A Quote by Mitch McConnell

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.
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.
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.
I believe the military should be wary of diplomacy until war is declared; then the State Department should keep its nose out and let the military do whatever is necessary to win.
You can do a lot with diplomacy, but with diplomacy backed up by force you can get a lot more done.
The Department of Peace would take a more human approach to healing our society, looking not merely for ways we can destroy an enemy, but for more powerful ways to create new friends. While the State Department engages in international diplomacy, there is no domestic parallel. There is no department seeking to harness the power of a nonviolent heart.
Quiet diplomacy is far more effective than public posturing.
Diplomacy was what I wanted to do. From really quite an early age and I think I had a false impression that diplomacy equals travel.
In my experience, in bringing coercive diplomacy to bear against Slobodan Milosevic, no bomb strike was more important than maintaining NATO's cohesion.
Mr. Tillerson's obsession with downsizing our diplomacy has colored his time at the State Department.
Propaganda was an important arm of the Soviet diplomacy, very important.
It has become clear that America's civilian institutions of diplomacy and development have been chronically undermanned and underfunded for far too long - relative to what we spend on the military, and more important, relative to the responsibilities and challenges our nation has around the world.
When people think of digital diplomacy, they think of government tweeting. It is not what it is. That is public diplomacy.
I'm a huge proponent of exchanges, student exchanges, cultural exchanges, university exchanges. We talk a lot about public diplomacy, .. It's extremely important that we get our message out, but it's also the case that we should not have a monologue with other people. It has to be a conversation, and you can't do that without exchanges and openness.
I support engagement, diplomacy, and trade with Cuba, China, Vietnam, and many countries with less than stellar human rights records, because I believe that once enslaved people taste freedom and see the products of capitalism, they will become hungry for freedom themselves.
Diplomacy is really far less important than the stock movements within Russia.
The most important thing is to find collective solutions in diplomacy and I think that is possible.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!