Dan Coats: “I think there is a great distinction between asking the President, ``What do you think the force should be? What, in…”

“I think there is a great distinction between asking the President, ``What do you think the force should be? What, in your judgment as Commander in Chief, with the advice and consent and assistance of your military commanders, should the number be to perform a certain mission?''--there is a great distinction between that and a direction to the President of the United States saying, ``You must give us a number based on an average of troops that are committed by nations outside Congress' control,'' and it cannot exceed that. The President here couldn't have the discretion to say, ``Well, we need whatever troops are necessary to protect, or complete our mission, or carry out our mission in this part of the world, or to protect our forces.'' The President is being dictated to arrive at a number, which the President may disagree with, or the Commander in Chief, or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff disagrees with in terms of ability to carry out that mission. That is my concern with the Byrd-Hutchison amendment.”