Quote

You may agree or not with Gaddafi's political ideas, but no one has the right to question the existence of Libya as an independent state and member of the United Nations.

Libya as a country is a relatively new concept. The period of Libya as a modern nation really starts after World War II.

We're not getting involved in terms of sending ground forces into Libya. Let's be clear about that. And indeed the UN Resolution forbids that. It says no foreign occupation of any part of Libya.

Libyans have to work together for a new Libya. They should keep in place the sinews of security.

The situation in Syria is quite different from Libya.

Libya is a good example of a country that has come to a realization that weapons of mass destruction threaten more than assure, and I hope that will be followed by others.

Of course, there is no question that Libya - and the world - will be better off with Gaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders, have embraced that goal, and will actively pursue it through non-military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.

I was opposed to the U.S. involvement in Libya from the very start. President Obama has never made a compelling national security case on Libya.

There is no state with a democracy except Libya on the whole planet.

As has been pointed out with Libya, the debate over Libya, sometimes we allow diplomatic relations with imperfect regimes because progress can best be made through engagement instead of isolation.