Anthony Zinni Quotes

There are two things to be considered with regard to any scheme. In the first place, Is it good in itself? In the second, Can it be easily put into practice?

I have concluded that the U.N. can do a few things well.

As proud and capable as it is, I think the idea that the military can build new countries is a tall order, and it's the sort of thing that we would only expect from a military that we have superresourced and thought of as supercapable.

In foreign policy, the only thing worse than not doing something is doing something that fails or makes the situation worse.

I want the troops from Great Britain and the U.S. to be successful, but by the same token, Afghanistan has always been a screw-up.

When you decide to get involved in a military operation in a place like Syria, you've got to be prepared, as we learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, to become the government, and I'm not sure any country, either the United States or I don't hear of anyone else, who's willing to take on that responsibility.

Wars are fought for political considerations. Military victory alone is never enough

Military action without political context is ineffective.

The job of nation building, the job of nation leadership in a difficult, complex coalition has worked.

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.

We have a strategic plan. It's called 'doing things'.

The U.N. is capable of endless process and mindless psychobabble, but as far as getting the job done on the ground, I just don't see them doing it.

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

I was never convinced that war was the best system to bring democracy to the country.

The U.N. is one of many competitors in a marketplace of global problem solving.

When we analyze this war in a materialistic way and ask when is it going to end and who will be the winner and the loser, it means that we do not see the endgame.

I think when war becomes your life, I think it's very difficult to have the proper perspective to be able to create a fully balanced policy.

Cooperation and collaboration among nations and countries can help in the process of development of promoting welfare as well as bringing peace and stability.

The Nobel Peace Prize is a powerful message. A durable peace is not a single achievement, but an environment, a process and a commitment.

For the security of the UK, it matters a lot for Somalia to become a more stable place.

It can be rebuilt if other countries with selfish interests will not meddle, as has been done in the past.

The U.N. is much more than the case of Iraq.

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

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.

From a very strategic level, I believe the military is part of the solution to better outcomes around the world, but at a higher level, it's really about economies.