More headlines: George W. Bush on Defense
(Following are older quotations. Click here for main quotations.)
Make nuclear secrets (like Los Alamos) secure again
Bush today criticized the recent security lapses at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, saying “America’s nuclear security should not be a matter of lost and found.” Bush promised, “In my administration our national labs will be secure again, our vital
information will be sealed again, our nuclear secrets will be safe again.” Federal officials are investigating the disappearance and reappearance at the laboratory of two computer hard drives containing nuclear secrets.
Source: Alison Mitchell, NY Times
Jun 18, 2000
Maintain commitments; define new challenges
- Would maintain longstanding US commitments, but order an immediate review of overseas deployments in dozens of countries, with the aim of replacing uncertain missions with well-defined objectives
- Would promote cooperation with our
allies, who should share the burden of defense
- Would order a comprehensive military review to develop a new architecture for American defense designed to meet the challenges of the next century
Source: GeorgeWBush.com: ‘Issues: Policy Points Overview’
Apr 2, 2000
Commander-in-Chief defines mission; Generals prepare for it
Q: What is the role of the Commander in Chief? A: The role of the commander in chief is to clearly define what the mission of the military is. The mission of the military is to fight and be able to win war, and therefore prevent war from happening in
the first place. The commander in chief must let the general officers understand what the goal is and ask them to prepare a military of high morale and high standing. The Generals [decide] the best way for us to prepare our military for the mission.
Source: GOP Debate on the Larry King Show
Feb 15, 2000
Lesson from Vietnam: no political wars
Our nation should be slow to engage troops. But when we do so, we must do so with ferocity. We must not go into a conflict unless we go in committed to win. We can never again ask the military to fight a political war.
If America’s strategic interests are at stake, if diplomacy fails, if no other option will accomplish the objective, the Commander in Chief must define the mission and allow the military to achieve it.
Source: “A Charge to Keep”, p. 55.
Dec 9, 1999
Supported Vietnam while a student in 1968, but not later
[At Yale in 1968], we discussed Vietnam, but we were more concerned with the decision each of us had to make: military service or not. I knew I would serve. Leaving the country to avoid the draft was not an option for me; I was too conservative and
too traditional. My inclination was to support the government and the war until proven wrong, and that came only later, as I realized we could not explain the mission, had no exit strategy, and did not seem to be fighting to win.
Source: “A Charge to Keep”, p. 50
Dec 9, 1999
Rebuild military power to deal with world of terror
This is still a world of terror & missiles & madmen. We are challenged by aging weapons and failing intelligence. I will rebuild our military power - because a dangerous world still requires a sharpened sword. I will move quickly to defend our people and
our allies against missiles and blackmail. And I will have a foreign policy with a touch of iron - driven by American values and American interests.
Source: Candidacy Announcement speech, Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Jun 12, 1999
Restore military’s self-esteem with respect
George W. Bush urged America’s servicemen and women on Saturday to “stay in the military -- there’s a new commander in chief coming. The great nation called America will be the peacemaker. I will not retreat.
We cannot retreat. I will be a commander in chief who respects the men and women in uniform and makes sure they are sent abroad only on clearly defined missions.”
Source: AP story in NY Times
Aug 12, 2000
$1B more in personnel raises; more for housing too
- Supports rebuilding America’s military strength to keep the peace
- Would increase by $1 billion the recently passed military pay raise to encourage the best and brightest to enlist and reenlist in the armed forces
- Would renovate
substandard military housing and improve military training
Source: GeorgeWBush.com: ‘Issues: Policy Points Overview’
Apr 2, 2000
America must win if US troops are committed
Q: Governor, will you spend what it takes if the US is involved in a war? A: Well, let me put it to you this way: When I’m the president, we’re not going to obfuscate when it comes to foreign
policy. If I ever commit troops, I’m going to do so with one thing in mind. And that’s to win. To win in a fashion that not only achieves victory, but gets us out of the theater in quick order.
Source: Republican Debate in Durham, NH
Jan 6, 2000
Increase spending on military pay plus R&D
I support increased pay and better benefits and training for our citizen soldiers. Rebuilding America’s homeland defenses is an urgent priority. I support deploying antiballistic missile systems to guard against attack and
blackmail. And America should modernize its military capability. by investing in research and development to make our military more suited to the needs of the twenty-first century.
Source: “A Charge to Keep”, p.239-240
Dec 9, 1999
Increase military salaries & weapons spending
Bush outlined a plan for additional spending to increase military salaries and fashion a new generation of more technologically sophisticated weaponry. Bush also said that he would conduct a thorough review of the country’s military commitments abroad,
an implicit statement that he might scuttle some.
Source: NY Times, p. A18, on “Renewing America’s Purpose”
Sep 24, 1999
Soldiers need a clear mission & best support possible
Those who man the lighthouse of freedom ask little of our nation in return. But what they ask our nation must provide: a coherent vision of America’s duties, a clear military mission in time of crisis, and, when sent in harm’s way, the best support and
equipment our nation can supply. With these things, they never fail us. Without these things, we have failed them. Let us resolve never to multiply our missions while cutting our capabilities.
Source: Memorial Day speech, Austin TX
May 31, 1999
Missile Defense System a priority, despite test failures
[Statement after the failure of the 3rd Missile Defense test]: While last night’s test is a disappointment, I remain confident that, given the right leadership, America can develop an effective missile defense system. In view of the potential threat we
face from an accidental launch or an attack from a rogue nation, the United States must press forward to develop and deploy a missile defense system. Development of a missile defense system will be a priority in my Administration.
Source: Statement on Missile Defense
Jul 10, 2000
Lack of details makes Bush SDI & START policy same as Gore’s
Bush portrays himself as a bold advocate of cutting the nation’s nuclear arsenal while building a bigger, better defense against enemy missiles. But Bush’s unspecified minimum number of nuclear warheads could end up being the same as the START-III goal
of 2,500 agreed to by Clinton and Yeltsin. Pentagon sources are already on record as saying the 2,500 level is as low as they would want to go. It’s unlikely that a pro-defense candidate such as Bush would overrule the military chiefs. So while Bush
sounds like he’s proposing substantial cuts in nuclear force levels, it could be a difference without much distinction. It’s a similar story on national missile defense. [The Clinton-Gore program] is, essentially, the same program advocated by Bush-at
least so far as can be determined from his public statements. [Bush has not] provided the details that would tell voters whether his policy on those two issues is really much different from Gore’s.
Source: CNN.com
Jun 1, 2000
Increase R&D; develop new generation of weapons with SDI
- Supports accelerated research for and deployment of both theater missile defenses and national missile defense, as soon as possible
- Prepared to cancel ABM treaty with Russia if unable to convince Russia to amend the treaty to allow deployment
of missile defense systems within a short period of time
- Would seize the opportunity to skip a generation of weapons, not merely improving existing systems, but replacing them with a new generation of technology
- Would earmark at least 20 percent
of the procurement budget for acquisition programs that propel America generations ahead in military technology
- Would increase defense R&D spending by at least $20 billion from FY2002 to FY2006
- Supports a continued moratorium on
nuclear testing, and opposed ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
Source: GeorgeWBush.com: ‘Issues: Policy Points Overview’
Apr 2, 2000