Wikiquote

Talk:War

Latest comment: 1 year ago by HouseOfChange in topic Removing offtopic, nonnotable, nonquotable quotes but preserving them here, so that others can check my judgment
Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the War page.

Should we create a peace page? I think AJ Muste's "There is no way to peace—peace is the way" should be there, and not [on] a war quotes page. - Jeandré, 2004-06-13t22:19z

I have just begun a page for Peace, and will add much more to it tonight. One need not ask to create a page on any theme. Just do it. But War definitely is deserving of a page as well, and collecting quotes about it is not necessarily an act of glorification of it: "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its stupidity." ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower (Forgot to sign previously, and re-reading your comment I realized you weren't arguing against having a War page, but that Muste's quote should not be there. I think it should be on both pages, as it involves commentary upon the processes of both.) Peace. ~ Kalki 23:08, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Personal interpretations do not belong in articles

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Removed "[The diffirence being that terrorists deliberate target civilians and western countries target military targets, if civilians die then that is an accident (as its not intended) and to blaim on the person who put the military target near the civilians. Also terrorists use civilians as human shields. Note: if enemy fighters hide in a school it become a military target (bunker/barracks).]" from the following quote:

  • "When people decry civilian deaths caused by the U.S government, they're aiding propaganda efforts. In sharp contrast, when civilian deaths are caused by bombers who hate America, the perpetrators are evil and those deaths are tragedies. When they put bombs in cars and kill people, they're uncivilized killers. When we put bombs on missiles and kill people, we're upholding civilized values. When they kill, they're terrorists. When we kill, we're striking against terror." - Norman Solomon from "Orwellian Logic 101 - A Few Simple Lessons".

Personal interpretations belong in discussions not in articles. The authors interpretation of the quote seems to be way off in my opinion. Also, the quote itself (and the two following it) don't seem to fit in 'War' at all, but I have no idea where to put them and will leave that to someone else.

Point of order: When is someone important enough, or their comments pithy/snarky/cogent enough to rate inclusion on the page? Or is there just a star chamber of political correctness one must pass through? Mlorrey 21:53, 9 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Can't remember the source of this one

edit

I know it was an Amrican general around the time of the second world war, the quote went something like: "No-one ever won a war by dying for his country. The idea is to make the other poor guy die for his" Anyone know the exact wording and who it comes from? 81.102.41.34 22:26, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The quote is from George S. Patton, and it's already included in the article. The quote, as rendered here, is: "Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country, he won it by making the other bastard die for his." I've also heard it as: "No poor dumb bastard... some other poor dumb bastard....." --Chris H 22:26, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

The quote is from Francis Ford Coppola's 1970 movie "Patton" as voiced by George C. Scott. The line "Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country." is in the movie's opening speech. It may be artistic license as I haven't found anything attributing a similar quote to the actual General Patton. You can listen to it in context at http://vodpod.com/watch/1693590-patton-in-typography

Several deletions

edit

I'll spare a whole appraisal here, but I removed several quotes of a nature I felt unbefitting to this page. To be on this page, a quote should, in my mind:

a) Make a philosophical, moral or technical comment about war and war alone b) Refer not to a war, but war in general c) While being pro-war or anti-war, it ought nevertheless to refrain from any political commentary beyond that, and any commentary remaining ought to be directly-related to the instigation or conduct of warfare

With those guidelines in mind, I've excised several quotes. Regardless of who said them or in what context, I looked at the quote itself:

  • Some were quotes regarding terrorism or "the war on terror", which cannot be counted as a quote about war, but rather about terrorism - the Michael Solomon quote qualified here.
  • Some, like the Michael Moore quote, were paraphrases, and therefore were removed for that reason (though not for ideological ones, as it did not specifically name a war or leader).
  • Some spoke of a specific war, i.e. the Robert Miller quote regarding Korea, and as it did so in the quote itself I removed it. The Howard Zinn about Iraq was also removed.
  • One referred to the journalism regarding the war, and mentioned America specifically, and this was removed.
  • Besides that - removed both for non-topicality and mention of a specific nation, a quote regarding Prussia was also removed.
  • One had no source cited (despite being a good quote) and was removed - if anyone knows who said, "War is half of the truth. Peace is the other half. Which side are you?", it ought to be reinserted.
  • Three quotes - a Churchill, a Blix and a System of a Down - may or may not have had to do with war, but in any case were not specifically about it, and were removed.

Those that remained were pertinent due to the content of the quotes, for example the Anthony Zinni one, which naturally was about a specific war but did not say such in the context of the quote, only spoke of war, and therefore stayed. Others were said by or about specific wars, but as the quotes themselves referred not to a war but war in general, they remained - the Eisenhower quotes, etc. The Heinleins stayed because, although they pushed an ideological agenda (which of these don't?) they said nothing specific about specific wars but did discuss war. Any questions, please reply. ~ (posted by User:Wally)

It seems that there is a second quote of Edwin Starr's song 'War' in the fictional section. I believe that we should get rid of the fictional quote. The words of Edwin Star are as much fiction as the words of Trotsky or Churchill. ~ (posted by Anroth (may be joining))

can we make sure that instead of outright deleting these quotes they make their way to the correct sections, i.e. wars on iraq/WW2/prussian military, whatever is appropriate and we put a nice table of links at the bottom, because i'm sure several people come here to view those quotes. ~ (posted by User:Pluke)
I can agree with most of the removals that occured, but not all of them, nor all of the reasons given for removal. The statement made by Moore in his movie has become famous and notable in itself, even if it is a paraphrase or an adaptation of other statements, and I can agree that if things are removed as being far too specific about a particular war, that are worthy of inclusion elsewhere, they should be put into such articles where they would be more appropriate. I agree that most of the "Theme" pages should probably be developed so that they have links for "Sub-Themes", related issues, and perhaps a list at the bottom of the pages to some prominent proponents or opponents of issues related to the theme itself. There is certainly a great deal of work that can be done on this project on many pages by many people, and some care should be taken in both adding quotes and removing them to insure that they do have placement where they are appropriate. ~ Kalki 20:38, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
All quotes still remain in the history, and so can (and should) be moved, with minimal effort.
Where the Michael Moore quote is concerned, I do not dispute the fact that it has become famous (although I rather wish he hadn't butchered Orwell so); I removed it because the quote was a paraphrase of another author, and therefore I did not feel it warranted continued inclusion. If there is general agreement, however, I'll replace it. Wally 03:27, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Benito Mussolini

edit

"War alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and imposes the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to make it. " Is it alright to add this?

that sounds very appropriate, please go ahead --Pluke 18:23, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"God is on the side with the most divisions."

