Theodor Herzl Quotes

To insist on strength ... is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering.

One of the great advances of our time is the recognition that one of the ways to prevent war is to deter it by having the will and the capacity to use force to punish the aggressor.

Wars are most often won by those who have made the greatest effort to prevent them.

Peace through strength works; but the flip side is war invited by weakness.

It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.

Among pacifists it was above all the English who always insisted on the importance of disarmament. They said that the man in the street would not understand the kind of pacifism that neglected to demand immediate restriction of armaments.

To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.

One cannot abolish only a single weapon, but only war as a whole.

France though armed to the teeth is pacifist to the core.

The shortest way to peace is the most stupendous and unanimous preparation for war.

The Mutual Security Act was intended not to fight a war but to prevent a war.

I think war is so incredibly backward, and I don't think it's intelligent, and it's not sane. So why would you want to support it?

War is evitable if conditions are such that the costs of making war are higher than the benefits.

Moreover, war has become a thing potentially so terrible and destructive that it should have been the common aim of statesmen to put an end to it forever.

I am, on principle, opposed to war and in favor of peace because I regard peace as a positive good and war as a positive evil.

War can be avoided, and it ought to be avoided. I want no war.

Nobel was a genuine friend of peace. He even went so far as to believe that he had invented a tool of destruction, dynamite, which would make war so senseless that it would become impossible. He was wrong.

Disarmament or limitation of armaments, which depends on the progress made on security, also contributes to the maintenance of peace.

Even a total and universal disarmament does not guarantee the maintenance of peace.

I know of no more important subject to the peace of Europe and the world than the reasonable reduction of armaments, especially in Europe, and of naval armaments throughout the world.

War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.

So long as peace is not attained by law (so argue the advocates of armaments) the military protection of a country must not be undermined, and until such is the case disarmament is impossible.

I'm really interested in how conflicts arise and how they reach points of no return. I'm no pacifist. Sometimes force is necessary. But war is a choice.

The war industry people are very together; they know exactly what they want; they don't even have to talk to each other. The peace industry people are just intellectuals who are very critical of each other... Unless the peace industry is powerful, we're always going to have war. It is as simple as that.

I didn't promote war when I was a weapons inspector.