A Quote by Richard Branson

If you go back into military history, the person who's leading the troops ought to be in with the troops and not just standing on the backline sending them into battle. — © Richard Branson
If you go back into military history, the person who's leading the troops ought to be in with the troops and not just standing on the backline sending them into battle.
Playboy magazine announced that they are going to support the troops by sending them emails from Playboy playmates. After hearing this the U.S. troops said 'Just our luck, we get emails from playmates, but we're embedded with Geraldo.'
Every single war that you see go down is illegal. They're breaking the Geneva Convention, and they're breakin' all kinds of sh*t they ain't supposed to be. All these soldiers that's dyin', every talkin' about, "Support our troops, support our troops," yeah we support our troops, but what are they fightin' for? Let's support 'em for the right reason. Let's tell our troops the truth, and maybe they wouldn't be out there fightin' these wars, because there are a lot of these troops that don't even wanna be out there if you talk to them.
Our troops are the best in the world. I have absolute confidence in the ability of the troops who are here, or additional troops, to do their part.
There is no military solution to the war in Iraq. Our troops can help suppress the violence, but they cannot solve its root causes. And all the troops in the world won't be able to force Shia, Sunni, and Kurd to sit down at a table, resolve their differences, and forge a lasting peace. In fact, adding more troops will only push this political settlement further and further into the future, as it tells the Iraqis that no matter how much of a mess they make, the American military will always be there to clean it up.
I just want to say we support the troops and we love every one of them. Even if they...I know a lot of my friends that are in the military that they don't agree with...Some of them are total, total liberals or this or that, whatever they are and I just want to say that we love all the troops. We don't care what they believe in, they're defending our country and we love them for that. And they're the biggest bad assses...in the world and we just want to thank you. We hope they enjoy the music and we'll keep pumping it out and just keep staying bad asses!
If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.
It's perfectly natural to desire more troops when engaged in a military operation facing serious obstacles, and the more troops you have, probably, the [lower the] risk of causalities.
There used to be the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. There used to be Soviet troops in the GDR. And we must honestly admit that they were occupation troops, which remained in Germany after WWII under the guise of allied troops. Now these occupation troops are gone, the Soviet Union has collapsed, and the Warsaw Pact is no more. There is no Soviet threat, but NATO and U.S. troops are still in Europe. What for?
American Green Berets have been on the ground reaching out to some of the factions there. But don't confuse them with combat troops. So we're only talking about airstrikes now. If there are any troops that go in there it will likely be the Italians.
No U.S. soldier ever dies in vain because they're carrying out the missions of their commander in chief. And we honor all the service that they've provided. Our troops have performed brilliantly. The question is for the next president, are we making good judgments about how to keep America safe precisely because sending our military into battle is such an enormous step.
When I hear Donald Trump say the American military is a disaster, I want to go through the screen and shake the guy. We ought to have a commander in chief who talks about our troops with respect and gratitude.
So, before leading my troops into battle, we would get drunk and drugged up, sacrifice a local teenager, drink their blood, then strip down to our shoes and go into battle wearing colourful wigs and carrying dainty purses we'd looted from civilians. We'd slaughter anyone we saw, chop their heads off and use them as soccer balls. We were nude, fearless, drunk and homicidal. We killed hundreds of people - so many I lost count.
How do you tell troops who volunteered to fight for our freedoms that the country they fought for won't take care of them when they come back? In the time of war our troops and their families are supposed to be our number one priority.
American troops on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq. And so she [Hillary Clinton] is saying we're not going to go back down that road, which is what the American people want. They don't want us putting more troops.
The History brand has long been a supporter of not only our troops but organizations that support our troops.
[Barack Obama] is sending more troops [to Afghanistan], but they have also realized that we are not going to win that war through guns and tanks. We have to engage the neighbors, and it is good that there is a non-military strategy in addition to a military strategy. It is, at least, encouraging. Whether it will work or not, the jury is still put.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!