Tom Cotton

Since Russia is arguably in violation of the Founding Act, why don't we permanently station forces in Eastern Europe?

I do think it is always important to remember that as troublesome as these flows of migrants and refugees are, it is merely a symptom, and the ultimate disease is the Syrian civil war. The U.S. administration bears responsibility for that…

I do believe that one of the primary goals of Mr. Putin is to find a division in NATO and find a division in the European Union.

While there not be military application, it would be a convenient political development if Bashar al Assad, who represents a minority sect in Syria, were to ethnically cleanse much of his country of Sunni Arabs.

You said that Vladimir Putin is weaponizing immigration in Syria.

I think that would be a good idea. I would like to see it much higher than that.

My response would be, first, we don't spend that much money on them, in the context of the defense budget.

In the end, I think some kind of genuine action on our part is going to be necessary; otherwise, they will present us with a fait accompli in the South China Sea.

What kind of message did that send to families in Central America and South America about the risk they're willing to undertake to send their children to the United States through human traffickers and through coyotes?

Statements by American leaders, that essentially create a full employment opportunity for human traffickers are very damaging.

I don't think it's an especially moral policy what Chancellor Merkel has proposed in Europe.

There was uncommon consensus in the subcommittee hearing about the need for this next generation bomber.

Are we putting the kind of resources we need to into this immediate problem of the maintenance and flight readiness of these aircraft?

I think deterrence works best when deterrence is clear, as with relationships that we have with NATO, Taiwan, and so forth.

Do you think it is more humanitarian to preserve these munitions in our arsenal and, hopefully, deter them or any other munitions from ever having to be used, or to remove them from the arsenal and perhaps increase the likelihood of a…

I cannot believe that U.S. citizens would face this kind of treatment abroad, particularly with countries that are allies.

I believe that Section 702 is a vital national security tool. It's constitutional. It has multiple layers of oversight.

Why do you think that is? What are the key drivers that's causing all that?

I wish we had heard more of those concerns during the debate and before the vote on it.

Well, thank you very much, again, for your service.

Our country is not at war with the Taliban.

500 years of Russian history shows that it's actually the West that has more to fear from Russian aggression than Russia from the West.

We actually don't spend that much on our nuclear weapons.

On the contrary, we use our nuclear weapons every single day.

There's no more fundamental issue for the safety and security of the American people than our nuclear forces.