Stanley A. McChrystal Quotes

What I'm saying is it is our responsibility to exercise due diligence, to ask the tough questions, to get the evidence before we make those very costly decisions about how and when and where our military is used.

You could argue that war is always an irrational act, and yet many states enter into military conflict out of rational calculation or national interest or the stability or longevity of their regime.

In matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.

No American President should ever take any option off the table.

My friends doubt about this Danish business. I own the policy doubtful; but our right is clear, if self defense is clear. They would have become our enemies very shortly. Still, our national character is injured.

Presidents should plan for war before they threaten war.

The President has full responsibility, which cannot be shared, for military decisions in a world in which the difference between safety and cataclysm can be a matter of hours or even minutes.

Rushing to war is not a wise course of action.

Bob Gates has unusual standing in the debate about the Obama administration's foreign policy: He was defense secretary for both a hawkish President George W. Bush and a wary President Obama. He understood Bush's desire to project power and Obama's skepticism.

You just hope that we haven't soured an entire generation on the necessity, from time to time, of using force because Iraq has been such a debacle. That would be tragic because Iran is a grave threat.

I understand the risks associated with being a soldier. But I think as members of Congress, we should not intensify the chance that we'll have to commit troops to a military conflict unless it's absolutely necessary to defend the nation.

President-elect Trump wants to win them if you're going to be involved in a war. I don't think he wants to be involved in war, but when we are, he wants to win.

We're in danger of breaking our army and preventing our national leaders from having the flexibility to confront not just Iraq and Afghanistan, but crises around the globe.

War is much too serious a thing to be left to military men.

I have not taken a position on that nuclear option. My view is I'm not going to do anything until I come to that bridge. I'm not going to jump off the bridge until I come to it.

Your message is stupid. Iraq is not afraid of you or anyone else when it has a right to claim. What you warned about is not on Iraq's agenda. Iraq is vital and powerful. It is not an opportunistic country. Your administration has not learned from the past.

War is complicated and intense, and it takes time and thoughts to understand what it was.

There seems to be a sense in the British media that prime ministers enjoy going to war. They do not. The decision to send British soldiers into battle is the worst and most stomach-churning senior politicians have to take. It makes them wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat worrying if they have done the right thing.

Our presence in Afghanistan is not worth the price of any more American lives or treasure.

What I've learned, and will try to remember from now on, is that defending your country's credibility is never sufficient reason to fight a war.

The definition of a modern approach to war is the acknowledgement of individual lives lost.

I'm just very wary that once you start military operations in any country, it's very difficult to predict what the outcome is.

Among all the upheavals of war with al Qaeda, the surest indicator of the historic stakes is the ongoing rotation of top U.S. government managers - scores at a time - into a bunker deep underground and far from Washington.

Presidents do not go into war lightly. It's a tremendous responsibility in making decisions, and I know Bush must deeply believe this is the only course.

Our modern states are preparing for war without even knowing the future enemy.