Foreign Troops Quotes

There's no reason why Americans should die when Afghans are perfectly capable of defending their own country.

We're probably going to see some post-2014 military presence - some U.S. presence and a NATO presence - and while we've got much work to do in the next 29 months, we'll have additional time later for the continued professionalization of the Afghan security forces.

Every predecessor has used mercenaries, often drawn from the country that they're attacking like England ran India with Indian mercenaries. You take them from one place and send them to kill people in the other place. That's the standard way to run imperial wars.

This forenoon ten Americans and twenty Russians went to the south cathedral, where the Boxers were looting, burning, and killing, killed seventy Boxers, captured ten, and took Catholic refugees to a place near the British Legation. In the afternoon twenty-five Germans and an equal number of French went to the same place, with much the same result, though not quite so many Boxers were killed

The stationing of U. S. troops abroad on a permanent basis in foreign military installations is the kind of thing that should not be done without the approval of the Senate.

U.S. imperialism will be compelled to withdraw its troops, and to allow the people of Vietnam to settle their national affairs as they wish.

Our main goal as Iraqi people is to drive the occupation out in any way.

If the Europeans want to intervene, that's their business. But if I were president, I would remove every United States soldier from the Balkan peninsula.

Americans will gladly support their president when he attacks nations that sponsor or harbor terrorists. We will even back him in a preemptive war against a country that might attack us. But when we start sending troops around the world to stabilize nations that, if left to disintegrate, might become breeding grounds for terror, it's a step too far for most Americans.

I'm hugely delighted with the presence of U.S. Armed Forces in the Polish territory.

It still puts burden on some troops of ours who are there [in Afghanistan and Iraq] as advisors and facilitators.

I was not in favor of U.S. troops in Lebanon. And I voted against it.

The Constitution says that troops can be in the Philippines if there's a treaty that provides for it, and we have two treaties with the United States.

And over time, I think, as Iraqi security capacity builds, you'll see American and coalition presence there decline.

Our neighbor Canada has 2,200 troops serving in Afghanistan. Canada has also assumed responsibility for the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kandahar, which was originally established by our own military.

The question is always how you get the number of troops needed. They do not have to be coalition forces. We also have to expand the training program for the Afghan National Army and the national police, in particular. and Defense Secretary Robert Gates has already announced support for a significant increase in the Afghan army.

Gandhi has more recently recognized the need for continuance of British, American and Chinese efforts in India and has suggested that these troops might remain by agreement with some new Indian Government.

What sort of country hides the identity of people who have killed American military personnel stationed in that country defending it and its royal family?

We don't mind that we still have troops in Germany, or that we still have troops in Japan or Korea. But they are not in danger, and we know that they are in danger in Iraq.

The British troops are not an occupation force. They are here with the consent of the people.

To maintain order after Assad's fall would require at least 500,000 troops in a never-ending occupation.

If your goal is to destroy ISIS, there needs to be a ground force. It could be American or foreign.

There is no presence of American infidels in the city of Baghdad.