Immanuel Kant Quotes

I dare predict that the influence of the Treaty of Renunciation of War will be felt in a large proportion of all future international acts.

The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that different nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without prejudicing their real interests.

What is the possible benefit? Can this material save lives? Can it improve the quality of life in Iraq? Can it tend to shape our perceptions of how war should and should not be conducted? Can it shape our perceptions of who should be conducting war and in what manner? And the answer to that is a clear yes.

War has been more common than peace, and extended periods of peace have been rare in a world divided into multiple states

It will be just as easy for nations to get along in a republic of the world as it is for you to get along in the republic of the United States. Now, if Kansas and Colorado have a quarrel over a watershed they don't call out the national guard in each state and go to war over it. They bring suit in the Supreme Court and abide by its decision. There isn't a reason in the world why we can't do that internationally.

We [with Shindzo Abe] should understand that the results of that terrible tragedy of the 20th century, namely World War II, are enshrined in corresponding international documents, and finding a way to settle all disputes without destroying the entire foundation of international law that evolved as a result of World War II is a highly delicate task. Therefore, I would like to reiterate that we cannot second-guess the course, let alone the outcome of our negotiations.

We are seeking to avoid a new Cold War, avoid a new arms race, and, therefore, we continue to work for a more constructive relationship with Russia, including political dialogue with Russia.

The world cannot live at peace without the United Nations. For this reason: it creates a reasonable guarantee that all this change in the world, these tremendous political and economic developments, can be channelized, kept orderly. The United Nations is a mold that keeps the hot metal from spilling over.

War is the supreme failure of bridging the differences between nations.

The only way to end war is communication between people.

I would have oriented myself in case of Donald Trump according to what former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder said to then - U.S. President George W. Bush when the Americans launched a war that was in violation of international law. Schröder showed that a German chancellor can act in a clear and self-confident manner toward a U.S. president.

We go to war only to make peace. We never went to war with any other design. We carry the national conscience wherever we go.

A permanent peace cannot be prepared by threats but only by the honest attempt to create a mutual trust. However strong national armaments may be, they do not create military security for any nation nor do they guarantee the maintenance of peace.

History offers examples of winning in diplomacy after losing in war.

Look at you in war...There has never been a just one, never an honorable one, on the part of the instigator of the war.

If nations could overcome the mutual fear and distrust whose sombre shadow is now thrown over the world, and could meet with confidence and good will to settle their possible differences, they would easily be able to establish a lasting peace.

It may be that for a long time some nations will continue to fight each other, but the example of those nations who prefer arbitration to war, law courts to the battlefield, must sooner or later influence the belligerent powers and make war as unpopular as pugilism is now.

In short, Roberto privately concluded, if you would avoid wars, never make treaties of peace.

It is always easy to begin a war, but very difficult to stop one.

The only place you and I disagree is with regard to the bombing. You're so goddamned concerned about the civilians, and I (in contrast) don't give a damn. I don't care.". . . "I'd rather use the nuclear bomb. . . Does that bother you? I just want you to think big.

Wars are to the body politic, what drams are to the individual. There are times when they may prevent a sudden death, but if frequently resorted to, or long persisted in, they heighten the energies only to hasten the dissolution.

All history is the decline of war, though the slow decline. All that society has yet gained is mitigation; the doctrine of the right of war still remains.

I do not approve the extermination of the enemy; the policy of exterminating or, as it is barbarously said, liquidating enemies, is one of the most alarming developments of modern war and peace, from the point of view of those who desire the survival

Treaties are observed as long as they are in harmony with interests.

There's no war that will end all wars.