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  • Who originally said it?
  • I know a Kaiser was attributed to saying that "God is not on the side with the most divisions, he is on the side that can shoot straightest." (which might be a good quote contrasting the arbitrariness of both terrorism and WMD vs. personal combat and guided munitions.)
  • Stalin asked how many divisions the Pope had.
  • "the most divisions" is commonly used in paraphrasing commentary.

Please contribute suggestions and sources, thanks. Mlorrey 22:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

MSN Encarta highlight for 30 May 2005

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A list of 15 War Quotes is highlighted at MSN Encarta. See [1]. Ceyockey 17:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Pro-War & Anti-War Quotations

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Do pro-war and anti-war quotations belong together in the same page? Shouldn't they be seperated somehow?

Not really, since sometimes they can be interpreted as either. 140.88.94.55 01:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Plato Misquote?

edit

The quote "only the dead have seen the end of war" - Plato, may not actually belong to Plato. It was misattributed to him by Gen. Douglas MacArthur in an farewell speech to some cadets at West Point academy, and probably from there to the opening credits at the start of the film Black Hawk Down. I believe the privilege of this quote goes to George Santayana. I don't claim this to be my own first hand information but it seems to be the general concensus after a little bit of research. Just thought I'd stir some trouble, but perhaps someone more knowledgable could throw their eye on this?

Here's one reference: http://plato-dialogues.org/faq/faq008.htm

and any search through google will give similar arguements from different sources.

Sections

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Does anyone think there should be sections? Right now the quotes are a bit jumbled here and there. I don't have too many ideas - the only one I can see is by time period. Anyone? 81.0.175.34 15:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

"every generation should experience war"

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think Adolf Hitler said it once, I searched google for at least a minute - did not find it. Someone else? PER9000 09:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

source please

edit

Anybody knows [the source of] "In a war powerful states act like robbers, weak states act like prostitutes"? Alberto

There are two almost identical Leon Trotsky quotes right after each other.

Latin Quote Claim?

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article claims that this latin text:

Epitoma Rei Militaris — Vegetius.

is the basis for the following expresion:

If you want peace, prepare for war — an ancient Roman expression, derived from "Epitoma Rei Militaris — Vegetius"

Now, my friend who knows latin thinks that the latin quote literately means "Epitomy of the miltary [thing, event, or property] - active", so I'm curious if someone has a more authoritative source.

--Imjustmatthew 19:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

The 1st Duke of Wellington is Real!

edit

So why is his quote in the 'War in fiction' section?

Hmmm

edit

Anyone know the source for "The history of the world is a history of war"?

Wiesel quote in The Watchtower

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  • From time immemorial, people have talked about peace without achieving it. Do we simply lack enough experience? Though we talk peace, we wage war. Sometimes we even wage war in the name of peace. . . . War may be too much a part of history to be eliminated—ever.

Is it appropriate to source a quotation to a publication like The Watchtower? I'm not talking about their religious orientation; I'm concerned about their editorial standards, and the neutrality of their POV. MitchS (talk) 15:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Several points about this situation:
  1. The citation given is misleading because Wiesel is not the author of the cited article. To cite that article one should say "as quoted in" or "as attributed in", depending on whether The Watchtower cites its source.
  2. The Watchtower very often does not cite its sources (except for bible citations), and has published numerous misattributions and misquotations. It also has a history of cherry-picking things out of context to suit their POV when it misrepresents the author's intent.
  3. When The Watchtower does not identify its source, I think it should not be cited by Wikiquote. I regard its unsourced attributions as no more reliable than anonymous graffiti.
  4. When The Watchtower does identify its source, that source should be verified and cited by Wikiquote. There is no reason to cite an unreliable source when a reliable one has been identified.
In this particular case, the quotation given is a misquote of a piece Wiesel published in Parade Magazine. I will correct the quotation and cite the source authored by Wiesel himself. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Unsourced

