John Kerry

The bottom line is, the President has no intention, and will not, and we do not want to, put American troops on the ground to fight this or be involved in the fighting of the civil war period.

The President's actions will make us more secure, less likely that Assad can use his weapons or chooses to use his weapons.

All of us who have the privilege and responsibility of serving this great nation owe the American people... a vigorous debate on how America should respond.

We understand that a country faces few decisions as grave as using military force.

The word of the United States must mean something. It is vital currency in foreign relations and international and allied commitments.

The Syrian regime's actions risk eroding the nearly century-old international norm against the use of chemical weapons.

America must protect its people and its national interests. That is our highest responsibility.

A refusal to act would undermine the credibility of America's other security commitments.

Assad must be held accountable for using these weapons in defiance of the international community.

A political solution created by the Syrian people is the only way to ultimately end the violence in Syria.

We believe we can achieve them with a military action that would be limited in duration and scope.

Given these threats to our national security, the United States must demonstrate through our actions that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable.

We cannot afford for Hezbollah or any terrorist group determined to strike the United States to have incentives to acquire or use chemical weapons.

The use of chemical weapons in Syria is not only an assault on humanity; it is a serious threat to America's national security interests.

Neither our country nor our conscience can afford the cost of silence.

When someone kills and injures hundreds of children with a weapon the world has banned, we are all responsible.

If Assad is arrogant enough, and I would say foolish enough, to retaliate to the consequences of his own criminal activity, the United States and our allies have ample ways to make him regret that decision without going to war.

President Obama is not asking America to go to war.

If we do not answer Assad today, we will erode a standard that has existed for those 100 years.

I will tell you there are some people hoping that the United States Congress does not vote for this very limited request the President has put before you.

The message is that he has been granted impunity, the freedom to choose to use the weapons again or force us to go through this cycle again.

Since President Obama's policy is that Assad must go, it is not insignificant that to deprive Assad of the capacity to use chemical weapons, or to degrade the capacity to use those chemical weapons, actually deprives him of a lethal weapon…

Our silence would embolden Kim Jong-un, who has a large chemical weapons cache, and would send a message that we are not serious about protecting South Korea and the region from nuclear or chemical weapons.

We will either send a message to Syria, Iran, North Korea, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and any other nonstate actors that the world will not tolerate the senseless use of chemical weapons by anyone, or we will choose to stand silent in the face…

We are at a crossroads moment. A precedent will be set either for the unfettered and unpunished use of chemical weapons, or a precedent will be set for the deterrence of the use of such weapons.