Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Critics blast Obama's comment on US Navy

Details

  • Description

    'Horses and bayonets' remark called 'dismissive' by GOP lawmakers

  • Duration 4:34
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

America's Newsroom

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

We'll tell -- is now seizing on what was arguably the most memorable comment from President Obama at the debate.

On Monday night.

You mentioned the navy for example we have fewer ships that we did in 1960.

Well governor we also have fewer horses in -- and that's.

Because.

The nature of our -- -- we have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on the we have.

These chips -- go underwater nuclear submarines.

That's quite a moment and it did get some laughs from the audience in Florida.

But former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld says the US military is no joking matter -- is on our show with us yesterday.

The fact.

That the -- is shrinking is an important serious subject.

That merited a thoughtful serious important discussion and all it got was a dismissive.

Arrogant answer from the president by someone who's never served in the military I found it.

Really disappointing.

Disappointing rumsfeld's words Texas Republican congressman -- thorn Berry is the vice chairman of the house armed services committee and he joins me Nasser good morning good to have you here today.

What was your reaction -- invested -- by the president.

You know I thought the president sounded like he could defend his record about trying to taunt or bully governor Romney and usually when somebody uses that -- -- tactic.

Whether it's on the playground -- in politics they're trying to cover something up.

And what he was covering up here was the fact that our navy has gone down to such low levels and and it's just not enough what.

Would navy at that level we cannot defend the country as well as protect the peace.

You know he'd he'd -- -- to say that navy ships where is obsolete as horses in bayonet and well that's obviously not sure.

In -- there was another comment that came prior to that.

Bayh and governor Romney -- that did not get as much attention but it raises an interesting point let's listen to -- so why did you pass on it.

We make decisions today in a military.

That there will confront challenges we can't imagine in the 2000 debates.

There was no mention of terrorism princes.

And a year later 9/11 happened so we have to make decisions based upon uncertainty.

And that means -- strong military.

I'm struck by that all the time I have -- a number of debates in convention speeches back in history.

In the past several months and rarely.

In these instances do we talk about what actually turns out to be the threat.

When that -- president does take office say what did you think governor Romney's point there.

Well I think it's an excellent point.

-- week.

There are trends that we concede that are are are a threat to the United States cyber security for example terrorism.

But there are always things we can't predict.

And what you have to have is -- capability.

To deal with the unknown and that again back to the ship's.

We had our ships today are more capable than they -- in 1916 of course but they can't be in more than one place at one time.

So if a ship is in the western Pacific it can't be in the Persian gulf and it's -- the -- if it's off the coast of Libya it can't be fighting pirates off Africa so numbers do matter.

And capability does matter that's the way you deal with the unknown is have that capability around the world to protect ourselves and defend our interest.

-- let's listen to this up for the president also I -- get your thoughts on the back and forth and sequestration.

First of all this question is not something that I propose something the congress has proposed it will not happen.

The budget -- we're talking about is not.

Reducing our military spending it's maintaining it.

That your understanding of how this worked.

No it's absolutely not true as a matter fat Bob Bob Woodward has said today that it is not true this proposal for sequestration came from the administration.

He says just ask the people in the administration.

Secondly it's the law of the land the president cannot say it's not gonna happen and let's see what is it going to intentionally.

Violate the law the third point is he has done absolutely nothing over the last year to prevent sequestration from happening.

While we in the house have passed the -- to find the site savings in other places the president has opposed that and only tried to blackmail congress.

To raise taxes.

With the threat of sequestration.

So -- on it very insincere.

At best Mac.

Thanks freak accident Tennessee congressman.

And.

Load More