I support the President and the international community moving the way it has moved to protect the civilian population.

Is it fair to say that, in effect, the military operation is designed to create space for political options to unfold?

Why the reduction when the challenge is greater?

The recipe for victory in my mind is clear. Our efforts must be shouldered jointly, recognizing a shared responsibility to address supply and demand for narcotics.

Why, of the $1.6 billion in law enforcement support promised under the Merida initiative, only $20 million of it had been spent by April of last year?

Do we really think it's just two or three?

Official responses to crime in many cases have not remedied the problem; have only exacerbated it.

I am concerned about a major breach with our partner, Mexico, in this.

A former ATF commander said stemming the flow of guns to Mexico is a Herculean task.

I just don't get how, when we are seeing a rising challenge... this is just one of those equations that just doesn't work.

we should at least line up the funding with the threat at the end of the day.

Development is part of it.

I hope integration will be part of your mission moving forward.

the funding seems to be incongruent with the threat.

we need to address the factors that perpetuate the narcotics trade, namely poverty and lack of economic opportunity.

I'm a very simple man from the Texas Panhandle and I have to think in very simple terms as to how we address this problem.

I believe we can put $200 million of INCL money into a Central America security partnership initiative this year.

I don't understand the lack of effort on the front end to undermine the gunrunning into Mexico, which would be in our own interests at the end of the day.