Ruth Sherlock has taken a look at where the candidates say they they stand on ways to cope with Isil and how to combat foreign threats. Lets see if they have changed their positions tonight: • Bernie Sanders: the senator has repeatedly advocated a relatively isolationist position where he said America "should not be policeman of the world". "The United States should be part of an international coalition, led and sustained by nations in the region that have the means to protect themselves. That is the only way to defeat ISIL and to begin the process of creating the conditions for a lasting peace in the region." • Hillary Clinton: has said she backs the strategies of the Obama administration in confronting Isil. She described Isil as not just a major risk to the stability of Middle East, but likely to try attacks on Western targets if given the opportunity (prescient). Mrs Clinton has been hawkish on foreign policy - she was a key architect in US bombing of Libya to oust Col Gaddafi, she voted in favour of the war in Iraq. On Syria is said to have wanted more military support to go to the rebels than the White House allowed. Martin O'Malley: has called for a rounded approach to defeating Isil: "To continue to work to degrade Isil, to cut off their funding, to disrupt their propaganda, to contain them, and to do some collaboration with other nations. We are still feeling the repercussions of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. I believe in hindsight and even now most people recognize that, that was a huge blunder in American foreign policy to engage our military there.”