Chris Matthews Quotes

War might be instantly banished from Europe, would its nations regard themselves as one great society, and by mutual consent, erect a court for the trial and decisions of their respective disputes.

They were unable to stand up and say: 'Here's our policy. It's Unite the world against terrorism.'

As we have seen, the wireless and the airplane have made the world so small and nations so dependent on each other that the only alternative to war is the United States of the World.

A war against terrorism is an impracticable conception if it means fighting terrorism with terrorism.

World federation is an ideal that will not die. More and more people are coming to realize that peace must be more than an interlude if we are to survive; that peace is a produce of law and order; that law is essential if the force of arms is not to rule the world.

No nation is so great as to be able to afford, in the long run, to remain outside an increasingly universal League of Nations.

We can have a World War, I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn't have a World Party.

We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today's complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not.

I want to highlight once again that when we talk about the fight against terrorism and the circles around it and when we talk about ensuring the safety and the peace of all, we are not talking about fantasies.

To solve the problem of organizing world peace we must establish world law and order.

The war on terror, if this is a war on terror, can only be won by a sincere regional and international cooperation. All have to believe they have something at stake and work together. In the absence of this it will become political and interest-oriented.

International cooperation, multilateralism is indispensable.

What I want to make clear though is that we oppose terrorism in any form. However, any operation against terrorism should be under the framework of the United Nations and follow the fundamental principles of international laws.

If the U.N. didn't exist, we'd be inventing it right now.

While there's been much progress on terrorism, there's still much work to do and it is very important that the countries work together in order to address this threat together.

As far as the international issues are concerned, the most important thing is the state of the transatlantic relationships, Euro-Atlantic relationships: how to develop them and how to strengthen them further.

We remain united with the British, and our allies around the world, in our resolve to defeat terrorism and bring those who commit these acts to justice.

The logic of collective security is flawless, provided it can be made to work under the conditions prevailing on the international scene... The odds, however, are strongly against such a possibility.

The present U.N. must be annihilated by our power. That is the stage for Communists. We must make a new U.N.

We would have to invent the U.N. if we did not have it, which is not an original thought.

We are ready to engage in international co-operation against terrorism with a view to safeguarding national interests and regional security and stability.

However difficult it may be to bring it about, some form of world government, with agreed international law and means of enforcing the law, is inevitable.

Terror cannot be finished by one war.

Nothing can be done about a rogue state unless the great powers stand together … There may be other things that the great powers can compete over, but not over dealing with rogue states and their methods of mass destruction.

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.