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
If you can provide a precise and verifiable source for any quote on this list please move it to War.
  • When two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.
    • East African proverb, quoted in print as early as 1918
  • It was close; but that's the way it is in war. You win or lose, live or die — and the difference is just an eyelash.
  • Men grow tired of sleep, love, singing and dancing sooner than war. (Homer)
  • In war, truth is the first casualty. (Aeschylus)
  • War spares not the brave but the cowardly. (Anacreon)
  • To lead untrained people to war is to throw them away. (Confucius)
  • We make war so that we may live in peace. Aristotle
  • I think the slain care little if they sleep or rise again. (Aeschylus)
  • War, as the saying goes, is full of false alarms. (Aristotle)
  • War gives the right of the conquerors to impose any conditions they please upon the vanquished. (Gaius Julius Caesar)
  • The sinews of war are infinite money. (Cicero)
  • Only the brave enjoy noble and glorious deaths. (Dionysius)
  • The true contempt of an invader is shown by deeds of valour in the field. (Hermocrates of Syracuse)
  • When there is mutual fear men think twice before they make aggression upon one another. (Hermocrates of Syracuse)
  • They have an abundance of gold and silver, and these make war, like other things, go smoothly. (Hermocrates of Syracuse)
  • Nobody is driven in to war by ignorance, and no one who thinks he will gain anything from it is deterred by fear. (Hermocrates of Syracuse)
  • In peace, sons bury their fathers; in war, fathers bury their sons. (Herodotus)
  • War is the only proper school of the surgeon. ([[]])
  • Ye gods, what dastards would our host command? Swept to the war, the lumber of the land. (Homer)
  • To those that flee comes neither power nor glory. (Homer)
  • A wise man in times of peace prepares for war. (Horace)
  • And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.(Isaiah 2:4)
  • The outcome corresponds less to expectations in war than in any other case whatsoever. (Livy)
  • To brave men, the prizes that war offers are liberty and fame. (Lycurgus of Sparta)
  • The man who runs away will fight again. (Menander)
  • A small country cannot contend with a great; the few cannot contend with the many; the weak cannot contend with the strong. (Mencius)
  • Soldiers do not like being under the command of one who is not of noble birth. (Onosander)
  • To blunder twice is not allowed in war. (Latin proverbs)
  • I am more afraid of our own mistakes than of our enemies' designs. (Pericles)
  • He conquers who endures. (Persius)
  • After the war is over, make alliances. (Greek proverbs)
  • An alliance with the powerful is never to be trusted. (Fedrus)
  • Every care must be taken that our auxiliaries, being stronger than our citizens, may not grow too much for them and become savage beasts. (Plato)
  • An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep. (Arab proverbs)
  • A good general not only sees the way to victory, he also knows when victory is impossible. (Polybius)
  • In war we must always leave room for strokes of fortune, and accidents that cannot be foreseen. (Polybius)
  • Pardon one offence and you encourage the commission of many. (Publilius Syrus)
  • We should provide in peace what we need in war. (Publilius Syrus)
  • Necessity knows no law except to conquer. (Publilius Syrus)
  • In war we must be speedy. (Silius Italicus)
  • A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house. (Socrates)
  • The cruelty of war makes for peace. (Publius Statius)
  • Great empires are not maintained by timidity. (Tacitus)
  • A bad peace is even worse than war. (Tacitus)
  • The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise. (Tacitus)
  • War is not so much a matter of weapons as of money. (Thucydides)
  • A dead enemy always smells good. (Alus Vitellus)
  • In war important events result from trivial causes. (Gaius Julius Caesar
  • Wars are the dread of mothers. (Horace)
Bella detesta matribus.
Bella, horida bella!
  • The fortunes of war are always doubtful. (Seneca)
  • Valour in war is the contempt of death and pain. (Tacitus)
  • It is a sweet and seemly thing to die for one's country. (Horace)
Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.
  • Let him who desires peace prepare for war. (Vegetius)
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
  • The blade itself incites to violence. (Homer)
  • Who was the first that forged the deadly blade? Of rugged steel his savage soul was made. (Tibullus)
  • So ends the bloody business of the day. (Homer)
  • What coast knows not our blood? (Horace)
Quae caret ora cruore nostro?
Alta sedent civilis vulnera dextrae.
  • They make it a desert, and call it peace. (Tacitus)
  • Conquered, we conquer. (Plautus
Victi vincimus.
Flet victus, victor interiit.
Timidi mater non flet.
  • A glorious death is his who for his country falls. (Homer)
  • All warfare is based on deception. (Sun Tzu)
  • The god of war hates those who hesitate. (Euripides)
  • The homeland is restored by iron, not gold. (Camillus, after Brennus sacked Rome, as quoted by Livy)
Non auro, sed ferro recuperanda est patria.
  • Woe to the vanquished! (Brennus, Celtic leader, as quoted by Livy)
Vae victis!
  • The true contempt of an invader is shown by deeds of valour in the field. (Hermocrates of Syracuse)
  • An adversary is more hurt by desertion than by slaughter. (Vegetius)
  • The strong did what they could, and the weak suffered what they must. (Thucydides)
  • The sinews of war are infinite money. (Cicero)
  • He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious. (Sun Tzu)
  • If a man does not strike first, he will be the first struck. (Athenogoras of Syracuse)
  • A wise man in times of peace prepares for war. (Horace)
  • In war, numbers alone confer no advantage. Do not advance relying on sheer military power. (Sun Tzu)
  • The purpose of all war is ultimately peace. (Saint Augustine
  • Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head. (Euripides)
  • If a plague asks you for a coin, give it two and make it go away. (Punic proverbs)
  • There can be no covenants between men and lions, wolves and lambs can never be of one mind. (Homer)
  • In war there is no prize for runner-up. (Seneca)
  • To everything there is a season; and a time for every purpose under Heaven... a time of war and a time of peace. (The Bible, Ecclesiastes 3:1-8)
  • Fight for your country - that is the best, the only omen! (Homer)
  • Now in place of the young men urns and ashes are carried home to houses of the fighters. (Aeschylus).
  • Beware lest in your anxiety to avoid war you obtain a master. (Demosthenes.
  • A sword is never a killer, it's a tool in the killer's hands. (Seneca)
  • A man that relies upon thirty armed legions for his matters is always right. (Favorinus, Celtic intellectual answering to Adrianus when the emperor reproved that he gave him too many times rightness)
  • A spider, when it catches a fly, thinks to have done something great, and so does whoever captures a Sarmatian. Both don't realize that they are only two little thieves. (Marcus Aurelius, fighting the Sarmatians)
  • When all the world is overcharged with inhabitants, then the last remedy of all is war, which provideth for every man, by victory or death.
  • You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
  • Only through war a man can achieve absolute fullness. And only a soldier that risks his life willingly will be able to experience the ultimate illumination that comes with war. Living on the edge, giving in to the bestial instincts that haunt the back of each man's head, leaving your body on the way between the enemy and your family, friends and nation – with a clear conscience that supports the moral backbone of each warrior.
  • Let us make war, since evidently, you have found peace intolerable.
  • Don't rejoice in his defeat, you men. Although the world stood up and stopped the Bastard, the Bitch that bore him is in heat again.
  • I have not come to you except for the purpose of restoring your rights from the hands of the oppressors...
  • I want war. To me all means will be right. My motto is not "Don't, whatever you do, annoy the enemy." My motto is "Destroy him by all and any means." I am the one who will wage the war!
  • Originally war was nothing but a struggle for pasture grounds. To-day war is nothing but a struggle for the riches of nature. By virtue of an inherent law, these riches belong to him who conquers them.
  • I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war, no matter whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterwards, whether he told the truth or not. When starting and waging war it is not right that matters but victory. Close your hearts to pity. Act brutally, eighty million people must obtain what is their right. Their existence must be made secure. The strongest man is right.
  • Generals think war should be waged like the tourneys of the Middle Ages. I have no use for knights. I need revolutionaries.
  • Do you think it's so nice to sit in prison after ten years of war for the Fatherland? If I would be God, I would do it differently!
  • We shall meet again. I have believed in God. I obeyed the laws of war and was loyal to my flag.
  • It is the curse of propaganda during war that one works only with black and white.
  • We have lost a battle, but I assure to you that we will not lose the war!
  • Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
  • Well, it was war - I could not have carried on as an administrative officer if I had let myself be swayed emotionally by my feelings.
  • We are in no position to withstand a prolonged static war. Wherever the allies concentrate their forces they will break through. For us there can be no question of military victory or of winning the war. Our only hope is to hold on long enough to allow some development on the political front...
  • In the burning and devastated cities, we daily experienced the direct impact of war. It spurred us to do our utmost...the bombing and the hardships that resulted from them did not weaken the morale of the populace.
  • A pre-emptive war in 'defense' of freedom would surely destroy freedom, because one simply cannot engage in barbarous action without becoming a barbarian, because one cannot defend human values by calculated and unprovoked violence without doing mortal damage to the values one is trying to defend.
  • War never ends, it only pales, reddens, blackens, and lightens again.
  • A really great people, proud and high-spirited, would face all the disasters of war rather than purchase that base prosperity which is bought at the price of national honor.
  • It takes two sides to make war. It only takes one side to make a massacre.
    • attrib. 2ACR, 1991, Al Samawah
  • I am sick and tired of war. It's glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.
  • War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is the sooner it's over.
  • Man has no right to kill his brother. It is no excuse that he does so in uniform: he only adds the infamy of servitude to the crime of murder.
  • Those who do war work, while refusing to fight, put the "fist" in "pacifist".


