As president, I decided that a strong, confident America could advance our national security by engaging directly with the Iranian government. We've seen the results.
Mitt Romney understands the importance of Alaska as a leader in our country's energy production and I look forward to working with him on such an important economic and national security matter.
I believe we're all aware that there are people and organizations throughout the world who are bent on destroying America, everything we stand for and inflicting harm on American citizens. It is the obligation of the president of the United States to respond to those. I believe, I must add, that this adminstration for the last seven months has neglected compelling national security threats besides this ... I hope that the president will not confine his activities to just this.
Gore Vidal, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, all these guys talk about how the United States became a national security state after World War II. I agree with that thesis. Essentially there's this bipartisan foreign policy elite who've been calling the shots for the last few decades and they're clearly still in control regardless of how clownish or absurd or stupid they demonstrate themselves to be. There's no shaking their orthodoxy.
We see it in attempts on Capitol Hill to impose gag rules on rules on doctors on what they can say to their patients about family planning. And we certainly see it now with an effort by the government to tap our phones; invade our medical records, credit information, library records and the most sensitive personal information in the name of national security.
We must prepare for a changing climate by incorporating climate preparedness into every aspect of our planning - for food, water, health, energy, even national security. We must reduce our emissions to prevent even more dangerous change.
Foreign policy is about US national security, it is definitely not non-intervention. It is definitely not isolationist. That's where people want to hear what they want to hear and not listen to what Donald Trump says. It is about national security for the United States, and that's fine.
We are trying to get a border wall to protect millions of low income Americans against folks who aren't supposed to be here. So, it's a national security.
We know through the process of energy independence, our whole geopolitical footprint changes in terms of our national security and how we operate the American military. In addition to that we've got all these forward liabilities on these entitlement programs that, with the right tax and the energy policy, we can pay down and offset some of those liabilities.
American national security and American economic interests, of course - every president, every secretary of state - that is the primary goal. As you are in this job and in the work, you begin to see, though, that in the long run, both American economic interests and American national security are better served when there are other decent countries in the world who are both your allies and even when your adversaries are acting more decently.
Finally, here at home, in one of her first decisions as Secretary of State, she set up a private e-mail server in her basement in violation of our national security. Let's face the facts: Hillary Clinton cared more about protecting her own secrets than she cared about protecting America's secrets.
Espionage is never a laughing matter. And in fact, this is not a political issue. I don't want to get this confused with the back and forth we might have about economic issues or anything else. This is a matter of national security now. And I find it very frightening that Donald Trump is encouraging any foreign power to breach a campaign and try to influence the outcome of the election.
Ultimately, the courts will make the final judgment whether the White House has gone too far. Independent and impartial judges must assess the proper balance between protecting our liberties and protecting our national security.
I do want to be very clear: I see our nuclear deterrent as absolutely core insurance for our national security.
We don't have warlords. We have strongmen. They control provinces with military forces. These men at one time controlled territory; they have now been transformed into businessmen and politicians. Today our national security forces are built to control the provinces.
We know that Russia has done things that are very much against our interests. They've done things that require us to take punitive action against Russia. That does not mean we can't work with Russia where we have a common agenda. Russia is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council; we need their help in isolating North Korea and their nuclear weapons violations. So, we still need to work with Russia. But Russia's done things that are contrary to our national security interest, and the US must respond to those types of activities.
As I travel around the country, the American people are focused on the very same things that President Trump is focused on every day. And that is: How do we advance our national security? How do we make the world a safer and more peaceful place? How do we make America more prosperous? And the president's gonna continue to focus.
Suffice it to say that Wall Street investors in the drug industries have used the government to unleash and transform their economic power into political and global military might; never forget, America is not an opium or cocaine producing nation, and narcotic drugs are a strategic resource, upon which all of the above industries - including the military - depend. Controlling the world's drug supply, both legal and illegal, is a matter of national security.
When you're offered a job to serve your country, you step back and assess. And once I spoke with President Trump and told him what I thought I needed to be successful - which was to be a Cabinet member; to be on the National Security Council, where I could be a part of the policy decisions; and to be able to say what I wanted to say - how do you not do that job? He was incredibly supportive. He's continued to be. I love a good challenge, and this certainly has been that.
I would argue that we have a patriotic duty to move toward energy independence and clean energy. It is a matter of national security - energy security, climate security, economic security, job security, everything.
There's, under Obama, an epidemic has developed of abusing national security laws to crack down on legitimate use of the First Amendment.
Edward Snowden is anything but narcissist. In fact, I wonder every day how he could come up with the courage, muster the courage to sacrifice everything just so he could do, as he said in rather eloquent speech initially, alert the American people to what was going on. Call him a traitor, call him whatever you want to. The fact is he is a symptom of the disease, and the disease is constant war and the national security state. That is what we've become. That is our raison d'être in the world today, to wage war.
Gore Vidal, Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, talk about how the U.S. became a national security state after World War II. Essentially there's this bipartisan foreign policy elite who've been calling the shots for the last few decades and they're clearly still in control regardless of how clownish or absurd they demonstrate themselves to be. There's no shaking their orthodoxy. To me it was the most depressing thing, these full-scale military interventions firsthand for a number of years, seeing how quickly we can get involved in another war with very little debate.
I served as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Let me tell you, it's tough to find out what the CIA is doing. They led us astray on the weapons of mass destruction that they said Saddam Hussein found. We sent out Collin Powell, Secretary of State, former National Security Counselor, chief of staff, four star general, couldn't find it out. I'd be reluctant to cut into term limits. I think if the voters would become informed and aroused, they could impose the proper limits on the guys who ought to be out.
I don't know Condoleezza Rice personally. I'm sure she's a nice lady, and I'm sure she plays the piano well. But she was a very bad National Security Adviser. The National Security Adviser is supposed to be an arbiter of policy and open minded in internal debates.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: