Jane D. Hull Quotes

Against … attack the existing peacetime forces of the Army and Navy in the Hawaiian islands, including their necessary munitions and supplies, are believed to be adequate. The success of our defense against this form of attack will depend almost wholly upon our not being totally surprised by the enemy, and will require an efficient intelligence service, not only in the Hawaiian Islands but elsewhere.

I'm very, very pro-defense.

The military is not a social experiment. The purpose of the military is kill people and break things. It's not to transform the culture by trying out some ideas that some people think would make us a different country and more diverse. The purpose is to protect America.

Who thinks seriously that if we sit on another hilltop, on another hundred meters, that this is what will make the difference for the state of Israel's basic security?

It is not whether an independent Scotland could go it alone and develop its own defence forces - of course it could - but what sort of forces would they be?

Although we must change the ways we protect our country, we must also guard against policies that appear attractive but offer little real protection and may even impede our ability to protect ourselves.

While the CDC is focusing on how our enemies could attack us, our military is focused on who may attack us.

In this ever-changing world, it's more important than ever that our top-notch military continues to receive the resources needed to serve and protect our country.

We're in greater danger today than we were the day after Pearl Harbor. Our military is absolutely incapable of defending this country.

The military strength and resources of the State must be reserved for its own defense and protection exclusively …

It’s not the plans, it’s the people. I think we should have Defense Department people.

It is necessarily requisite to the peoples defense, that they be fore-armed. Now to be fore-armed is to be furnished with Soldiers, Armies, Ships, Forts and Monies, before the danger be instant; for the listing of Soldiers, and taking up of Arms after a blow is given, is too late at least, if not impossible.

I can do whatever is necessary to protect the United States.

The notion of a defense that will protect American cities is one that will not be achieved, but it is that goal that supplies the political magic, as it were, in the president's vision.

The Constitution places the responsibility on Congress for setting the size of the U.S. military, ensuring sufficient resources are in place to train and equip it, and funding maintenance programs and replacing worn-out equipment. We have a moral responsibility to ensure that our people are fully prepared and fully supported.

The military budget must reflect the threats we face, rather than the budget defining those threats.

I have spoken to Donald Trump about this. He understands the dramatic budget cuts our military has faced.

I think it's encouraging that President Trump is talking about strengthening our national defense, something he ran on again.

A military starved of resources, training, and equipment will not long be able to protect the country physically or economically.

Today, we are not likely to need to organize local militias for our defense now we have something called the Pentagon.

Our most important job in Congress is to provide for our national defense, and therefore, every year, Congress allocates funds and determines defense priorities in a bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA.

National security, both internal and external, is a challenge.

The No. 1 purpose of the federal government is national defense.

The bottom line, addressing defense spending cuts with a meat ax like sequestration will damage defense readiness for decades to come.

If the military is to show the capabilities that we demand and expect of it, then the defense budget has to continue to rise.