Lindsey Graham

From our own national security interests, a nuclear-armed North Korea sharing technology with terrorist groups is a real concern; do you agree with that?

Would it severely restrict our ability to deal with the threat that you face today in your backyard; do you agree with that?

I think the North Korean nuclear program would come to a grinding halt as soon as China demands that it happen.

Their behavior is not only provocative, it's obscene. They're stealing American intellectual property.

I think this is a communist dictatorship that fears individual expression. They fear freedom of thought. They fear freedom of religion. They fear anything not controlled by the state. It is now time to deal with these people more directly.

North Korea's a client state of China and they could stop this if they chose to in my view.

If you looked out over a 10-year window and sequestration was fully implemented, we would have 232 ships left in the Navy a decade from now. Is that a wise thing?

We feel like China can bring it to a stop. We feel like they have not chosen to do so.

We would like to have a more mature China as part of the international community.

The politics in South Korea has changed, would you agree, where the tolerance by the South Korean Government and people to accept any more attacks against South Korean interests is much lower than it was 2 years ago, do you agree with that?

A North Korea with an advanced nuclear weapons program is probably a nightmare for this country, because they have shown a propensity to share the technology with terrorist groups.

If Congress doesn't get involved, I think we will regret the day.

So basically my view is we never honored the modernization commitment in terms of funding, and along comes sequestration.

They could do as much or more damage than the attacks of September 11?

If these best business practices are in the minds of the government meaningful, we would grant liability protection to those who met those standards. It would be voluntary.

I think his concept is that, let's identify our critical infrastructure and allow the industries in question, like the utilities, to come up with best business practices within their industry and submit their proposal to a collaborative…

Why isn't an attack on critical infrastructure in this nation, a cyber attack by a government like China or Russia, why is that not considered an act of war?

If it's across-the-board your account will be hit, right?

I think we have to look at the world we live in when we make these decisions about numbers and capabilities.

Let's just assume that. Get back to me or the committee in writing: Assuming an across-the-board continuation over a 10-year period, what it would do to our nuclear modernization efforts.

Finally, the Executive order, I think, is a result of Congress' inaction and I don't blame the President at all.

If you can't close those books, which are done today by computers, you have a significant problem in our banking infrastructure.

The issue that it leaves not addressed is the information-sharing part.

I think we are coming out of a period where the answer was no.

Could you give this committee in writing a detailed analysis of the military assets available that could have gotten into the Benghazi area within 12 hours?