Top 1200 Us Foreign Policy Quotes & Sayings - Page 7

There was time in the first half of the '80s when what I was saying on the stage was controversial. A lot of things I was talking about - Nicaragua and American foreign policy.

The Daily Mail can't say 'asylum-seeker' without saying 'foreign criminal' in the same sentence. I'm sure it's practically editorial policy.

The art of good foreign policy is to understand and to take into consideration the values of a society, to realize them at the outer limit of the possible.

In a proper pub everyone there is potentially, if not a lifelong friend, at least someone to lure into an argument about foreign policy or the Red Sox.

Secretary Tillerson is not going anywhere. I can vouch for that. He is where he is, he continues to be strong in how he handles foreign policy, and I continue to work well with him.

No foreign policy - no matter how ingenious - has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none.

Do not read 'Hard Choices' if you seek a nuanced analysis of the people who run the world's foreign policy, let alone any juicy gossip.

American foreign policy has been - and must continue to be - based on unequivocal support for Israel's right to exist and to be free from terror.

Do we go back and be the mushy middle party? Or do we have conservative, principled ideas for all the issues of the day, from the economy, from foreign policy, defence, security, that's the choice.

If America was trying to keep the bubonic plague out of its hemisphere, Canadians would import it just to show their independence of American foreign policy.

Following its peaceful reunifica'tion in 1990, Germany was on track to become an economic giant that had little in the way of foreign policy.

In Haig's presence, Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy.

Foreign policy is about US national security, it is definitely not non-intervention. It is definitely not isolationist. That's where people want to hear what they want to hear and not listen to what Donald Trump says. It is about national security for the United States, and that's fine.

The chief job of foreign policy today is helping to figure out the rules for the global economy and defending each nation's interests within it.

Mistakes, after all, are endemic to foreign and military policy given the unpredictability of events and the difficulty of securing reliable information in a place like Iraq.

We need a balanced, long term energy policy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and preserve the beauty of the land we love.

I'm going to be bringing people into the public diplomacy function of the department who are going to change from just selling us in the old USIA way to really branding foreign policy, branding the department, marketing the department, marketing American values to the world and not just putting out pamphlets.

Constantly referring to past wrongdoings can become a substitute for developing a deeper analysis of today's foreign-policy challenges, of understanding what is new and different.

While all of these are important and significant events, it is the United States' foreign policy that furthers the advancement of freedoms and rights for women that is the most striking for me.

The dirty little secret is that both houses of Congress are irrelevant. ... America's domestic policy is now being run by Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve, and America's foreign policy is now being run by the International Monetary Fund [IMF]. ...when the president decides to go to war, he no longer needs a declaration of war from Congress.

There should be full engagement to protect our country from a grave threat, which is the weakest foreign policy since Jimmy Carter.

Democrats should insist that a pluralistic democracy such as ours rely on bipartisanship in formulating a foreign policy based on moderation and the nuances of the human condition.

I know the power of the Israeli lobby and the other lobbies, but we need a foreign policy that puts our own country first.

One reason the United States finds itself at the edge of a foreign policy disaster is its underinformed citizenry, a key weakness in democracy.

In State of the Union addresses, I always look at the foreign policy and military parts first, which are generally pretty minimal.

Long before the migrant crisis, Sweden had codified its form of humanitarianism into the country's domestic and foreign-policy framework.

Ending Iran's nuclear threat and bringing it into the international community of law-abiding nations is one of the most pressing U.S. foreign policy objectives.

We look a little bit disorderly, indecisive, leaderless. That's a real problem, and that's a problem that concerns me particularly on foreign affairs. The presidency, not just President Obama, but the presidency in recent years has lost some of the terrain that they used to dominate in the making of foreign policy. I think President Obama has to make a serious effort to regain it because he lost some of it himself.

Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? Is it a legacy of our colonial years? We want foreign television sets. We want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology. Why this obsession with everything imported?

War on terrorism reflects, in my view, a rather narrow and extremist vision of foreign policy for a superpower and for a great democracy with genuinely idealistic traditions.

The costly unilateralism of the younger Bush presidency led to a decade of war in the Middle East and the derailment of American foreign policy at large.

The sad thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome's did, when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted.

In fact, it is the dictatorship's policy that isolates the people of Burma while it reaches out to different countries every year and opens new embassies around the world. It is the dictatorship's policy that kills civilians and makes people poor. As long as the dictatorship is in power, foreign trade and investment in Burma will not benefit people. Instead, it will end up fueling the oppression in Burma.

The National Security Council's real role is to coordinate the various activities of the government of the United States in the furtherance of American foreign policy.

Where defining foreign policy as 'ethical' went wrong was that it implied that all decisions would be exclusive in every respect of any dealings with unethical regimes.

We only have one president and one secretary of state, but our founding fathers very clearly insisted that Congress play a significant role in foreign policy.

The overwhelming public sentiment in India was that no meaningful dialogue can be held with Pakistan until it abandons the use of terrorism as an instrument of its foreign policy.

I get these lightweights like Marco Rubio, he gets up and says'Oh, Donald Trump didn't talk about foreign policy'.

I think that Benjamin Franklin felt very strongly in foreign policy in this world, that you needed to at least show some humility, especially when you were strong.

Look, I think the notion that there's a dogma or doctrine of foreign policy that gives you a textbook recipe for how to react to all situations is really nonsense.

We have to engage in a dialogue with Donald Trump because he is the elected president of the United States of America. But we have to emphatically oppose his foreign policy ideas.

One could argue [Bob] Corker has been more supportive of [Donald] Trump`s foreign policy skepticism of the establishment than anybody else.

Since the end of World War II, U.S. presidents of both parties have recognized that foreign and domestic policy do not have to be pursued at the expense of each other.

Bringing democratic control to the conduct of foreign policy requires a struggle merely to force the issue onto the public agenda.

Every damn President since I can remember has been so in love with foreign policy that they're just like a schoolboy with a new girl.

Their foreign policy is so disjointed, confusing, and chaotic that, really, people need to reexamine those who want to be involved in every war.

I do think Russian foreign policy is very savvy. There's a need for great caution because the Russians are able to discreetly blackmail countries.

My home policy: I wage war; my foreign policy: I wage war. All the time I wage war.

Too often in Washington we tend to see foreign policy as an abstraction, with little understanding of what we are committing our country to: the complications and consequences of endeavors.

We have to be cognizant of the fact that they've had foreign fighters coming to volunteer for them, foreign money, foreign weapons, so we have to make this the top priority.

Values-oriented foreign policy of the free world would be much better, supported by the self-awareness of being on the right side of history.

I'm confident that America's foreign policy rebalance to the region will endure beyond my presidency because it's in the national interest of the United States.

Truth be told, except for foreign policy, Ron Paul's voting record and mine are virtually identical and I wear it as a badge of honor.

And the ultimate thing is, I may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

China has been committed to the independent foreign policy of peace and has developed friendship and cooperation with all countries on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

I haven't got the time to sit here arguing with someone whose idea of a coherent foreign policy is what comes up in Google when you type in peace!

American foreign policy needs to be driven by what will get results and what is legal, not by what satisfies our primal instincts of revenge.

Britain should take pride in a foreign policy that reflects her values and responsibilities - but it must be grounded in the tangible interests of the citizens who pay for it.

Look, I think the notion that theres a dogma or doctrine of foreign policy that gives you a textbook recipe for how to react to all situations is really nonsense.

Robert Kagan said the neocons couldn't get a better president than Hillary Clinton, who would enforce the neocon foreign policy. No one's questioned it.