  • If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at some guys, throw one of those little baby-type pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think of how crazy war is, and while they're thinking, you can throw a real grenade at them.
  • All wars are wars among thieves who are too cowardly to fight and therefore induce the young manhood of the whole world to do the fighting for them.
  • I have concluded, there is no war, in the history of man, that could not have been avoided by 15 minutes of honest diplomacy.
  • I have seen war. I have seen war on land and sea. I have seen blood running from the wounded. I have seen the dead in the mud. I have seen cities destroyed. I have seen children starving. I have seen the agony of mothers and wives. I hate war.
  • I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
  • I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a method of settling international disputes.
  • I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war.
  • If people would just demand that war be an absolute last plan of action, to be used after, and only after, all peaceful attempts have failed, this world would see far less bloodshed and fewer birthdays missed and more New Years spent together with loved ones and more summer fishing trips.
  • If soldiers were to begin to think, not one of them would remain in the army.
  • If we give up all future wars we must give up our empires and all hope of empire.
  • In war there is no prize for the runner-up.
  • In war, there is no such thing as a cheap shot.
    • Rubedo, the Crystal Blood; Written to portray the nature of war in a game
  • In wartime truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.
  • It is missing the point to think that the martial art is solely in cutting a man down; it is in killing evil. It is in the strategem of killing the evil of one man and giving life to ten thousand
  • It is well that war is so terrible — lest we should grow too fond of it.


