Charles James Fox Quotes

I'm a professor of national security studies, and I know a lot more about fighting than Rumsfeld does.

There are a number of World War II historians I admire: Cornelius Ryan, Mark Stoler, Antony Beevor, to name a few. As for generals, there are those I admire as combat leaders and others I admire because they're great fun to write about.

The object of a general is not to fight, but to conquer: he fights enough who obtains the victory.

It is surely no coincidence that Napoleon's two greatest heroes were Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar. In certain respects, he would outdo them both.

There are not fifty ways of fighting, there is only one: to be the conqueror.

Who could not conquer with such troops as these?

If you don't understand weapons you don't understand fighting. If you don't understand fighting you don't understand war. If you don't understand war you don't understand history. And if you don't understand history you might as well live with your head in a sack.

If they attack, we shall fight to the end. If the rockets had remained, we would have used them all and directed them against the very heart of the United States, including New York, in our defense against aggression. But we haven't got them, so we shall fight with what we've got.

I think if Donald Trump should become commander in chief, we all want that in a leader, somebody who is able to fight back.

The laurels of victory are at the point of the enemy bayonets. They must be plucked there; they must be carried by a hand-to-hand fight if one really means to conquer.

It seems to me the worst possible concept, militarily, that we would simply stay there, resisting aggression, so-called...it seems to me that the way to "resist aggression" is to destroy the potentialities of the aggressor to continually hit you...When you say, merely, "we are going to continue to fight aggression," that is not what the enemy is fighting for. The enemy is fighting for a very definite purpose-to destroy our forces.

Mankind has had ten-thousand years of experience at fighting and if we must fight, we have no excuse for not fighting well.

Americans tended to think of war as something that had to be done from time to time, for a particular purpose or goal. They fought not for the sake of fighting but for the sake of winning.

I am of Virginia and all my professional life I have studied of Lee and Jackson

Renown awaits the commander who first restores artillery to its prime importance on the battlefield.

After the battle in Pharsalia, when Pompey was fled, one Nonius said they had seven eagles left still, and advised to try what they would do. "Your advice," said Cicero, "were good if we were to fight jackdaws.

Battles decide everything.

It takes more courage to send men into battle than to fight the battle yourself.

Many opportunities have been lost and hundreds of valuable lives uselessly sacrificed for want of a strict observance of discipline. Its object is to enable an army to bring promptly into action the largest possible number of its men, in good order and under the control of their officers. Its effects are visible in all military history, which records the triumphs of discipline and courage far more frequently than those of numbers and resources.

No man was ever a good soldier but the man who goes into the battle determined to conquer, or not to come back from the battle field (cheers). No other principle makes a good soldier.

No ruler should put troops into the field merely to gratify his own spleen; no general should fight a battle simply out of pique.

The United States has never entered a serious war, and has never been victorious.

In his fairy dreams of war [Thaddeus] always made conquest the sure end of his battles.

The greatest of the arts is the conquering of men.