Robert Toombs Quotes

The National Security Council's real role is to coordinate the various activities of the government of the United States in the furtherance of American foreign policy.

So I think that our foreign policy, the president's strong and principled leadership when it comes to the war against terror and foreign policy is going to be an asset.

Congress cannot—nor should it—run foreign policy on a day-to-day basis. That is a truism.

As a senator, I play an important role in crafting foreign policy.

My father was a Foreign Service officer, a diplomat and an Arabist who spent virtually all his career in the Near East, as it was called in the State Department. So I spent most of my childhood among the Israelis and the Arabs of Palestine, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

I said it was my feeling that the American people would struggle for peace, and that has since been underscored by the President of these United States.

In our modern world of interdependent nations, hardly any state can wage war successfully without raising loans and buying war materials of every kind in the markets of other nations.

My politics are of a practical kind - the integrity of the country, the supremacy of the Federal government, an honorable peace, or none at all.

The advance guard in the campaign for peace that America wages today must be the State Department.

So with the end of the Cold War, it became increasingly obvious that there was no basis upon which any decision was being made, not in the White House, and certainly because of that, not in the Congress.

When a peace agreement is concluded between the Lebanese government and Israel, we would surely disagree with the Lebanese government about that, but we would not make any turmoil out of it.

The principles that should guide American foreign policy are simple: the world is safer when America leads, only strength ensures peace and freedom, and America must stand with its allies and challenge its adversaries.

I used to have a little saying I used when people said, 'What are your priorities?' I'd give them a bit of government alphabet soup. I'd say 'CTCPROW: Counterterrorism, counterproliferation, rest of the world.'

There are legitimate, even powerful arguments, to be made against the Bush administration's foreign policy. But those arguments are complicated, hard to explain, and, in the end, not all that sensational.

The U.S. government engages with many countries around the world in official dialogues on human rights.

Fundamentally, I believe that the U.S. can improve its international standing and its national security by expanding trade and strengthening its relationships with moderate Muslim countries.

I would have a democratic process for people to get together and talk about the way they want the government to conduct business with China.

In a sensitive matter, where its own ignorance could scarcely have been greater, Congress would have been better advised to leave the conduct of foreign policy in the hands of those who have been constitutionally charged with it.

The ability of the Congress of the United States to have any strategic view [of foreign policy] is virtually nil.

Foreign policy is too important to be left up to foreign service officers.

Congress cannot and should not run foreign policy.

The Emperor has the option to communicate with the help of the Italian government for all matters that he wants with the kings of Europe. [Aramaic Version] The Emperor consents to use the Italian government for all the business he does with all the other Powers or Governments. [Italian Version]

It is the President alone who must make the major decisions of our foreign policy.

Between countries -- regardless of whether they are democratic or authoritarian -- there will need to be an explanation, either for publics or for powerful constituencies

My friends doubt about this Danish business. I own the policy doubtful; but our right is clear, if self defense is clear. They would have become our enemies very shortly. Still, our national character is injured.