  • Quand les riches se font la guerre, ce sont les pauvres qui meurent.
  • Sweat saves blood, blood saves lives, brain save both.
  • The most persistent sound which reverberates through man's history is the beating of war drums.
  • The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his.
    • General George S. Patton
  • The purpose of war is to push back the unrighteous enemy, not to exterminate the human race.
  • "There are no atheists in foxholes" isn't an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes.
  • There can only be peace when they will start to love their children more than they hate us.
  • There is no war crime, war is a crime.
  • This is the field where the battle did not happen, where the unknown soldier did not die. This is the field where grass joined hands, where no monument stands, and the only heroic thing is the sky.
  • War alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and imposes the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to make it.
  • War begins with one man's lack of soul, intellect and reasoning.
  • War in our time has become an anachronism. Whatever the case in the past, war in the future can serve no useful purpose. A war which became general, as any limited action might, would only result in the virtual destruction of mankind.
  • War is harmful, not only to the conquered but to the conqueror.
  • War kills men, and men deplore the loss; but war also crushes bad principles and tyrants, and so saves societies.
  • War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always an evil, never a good. We will not learn how to live together in peace by killing each other's children.
  • War should be made a crime, and those who instigate it should be punished as criminals.
  • We make war that we may live in peace.
  • What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
  • When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.
  • You can't say civilization don't advance, however, for in every war they kill you in a new way.
  • We should not ask 'Why does an event like the Great War occur?' But rather, given our nature, 'Why does it not occur more often?'
  • What a state we are in now. Peace has broken out.
    • Napoleon
  • Come on you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever?
    • Gunnery Sergeant Daniel Daly, 4 June 1918 leading marines at Belleu Wood.
  • War does not end strife - it sows it. War does not end hatred - it feeds it. For those who argue war is a necessary evil, I say you are half right. War is evil (where strife, there every evil work: Bible, James 3:16). But it is not necessary. War cannot be a necessary evil, because non-violence is a necessary good. The two cannot co-exist.
  • I hate war. War is terrible.
    • John McCain, stated during his speech at the Republic National Convention
  • Whoever said "the pen is mightier than the sword" obviously never encountered automatic weapons.
  • "[...] the war, the true war, has never been one waged by droids, or warships, or soldiers. They are but crude matter, obstacles against which we test ourselves. The true war is waged in the hearts of all living things, against our own natures, light or dark. That is what shapes and binds this galaxy, not these creations of man. You are the battleground."
  • Look, all I know is what they taught me at Command School. There are certain rules about a war. Rule #1 is young men die. And Rule #2 is doctors can't change Rule #1.
  • Make love; not war!
    • 1960s saying
  • War is much more fun when you're winning!!
    • Martok (A Klingon)
  • We're Klingons. We don't embrace other cultures, we conquer them.
    • Martok (A Klingon)
  • There is always an enemy to fight. Sometimes it's boredom, but not today.
    • Maltz (A Klingon)
  • "There are more planes in the ocean than submarines in the sky."
    • U.S.N. sailor
  • Battles are fought on the battlegrounds, but are won in War Rooms.
    • Ashish Kerkar
  • Honor? There ain't no honor in this war. The machine-guns killed it. And if the machine-guns didn't, then the artillery did. And if the artillery didn't, then the chlorine gas sure as hell did.
  • Chaos. Panic. Disorder. My work here is done.
    • Kenpachi Zaraki
  • Today is a good day to Die!
    • Kaless (The first emperor of Klingon empire)
  • There is no darkness, only a lack of light. There is no cold, only a lack of heat. There is no peace, only a lack of war
    • Yoda (Star Wars)
  • Nations first develop need, next comes envy, after that desperation, soon war.
    • Unknown
  • I warn all leaders of nations: Abandon all your hopes of peace before you dare to pursue your wars.
    • Unknown
  • War is not determined by who wins, but who loses least.
    • Unknown
  • Sometimes even when you fight, you can't win; an unobtainable victory. Then... why do people fight, even when death is inevitable?
    • Gilbert Durandal
  • True, peace dulls the sword, but war shatters it.
    • Unknown
  • It is a tribute to the humanity of ordinary people that horrible acts must be camouflaged in a thicket of deceptive words like "security," "peace," "freedom," "democracy," the "national interest" in order to justify them.

Quotes that don't directly mention war?

edit

Should those quotes that don't directly use the word war be kept? There's a couple other pages like that as well, medicine, necromancy, paranormal, psychiatry and eternal return. CensoredScribe (talk) 03:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Theme headings are not a word index, they identify the subject. At the same time, this generality is not license to include things that are not directly about the identified subject. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Removing offtopic, nonnotable, nonquotable quotes but preserving them here, so that others can check my judgment

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Comment, WikiQuote collects notable, sourced quotations. I am removing some lengthy bits of editorializing that have been added to this article that do not meet the criteria for being in Wikiquote or for being in this themed article. I also removed some, though not all, of the sockmasters' longwinded non-quotable paragraphs POV pushing about Julian Assange, the wickedness of Israel and the US, the innocence of Russia in Syria and Ukraine, HouseOfChange (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC) Updated title and organization, having returned to work on this article more than a year later. HouseOfChange (talk) 21:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Rebuttal: Some would say that by removing all those apparently excellent quotes, we are witnessing a desperate, extremist act of censorship. One could say that you are systematically removing quotations, that tyrants fearful of the truth, would want removed. Don't you think that the admins here everyday for years, would have removed anything that was "offtopic, nonnotable, or non-quotable" long ago if the material actually fit that category, or do you see yourself as one with special powers of observation that exceed theirs, who has come to the rescue? It's good that you care and are supportive of some of the USA's leadership, but with all due respect your approach seems quite absurd! Apparently you have removed much more work in the last three months than you have contributed in many years. 24.42.166.244 19:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Sadly, it seems necessary to mention here what is obvious to many. That is that your removing all those quotations is an extreme example of POV-pushing. Extreme & laughable. It's as if you are assuming those who see your comments are all stupid, illiterate, opponents of the good/beneficient/logical philosophy encouraged by the founders of the wikimedia foundation 24.42.166.244 20:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Removed

edit
 
If the U.S. government had prosecuted Bush administration officials for their war crimes during the “war on terror,” the ICC (International Criminal Court) would not now take jurisdiction. But after Barack Obama  said, “Generally speaking, I’m more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards,” his administration refused to prosecute those implicated in the torture and willful killings of detainees during the Bush administration. ~ Marjorie Cohn
  • On December 20, concluding a five-year preliminary examination of the “situation in Palestine,” Bensouda said she has “reasonable basis to believe that war crimes were committed” in those regions by both the Israel Defense Forces and Hamas and other “Palestinian armed groups." At the time, she said that she herself believes the court indeed has jurisdiction to investigate possible war crimes in the regions, but, due to the controversial nature of the case, asked for a definitive ruling on the matter from a pre-trial chamber. Member states and independent experts were invited to weigh on the matter as well. “Such a wide variety of perspectives will afford considerable legitimacy to the Court’s ultimate decision,” Bensouda wrote. In the document she published Thursday, Bensouda reiterated that her position is not about the question of Palestinian statehood per se, but rather about whether the “State of Palestine,” which is a member of the ICC, can convey criminal jurisdiction to the court. In her view, Palestine indeed fulfills all required criteria to do that.
 
