Military Funding Quotes

Endless money forms the sinews of war. Nervi belli pecunia infinita.

… war is a matter not so much of arms as of money

Were the expense of war to be defrayed always by a revenue raised within the year ... wars would in general be more speedily concluded, and less wantonly undertaken

As Secretary of Defense my job would be much easier if I didn't have to put up with [budget] cuts.

The sinews of war are infinite money.

I must have money to get ready for war. I am doing everything possible to prevent war but it must come, and we are not prepared.

If [Donald Trump] is paid zero [taxes], that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero for schools or health.

Balanced budgets have a lot to do with National Defense.

I’m going to keep on working to get rid of the sequester. You get up and do your jobs every day; let’s make sure Washington gets up and does its job. And what makes me frustrated is sometimes the very folks who say they stand with our military proudly are the same ones who are standing in the way of fixing the sequester. It’s important to look at deeds and not words.

Sometimes Republicans want to cut the social welfare programs and yet they ask for billions and billions more for the Defense Department. I don’t take that approach.

Using these new funds, I will ask my secretary of defense to propose a new defense budget to meet the following longtime goals.

You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service.

He who first called money the sinews of the state seems to have said this with special reference to war.

The military always asks for more [appropriations] than it gets.

In Congress, while the House's proposed defense budget calls for significant increases, it also cuts 11 billion dollars from veterans spending - including healthcare and disability pay. Be clear: we can't equate spending on veterans with spending on defense.

President Trump has made rebuilding our military strength one of his top priorities. More money is certainly required, but so is reform of the Pentagon and how it does business.

One very difficult decision was deciding to vote against the appropriations bill for the war. I had consistently said that I wanted to make sure our troops got the adequate and training in the war effort, despite the fact that I opposed the war at the point that the president decided to double down and send more troops. I had to vote against funding as a way of bringing it back to the table. That was a difficult decision for me.

NDAA should be about providing critical funding for our troops, not debating immigration policy.

World's major powers, including China and Russia, don't want to 'finance' American military adventures anymore.

We can always find money for what the military wants.

Only those who are ideologically opposed to military programs think of the defense budget as the first and best place to get resources for social welfare needs.

When we're told, "You have to find $750 billion to cut", and we say "OK, we can do that; ....the Congress shouldn't turn around and say, "Not in my district" or "Not my weapons system".

In every major war we have fought in the 19th and 20th centuries. Americans have been asked to pay higher taxes - and nonessential programs have been cut - to support the military effort. Yet during this Iraq war, taxes have been lowered and domestic spending has climbed. In contrast to World War I, World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam, for most Americans this conflict has entailed no economic sacrifice. The only people really sacrificing for this war are the troops and their families.

When the Budget has once been approved by the President and transmitted to Congress, it is his budget estimate and no officer or official of the War Department would have any right to come up here and attempt to get a single dollar more than is contained in that estimate .

When is the last time we had a tax cut before going to war?