A Quote by George W. Bush

Diplomacy can be a frustrating thing. I think the strategy can work, so long as the force is robust and the rules of engagement are clear. — © George W. Bush
Diplomacy can be a frustrating thing. I think the strategy can work, so long as the force is robust and the rules of engagement are clear.
I think all of our experience with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein teaches us that diplomacy has very little chance of working unless it is clear to him that if diplomacy does not work, that the threatened reality of force is there.
Let me be clear: I'm a believer in a robust military, which is essential for backing up diplomacy. But the implication is that we need a balanced tool chest of diplomatic and military tools alike. Instead, we have a billionaire military and a pauper diplomacy. The U.S. military now has more people in its marching bands than the State Department has in its foreign service - and that's preposterous.
Diplomacy is important, extremely important, and I don't think these reductions at the State Department are appropriate because many times diplomacy is a lot more effective - and cert cheaper - than military engagement.
In diplomacy, like in great many other things, the rules of engagement survive only until one remarkable person decides to break them.
I think the most frustrating thing is when people... sometimes people are a bit lazy and they don't listen to something, and they'll just say you sound like something else and it's quite clear that you don't, I think that's frustrating.
At this point of time in history, I don't think that women in any work force that's a male-dominated work force have the same rules to play or live by as men do.
We're very clear in the race that priority will be given to the lead car and more risk will be taken with the tail car. Sometimes that will work out, sometimes it won't, but it's very clear going into the event that those are the rules of engagement.
Under our rules of engagement, if I were ISIS, what I would do is collocate my headquarters next to a school or a hospital and ensure that there would be collateral damage. They know our rules of engagement as well as we do. They operate with impunity.
And we ought to work our diplomacy first and I think it's a reason it's going to respond increasingly to our diplomacy particularly with the president's direct involvement in the peace process, and I think that's extraordinarily important.
The most successful cultural diplomacy strategy integrates people-to-people or arts/culture/media-to-people interactions into the basic business of diplomacy. The programs in Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iran all contribute to core goals of U.S. policy in those countries.
We need to really use the full force of diplomacy. And we need to be seen and understood to be on the side of diplomacy and international law.
As I worked to explain how to avoid bad strategy, I began to see that one cannot really evaluate or criticize a strategy unless there is a fairly clear statement of the problem the strategy is trying to solve.
You can do a lot with diplomacy, but with diplomacy backed up by force you can get a lot more done.
Iran has little capacity to deploy force. Its strategic doctrines are defensive, designed to deter invasion long enough for diplomacy to set it.
Preemption is the right of any nation in order to preserve its National Security; however, preemptive war is a tactic, not a strategy. When used as a strategy preemption dilutes diplomacy, creates an atmosphere of distrust, and promotes regional instability.
If you put our guys in harm's way, you better support them with the right equipment, the right rules of engagement, the right Medevac, the right quick-reaction force.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!