William S. Cohen Quotes

How much do we really need for the defense of the United States of America? Only the defense to defend its shores? Well I suppose that the maximum for the defense of our shores is one billion dollars. So the rest of our defense budget relates to what we regard as our responsibilities as a world power.

Well, no American wants to in any way hurt our capabilities to national defense, but that doesn't mean an unlimited amount of money, and a blank check for anything they want at any time, for any purpose. Not at all.

This nation can no longer tolerate the autonomous conduct of any single service. A waste of the resources of America in spendthrift defense is an invitation to disaster for America.

We want to make sure the military gets it right and understands that if they're going to have less money, they're going to have to spend it a lot more smartly.

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.

I had learned many years ago in private business never to take responsibility without adequate authority; and the new Secretary of Defense, as budgets were sharply cut, quickly found that out.

The Pentagon has a long tradition of dialing up the threat to get more dollars at budget time.

No nation, no matter how destitute, likes to be told how much military "security" to buy.

Japan is the only country in the world that does not call its defense organizations a military. That is absurd, when the government is spending 5 trillion yen a year for self-defense.

Contrary to … conventional wisdom, the consequence of past U. S. Defense cuts were not bad …. austerity can be useful in forcing Washington to think strategically, something it rarely does when times are flush.

Austerity [in the Defense Department] meant that risks had to be managed, not eliminated.

I love the U.S. military. I want them to be the most effective and the most cost-effective and I think there is so much spending and so much bloat and so much bureaucracy that it actually hinders them from having a lot of the mission accomplishments that they should.

The Pentagon needs precious resources to build the strength of America, and we can't say, 'this is really important to this community, and it's really not vital to the national security, but we ought to do it anyway.' So, I think we have to have a discipline on this

The Pentagon budget, like all government spending, is an expression of priorities.

I was able to promote a strong defense budget when it could have been cut a lot more severely.

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.

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

I understand all the problems for the Ministry of Defence, of course I do; working within a budget and trying to do so many things is not easy.

The Pentagon can't even audit its own books. It doesn't even know where its money is going. And we refuse to have the tough forces go on the Pentagon so that at least they are efficient with the money they're spending.

Our Defense Department is the best in the world at winning wars and protecting the country. However on basic management, and fiscal activities, their grade would be a D…. The Pentagon is the last obstacle we have to overcome in order to audit the Defense Department. They are unauditable today.

The Defense Department has a great deal of influence on foreign policy, and State has very little impact on defense policy.

[The] up-and-down pattern of [defense] spending over the last 18 years averages out to below zero percent real growth. In other words, if defense spending had followed a path of zero percent real growth, the U.S. probably could have obtained more defense for its dollar.

We have a military policy instead of an energy policy.

We must have a Secretary of Defense who will manage, and not be managed, by the Pentagon.

No state, without being soon exhausted, can maintain above the hundredth part of its members in arms and idleness.