After President Barack Obama's address on Syria Tuesday, federal lawmakers from the suburbs are split over how to proceed.
Several local members of Congress offered thoughts after the speech.
U.S. Rep. Bill Foster, a Naperville Democrat: "I support the president's continued efforts to first find a diplomatic solution. While a military response is something that we may ultimately need to consider, my decision will depend upon continued diplomatic progress toward the complete elimination of chemical weapons in Syria, detailed information on the president's strategic plan, and an authorization which is limited in time and scope. The choice to take military action is one of the most significant decisions a government can make and should only be used as a means of last resort."
U.S. Rep. Randy Hultgren, a Winfield Republican: "It was clear to me in the last 24 hours that we are dealing with a rapidly evolving situation that requires a strong collective response by the international community. I do not believe the President and his administration have made a convincing case to the American people that striking Syria with military force is in the best interest of our nation. I welcome constructive diplomatic efforts and will look seriously at any proposal that takes chemical weapons out of the hands of Assad -- or rebel factions -- and places them under secure international monitoring and control."
U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, Evanston Democrat: "I strongly believe a diplomatic solution is the best way to end Syrian use of chemical weapons. The Russian proposal, first suggested by the Obama administration, should be fully explored. The U.S. threat of military action is the only reason Syria is even considering this solution. If that fails, we should consider the option of a limited strike because I believe the use of chemical weapons must be a "red line" for humanity and that we must act."
U.S. Rep. Brad Schneider, a Deerfield Democrat: "I strongly believe the international community must hold the Assad regime accountable, but I've also been clear that the U.S. must be thoughtful in our approach, with specific goals and a fully developed and vetted strategy. The announcement of a possible diplomatic solution is a welcome development, but any prospective agreement must have transparency, realistic time frames and verifiable benchmarks for securing and destroying Syria's chemical weapons."
• The Associated Press contributed to this story.