There is no evidence that Congress is concerned at all about ISIL.

Most will agree that there can be no future for Syria with Assad in power.

We do not want to have a debate and vote because we do not want to put our names on it.

Moderate Syrian Opposition forces require significant external support if they are to generate the required combat power.

The fact is that what matters is that the strategy is failing.

Is the President steadfast in having a goal that includes Mr. Assad being removed from power?

If the President had not started a bombing campaign on August 8th near Irbil, we might not be here today.

Many of us believe that the goal the President laid out, quote, "to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL" is right.

I do not believe that there is any reasonable prospect that it will be possible to retake Mosul this year.

I think the real reason is, we don't have the backbone to take it up and do the job that Congress is supposed to do.

This is now a war, into the 10th month, without a clear legal basis.

If you're not winning in this kind of warfare, you are losing. Stalemate is not success.

I harshly criticize the administration for not sending in a draft authorization over right when they started this legal action.

There has not been a declaration of war, there's not been an authorization for use of military force.

We've been at war since August 8.

Congress to this point has decided that the budget caps enacted in August 2011 is a higher national priority than defeating ISIL.

The option of Coalition boots on the ground should be retained as we seek to build our understanding of opposition groups.

This appearance of success only enhances ISIL's ability to radicalize, recruit, and grow.