, but it's in the news today.  The South Koreans saying that North Korea, their belief, has a deployable, miniaturized, nuclear weapon.  

I know that the U.S. view is more nuanced on that.  But operationally, how does it change U.S. operations in that region in terms of protecting allies?


Staff:  (off mic)

Q:  Well, we went -- we've gotten to Sinai, just in the news.  If you could -- is it an operational question?

Staff:  (off mic).

ADM. LEWIS:  Yes ma'am.

Q:  Thank you sir for doing this.  Carla Babb, Voice of America.  I have two, quick questions.  The first is on the border with Turkey.  What's being done by the coalition -- Turkey being a member of the coalition -- to secure the border further and stop any Islamic state gains?  Because we can see in the map that they've made some gains.

And then my second question is around Ramadi and Hit.  There's been a lot of touting of success with the retaking of Ramadi, but I've noticed that they've -- there's also been some losses around Hit and Ramadi as well.  Is this trading territory?  Are they -- or are they removing Islamic state fighters from the battlefield?  Or are they just pushing them outside of the major cities?

ADM. LEWIS:  Well, I'll take the second question first.  The -- in the area of Ramadi, it is not trading territory.  It is clearing operations and securing and putting governance in place.  There -- it's a dangerous situation still, but one in which they are -- Iraqi security forces and Iraqi police forces are moving in and -- and securing and moving in the right direction.  

In regards to the border with Turkey and Syria, the broader coalition -- you know, it's a very complicated situation there on the ground, with various coalition input, to include the Turks -- our NATO ally in the Turks.  But the -- that situation is, you know, with the big take-away operation, is we are making -- the coalition is making gains in securing that border. 

Because one of the things that we are concerned about is the foreign fighter flow into Syria through that -- that area.  So that has a lot of impact on it.  But there is -- there are gains being made.

Q:  If I may follow up.  How are there gains when the Islamic state is also making some gains?  

ADM. LEWIS:  I think in aggregate, the gains by the coalition are more than what the Islamic state is.

STAFF:  Yes, ma'am?

Q:  Thank you.  Tara Kopp with Stars and Stripes.

With Fire Base Bell, could you describe the range of operations the Marines there are involved in?  Are they now getting outside the base as Iraqi forces keep pushing west?  And then as a follow-up to that, could you similarly describe the range of operations against the Islamic state in Afghanistan beyond -- including the airstrikes, but are there any additional roles for U.S. ground forces to fight the Islamic state in Afghanistan?

ADM. LEWIS:  First -- I'll take your second question first, because I think I have a short-term memory loss.  The -- in Afghanistan, I think just a couple of days ago Afghanistan had the command structure within USFOR-A and Resolute Support, had some specific numbers that they came out with.  So I – won’t talk to those.

But I will say that there have been, you know -- I won't name numbers, but there have been counterterrorism strikes in Afghanistan recently.  And they're -- and I know that's of interest, and the public affairs organization here at the secretary of defense's office is working with the press to be as forthcoming as possible when they can with the information.

Obviously, what we are concerned with is putting our forces at risk and putting the mission at risk by sharing too much.  

In regards to Fire Base Bell, which goes by another name, which the name I can't pronounce right now, I’ll just leave it as Fire Base Bell.  But the chairman addressed this very succinctly a week ago Friday in regards to, you know – well behind the FLOT.  And they were -- their mission is to provide fire in support in Iraqi forces, just like we do with airplanes, just it's -- surface-to-surface fires, by air-to-surface fires.  

The same concept; very accurate; very -- and we have put force protection measures in place at Fire Base Bell, and strengthened those measures even since the -- the attack on there several weeks ago.

STAFF:  Yes, ma'am?

Q:  Hi.  Courtney Kube with NBC News.

Can you explain a little bit more what you mean that the Russian focus of effort in Syria has been more defined recently?  There were some reports I think it was yesterday that the Syrian regime, along with the Russian, had launched this fierce assault against an area just south of Aleppo.  So that doesn't seem like it's necessarily ISIS, if their mission is more defined.  