Only our own deeds can hinder us; only our own will can fetter us. Once let men recognize this truth, and the hour of their liberation has struck. Nature cannot enslave the Soul that by Wisdom has gained Power, and uses both in Love. ~ Annie Besant
  • It must be recognized that the cause of all world unrest, of the world wars which have wrecked humanity, and the widespread misery upon our planet, can largely be attributed to a selfish group with materialistic purposes, who have for centuries exploited the masses and used the labor of mankind for their selfish ends . . . This group of capitalists has cornered and exploited the world's resources and the staples required for civilized living; they have been able to do this because they have owned and controlled the world's wealth through their interlocking directorates, and have retained it in their hands. They have made possible the vast differences existing between the very rich and the very poor; they love money and the power which money gives; they have stood behind governments and politicians; they have controlled the electorate; they have made possible the narrow nationalistic aims of selfish politics; they have financed the world businesses and controlled oil, coal, power, light and transportation; they control publicly or sub rosa the world's banking accounts.
    The responsibility for the widespread misery to be found today in every country in the world, lies predominantly at the door of certain major interrelated groups of business men, bankers, executives of international cartels, monopolies, trusts and organisations, and directors of huge corporations, who work for corporate or personal gain.
    • Alice Bailey, Problems Of Humanity, (1944) p. 70/1 ((This article already includes 2 other quotes by Alice Bailey making the same point but in fewer more quotable words. HoC))]
  • We need to hear a much more vigorous debate about war and peace in this campaign, with more specific plans from all the candidates. This vicious cycle of U.S. wars, militarism and runaway military spending drains our resources, corrupts our national priorities and undermines international cooperation, including on the existential dangers of climate change and nuclear weapons proliferation, which no country can solve on its own... We are calling for this debate most of all because we mourn the millions of people being killed by our country's wars and we want the killing to stop. If you have other priorities, we understand and respect that. But unless and until we address militarism and all the money it sucks out of our national coffers, it may well prove impossible to solve the other very serious problems facing the United States and the world in the 21st century.
  • A war with Russia or China would risk escalating into World War III. As Andrew Weiss told the Times on Ukraine, Russia and China would have conventional “escalation dominance,” as well as simply more at stake in wars on their own borders than the United States does. So what would the United States do if it were losing a major war with Russia or China? U.S. nuclear weapons policy has always kept a “first strike” option open in case of precisely this scenario. The current U.S. $1.7 trillion plan for a whole range of new nuclear weapons therefore seems to be a response to the reality that the United States cannot expect to defeat Russia and China in conventional wars on their own borders. But the paradox of nuclear weapons is that the most powerful weapons ever created have no practical value as actual weapons of war, since there can be no winner in a war that kills everybody. Any use of nuclear weapons would quickly trigger a massive use of them by one side or the other, and the war would soon be over for all of us. The only winners would be a few species of radiation-resistant insects
  • The Chilcot inquiry’s conclusion that the invasion of Iraq was unnecessary and undermined the United Nations requires the prosecution of Tony Blair, the high court has heard. In his opening argument calling for a war crimes trial in Britain, Michael Mansfield QC (Queen's Counsel) said that the offence of waging an aggressive war has effectively been assimilated into English law.... Mansfield summarised the report’s findings as: “Saddam Hussein did not pose an urgent threat to the UK, intelligence reporting about [Iraqi] weapons of mass destruction was presented with unwarranted certainty, that the war was unnecessary and that the UK undermined the authority of the UN security council....Nothing could be more emphatic than these findings,” he said. “It was an unlawful war.” Sabah al-Mukhtar, of the Arab Lawyers Network, said... “The magistrates court dismissed it on the grounds that Tony Blair had immunity and that the crime of aggression was not part of English law. Many think they were not correct on that.”
  • Posh cunts telling thick cunts to kill poor cunts. That's the army for you. It's all a lie. They don't care about you. You're just a piece of meat to them. Piece of meat.

War is a racket, by Major General Smedley Butler (1935)

edit

Full text online

  • War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.
  • A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
  • In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.
  • How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets?...How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?
  • Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few -- the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.
  • And what is this bill? This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.
  • For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.
  • But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers and sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children? What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits? Yes, and what does it profit the nation?
  • There are 40,000,000 men under arms in the world today, and our statesmen and diplomats have the temerity to say that war is not in the making. Hell's bells! Are these 40,000,000 men being trained to be dancers?
  • A few profit – and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can't end it by disarmament conferences. You can't eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can't wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.
  • The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits -- ah! that is another matter -- twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent -- the sky is the limit.
  • Of course, it isn't put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and "we must all put our shoulders to the wheel," but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket -- and are safely pocketed.
  • I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
  • I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.
  • What business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy. And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.
  • Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don't mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these conferences. And what happens?
  • The professional soldiers and sailors don't want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences, lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit armaments.

