Quote

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

I never thought that Syria and Israel should engage in a violent confrontation because I don't think that there is any particular interest for any of us to do it.

Given that the president has not yet demonstrated why military action is in our best interest, given that the administration will not be constrained to keep boots off the ground, and given that there is no clear end-game, I am against the president's resolution to go to war in Syria.

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.

As far as we are concerned, we Syria have not changed.

We must do everything we can to be more aggressive in confronting Syria about what they are doing in Iraq.

Our priority is to go after ISIL. And so what we have said is that we are not engaging in a military action against the Syrian regime. We are going after ISIL facilities and personnel who are using Syria as a safe haven, in service of our strategy in Iraq.

I explained that we would like to adjust our position on the Syrian question to theirs, as, in our view, they are the decisive factor in our relations with our neighbors, and Syria is unimportant.

The president has largely taken a hands-off approach in Syria and granted it as a legitimate sphere of interest to countries like Iran and like Russia. This is very bad policy, and it's going to lead to very dangerous consequences for our partners in the region, which is why so many of them are so opposed to U.S. policies.