Dick Morris Quotes

To win the war on terror, we must know who our friends are and where our enemies are hiding. We can't continue fighting terrorism using the same foreign policy blueprints that were in place before September 11th.

Abroad, our most important policy is to support our troops and continue forward-thinking foreign policy in the war on terror - keeping our enemies on the run and hitting them before they hit us.

If the war on terror is endless, you could forget about democracy.

After 9/11, it became clear that we [the United States] had to do several things to have a successful strategy to win the global war on terror, specifically that we had to go after the terrorists wherever we might find them, that we also had to go after state sponsors of terror, those who might provide sanctuary or safe harbor for terror.

The war on terror, I believe, will be waged by effective intelligence and police work and cruise missiles.

War on terrorism defines the central preoccupation of the United States in the world today, and it does reflect in my view a rather narrow and extremist vision of foreign policy of the world's first superpower, of a great democracy, with genuinely idealistic traditions.

If Clinton had only attacked terrorism as much as he attacks George Bush we wouldn't be in this problem.

The War on Terror is one of the most critical national security efforts in our history.

They do believe that if we do not wage this war against terror in places like Baghdad and Kabul, we are more likely to have it waged in Baltimore and Kansas.

Carter's hopes died when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan and he ended up having to reverse policy and launch the military buildup that Reagan continued. Mr. Obama would be forced back into a war on terror if terrorist groups pull off enough damaging or frightening attacks to force this issue to the fore.

America decided we were going to stand by and let Americans die at the hands of terrorists a long time ago.

The Pakistani government under Musharraf is a strong and key player in the global war on terrorism, and their contribution has been second to none.

The problem was you didn’t have an approach against Al Qaeda because you didn’t have an approach against Afghanistan. And you didn’ have an approach against Afghanistan because you didn’t have an approach against Pakistan. And until we could get that right, we didn’t have a policy.

The war on terror, sometimes known as the 'Global War on Terror' or by the clunky acronym GWOT, became the lens through which the Bush administration judged almost all of its foreign policy decisions. That proved to be dangerously counterproductive on several levels.

The fact is, our men and women in uniform, the bravest in the world, did everything they could to protect this country from a terror threat and to protect others from the terror threat that was Saddam Hussein. And nobody can deny that we are in a better place because Saddam Hussein is dead.

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda.

The towers are gone now, reduced to bloody rubble, along with all hopes for Peace in Our Time, in the United States or any other country. Make no mistake about it: We are At War now & with somebody & and we will stay At War with that mysterious Enemy for the rest of our lives.

I recommended to the president [George Bush] that our focus had to be on al-Qaida, the Taliban and Afghanistan. Those were the ones who attacked the United States of America on 9/11.

And above all, what does being liberal have to do with opposing, or, uh, supporting the war against terror? Our enemies in the war against terror are so anti-liberal that you would think it would be liberals leaping to protect the world from these monstrous ideologies.

The war on terror, rebranded under Obama as the "Overseas Contingency Operation," has morphed into war on democracy.

Barack Obama can't beat ISIS. He's a lousy president.

My evaluation of President George W. Bush is nothing personal. He's a lovely person. Sadly, I believe he will be remembered for taking us into war unnecessarily at the cost of thousands of American lives, injuries to tens of thousands of our troops, and trillions of dollars to our economy - enormous costs to our reputation, and undermining the capability of our military to protect us. That, I think, will be the overwhelming issue for which his presidency will be remembered: extensive damage to our country.

Most people think the Iraq war has increased the probability of an attack. However, it's difficult to put this aspect into financial terms.

Terrorists can endanger some of us, but the war on terror endangers us all. How much more can the Constitution be diminished before it is completely replaced by arbitrary government power?

We argued, as did the security services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the government ignoring such warnings.