Fyodor Lukyanov Quotes

We have a model that we're following, and it's the Libya model.

By linking these countries together in his 'axis of evil' speech, President Bush implied an identity between them not only in terms of their threat, but also in terms of the action necessary to deal with the threat. A lot of work will now need to be done to delink the three, and to show why military action against Iraq is so much more justified than against Iran and North Korea.

Romania will continue to fulfil its obligations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As we continue to make great progress in the war on terror, now more than ever, it is important that members of the international community stand-by and bolster the efforts of the emerging diplomatic leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The big risk to British lives in 2013 is in Afghanistan. Our troops, diplomats and aid workers have made a big contribution there. But while there is an end date for Western engagement, 2014, there isn't a proper end game.

It was essentially for self defence that we went to war in Afghanistan and would go to war in Iraq.

I don't think we would have had to be an occupying power if we had done the right thing in 1991.

I have never believed you go to war in Iraq, you go to war in Afghanistan, and believe that you can deal with those battlefields, those countries, in microcosms, or narrow channels.

To leave Afghanistan as a playground for terrorists and adventurers was simply not possible anymore.

Our country is being bled daily in an effort to create a democracy in a place where it never existed.

Thinking about the war now and the occupation later is not an acceptable solution.

History will judge the war against Iraq not by the brilliance of its military execution, but by the effectiveness of the post-hostilities activities

We’re not going to need as many people to do peacekeeping as we needed to fight the war.

Our troops shouldn't be mired in taking land for the Afghan military, providing force protection and fighting a permanent insurgency.

It's just a matter of time before we go into Iraq and get Saddam Hussein. I think just before Bush falls below 50 percent, that's when we'll be going.

By threatening war against Iran, Iraq and North Korea in his now-famous "Axis of Evil" address, the president painted himself into a corner. Either Bush now goes to war against one of these regimes, or he will be humiliated and exposed as a bellicose bluff.

Look at the results of regime change in Iraq. You can't possibly claim that it was successful.

Removing Saddam Hussein was the right decision early in my presidency, it is the right decision now, and it will be the right decision ever.

We are not at war with Egypt. We are in an armed conflict.

A fly cannot go in unless it stops somewhere; therefore weapons, fuel, food, money will not go to Afghanistan unless the neighbors of Afghanistan are working, are cooperating, either being themselves the origin or the transit.

It's not just Iraq - it's the Atlantic partnership which is at stake.

I think all of us who have been in Afghanistan on the ground multiple times know that what we're doing there on the ground is just not sustainable.

One of the enduring mysteries of America's occupation of Iraq is why a nation that so little relishes peacekeeping nonetheless refuses to turn the job over to the United Nations.

I've been to many countries and watched a number of conflicts or their residue, and I've served in the military.

So to recap: we may or may not be going to war with Iraq because Saddam may or may not have weapons of mass destruction, which he may or may not use, or pass to other terrorists groups with whom he may or may not have links.