Are you seeing that they are continuing to support the government's assault on civilians, on opposition forces, or what not?  And then I have one other question on Syria.

ADM. LEWIS:  Okay, I'll answer that one before you ask the second one.

You know, I'm -- I have four kids, so I've always told my kids, you know, actions speak louder than words.  For me to try to figure out, or any of us to try to figure out about the -- what the Russians intend and what the Russians and the Syrian regime intent is -- I -- I'm not -- what I'm referring to as far as their actions and where we're seeing their activity, it is confined to a geographical area that is not presenting a problem with our fight -- the coalition fight against ISIS, if that's clear.

Q:  Are they actually striking ISIS?  I mean, like, Aleppo -- what -- what is your assessment of what -- (inaudible)?

ADM. LEWIS:  Where they're having -- where the concentric circles of -- (inaudible) -- ISIL that are being struck by the Russians, we will happily accept that happening.  Where it doesn't happen, it has not become a hindrance for our operations – it would be -- 

Q:  I just have one more about your -- your question -- or (inaudible) question about -- Idlib.  I was just struck by your answer to that because it was something that came out in the CENTCOM daily roundup of strikes.  And I think it was they struck a tactical unit and some other ISIS thing near Idlib.  And I was just curious why you won't -- (inaudible).

ADM. LEWIS:  Well -- (inaudible)

(CROSSTALK)

Q:  (inaudible) -- specific about the strikes that we should be asking about?

ADM. LEWIS:  No, no, not at all.  It's more my comfort level of talking in detail.  And from a -- and just from a standpoint of committing to memory what those details are -- not anything other than that.  That's -- to be quite honest, that's where I'm coming from.

ADM LEWIS:  Yes, sir?

Q:  Joe Tabet  with Al Hurra.

I would like to ask you if you could provide us with a clear picture about the size of the SDF, the Syrian Democratic Forces?  Could you confirm that the number runs between 30,000 to 40,000?  And also, I have a follow-up on Syria.

AMD. LEWIS:  I don't think that I can provide you a clear number.  And I will -- I will say that -- and I won't even be as specific as SDF.  I will back up and say the coalition, and contributing members of the coalition, which is inclusive of several different groups, is, you know, I think that range of numbers is probably pretty close.  But I think it would be disingenuous for me to say -- to come down on a number.

Q:  How much -- how much do you think the Arab component  is among this force, the coalition force?   Thirty percent?

ADM. LEWIS:  Sorry, I would be -- I would be making something up if I answered.  I just don't know.

Q:  Okay.  You mentioned the significant loss that ISIL has faced lately.

Do you believe that the U.S. and the coalition have reached a turning point in the fight against ISIL?

ADM. LEWIS:  As I stated up front, I think there is momentum, and I would characterize it as significant momentum.

But ISIL is still a dangerous enemy.  And -- and -- and capable of irrational actions that present danger to a lot of innocent people.  So, they're -- have we turned the corner?  I don't know if we've turned the corner, per se, but I know that we are -- we are -- the trend is going in the right direction.

And we are committed, the coalition is committed and -- to accelerating that where we can.  And that -- it just doesn't happen.

STAFF:  All right, last one.

Q:  Last follow-up, sorry.

As you know, Assad regime -- the Assad regime is pushing ISIL out of Palmyra and the – suburbs of Palmyra.  Also, the SDF are closing, are pushing ISIL from the Northern -- the Northeastern side of Syria.

Do you believe as a combatant military commander that there is a point one day you would be -- you would need to communicate with the Assad regime through their channels, for example?

ADM. LEWIS:  Outside of my lane as military officer, outside of the operational piece, I -- I would -- I would say that those discussions are happening, the diplomatic discussions, political discussions are -- are happening, you know, the -- being played out and alternatives being addressed.

