A Quote by Dean Rusk

Appeasement only makes the aggressor more aggressive. — © Dean Rusk
Appeasement only makes the aggressor more aggressive.
Who knows why women aren't - obviously, rock 'n' roll, I keep saying this, but aggressive and in a way that is sexually aggressive, like the singer is the aggressor. And people don't want to see girls in that position. They would rather go after them.
Appeasement does not work. As was the case in the 1930s, we see in Saddam Hussein an aggressive dictator threatening his neighbors.
Without doubt one is allowed to resist against the unjust aggressor to one's life, one's goods or one's physical integrity; sometimes, even 'til the aggressor's death... In fact, this act is aimed at preserving one's life or one's goods and to make the aggressor powerless. Thus, it is a good act, which is the right of the victim.
There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.
Against naked force the only possible defense is naked force. The aggressor makes the rules for such a war; the defenders have no alternative but matching destruction with more destruction, slaughter with greater slaughter.
In these cases, where there is an unjust aggression, I can only say that it is licit to stop the unjust aggressor. I emphasize the word: "stop". I'm not saying drop bombs, make war, but stop the aggressor. The means used to stop him would have to be evaluated.
The more aggressive our ideologies become, the more aggressive our discourse whether it's in the United States, from Washington D.C., or whether it's from Tehran, or from some underground Al-Qaeda cell. The more aggressive that discourse is, the more people of moderate persuasion have to organize and speak a voice of compassion. That means to feel with the other.
Bumble gives men a chance to take a step back and not be the macho aggressor that they may not want to be but were socialized to be. We think it makes for a better and more peaceful environment for everyone.
No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a non-aggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory.
Usually, a well thought answer makes an aggressor think twice.
If they know you're a nibbler, they're going to wait and look for that. Hitters have to be more aggressive if you're more aggressive.
I was asked to do some studies to see if I was different. And I do have more male testosterone than the average woman does. Whether that makes me more aggressive, I don't know.
I was only aggressive with my game play. I was not aggressive with people. My personality was just as humble as I can be out there.
The Iranians have shot down drones. They tried to destroy the Saudi oil fields. They tried to storm our embassy. So, when my Democratic friends say we need appeasement, well appeasement hasn't worked. And I think that we've learned, with respect to Iran, that weakness invites the wolves.
My guess is that before Obama departs, he will adopt some of the more aggressive military options he has been resisting, such as 'safe zones' inside Syria and more aggressive deployment of U.S. special forces.
The more I'm aggressive, the better off we're going to be. I have to take that into consideration every game to make it a point to be aggressive.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!