Richard Butler Quotes

Sanctions aren't about weapons of mass destruction. People need to understand that.

We must have a world organization for the purpose of deliberation, but not for the purpose of waging wars and imposing sanctions.

Unilateral preemption should not in any way be the model for how we conduct international relations... It brings us into very dangerous territory and it could be used and abused by any other country. We need to continue to base our security on multilateralism, and on the Security Council.

Resolution 1441 does not give anyone the right to an automatic use of force. Russia believes that the Iraqi problem should be regulated by the Security Council, which carries the main responsibility for ensuring international security.

Most Americans have no memory of the designs Franklin Roosevelt's New Dealers had for postwar-American foreign policy. Human rights, self-determination and an end to European colonization in the developing world, nuclear disarmament, international law, the World Court, the United Nations - these were all ideas of the progressive left.

If it must come to war, I argue that the world should respond through the United Nations. This is the best way to give legitimacy to the use of force in these circumstances.

If the American people are to say yes to U. N. peace keeping, the United Nations must know when to say no.

The mobilization of world opinion and methods of negotiation should be developed and used by every nation in order to strengthen the United Nations. Then if we are forced into war, it will be because there has been no way to prevent it through negotiation and the mobilization of world opinion. In which case we should have the voluntary support of many nations, which is far better than the decision of one nation alone, or even of a few nations.

The United Nations inspectors cannot tell us anything that we do not already know nor can they galvanize the world to the action that should be taken.

Genuine association of interest on the part of the great powers must precede the transformation of the united nations military alliance into a political society of nations.

Note the three most important Cabinet positions. Rice said that it was better to find the weapons of mass destruction than to see a mushroom cloud.

I believe in not attacking a country pre-emptively unless you're sure of what you're doing and you're working with allies.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

In the euphoria after the Cold War, there was a misplaced notion that the UN could solve every problem anywhere.

Let us face it, the U.N. has failed. It has failed in its mission to promote world peace.

We are a country that has many friends, many allies, when we operate in the world, we operate with friends and allies that's been true for decades and if we wind up going to war in Iraq it will be true in Iraq.

Of course the United States and Russia have different interests. Nevertheless, both are strategic partners.

We have helped to organize the United Nations. We believe it will stop aggressor nations from starting wars. Because we believe it, we intend to support the United Nations organization with all the power and resources we possess.

What makes the United Nations an appropriate source of legitimacy for intervention is that it is the only place where the claims of the strong are put through the test of justification in front of the weak.

The question was never whether the United States, E.U., NATO, Arab League, U.N. Security Council, and African Union could together using economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and military attacks to bring Qaddafi down. The question was always how much time, how much blood, and what damage to NATO.

The British can not alone act as the policemen of the world.

The old NATO was primarily configured to deter a Soviet attack against its members; the new NATO is focused on countering any threats such as terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, rogue states, and other dangers that emanate from beyond Europe’s borders.

When states decide to use force to deal with broader threats to international peace and security, they need the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations.

Great powers engage.

The U.S and England are not worthy of security council membership. Those who want good relations with the Iranian people should bow and surrender to its right and might.