Joseph Dunford Quotes

It can’t be any other than madness to commence hostilities before we have established resources on a sure plan for certain and effectual military supplies. Men in that case will not be wanting.

… you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.

I submit that those who run the American military at the top, and those whose boots are on the ground and who run the machinery and equipment, are sending a signal: You asked us to do something. Give us some time and we will solve the problems and we will do it.

There has never been a military commander in history who didn’t want more men for a longer time …

Our military plans for everything.

Seventeen consecutive years of irregular war, extended years of budget uncertainty, and an increasing complex security environment have eroded our competitive edge.

The Army (considering the irritable state it is in, its suffering and composition) is a dangerous instrument to play with.

Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terrorism have reduced the pace of military transformation and have revealed our lack of preparation for defensive and stability operations. This Administration has overextended our military.

Whether or not you could actually increase the size of the force is something that will have to be determined.

Our artillery has really been sensational. For once we have enough of something and at the right time. Officers tell me they actually have more guns than they know what to do with.

Within NATO, our Defence Capabilities Initiative has identified the essential capabilities all Allies must have for modern operations, and Allies are working to meet those requirements.

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.

And to do that not only for the war fighter, but also to help prepare the people in the acquisition, personnel and policy worlds who need to make adjustments in the department's business, which itself may take 10 or 15 years to accomplish.

It takes more than a trained army … it takes an institutionalized army.

We must ensure that our troops are ready when called upon, that they are fully capable of fighting, and that they must win every war

We haven’t done strategic military analysis in so long that most of our analysts don’t know how to do it any more..

Unless more efforts based upon long-range planning are put into military preparations and operations, it will be very hard to win the final victory.

There is not a military commander alive today who is genetically predisposed to say that he has enough ISR and assets, and particularly not in the Central Command theater.

Throughout history, the organizational evolution of the military has been inextricably linked with that of the business world.

One of the key challenges the military has faced - and the Army, in particular - is defining our requirements and keeping them stable.

Instead of measuring military readiness in terms of overall size and numbers, we must focus on metrics of capability, particularly in technology, and positioning.

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.

I think the troops deserve the best equipment on the battlefield, the best training, and American armor if they get in trouble.

We have an obligation to ensure our service members are protected, our national defense is resilient, and our forces are well-equipped.

Now that you're Secretary of War, what kind of an army do you think we ought to have?