Quote

The thing that really struck me was how many firms that we think of as strictly civilian had ties to the Pentagon. Companies like Apple, Starbucks, Oakley the sunglasses manufacturer. Even Google, and a lot of big corporations like PepsiCo, Colgate-Palmolive, and Nestle, that you don't normally think of as defense contractors.

For some individuals - some soldiers, some contractors - combat provides a kind of purpose and meaning beyond which all else potentially pales in comparison.

Taxpayer dollars should not be used as a reward for contractor executives, especially when other segments of society are hurting.

But a lot of businesses out there don't see the return on investment, they look at it as a liability, and until they can understand that proactive security actually returns, gives them a return on investment, it's still a hard sell for people.

There are lots of risks, but without risks, there's no reward. I think the reward is bigger than the risk.

When morality comes up against profit, it is seldom that profit loses.

It is Basic Management 101 that if you reward failure you are going to get more failure, and if you want success you should reward success. But if you look at the way this administration has approached national security, they have kind of got that principle backwards.

Business people get many undeserved prizes - golden parachutes and bonuses even when companies fail. I don't think people should get rewarded for screwing up.

I think we should be looking at the defense and seeing where we can actually be more efficient because I think that, you know, sometimes during the contracting process, we lose some efficiencies in that regard.