Central Intelligence Agency Quotes

'Bombing Afghanistan back into the Stone Age' was quite a favourite headline for some wobbly liberals. The slogan does all the work. But an instant's thought shows that Afghanistan is being, if anything, bombed out of the Stone Age.

You know what I had a problem with? The war - the war in Afghanistan.

The American people have decided that it was a mistake to choose to go to war in Iraq.

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.

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

In the 1980s, the U.S. Army invaded two Caribbean countries, Grenada and Panama, to depose leaders who had defied Washington.

The Iraq war was not necessary.

The Sudan bombing is a blot on the Clinton presidency, and a blot it ought to remain.

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.

A great many people simply do not at this moment see that Cuba presents so grave and compelling a threat to our national security as to justify a course of action which much of the world will interpret as calculated aggression against a small nation.

When the United States bombs South Vietnam, it is defending South Vietnam.

…we had a very desperate situation, or we thought it was at least, in Central America, and we had to get rid of a Communist government which had taken over, and our early efforts were defeated by a bad accident and we had to help, some send help right away.

Anti-U.S. sentiment has been born out of many grievances - support and weapons for such dictators as Mubarak, unquestionable support for Israel in its occupation of Palestine, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen that kill more civilians than intended targets.

The American claim that the bombing of North Vietnam was directed against military targets does not withstand direct investigation.

Bombing Syria will achieve nothing.

How will the bombing of Baghdad, a city of five million, accomplish a regime change?

It is not surprising that most Pakistanis do not support America's bombardment of Afghanistan. The Afghans are neighbours on the brink of starvation and devastated by war. America has shown itself to be untrustworthy, a superpower that uses its values as a scabbard for its sword.

Being an occupier is not good for anybody's global standing. It is a catalyst for terrorist recruitment.

The war in Iraq has been extremely divisive here at home, and has also divided the world community.

I don't think Russia could start a war by attacking any of the NATO member states.

One of the sharp parallels is that neither Vietnam nor Iraq was the slightest threat to America's national security.

My anger with the US was not at first, that they had used that weapon - although that anger came later.

I consider Bush's decision to call for a war against terrorism a serious mistake. He is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies, and one cannot lead a war against a network if the term war is to retain any definite meaning.

It is now conventional wisdom that Americans do not care why we went to war in Iraq, that it is enough that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein.

First, we could have defied both of them and could have gone to war against both of these nations for this violation of international law and interference with our neutral rights.