I commend Chairman Cotton, Senator King, and the rest of the Airland Subcommittee for beginning this conversation.

We can no longer afford this misalignment--not only is it costly, but it also poses undue risk.

I do expect that we will be fighting away games because, quite frankly, that is a premise of our national security strategy.

No doubt about that as was true in the Cold War as well in Central America and Grenada and the threats from Cuba.

We got stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan because we cared about the political outcomes of those countries afterwards.

Our defense strategy must contend with non-state and transnational actors; a rising economic and military powerhouse in China.

Given the changing face of war in the future... what differences would you expect to see in ground combat leaders of the future?

I think we can all agree that we would not like to see an infusion of taxpayer cash repeatedly into the program.

It is $25 billion in debt. And while the program does help some Americans with moderate incomes, as well as farmers, it also takes money from working-class Americans to subsidize beach homes for the rich.

My first priority is delivering functional systems to our warfighters on the front lines.

China is not a signatory to the treaty.

I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Senator Blumenthal on the helicopter program.