We cannot allow anything that's called 'national defense' to justify any and all spending. We need to be very, very careful that we don't overspend and say, 'Oh, that's defense,' when perhaps it isn't.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Our national-security strategy must drive our military budget, rather than the budget setting our strategy.
At Concerned Veterans for America, we've made the case that the defense budget could be targeted for spending reform, but in a targeted fashion that genuinely changes unsustainable spending trajectories while preserving U.S. defense capacity.
We need a defense budget that's big enough to sustain an increase in the size of the Army.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
What I say is, national defense is the most important thing we do in Washington, but there's still waste in the military budget.
The job of the government isn't to go around and try and make people sacrifice, it's to try and make people free. The reason why we have a national defense is to protect our freedoms.
Today, the US spends less on defense as a percentage of our economy than we did at any time since he Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. For the world's only superpower, that is an invitation to very serious trouble.
I believe that wholeheartedly - that we have to maintain a strong national defense.
I think cutting our defense capacity not only demonstrably diminishes our national security, but it has a tremendous negative impact in the long run on our economy because we end up having to fight wars and clean up after terrorist disasters.
The military budget must reflect the threats we face, rather than the budget defining those threats.
No opposing quotes found.