Quotes About Strategy

I could never understand why they did that to Barry Sanders in Detroit. I know that's one of the reasons why he retired, because they took him out on third down and let someone else catch the ball. I thought they must be out of their mind because Barry is such a threat.

It takes someone with a unique background to stand up to the threat of a strike and win.

Not every threat to America's national interests can be addressed with military power.

Now I'm just a threat. I'm a threat out there. Guys are running out at me, and I'm able to either give them a pump fake or let it fly. Guys are going over the screens, and I'm able to get into the lane and find my teammates a lot better. It just makes things a lot easier for me.

Good decisions are not necessarily playing it short every time you get the ball. The best teams can play longer or have a threat behind or play through or around. They adapt.

Anyone who is a post man who's a huge offensive threat, I definitely want to play against to try to limit them to as few points as possible. It's a challenge for me, but I love it though.

Understanding the Chinese counterintelligence threat better will help us respond to it more effectively. China is taking a multi-faceted approach, so we've got to have a multi-faceted response.

I am an offensive threat, but I can play 'D' with the best of them.

The intelligence is so clear that China is our greatest threat.

If you're going to be a championship-caliber team or a threat to be a championship-caliber team you have to play a 200-foot game and you have to produce on both ends of the ice.

In international affairs, you never threaten things you're not prepared to do.

Jacob Rees-Mogg gets his tummy tickled when the ERG threatens to vote against a government bill unless it is amended on policy.

The one thing you can't do is get carried away with that pace and bounce. There's a temptation to charge in and just slam the ball into the pitch and you can end up bowling too short. You still have to bowl the right length so that you threaten to take wickets.

The thing that makes countries want to pursue some kind of nuclear deterrent is precisely the fact that they feel threatened.

The fact is that as soon as they reach Baghdad gates, we will besiege them and slaughter them. Until now they have refused to do battle with us. They are just going places. One can describe them as a boa: when it feels threatened, it runs to somewhere else.

We need to focus our energies there, not these broad, blanket, kind of statements that will make it harder for us to deal with ISIS. We need to deal with ISIS in the caliphate. We need a strategy to destroy ISIS there. You can't do that without the cooperation of the Muslim world because they're as threatened as we are.

This is where I would lodge my deepest criticisms. We have very whimsically been threatening and then backing off of tariffs. The people who are paying the price for the lack of strategy are North Carolina consumers who are paying more for durable goods and North Carolina farmers who don't have markets today.

We defended our allies in Europe for 40 years during the worst days of the Cold War - very threatening days of the Cold War - and nothing happened. So deterrence does work.

Our top focus - protecting our Nation - must go beyond homeland preparedness; America will only be secure if we deal with threats before they happen, not just after they happen.

Direct threats require decisive action.

Without a strategic, long-term gameplan to defend our networks from foreign-based 5G threats, we are putting the privacy of American consumers and companies at risk.

If the United States is to protect itself from the economic and the political threats created by this excessive dependence, we must reduce our reliance on foreign energy sources and on foreign oil as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

Military confrontation is not a suitable alternative in confronting terror and current security threats.

So not only do we need to deal with threats as they emerge, we have to be thinking in anticipation of future threats, and the things we do have to be things that enable the system to continue to work.