//

  • After 20 years of the United States military destroying entire countries under the guise of fighting terrorism, there is finally a partial reckoning with U.S. warmongering around the world.... As mainstream news outlets become increasingly complacent, and even supportive of pro-war policies, it becomes more essential that anti-war voices, and anti-war journalists in particular, resist the attempt by the United States to set the precedent that the act of publishing war crimes is a punishable offense.
  • In contrast to publications that take such a careless or outright supportive stance on the irreparable harm of U.S. foreign policy are WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange. Following his view that "if wars can be started with lies, they can be stopped by truth," Assange has published some of the most vital information on U.S. foreign policy of the 21st century with perfect accuracy. Some of the information provided to the public (thanks to the anonymous online source submission system developed by Assange) includes the CIA rendition program, detainee abuse at Guantanamo Bay, and U.S. war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and more. It is this view on publishing which understands war as something to be exposed and resisted that has made Assange such a hated figure by warmongers in the United States.
    However, as every Assange supporter knows, a potential extradition of Assange will not just stop with Assange. The... torture he has endured and a possible extradition and even sentencing under the Espionage Act would enable the U.S. government to do the same to anyone else who exposes the crimes of the U.S. military. Even if the United States cannot successfully imprison every journalist who exposes its crimes, such a precedent would likely scare publications into even greater submission to the state. The desired outcome is the complete neutering of anti-war journalism.
  • Although the US is militarily superior to Iran by a wide margin, the Iranians as a last resort could fire rockets or otherwise attack Saudi and UAE oil facilities. Such apocalyptic events are unlikely – but powerful figures in Washington, such as the national security adviser John Bolton and secretary of state Mike Pompeo, appear prepared to take the risk of a war breaking out... Bolton and Pompeo are reported to have used some mortar rounds landing near the US embassy in Baghdad in February as an excuse to get a reluctant Pentagon to prepare a list of military options against Iran... the US and Saudi Arabia have been talking up war against Iran just as economic sanctions are seriously biting.
  • The verdict finding Manning guilty of Espionage Act offenses, however, sends an ominous warning that could deter future whistle-blowers from exposing government wrongdoing. It’s important to keep in mind that Manning provided information indicating the U.S. had committed war crimes. Traditionally the Espionage Act has been used only against spies and traitors, not whistle-blowers. Yet President Obama has used the Espionage Act to prosecute more whistle-blowers than all prior administrations combined.
    Manning’s revelations actually saved lives. After WikiLeaks published his documentation of Iraqi torture centers established by the United States, the Iraqi government refused Obama’s request to extend immunity to U.S. soldiers who commit criminal and civil offenses there. As a result, Obama had to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq.
    The American public needed to know the information Manning provided. He revealed evidence of war crimes in the "Collateral Murder" video, which depicts a U.S. Apache attack helicopter crew killing 12 unarmed civilians and wounding two children in Baghdad in 2007. The crew then killed people attempting to rescue the wounded. A U.S. tank drove over one of the bodies, cutting it in half. Those actions constitute war crimes under the Geneva Conventions. The Bush administration waged an illegal war in Iraq in which thousands of people were killed... Yet it is Bradley Manning, not the Bush officials, who is being prosecuted.
  • WikiLeaks... published nearly 400,000 field reports about the Iraq War, which contained evidence of U.S. war crimes, over 15,000 previously unreported deaths of Iraqi civilians, and the systematic murder, torture, rape and abuse by the Iraqi army and authorities that were ignored by U.S. forces.
    In addition, WikiLeaks published the Guantánamo Files, 779 secret reports that revealed the U.S. government’s systematic violation of the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, by abusing nearly 800 men and boys, ages 14 to 89.
    One of the most notorious releases by WikiLeaks was the 2007 “Collateral Murder” video, which showed a U.S. Army Apache helicopter target and fire on unarmed civilians in Baghdad. More than 12 civilians were killed, including two Reuters reporters and a man who came to rescue the wounded. Two children were injured. Then a U.S. Army tank drove over one of the bodies, severing it in half. Those acts constitute three separate war crimes prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Army Field Manual.
  • Present day political structures are... characterized by a spirit of intense rivalry and exclusiveness. The followers of each are convinced that they alone have the answers to man's need for structure and organization and are ready, if need be, to plunge the world into catastrophic war to uphold their particular system... A true Democracy in which all men participate will take the place of the present sham.
  • The war in Iraq is part of a wider war in the Middle East between two opposing forces, the forces of light and the forces of darkness, or evil. The forces of evil have replicated themselves from the Axis Powers in the war from 1939 to 1945. There are three such points of deep evil in the present situation. One is in this country, America, centred in the Pentagon; one is in Israel; and one is in Eastern Europe. These three points make a triangle which potentizes all the energy which is sent through them.
    This is the same energy — although luckily at a lower potency — as drove Hitler, Mussolini, and the groups around them, and the warmongers in Japan, from 1939 to 1945. It is the energy of the forces of evil on this planet. It is not less than that. The Masters have said it will take all the strength and awareness of humanity, plus that of Hierarchy itself, to contain. It will be contained, but in the meantime Israel is making mischief, terrible menace, in the Middle East, and America is waging the same mischief in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is ready to do the same wherever the ‘need’ arises. p. 44-45
  • Essentially, everybody wants a world at peace. Only mad warmongers want war, which is good for business and makes fat profits for certain groups. But when humanity as a whole sees the absolute necessity for peace, then the end of war itself can be achieved. This is Maitreya’s task, to teach humanity these facts. It’s a question of putting over what people know: I know, you know, everybody knows the need for peace, but still we have wars. It’s because people think that by the use of war, of some measure, they can restore the balance their way. But when the world as a whole is going in a certain direction, then you will find that small factions will follow suit. p. 60
  • It's obvious that the number one thing we have to do is to get rid of war... Maitreya says 'To get rid of war is not so difficult. It's really very simple. You just have to have a change of heart. That's all. You just have to change your heart.'... you have to look at life differently. You have to look at your self differently to understand... what we're here for, why we're in incarnation at all....

Quotes removed from E through H

edit

War crimes in general are relevant to war, finger-pointing about alleged war-crimes, wikileaks, etc. is not relevant to War, IMO. HouseOfChange (talk) 18:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Rebuttal: With all due respect, quotable quotes that explain or document war and or war crimes, including wikileaks work are absolutely as relevant to war, as diseases are to health, or tires to cars. War is hideous and any actions that tend to sanitize any aspects of it, seem totally barbaric & backwards to my mind - like the POV of those who think it's a good thing. Some of the material you've removed does indeed seem excessive & inappropriate, but IMO less than half of it. That's my two cents. Hope some others here who understand & respect wikimedia's philosophy, will speak up & share their views on what you are doing. Thank you. 24.42.166.244 02:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply


Removed

edit
 
We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security — and indeed to continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use.
~ Mohamed ElBaradei
 
