Chris Murphy

In his request for a Federal probe in to this mounting, appalling problem, your colleague, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, described some of these tragic outcomes in a letter to OIG Inspector Daniel Levinson.

I am glad that we have spent a good amount of time here talking about the roots of extremism.

If these communities feel that the authorities are not on their side, then there will be fewer tips and, of course, more radicalization.

All this demagoguery may have made for effective electoral politics, but it will undermine our security in far-reaching ways.

The principal danger will remain from homegrown extremists, especially those who operate alone or in very small groups.

We do not have a dysfunctional immigration system. that does not permit us to know who we let into our country.

We must not only pursue a whole-of-government approach to counter terrorism but a whole-of-government perspective as well.

Identifying Islam itself as a terrorist source... is just fallacy.

To me, that is counter to the strategies we need to fight extremists.

We have caused the sons and daughters and brothers and uncles and sisters of those in the Syrian opposition to be slaughtered.

We certainly have made bold statements about what we were going to do relative to Syria that were followed up with almost nothing.

I think hubris certainly is something that can be the downfall of us all.

How does that get us the political solution?

We have a political problem.

I reject the idea that there are easy, clear alternatives that the administration just is not looking at.

I think history should probably teach us that those two things are likely not a coincidence.

Maybe, just maybe every bad thing that happens in the world is not a fault of failed U.S. policy.

This idea that there was a magical moment in 2012 where we could have parachuted arms to the Syrian rebels and they would have overrun Assad is not true.

At the heart of the most spectacular U.S. foreign policy failures of the last 50 years is hubris.

Ten to 15 years is what you're recommending?

The threat of withdrawing humanitarian aid is only so good as the concern that leaders show for the people.

A lot of people would suggest that that is essentially the policy that we have tried so far, that we have put in almost $2 billion worth of aid, we have attached conditions on it.

I would like to thank Chairman Inhofe and Ranking Member Boxer for this informative discussion and for their help in clarifying the content and intent of section 2004 and the dredging provisions contained in WRDA 2016.

Does section 2004 or any other provision in WRDA 2016 revise the Army Corps' Federal standard for disposal of dredged material from Federal projects?

Do you worry that it is just simply not in the DNA of the Taliban to compromise, that we are not talking about a political party?