Zitat des Tages über Nationale Sicherheit / National Defense:
I want to compliment The Heritage Foundation for its work on behalf of a strong national defense.
The mission statement of the RSC is to foster a constitutionally bound limited government, it's to have a strong national defense, it's to protect private property rights and it's to support American values. That's what the mission statement is. There's nothing in the mission statement about trying to hold leadership accountable.
If you like small government you need to work hard at having a strong national defense that is not so militant. Personal liberty is the purpose of government, to protect liberty - not to run your personal life, not to run the economy, and not to pretend that we can tell the world how they ought to live.
Think what evil creeps liberals would be if their plans to enfeeble the individual, exhaust the economy, impede the rule of law, and cripple national defense were guided by a coherent ideology instead of smug ignorance.
Ronald Reagan's vision of smaller government, less taxes, and a strong national defense has led to a prosperous America. As president, he rebuilt our military and reinvigorated our confidence in ourselves.
Spending on programs such as national defense and funding the operating budgets of all federal agencies represent only 39 percent of our yearly budget, an all-time low.
As a national security aid, I worked with our military to strengthen our national defense.
There's no excuse for skimping on national defense when the country is at war.
During the Cold War, workers proudly contributed to national defense, but the carelessness and haste in handling toxic waste created a nightmare of pollution for subsequent generations.
But the federal government, our collective government, has responsibilities that none of these other levels of government can fulfill; and chief among these is national defense.
Since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, conservatives have succeeded by adhering to a platform that rests firmly on three legs: smaller government, faith and family, and a strong national defense. These three legs do not merely represent a political coalition; they are three necessary components of a strong and secure America.
What we mean by an outcome will naturally depend on the context. Thus, for a government charged with delivering public goods, an outcome will consist of the quantities provided of such goods as intercity highways, national defense and security, environmental protection, and public education together with the arrangements by which they are financed.
There are not as many women who support the national defense budget now as men. I really think there is a gender gap in the support for the large expenditures that are necessary to modernize the force.
There's nothing wrong with being a Conservative and coming up with a Conservative believe in foreign policy where we have a strong national defense and we don't go to war so carelessly.
House Republicans are the most powerful force for limited government, strong national defense, and economic opportunity that exists in America today. But it is not enough to just talk about conservative values.
I now sit at the table in a variety of ways with the House leadership... as we go through taking a look at threat assessments and hot spots around the world. It's a national position, but certainly I don't forget that New Jersey has a critical part of national defense.
From protecting our natural resources to providing maritime security and national defense, the Coast Guard's duties are broad in scope, and the performance of those duties has never been more important.
Bottom line: A market approach to national defense would give us a lousy national defense.
Protecting Americans from harm goes beyond police and national defense. It's imperative that we not destroy the commons, the physical environment on which we rely.
I believe that wholeheartedly - that we have to maintain a strong national defense.
Since 2001, the Patriot Act has provided the means to detect and disrupt terrorist threats against the U.S. Prior to enactment of the law, major legal barriers prevented intelligence, national defense, and law enforcement agencies from working together and sharing information.
National defense is the sacred duty of the young and all other people.
More and more major businesses and industries are being run on software and delivered as online services - from movies to agriculture to national defense.
What I say is, national defense is the most important thing we do in Washington, but there's still waste in the military budget.
Legislation passed in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 enhanced our intelligence capabilities and strengthened our national defense, but until now our nation's immigration policies have not adapted to the needs of a post-September 11th world.
The American people deserve a blueprint for policymaking that is built upon the Constitution of the United States and the principles of fiscal discipline, limited government, accountability, and a strong national defense.
I think it's encouraging that President Trump is talking about strengthening our national defense, something he ran on again.
It's not enough to be a woman. You have to care about women's issues. And women's issues here in Iowa are that we have a strong economy. We have jobs that our sons and daughters can go off to someday. We have a great educational system. And women want strong national defense. We want to know that our families are going to be safe.
I like Ronald Reagan, who didn't play crass politics, and he just articulated and delivered on broad themes that were needed. Free markets meant free markets. Deregulation. Lower tax rates. Strong national defense. And he was credible and believable.
There is no plausible theory under which the record of the Pentagon Papers can be interpreted as relating to the national defense.
When people see the budget, they're going to say, 'Oh, my God, I wanted a tax cut, but I didn't know what you were going to do to health care and to Medicare and national defense.'
I believe in a strong national defense. But it's my belief that neither Iraq nor Afghanistan poses a threat to national security, and we shouldn't be involved in either area.
In 1940, then-Senator Harry Truman headed up a Senate Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program. In the course of World War II, more than $15 billion in unnecessary and fraudulent defense spending was identified.