A Quote by Richard Holbrooke
People in uniform are not sacrosanct. They don't have all the answers. The use of force is a political decision at its core, in terms of its objectives; then the military, as the experts, must be brought in to tell you how to do it.
Related Quotes
The most fundamental paradox is that if we're never to use force, we must be prepared to use it and to use it successfully. We Americans don't want war and we don't start fights. We don't maintain a strong military force to conquer or coerce others. The purpose of our military is simple and straightforward: we want to prevent war.
My advice is: 1. Be judicious in the use of military force. 2. When military force is required, use overwhelming force. 3. Do not micromanage military leaders. 4. Ensure your battle plans will win the conflict and win the peace.
If you are going to use military force, then you ought to use overwhelming military force. Use too much and deliberately use too much; you'll save lives, not only your own, but the enemy's too.
Washington is politics! Somehow if people have political objectives, then those objectives are automatically disqualified? If that's the case, the Democrats have no business being legitimized about anything because everything they do is political.
We should never hesitate to use military force, and I will not, as president, in order to keep the American people safe. But we have to use our military wisely. And we did not use our military wisely in Iraq.
The key thing is that I've led a life of service to country that gave me perspectives that most people don't get, having been involved in international and national decision-making and the accomplishment of national and international political and diplomatic and military objectives.
Every decision to use military force is an excruciatingly difficult one.
The commander must decide how he will fight the battle before it begins. He must then decide who he will use the military effort at his disposal to force the battle to swing the way he wishes it to go; he must make the enemy dance to his tune from the beginning and not vice versa.
Any military force should be dictated by the vital national security interests of the United States. And if and when we use force, we should use overwhelming force for a clearly stated objective. And then when we're done, we should get the heck out.
Radical groups can become legitimate political players in the democratic process if they accept core democratic principles and abandon the use of force as a political tool. Or they can maintain armed terrorist militias in order to threaten their neighbors and intimidate their people. The international community should not allow them to do both.
Overwhelmingly, Israel's political and military establishment want the rest of the world to act diplomatically or otherwise to stop Iran. But if that doesn't happen, then the impulse toward the use of force will become quite strong.
The decision to use military force should always be one made with the utmost caution, with U.S. interests at stake, and with the consent of Congress.
The libertarian approach is a very symmetrical one: the non-aggression principle does not rule out force, but only the initiation of force. In other words, you are permitted to use force only in response to some else's use of force. If they do not use force you may not use force yourself. There is a symmetry here: force for force, but no force if no force was used.
The use of our military in combat should first require declaration of war. I have long called for reinstating the military draft, simply because I believe strongly that a national decision to go to war must also include a broad commitment to share its burdens. Whenever Congress decides to fund a war or other U.S. combat activities, it must provide a means to pay for it-then and there-not later. If we don't have the will to fully share the burdens of war, then we have no right to send our sons and daughters into harm's way.
The president of the United States, Barack Obama, deserves the benefit of the doubt and our support in his decision to use military force in Libya.
I don't understand what the president's [Donald Trump] position is on Russia. But I can tell you what my position is on Russia: Russia is a great danger to a lot of its neighbors, and [Vladimir] Putin has as one of his core objectives fracturing NATO, which is one of the greatest military alliances in the history of the world.
Related Authors
Andrew Yang Quotes
American
Public Servant
Ben Bernanke Quotes
American
Public Servant
David Frum Quotes
American
Public Servant
Elizabeth Warren Quotes
American
Public Servant
Henry Paulson Quotes
American
Public Servant
James Comey Quotes
American
Public Servant
Janet Reno Quotes
American
Public Servant
Janet Yellen Quotes
American
Public Servant
Karren Brady Quotes
British
Public Servant
Michael Hayden Quotes
American
Public Servant
Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf Quotes
Iraqi
Public Servant
Paula White Quotes
American
Public Servant
Samantha Power Quotes
Irish
Public Servant
Steve Bannon Quotes
American
Public Servant
Vivek Murthy Quotes
American
Public Servant
Wendy Kopp Quotes
American
Public Servant