Even if bin Laden had been captured or killed in the weeks before September 11, no one I know believes that it would necessarily have prevented September 11.

capturing or killing of Osama bin Laden would not change the problem of international terrorism.

capturing or killing of Osama bin laden would not change the problem of international terrorism.

It's been a problem we've worried about from day one.

The more than 600 suspected terrorists at Gitmo will have a number of rights, including the presumption of innocence and the right to counsel.

It is not possible to predict costs a year in advance in a war.

there is a very real possibility that we may not succeed in Iraq and we've got to realize that now.

The United States has a vital national interest in the success of free institutions in Iraq as the alternative to tyranny and terrorist violence in the Middle East.

The President has said that we should stay in Iraq as long as is necessary and not a day longer.

As Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld noted, this new era was illustrated by the coalition's 'unprecedented combination of power, precision, speed, and flexibility.'

Think. It took us 10 months to find Saddam Hussein. The reality is that the hole he was found hiding in was large enough to hold enough biological weapons to kill thousands of human beings.

If lives can be saved by physical proof that that man is off the street, out of commission, never to return, then we opt for saving lives.

I could characterize Guantanamo Bay, Cuba as the least worst place we could have selected.

When you have people filming in front of crowds, cheering and clapping, you have people cutting off people's tongues and cutting off people's heads and chopping off their fingers and chopping off their hands, throwing them off three-story…

Slog: to hit or strike hard, to drive with blows, to assail violently. And that's precisely what the U.S. has been doing and intends to continue to do.

He said he still can't say when the troops will be coming home from Iraq and urged commanders against raising false hopes before firm schedules are set.

The American people were told by the president of the United States at the U.N. and here in the United States the reasons for going in.

I don't believe that the United States has a responsibility for reconstruction, in a sense.

I can assure you the President of the United States is exactly where you are. We're not pulling out.

I never used the word 'imminent danger.' I don't know anyone who did in the administration.

I think that one could argue that that would have weakened the United Nations more.

I have publicly stated, as has the President, past, present, and recently, that we do not have evidence of a direct link between 9/11 and Iraq at all.

At some point the war will end, and it will end at that point where that regime does not exist and a new regime is ready to go in its place.

There is not, at the moment, any evidence, any good intelligence that suggests there is a humanitarian crisis in that country.

I may have answered an earlier question so cryptically, or briefly, that there might have been a misunderstanding.