
I think that the IAEA, certainly, that is an important one as we are looking at the nuclear situations that we have and threats that are around the world.
On the public record
Every politician on the site, every statement on file. Search, filter, and read the public record.
21,500+·quotes on file

I think that the IAEA, certainly, that is an important one as we are looking at the nuclear situations that we have and threats that are around the world.

Absolutely. And so what we are doing is we are putting in best practices with every single renewal that we have done.

I can tell you the work that UNICEF is doing on the ground is fantastic, and they really are changing lives there in Syria for the better.

We are not going to put up with that anymore. You know, we are going to call out every time you do something.

If we are not helping on the humanitarian efforts, if we are not helping in the peacekeeping efforts, it does cause instability.

It is holding the governments accountable, because, as you know, in a lot of the governments where we have peacekeeping missions, they have actually been a hindrance and not a support to the peacekeeping process.

I think that the administration very much wants to do all they can. They have made ISIS and terrorist groups a priority.

Is it fair to say it is in our national security interests for Damascus not to be handed over to Assad, a proxy for Iran, in any final settlement, that you cannot have Iran dominating Damascus?

Is it the policy of the Trump administration to deny North Korea the capability of building an ICBM that can hit the American Homeland with a nuclear weapon on top?

As a matter of fact, it is one of the best purchases you could have, in terms of dealing with the international terrorism, is Afghanistan.

What signal would we be sending to Russia if Congress failed to act for punishing them?

If Congress rejects this arms deal, what message are you sending to Iran?

If anybody falls in the service of the country in Afghanistan, they died to protect the Homeland?

That policy has to have all options on the table to be meaningful, including the military option?

What would happen to the Air Force's ability to deal with these threats if we went back to sequestration levels?

If you had $10 billion more on top of what the White House requested, that would be a good thing.

This committee--the chairman has decided, I think, to mark up the 640 versus 603.