But not something that I'm involved with day-to-day, or even at all.  

Yes, sir?

Q:  Going back to comments – Thomas Gibbens-Neff, Washington Post.

Going back to Idlib and strikes that were not on the CENTCOM release, can you speak to the U.S. drone strike that targeted five militants, Al Qaida militants in Idlib City last night?

ADM. LEWIS:  I won't speak specifically to that.  I will say that the authorities to strike, AQ have stayed -- stayed in place, and we continue to execute those strikes.

Q:  And a second follow-up unrelated to the -- related the Syria train and equip.

There has been reports coming out of theater, a lot more U.S. equipment flowing to Syrian -- Free Syrian Army divisions that we previously haven't worked with in the past, we've worked with division 30, but now there is pickup trucks, heavy machine guns, mortars.

Have we changed how much we're equipping the Syrian rebels that we support?

ADM. LEWIS:  The easy answer to that is no.  What we -- how we are equipping is -- it is transactional dependent.  In other words, their -- their stated -- whatever force that we are supporting with equipment, their stated objectives on the ground.  And we provide those -- those -- that equipment that they can execute that mission.

And then we -- you know, we evaluate it at the end of it for further support.  It's not -- it's not a, you know, unfettered support of arms and supply.

Q:  Are we supplying people that we haven't supplied in the past with that transactional agreement?

ADM. LEWIS:  As I -- I -- no.  I don't think we're supplying as a group, no, we're not doing anything -- anything -- we're not supplying people -- the different groups overall any differently than we were in the past.

So -- okay.  Yes, ma'am.

Q:  I want to go back -- just for purposes of efficiency, I'll call Fire Base Bell.

Have there been any other similar bases put up in Iraq or Syria since that time?  And/or are there -- or should the American public expect that future such compounds will appear in Iraq and/or Syria?

ADM. LEWIS:  Well, subsequent Fire Base Bell -- they still have -- there is, you know, it's dependent upon what's happening on the ground, and in the campaign -- military campaign.

So, this is -- you know, as the -- as Iraqi force -- Security Forces progress towards isolating Mosul, there may be a situation in which there is another -- a base or -- that has opened or reopened from years past that would -- would be used in the same manner as a -- as a fire support base behind the FLOT

Q:  And has it happened yet?

ADM. LEWIS:  Not to my knowledge, no.

Q:  And then, there are reports emerging that Anbari -- Ali Anbari was killed in Dayr Az-Zawr.

Does the U.S. military have any information, one way or the other, whether he has indeed been killed or struck in Dayr Az-Zawr?

ADM. LEWIS:  I -- I can't confirm that.  I can't confirm that, so.

Yes, ma'am.  Go ahead.

Q:  The last thing is you've talked a lot about territorial losses that ISIS has suffered.  And you also mentioned that ISIS routinely will strike almost immediately when it suffers such losses to signal that it has not been debilitated.

And I would like to know if you have a sense of how much of a backlog or an estimation of their backlog in terms of strikes, particularly in the West that they have, sort of in stock?  And -- and because I think it will help understand the -- or address how the territorial losses might not be mitigating, at least in the short-term, strikes on Western countries.

Do you guys have a sense, in terms of how much of a backlog they have?

ADM. LEWIS:  If -- if we had -- if we had a sense of that, we would stop it now.

But we don't.  I mean, there is a -- there is a -- there is a -- you know, this is not rational actor that speaks -- that behaves like we would behave, or like common, decent people would behave.

But to -- to be able to -- to be able -- now, we're constantly diligent, looking for threat of these kinds of attacks throughout the globe.  But where -- we have an estimate on what -- what's in -- what's cooking right now, I don't -- I don't think we do.

Q:  Can you address broadly, then, when ISIS losses territory, like Palmyra, like Shaddadi, like -- (inaudible) -- just a few days ago, how much has that been limiting their ability to conduct, to – plot, to train, to conduct strikes as long as they hold onto places like Raqqa and Mosul, where the predominate number of foreign fighters have come in and trained, and then in some cases, gone back to Europe?

