Ehud Olmert Quotes

I think it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to intervene in Kosovo. I am in favor of an intervention. On some level, you have to say that at least somebody is doing something.

So while I will never minimize the costs involved in military action, I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America.

International law seeks to avoid the use of force but does not preclude it.

Today, war of necessity is used by critics of military action to describe unavoidable response to an attack like that on Pearl Harbor that led to our prompt, official declaration of war, while they characterize as unwise wars of choice the wars in Korea, Vietnam and the current war in Iraq.

We're not going to baby sit a civil war.

I’m not opposed to all wars; just dumb wars.

There are, however, cases in which, while our own interests are not greatly involved, strong appeal is made to our sympathies.... in extreme cases action may be justifiable and proper. What form the action shall take must depend upon the circumstances of the case; that is, upon the degree of the atrocity and upon our power to remedy it.

… the financial cost of a [military] strike isn’t a reason to acquiesce in mass murder in Syria.

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.

I did not support the U.S. decision to intervene with military force in Libya. The evidence was not persuasive that a large-scale massacre or genocide was either likely or imminent. Policies other than military intervention were never given a full chance.

We're in an illusion about what our role is in world politics and foreign affairs, and our policies are killing and destroying and doing a lot of things that we are not aware of.

Countries that intervene militarily rarely do so out of pure altruism.

And, perhaps most importantly, regional conflicts will again and again confront us with a cruel choice between costly engagement and costly indifference.

I think that war is diplomacy by other means, for sure, and there have been wars that have been fought for righteous reasons. There are wars that have had to be fought, and there will probably continue to be.

It is one thing to be against unilateralism and against nonhumanitarian interventionism - but it is quite another thing to be against humanitarian interventionism.

Regime change cannot be the objective of military action.

I don’t like genocide, but I would not commit our troops [to stop it.]

[The Kosovo intervention] would set a dangerous precedent to commit our troops to fighting civil wars for independence in every corner of the world.

Americans must not be given the impression that they have a duty to go to war against every evil leader in the world and against every transgression of the international order.

Be very careful of military action. You will be judged by how it ends—not by how it begins.

There are bad people all over the place, and we really can't have a war each time just to get rid of one of these bad people.

Wherever there's injustice, oppression, and suffering, America will show up six months late and bomb the country next to where it's happening.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations—acting individually or in concert—will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

Every war I have ever covered – Kosovo, Bosnia, Sierra Leone and Liberia – withstood all diplomatic efforts to end it until Western military action finally forced a resolution.

It’s not only time to It is time not to take force off the table… It is time to put force on the table and use it