If we have to continue to live under sequestration, it will have a maximum impact on our ability to fulfill the president's strategic guidance. We can't do it all. It's as simple as that, with the limitations of the budget as severe as they are. These deep, abrupt cuts have forced us to make decisions that are not in the interest of America.

The recent wave of Taliban attacks has made clear that the international community must not waiver in its support for a stable, secure and prosperous Afghanistan.

There has to be a reason and objective (to air strikes). What does it do to move the effort down the road for a political conversation?

Bogging down large armies in historically complex, dangerous areas ends in disaster.

The United States can't impose democracies. We can't impose our will. The Russians found that out in Afghanistan.

I'm not saying my idea is the one and only idea. We should have other ideas, but the president has not laid down a specific plan as to how he's going to get us to solvency. I do that.

[Sheehan] deserves some consideration, and I think that should have been done right from the beginning.