Quote

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.

Bottom line: A market approach to national defense would give us a lousy national defense.

I think what both Republicans and Democrats need to do and the leaders on both sides is to recognize that if sequester takes place, it would be disastrous for our national defense and very frankly for a lot of very important domestic programs. They have a responsibility to come together, find the money necessary to de-trigger sequester.

When you cut a half-a-trillion dollars from the defense budget, it affects almost every area in the defense budget.

Historically, defense spending cuts have preceded increased international turmoil as America's global enemies sense a failure of will.

If we can't find cuts in the defense budget, we're not looking carefully enough.

We need a defense budget that's big enough to sustain an increase in the size of the Army.

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 to stop spending money on those weapons systems that do not advance national security.

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.