Todd Young Quotes

I care about people's human rights and, as a country, we have a very proud record indeed. But I'm also realistic about what we can do... we can raise those issues with leaders and we can talk about those issues, and we do that.

It is both wrong and short-sighted to believe that we can better protect our national security interests by ignoring or sidelining human rights.

I refer to calls for humanitarian intervention in the affairs of another state - a new idea, this - even when they are made under the pretext of defending human rights and freedoms.

In the '90s, there was scant presidential leadership and insufficient domestic political mobilization for foreign policy grounded in human rights.

The promotion and preservation of human rights can and should be the driving force for world affairs.

Stability is a reasonable foreign policy goal, but not at the expense of human rights.

While supporting human rights in another country is important, fighting for our own safety is crucial.

If we don't like the Human Rights Council, then let's not fund it. We should pick and choose cafeteria style which groups we want to help.

I am waiting for the day when the German Bundestag debates the violation of human rights in Saudi Arabia.

Well, human security is a concept that I am very committed to enshrining in American foreign policy.

Big global players like China need to do a better job of respecting human rights.

I do think that every super power on the globe has a very poor record on human rights.

Abuse of human rights and international law demand resolution - whoever is responsible.

America should always stand for human rights and freedom, but not through endless military intervention.

Human rights in China should absolutely play a role in broader U.S. policy toward China. When we look the other way on fundamental issues of human rights, we are also responsible.

When human rights are systematically abused, it raises the question whether it may be legitimate in some circumstances for the international community to intervene within individual states as well as in conflicts between states.

Few governments in the world, for example, praise human rights more ardently than does the government of France, and few have a worse record of supporting tyrants and killers.

I would say issues around human rights - either you're going to take a hard stance, or you're not. You can't borrow money from China the way the U.S. has done and then turn around and say, 'But you've got a human-rights problem.' You can't be half pregnant.

As a consequence of these hesitations and of the vague character of such innovations, the Commission on Human Rights itself had doubts from the beginning about its role and its functions in general.

Upholding human rights is not merely compatible with fighting terrorism, it is essential.

It is one thing to be against unilateralism and against nonhumanitarian interventionism - but it is quite another thing to be against humanitarian interventionism.

Every State has the primary duty to protect its own population from grave and sustained violations of human rights, as well as from the consequences of humanitarian crises, whether natural or man-made.

There are, however, cases in which, while our own interests are not greatly involved, strong appeal is made to our sympathies.... in extreme cases action may be justifiable and proper. What form the action shall take must depend upon the circumstances of the case; that is, upon the degree of the atrocity and upon our power to remedy it.

I refuse to allow human rights to become a slogan to protect terrorists.

Armenians, as a people that have survived the Genocide, have a moral duty towards mankind and history in the prevention of genocides. We have done and will continue to do our best to support the persistent implementation of the Genocide Convention. Genocide cannot concern only one people, because it is a crime against humanity.