John Redmond Quotes

I am not disputing the need for this money. What I am disputing and calling attention to is the fact that we are taking the tab for defense in our time against terrorists in the Middle East and elsewhere and shoving this tab off onto our children.

The biggest budget is the military budget. For what? We're fighting two wars in very small countries that have no nuclear weapons, that have no capabilities to destroy anything. They probably couldn't even get to America.

If the Pentagon truly confined itself to providing defense, then presumably we wouldn't need a whole separate government agency to provide 'Homeland 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.

Armaments; extremely useful for fighting wars, a deadweight in any civil economy.

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 have to have a conversation about whether Obama's plan to increase spending to occupy Afghanistan helps make America a safer country, or not. I think at some point, we may decide that we don't have to have that size military and cost footprint in the country. You look at what you want to accomplish, how many soldiers you need.

The truth is that I oppose the Iraq war, just as I opposed the Vietnam War, because these two conflicts have weakened the U.S. and diminished our standing in the world and our national security.

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

Our guns are not called upon to hurl huge projectiles each one of which costs as much as the construction of a happy home.

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

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

The public was entirely free of the great danger and expense of a standing army.

We can cut the Defense Department budget because we’ve got bombs running out of our ears.

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.

There is only one way safely and legitimately to reduce the cost of national security, and that is to reduce the need for it.

Fighting terrorists does not require half a trillion dollars worth of conventional and nuclear forces.

Wars cost money.

It is often easier to assemble armies than it is to assemble army revenues.

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

It is not how much you spend on defense as much as how you spend it.

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.

As the name of the agency suggests, 'Department of Defense,' the defense refers to the United States of America - not the defense of South Korea, not the defense of Ukraine, not the defense of Syria or Germany.

I have long maintained the military budget is not a jobs bill... and will continue to support the lowest budget possible.

It would be better for the country if the Pentagon and the military do not shut down at any point because the threats to the country do not shut down.