ADM. LEWIS:  Sorry, can you repeat the question?

Q:  I meant to say that when you lose places like -- when ISIS loses places like Palmyra and some of these other smaller towns in Shadadi.  As long as they hold Mosul and Raqqa, are they not then able to continue to pose a significant threat to the west?  How much does Palmyra matter if they continue to hold places like Raqqa and Mosul, given that that's where most of the training of foreign fighters have gone through those --

ADM. LEWIS:  Well, it -- no.  It degrades significant because it degrades our ability to move freely on the battlefield and to -- they -- so we're taking away their mobility and their agility on the battlefield, the coalition is.  And so that -- it does degrade it.  Does it reduce it to zero?  No.  But it definitely degrades it.

Yes, ma'am?

Q:  If you, sir, could just move back to the microphone so we --

ADM. LEWIS:  Okay.  Sorry.

Q:  Thank you so much.  We're sorry about that.

ADM. LEWIS:  I had to make eye contact.

Q:  I wanted to -- I wanted to just go back on the issue of Raqqa, because I was very struck by the president yesterday saying, and quoting him, he said, "We should no longer tolerate the kind of positioning that is enabled by them, ISIS, having headquarters in Raqqa and Mosul."  So if the sort of guidance is not the tolerate the positioning of ISIS to have Raqqa as its headquarters, can you go back over the Pentagon's thinking, the Pentagon's status of this?  Because I -- is there an operational plan, then, to get ISIS out of Raqqa?  Even if you can't say what the plan is, where are you on getting them booted out of Raqqa?

ADM. LEWIS:  What I can say is the president provided -- asked the secretary of Defense and the chairman to work on accelerants in the -- to accelerate the campaign against ISIL.  And those options of being -- are being discussed and being planned with the leadership in the department.  And what has -- and those options haven't been brought to -- you know, they're being discussed also with the president, and giving him options to address that.

And those specific -- you know, obviously, those options are being addressed with our coalition partners in Iraq and our coalition partners in Syria because ultimately, our overall strategy of fighting is support to those fighting those on the ground.

Q:  Do you have an operational plan yet to get ISIS out of Raqqa?

ADM. LEWIS:  I can't answer that question.  I don't -- I'm not -- I'm not qualified to answer.

Yes, ma'am?

Q:  One last one on Fire Base Bell.  Do you know why the base was renamed?

ADM. LEWIS:  You know, I have -- I do know why, but I can't remember why right now.  I'm sorry.  I'll take -- (inaudible). 

STAFF:  (off mic).

ADM. LEWIS:  Okay.

Q:  The cap level of American troops in Iraq, the FML is 3870, but it's come out that the numbers are higher because of TDYs or other temporary assignments, as you call them.  Can you explain what the Joint Staff thinking is as -- what do you define as a TDY in theater?  And what is the actual number of American troops there in Iraq right now?

ADM. LEWIS:  This is an --

Q:  What -- (inaudible) -- troops are actually being sent under this kind of assignment.

ADM. LEWIS:  This is a pretty easy one to answer because the chairman answered this exact question here a week and a half ago, and he answered it in that -- the rules that we use and the process we use is the same one that we've used for about 15 years now as far as FML, boots in the ground.  And what -- you know, things like swap outs of troops, we don't double count.  Things like security -- military security forces for embassy personnel, that doesn't count toward FML.  And then there's periods of, you know, TDY time that, in the business rules, if you like.  

We know there's more than 3750 in Iraq at any one time, but it's all being done in the -- in the -- along the lines of those business rules.  So I think the chairman answered that much better than I just did, but that's essentially what he said.

Q:  A thousand more than --

ADM. LEWIS:  I can't.  I don't know.  I mean, to be honest with you.

Q:  Thanks, admiral.