I think the Russians will do -- will say, drop your preconditions of threatening force against Syria, drop your support for the rebels, and then we can talk about an overall peace settlement.

In this time of economic crisis and huge government deficits when both Congress and the Administration are looking for equitable ways to reduce government spending, we certainly welcome this opportunity to evaluate and propose mechanisms…

I don't think that Gadhafi is going to survive this. In fact, if he were to survive, it would be a major blow to the prestige of NATO, to the United States and to others.

I think they have raw courage and determination to rid themselves of Gadhafi, and that counts a lot in any battle.

It's time for other countries to pick up a fair share of the burden of these kinds of interventions on behalf of preserving humanitarian interests, protecting people.

I think that the United States and the NATO countries will intensify the military activities to the extent that we can without engaging what they call 'collateral damage.'

success is going to take some time to achieve, depending upon how we're defining it. But obviously, in Afghanistan, by way of example, we actually need more forces rather than fewer.

the president is calling for a surge in the short term. So once again, we're looking at more forces rather than fewer.

It means that if we had to face another contingency, that the risk involved would be significant in the sense it would take longer in order to complete and also involve more risk in terms of perhaps to our forces itself.

this has been seen as the United States having to wage the so-called war against terror when, in fact, the entire world is subject to this kind of terrorism, that we're all on the front lines.

we have to do is persuade other countries that they need to join in this effort.