Tzipi Livni Quotes

For the most part, I think American armies are awfully good in the business of protecting civilians, of not going over the line.

The last thing we want to do is to go into an area and inflict unnecessary civilian casualties. One is too many.

Protecting Afghan civilians is the cornerstone of our mission.

If blue-helmeted UN peacekeepers show up in your town or village and offer to protect you, run. Or else get weapons. Your lives are worth so much less than theirs.

According to the laws of war, a warring party can just walk away from civilian harm that they have caused.

War is no picnic. Wars should be prevented, and if you can't prevent them, you have to put them off.

In conflict zones in particular, we need personnel who wear the badge of the United States, are a part of our official military command, and are always held accountable for their actions.

One of the fundamental pillars of international humanitarian law is that proper distinction should be made between military targets and civilians. That is why indiscriminate bombing, let alone the deliberate targeting of residential areas or agricultural infrastructure, is considered a war crime.

I think it is tragic that a situation should arise where civilians on any side are killed. But it is almost a cliche to say that it is virtually unavoidable and this isn't unique to us alone.

I don't think you can perpetrate war crimes with defensive weapons, with air defense systems.

The world must know that America holds to the highest standards of military conduct and human rights protections. Anything less is unacceptable.

President Bush and his commanders announced early in the conflict that the Conventions applied.

No, the United States does not target civilians.

An order to fire on people that do not fire on you is a completely illegal order.

This war no longer has anything to do with knightly conduct or with the agreements of the Geneva Convention.

No matter how many people you kill, using a machine gun in battle is not a war crime because it does not cause unnecessary suffering; it simply performs its job horrifyingly well.

I have known war as few men now living know it. It's very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes.

If we say the Geneva Convention is obsolete, then what do others who have our soldiers say?

I will protect all Colombians regardless of whether the attacks come from guerrillas or paramilitaries.

It is a rule of international law that weapons and methods of warfare which do not discriminate between combatants and civilians should never be used.

What is and isn't justified by military necessity is, naturally, open to interpretation. One of the key concepts, though, is the law of proportionality. A military attack that results in civilian casualties - 'collateral damage' - is acceptable as long as the military benefits outweigh the price that is paid by humanity.

What is the Geneva Convention on wars! I have never read it.

I'm not anti-war. I served in a war, and I served proudly. But just or not, necessary or not, war is the industrial-scale slaughter of other humans.

Police do not belong in war zones.

Perhaps the most basic rule of the law of armed conflict is that civilians and civilian objects must not be made the object of direct attack, although incidental injuries caused to such persons or objects in the course of a legitimate attack must be proportionate to the purpose of the attack.