We have, I think, come to the conclusion--most of us, but not all in this body--that it would be a mistake to put an explicit time limit, for example, on our presence in Bosnia, or an explicit time limit on certain other kinds of military activities or threatening national security activities because, of course, what that does is enable the party against whom the action is being taken to simply ride it out and to understand if they can just get by the next 60 days or 6 months, then they will not have to worry about that. So we have always taken the position that when it comes to this kind of thing--national security--our actions should be somewhat open-ended to ensure that the other party begins acting in the way that we would like to have that party act. Obviously, when you have a 2-year sunset on these kinds of sanctions, you eliminate that flexibility.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing national security and military presence in Bosnia during a Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Jon Kyl
One of the things that we noticed in this endeavor is there is a great attitude among the military, among the Defense Department generally in being able to succeed at a mission.
we're obviously not starting anything, we're playing catch up, and it's going to be a pretty tough job to catch up
the other thing I would like to do this afternoon is to very briefly report to my colleagues and to constituents back home on some things which my predecessor, Senator McCain, was working on at the time of his untimely death and which his…
today, along with several other colleagues from the Senate, I wrote to the President on the subject of the possible extension of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START. Several people have been encouraging the President to…





