It would be very--in my opinion, it is doubtful that we'd be able to conduct one prolonged, sustained, multiphase campaign.

new systems are too often set at the far limit of current technological boundaries.

We're digging ourselves a readiness hole out of which it will take several years to climb.

In light of the shift to the Asian-Pacific theater and a greater need for electronic warfare capability, has the Navy acted too quickly in ending its procurement of Growler (EA-18G) aircraft?

Is it because our system allows one person, whether that person is the President of the United States or the Secretary of Defense, to make these decisions that are so irresponsible?

I think it goes without saying that we cannot afford to continue to award contractors $1.2 billion on a weapon system such as the Army Ground Combat Vehicle only to, shortly afterwards, terminate the program.

I also believe that each component has its own critical role in the total force.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned that you and I have talked about is the Air Force requesting the funding to recapitalize joint North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) intelligence.

The threats to our national security are growing. The readiness and capability of our military are being degraded by drastic budget cuts.

Risk means lives and I think we all need to understand it. We do understand it.

The Asia-Pacific area is 62 percent of the world's surface area. It's huge.

A strong and well-resourced U.S. Navy is vital to protecting our access and freedom of maneuvering.