State of Rhode Island secondary Archives: on War & Peace

Allen Waters: Clean up the poorly managed Veterans Affairs department

Allen Waters: Aggressively pursue terrorists; dismantle terrorist networks

A: We must aggressively pursue terrorists, dismantle terrorists' networks and eliminate the financial sources of strength and support that sustain them, and maintain sufficient pressure on terrorist organizations to stop them from reemerging. We must also defend the homeland by building strong borders, strengthening security at all U.S. ports of entry, and facilitating preparedness and vigilance.

Bob Flanders: Intervene militarily if vital interest at stake, like nukes

A: Yes.

Q: Do you support increased American intervention in Middle Eastern conflicts beyond air support?

A: Yes, if needed to support America's vital interests in the region.

Bobby Nardolillo: Supports Afghanistan war but not forever

Jack Reed: More pressure on Iran; keep all options on the table

REED: It's going to take increased pressure, economically, and that's why the issue of multilateral sanctions is so critical. Up until we enlisted under President Obama, the entire world or significant parts of it in putting pressure on the Iranians, they were not at all responsive. We have to continue that pressure. Also, they have elections scheduled for June. We hope we it will shape it in a positive way, that they will back down from their aspirations for nuclear technology and nuclear weapons. But the first issue is keep the pressure on. We need every option on the table. We have to assess all those options.

Jack Reed: Red line in Syria if chemical weapons used against people

REED: We don't have a good sense of who is on the ground. A no-fly zone could be feasible from an operational standpoint.

Q: What would it accomplish?

REED: It might not accomplish a great deal, but it would give us a step further to our engagement in a very complicated civil war. I think the best approach is a diplomatic approach at this point.

RADDATZ: What about the "red line" and evidence that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons?

REED: I think we have to take it very seriously. We do have to be careful, though, because we've had situations in the past where we've acted on information that was incomplete, and frankly, to the detriment of our country.

Q: Should Obama have drawn that red line?

REED: I think he should have made it clear, as he did, that the systemic use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people is something the international community cannot tolerate.

Jack Reed: Coalition to stop Syrian WMDs, but nothing more militarily

REED: It will help because one of the first things that we have to do is verify, although there is increasing evidence that the Assad regime conducted a horrific attack on its own people, but we have to verify that it was directed by the Assad regime. Because that will allow us to build an international coalition, which is absolutely necessary to take any further steps in Syria.

Q: What do you think the president ought to do?

REED: He has to be careful about defining what is our objective. I believe our objective is to make it prohibitive for any country to use chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction. So a military option that would be limited to that point is something that he should be thinking about very carefully. But I think we can't let ourselves get into a situation where this becomes a springboard for a general military operation in Syria.

Matt Brown: Born and raised protesting the Vietnam war

Sheldon Whitehouse: More troops in Afghanistan OK but revisit later

He said he would continue to look at the situation. "If it looks like the military is right and it's successful, good," the senator said. "If not, we'll have to revisit it."