John McCain

So we're in an Orwellian situation here.

Does it intrigue you, as it does me, that there doesn't seem to be the concern in Congress that there was back in 1976?

Arguably, the world is in many ways more dangerous than we have ever seen it.

It's inevitable we would return to the era of a hollow Army.

I worry that we are getting somewhat used to that.

Finally, in the event of hostilities on the Korean Peninsula, we all know the North Koreans would lose, they could inflict incredible damage on Seoul because of their capability at the demilitarization zone.

I don't hear the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, saying: 'This is destroying our military.'

I made a comment early in my testimony, that I came into a hollow Army; I don't want to leave a hollow Army when I leave the Army.

If something does not change.

President Obama identified nuclear proliferation as a key danger to the United States and its allies, and it is a danger.

The disarmament provision and the President's policies are undermined by our inability to keep regimes such as North Korea and Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

I do not think that is too----

General Dempsey, the Commandant of the Marine Corps says the sequester's impact on marines constitutes excessive risk.

But you need to share those with Congress, Mr. Secretary.

It is in your interests, in my view, to give us that information as to what would happen if we just simply complied with existing law.

I am very worried because Congress is not going to raise taxes to eliminate the sequester.

The defense budget for the 2014 request is $52 billion over the spending cap imposed by the BCA.

Would you agree with me that the only really restraining force on North Korea would be at this time the Chinese?

My question is would you recommend that we intercept a missile if it is launched by North Korea, no matter where the intended target is?

I don't know of a time of greater tension since the end of the Korean War that exists today between North Korea, South Korea, and us.

I think at the end of the sequestration we'll still have the most powerful military in the world, I expect.

Do you think they have played a sufficient role of restraint of North Korea yet?

I see the continued need for a strong, able, and well-resourced force that remains engaged in the Asia-Pacific and beyond.

Isn't it true that this concern about North Korea is exacerbated by the fact that artillery at the demilitarized zone (DMZ) could strike Seoul and cause horrendous casualties?

Shortsighted cuts to defense capabilities will result in a weakened U.S. military and would embolden adversaries like North Korea.