Quote

Assad has to go. I mean, the way that ISIS can recruit, and the rebels that are in the north, and all the chaos that's happening through a lot of Syria circles around a lot of people that do not like Assad.

It's difficult to see how Syria can have any long-term future with Assad there as president. Many people would never return to that country if that were the case.

A lot of the issue that is happening in Syria is Assad is still there. And after years now, the administration, of saying Assad has to go, the pressure is not being applied to Russia, to Iran - the folks that are propping up Assad - and Assad himself to be able to actually be removed there and to transition to another leader.

We are not directly involved in Syria. But we will be working with our partners in the European Union and at the United Nations to see if we can persuade the Syrian authorities to go, as I say, more in that direction of respect for democracy and human rights.

There is no one leader that's going to unify all of Syria that suddenly everyone is going to go, 'Yes, that's a logical place.' They're not unified. They don't have a setup succession like we do in the United States.

I have sympathy for the people in Syria, and I do think there should be a worldwide response, but we should act cautiously.

I can only say it is not for us to decide who should lead Syria. It is for the Syrians to decide.

I know something quite sure. We'll never have peace with this Syrian regime. They'll never give us relief, and we'll never forget that.

As the United States Congress considers military intervention in Syria, per President Obama's request, I think it's important to be very honest about what we are considering.

Here's the problem the Free Syrian Army has. They really want to topple the regime in Damascus, and this is where most of the fight takes place, between Aleppo and Damascus for the Free Syrian Army.