Joe Sestak Quotes

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.

The responsibility of commanding the invasion fell to me, and the task was assigned to my Army Group.

... even political opponents of evil governments show little gratitude for American invasion to modernize them..

You can’t undo a thousand years of history by sending military troops into a country.

We're not going to spread democracy at the business end of a M16 held by a 23 year old Marine.

We have to go in and win this war quickly, and then be prepared to help stabilize Iraq over an indefinite period, five to ten years, at a minimum, I believe, using a large fraction of American forces. This is a major undertaking that likely would require a total of 150,000 troops and could stay above 100,000 for several years

It is apparent that the Japanese military have initiated a widely extended movement of aggression only after careful preparation with a strategic goal in mind

Stability is when the U.K. and U.S. invade a country and impose the regime of their choice.

They will try to enter Baghdad, and I think this is where their graveyard will be.

The war in Iraq was unwinnable.

How can you lay siege to a whole country? Who is really under siege now? Baghdad cannot be besieged.

We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.

You don't spread democracy through the barrel of a gun.

I don't think a wise thing at this moment is for Israel to launch a military attack on Iran.

Iraq is a country that has been invaded. It's not a failing state that you want to help. It's a country that was functioning good or bad, with a horrible dictator, but you have invaded.

Instead of a few hundreds of thousands of men meeting each other in war, millions would now meet, and modern weapons would multiply manifold the power of destruction.

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.

Going to war against Iran - whether one calls such a move 'surgical' or 'total' - would be an extremely serious undertaking; with worldwide economic, military, diplomatic and human ramifications in both the short- and the long-term.

War - An act of violence whose object is to constrain the enemy, to accomplish our will.

They’re invading.

Anybody who believes that we can democratize Iran, Iraq and Syria by military force is living in a fantasy world.

It can’t be any other than madness to commence hostilities before we have established resources on a sure plan for certain and effectual military supplies. Men in that case will not be wanting.

Failure to subject the project, especially in its latter frenzied stages, to a cold and objective appraisal by the best operating talent available, particularly by those not involved in the operation Failure to advise the president, at an appropriate time, that success had become dubious and to recommend that the operation be therefore canceled Failure to recognize that the project had become overt and that the military effort had become too large to be handled by the agency alone

Anyone who takes the first step without planning the last step should not be allowed in the counsels of war.

From a military point of view it was a complete success