Diplomatic Solution Quotes

The time has come to stop this [war]. The points at issue are Jerusalem, the cross and the land. Jerusalem is for us an object of worship that we could not give up even if there were only one left. The cross, which for you is only a piece of wood with no value is for us of enormous importance. If the Sultan will deign to return it to us, we shall be able to make peace and rest from this endless labor.

Any one who speaks in favor of bringing the Arab refugees back must also say how he expects to take the responsibility for it, if he is interested in the state of Israel. It is better that things are stated clearly and plainly: We shall not let this happen.

Europeans should pay more attention. Iran has called for dialogue and is moving in the direction of reaching an agreement through peaceful means.

There is no military solution to the challenges of Syria.

As a Korean War Veteran, I know too well the troubling nature of war. This is why I will always support a diplomatic answer before military intervention.

We have brought you back, I think, Peace with Honor.

I am pleased though that there's a possibility of a diplomatic solution [in Syria]. I remain somewhat skeptical, but I am pleased that it's a possibility and I think people like myself who've been arguing for delaying this bombing, have allowed this diplomatic possibility to occur.

War is the admission of defeat in the face of conflicting interests.

Suddenly in a matter of months there were more than 100 thousand Boxers in the capital, from ordinary people to soldiers to princes and grandees … The capital would be plunged into unthinkable peril if I tried to use the army to crush them. I have to go along with them and salvage the situation somehow...

Resolution 1441 does not give anyone the right to an automatic use of force. Russia believes that the Iraqi problem should be regulated by the Security Council, which carries the main responsibility for ensuring international security.

We can rattle our sabers all we want but, realistically, we don't have troops for an invasion [Iran] and surgical strikes aren't going to work.

How can you have a security guarantee? The Europeans can give their security guarantees to Iran all they want in return for their stopping their enrichment. But as long as America says we're going to stay out here and we're not going to drop the stick, we're going to pound you if we have to, it's not going to work.

Most Americans believe that escalation will not bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end, and that's why I've proposed not just a troop cap, but a phased redeployment that will start bringing our troops home.

To get home you had to end the war. To end the war was the reason you fought it. The only reason.

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.

The military plan is basically invasion. When we attack Cuba, we are going to have to attack with an all-out attack," he said. This is almost certain to lead to an invasion. The Soviet Union may, and I think probably will, attack the Turkish missiles. Then the United States would have to attack Soviet ships. And I would say that it is damn dangerous. Now, I'm not sure we can avoid anything like that if we attack Cuba. But I think we should make every effort to avoid it. And one way to avoid it is to defuse the Turkish missiles before we attack Cuba.

To simply demand that Assad go, and create a vacuum, could make the circumstances worse. To 'protect' Assad and his brutality is unconscionable. So you have to have a transition period here.

The framework for peace signed by Egypt and Israel is almost a peace treaty. We solved the problem for the peace treaty 98%.

We call for a new kind of offensive in the Middle East because our current approach has a track record and it's not a good one.

Although we are very strong, we are pursuing a very calculating and moderate policy. We prefer a political solution and are managing the situation accordingly.

The cost of an on-site inspection team would be minuscule compared to war, Saddam would have no choice except to comply, the results would be certain, military and civilian casualties would be avoided, there would be almost unanimous worldwide support, and the United States could regain its leadership in combating the real threat of international terrorism.

Some of the same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would take a few months.

Victory means exit strategy. And it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.

We are not interested in a proxy war. Our objective is to change Russia's behavior.

The just response to this terrible event [9/11] should be to go immediately to the world community, the United Nations. The rule of international law should be marshaled, but it's probably too late because the United States has never done that; it's always gone it alone.