Michael T. Flynn Quotes

Once you start a war, you have to win.

You need to think, when you get involved in wars, how you're going to get out of them.

Wars without military objectives have a tendency to go on forever.

We've made some mistakes in this country in times past - the Korean conflict proceeding that, some say proceeding the Persian Gulf War, where we were ambiguous as to what we would do.

To go to war, you must always think of, can you win?

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

Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper and safe judges of whether a war ought to be commenced, continued or concluded.

It’s damn easy to get into a war, but damned harder to extricate yourself once you get in.

Every aspect of war is political.

Wars are hard to exit. Once a war against poverty, crime, or terrorism is launched. Announcing a unilateral truce is usually political suicide. Presidents get boxed into absolutist policies in which compromise is impossible and victory is the only acceptable outcome.

One war at a time.

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

I don't think that anyone in the pages of 'War on Peace' is arguing that diplomacy is the replacement for military power. But, correctly, the job of the military is to think tactically.

Withdrawal of American troops must be a unilateral act, as the invasion of Vietnam by the American government was a unilateral act in the first place.

Because war is a competition involving life and death, and in which national security and vital interests are at stake, establishing an objective other than winning is not only counterproductive, but also irresponsible and wasteful. In some circumstances, it is also unethical.

I know I will be severely criticized by the interventionists in America when I say we should not enter a war unless we have a reasonable chance of winning.

Gen. Mattis is a warrior. What I appreciate about Gen. Mattis is he understands the principle that if you go to war, you go to war to win.

We should not fight wars without a clearly defined end state... when you go to war, it can't be a half-step.

For some years I have spent my time on exactly these questions - both in thinking about ways to prevent war, and in thinking about how to fight, survive, and terminate a war, should it occur.

War as Napoleon knew it just not possible any more. However, we're very unlikely to accept or recognize 'world peace' even when we get it.

I'm saying this as a Republican: In the White House, the effort that goes in and wherever these decisions are made, as to limit civilian casualties, is more probably than any in the history of the world, especially when you consider the history of warfare.

I can honestly say I've never sold any arms to a repressive foreign regime while reassuring everyone at home that the weapons will be used for nice things.

War is too serious a matter to leave to soldiers.

Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster.

Britain does not normally these days play a huge part in peacekeeping.