A Quote by Tom Cotton

The military budget must reflect the threats we face, rather than the budget defining those threats. — © Tom Cotton
The military budget must reflect the threats we face, rather than the budget defining those threats.
We must build toward the future so that we are prepared to deal with the threats we will face at home and abroad and understand how those threats may be connected.
Our national-security strategy must drive our military budget, rather than the budget setting our strategy.
An institution which is financed by a budget - or which enjoys a monopoly which the customer cannot escape - is rewarded for what it deserves rather than what it earns. It is paid for 'good intentions' and 'programs'. It is paid for not alienating important constituents rather than satisfying any one group. It is misdirected by the way it is being paid into defining performance and results as what will produce the budget rather than as what will produce contribution.
There's no substitute for taking a clear-eyed look at the threats we'll face and asking how our force will adapt to meet those threats.
To the extent that Israel does face threats, like from say Hamas or Hezbollah, those are threats that do not jeopardise Israel's existence.
Senator McGovern is very sincere when he says that he will try to cut the military budget by 30%. And this is to drive a knife in the heart of Israel... Jews don't like big military budgets. But it is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States... American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don't want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel.
In some ways, the challenges are even more daunting than they were at the peak of the cold war. Not only do we continue to face grave nuclear threats, but those threats are being compounded by new weapons developments, new violence within States and new challenges to the rule of law.
Those who analogize the federal budget to a family's budget must know nothing about either.
I think part of making movies is dealing with restrictions of freedom and budget. I'd rather deal with restrictions of budget. It's better to feel free within any budget.
Jobs are a key essential in the Budget.They are government's number one priority and the Budget is going to reflect that.
Russia is really a sort of a nonentity when it comes to - the economy is the size of the state of New York. Their military budget is 5 percent of the U.S. military budget. We shouldn't even be thinking about Russia other than the fact that they're sort of putting their nose into every bit of terrible activity all over the world.
According to the National Priorities Project, military expenditures are 54% of the budget. The next biggest line item is 7%. And there are a whole bunch of 7 percents. So in short, we have a military budget surrounded by a lot of footnotes. This is not serving us well.
There are environmental threats to health; there are internal threats to health - genetic conditions, viral threats, diseases like cancer and Parkinson's. And then there are societal and global ones, like poverty and lack of nutrition. And unknown viral threats - everything from a new kind of influenza to hemorrhagic fever.
In software and many other online markets, even dominant firms face potential threats because of the low costs for competitors to enter those markets. Threats more easily emerge because of better or newer technologies leapfrogging older ones.
I have long maintained the military budget is not a jobs bill... and will continue to support the lowest budget possible.
I love shopping on a budget. I believe that more fashion mistakes are made by people with deep pockets than by those who shop on a budget.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!