Dick Lugar

Mr. Yohannes, looking at the MCC's calculations for the amount of benefits each compact provides, it appears Congress is appropriating more money for four MCC compacts than those compacts provide in benefits.

Countries that descend into chaos and anarchy are breeding grounds for extremism.

Administrator Shah, the administration has requested $1.1 billion for the Feed the Future Program, and an additional $308 million for the United States contribution to the World Bank Global Agriculture and Food Security Program trust fund.

The President and members of his team have stated that the removal of Qadhafi is a diplomatic goal of the United States, but not a military goal.

The last 10 years have illuminated clearly that initiating wars and killing the enemy is far easier than achieving political stability and rebuilding a country when the fighting is over.

I also believe that policymakers in this country and other countries made a mistake early on in calling explicitly for Muammar Qadhafi's removal.

Without a defined endgame, Congress and the American people must assume U.S. participation in the coalition may continue indefinitely.

I would say that not all of these conditions were satisfied in the Libyan case.

I'd like to raise the general question of when the United States should become involved in the civil war of another country.

Let me just leap ahead for a moment to the fact that we are, apparently, implementing a humanitarian response.

The President must establish U.S. goals and strategies with much greater clarity.

the point NATO is making is that, although the President may have rationalized our involvement in Libya on the basis of humanitarian concerns pertaining to civilians in Benghazi, many Libyan civilians, even in Benghazi, have been moving…

It is not credible to suggest that the provision of arms to the Qaddafi regime would serve the purpose of protecting civilians or civilian-populated areas under threat of attack in Libya.

we are in a situation in which we in the United States have to be very clear, even in the context of our role as a NATO coalition partner, precisely why we are conducting operations in Libya and furthermore what outcome we would see as…

Without such a plan, I fear this will not be the last unusual headline to appear in the New York Times or elsewhere which details that hostilities have taken very unusual turns and that the United States has not made clear a definition of…

At the end of the day it may be the will of the President and the Congress that Libya is of sufficient importance that we devise a military strategy to obtain the ends that we want and achieve victory;

the President has indicated Qadhafi must go.

However, I do believe that this committee must raise substantive and sometimes difficult questions, even with regard to the nature of our alliance with NATO and the passing over of authority.

The President must establish with much greater clarity what would constitute success.

I believe that the Foreign Relations Committee should also take on the burden of detailed oversight of United States involvement in Libya.

I don't understand the mission, because as far as I can tell there is no mission and no guidelines for success.

some Senators are indicating in a bipartisan way that they feel the President and the administration have not been forthcoming enough in meeting the problems of human rights in Libya.

There has been dramatic change, but we are only at the very beginning of a long process.

My view is that there should be considerably more than that. There should be congressional participation.

I would like to prevent that from occurring again.