Since the beginning of history, human beings have been at war with each other, under the pretext of religion, ideology, ethnicity and other reasons. And no civilization has ever willingly given up its most powerful weapons. We seem to agree today that we can share modern technology, but we still refuse to acknowledge that our values — at their very core — are shared values.
~ Mohamed ElBaradei
  • I don’t believe in western morality, i.e. don’t kill civilians or children, don’t destroy holy sites, don’t fight during holiday seasons, don’t bomb cemeteries, don’t shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral. The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: "Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)." The first Israeli prime minister who declares that he will follow the Old Testament will finally bring peace to the Middle East. First, the Arabs will stop using children as shields. Second, they will stop taking hostages knowing that we will not be intimidated. Third, with their holy sites destroyed, they will stop believing that G-d is on their side. Result: no civilian casualties, no children in the line of fire, no false sense of righteousness, in fact, no war. Zero tolerance for stone throwing, for rockets, for kidnapping will mean that the state has achieved sovereignty. Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.
    • Manis Friedman, Answer for the question "How Should Jews Treat Their Arab Neighbors?" for the "Moment" magazine. [2]
  • I would like to clarify the answer published in my name in last month’s issue of Moment Magazine. First of all, the opinions published in my name are solely my own, and do not represent the official policy of any Jewish movement or organization. Additionally, my answer, as written, is misleading. It is obvious, I thought, that any neighbor of the Jewish people should be treated, as the Torah commands us, with respect and compassion. Fundamental to the Jewish faith is the concept that every human being was created in the image of G-d, and our sages instruct us to support the non-Jewish poor along with the poor of our own brethren. The sub-question I chose to address instead is: how should we act in time of war, when our neighbors attack us, using their women, children and religious holy places as shields. I attempted to briefly address some of the ethical issues related to forcing the military to withhold fire from certain people and places, at the unbearable cost of widespread bloodshed (on both sides!)—when one’s own family and nation is mercilessly targeted from those very people and places. Furthermore, some of the words I used in my brief comment were irresponsible, and I look forward to further clarifying them in a future issue. I apologize for any misunderstanding my words created.
  • Imagine if you will a ship from a nation not at war with anyone sailing in international waters on a quiet June day being suddenly attacked by unidentified warplanes and torpedo boats, their markings covered up to conceal their country of origin. The vessel under attack had little with which to defend itself, but its crew heroically made sure that a large national flag was hoisted to demonstrate that it was not a belligerent in anyone’s conflict. The attackers noted the nationality of the vessel, but persisted in their aggression in a clear attempt to sink the ship and kill all its crew. The officers on the ship radioed that they were under attack and asked for help, but even though friendly fighter aircraft were within striking distance and were automatically dispatched, they were then mysteriously recalled... Life rafts lowered into the water as the vessel seemed to be sinking were machine gunned by the attacking aircraft and torpedo boats to make escape or evacuation of the wounded impossible but the captain and survivors worked heroically, and successfully, to keep the ship afloat. When the vessel finally made it back to port, the officers and crew were sworn to silence by their own government and a cover-up was initiated that has persisted to this day. Many of the ship’s survivors have died since that day 53 years ago, and the attempts of the remainder to see justice before they are also gone have been ignored.
  • Manning's leak gave Reuters, and the world, a graphic view of the horror of modern war, of the violent death of two media workers in the line of duty... Manning took incredibly courageous actions to release data, to pierce the fog of war, to make public the machinations of modern American war-making. Edward Snowden has exposed the sophistication and extraordinary reach of the US surveillance state, cracking down on those who would dare to release information. And Julian Assange sits within the four walls of his embassy redoubt, persecuted for the crime of publishing. Yet those who planned the wars, those who committed war crimes, those who conduct illegal spying, for now, walk free.
 
WikiLeaks and Assange have done more to expose the dark machinations and crimes of the American Empire than any other news organization. Assange, in addition to exposing atrocities and crimes committed by the United States military in our endless wars and revealing the inner workings of the Clinton campaign, made public the hacking tools used by the CIA and the National Security Agency, their surveillance programs and their interference in foreign elections... ~Chris Hedges
  • Patriotism, often a thinly veiled form of collective self-worship, celebrates our goodness, our ideals, our mercy and bemoans the perfidiousness of those who hate us.
  • But human beings matter little in the corporate state. We myopically serve the rapacious appetites of those dedicated to exploitation and maximizing profit. And our corporate masters view prisons — as they do education, health care and war — as a business.
  • When all else fails... You must manufacture an existential threat. Terrorists at home. Russians and Chinese abroad. Expand state power in the name of national security. Beat the drums of war. War is the antidote to divert public attention from government corruption and incompetence... The US is a de facto one-party state where the ideology of national security is sacrosanct, unsustainable debt props up the empire and the primary business is war. ...An economic crisis means a political crisis. And a political crisis is traditionally solved by war against enemies inside and outside the nation. The Democrats are as guilty of this as the Republicans.... Wars can get started by Democrats... and perpetuated by Republicans. Or they can get started by Republicans... and perpetuated by Democrats...
    The war industry, with its $768 billion military budget, along with the expansion of Homeland Security, the FBI, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the National Security Agency, is a bipartisan project. The handful of national political leaders, such as Henry Wallace in 1948 and George McGovern in 1972, who dared to challenge the war machine were ruthlessly hounded into political oblivion by the leaders of both parties.
  • The disputes with Republicans are largely political theater, often centered around the absurd or the trivial. On the substantive issues there is no difference within the ruling class. The Democrats, like the Republicans, embrace the fantasy that, even as the country stands on the brink of insolvency, a war industry that has orchestrated debacle after debacle, from Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq, is going to restore lost American global hegemony. Empires, as Reinhold Niebuhr observed, eventually “destroy themselves in the effort to prove that they are indestructible.” The self-delusion of military invincibility is the scourge that brought down the American empire, as it brought down past empires.
    We live in a one-party state. The ideology of national security is sacrosanct. The cult of secrecy, justified in the name of protecting us from our enemies, is a smoke screen to hide from the public the inner workings of power and manipulate public perceptions. The Democratic courtiers and advisers that surround any Democratic presidential candidate – the retired generals and diplomats, the former national security advisers, the Wall Street economists, the lobbyists, and the apparatchiks from past administrations – do not want to curb the power of the imperial presidency. They do not want to restore the system of checks and balances. They do not want to challenge the military or the national security state. They are the system.
  • If we're going to have hearings, why don't we have hearings on the politicians and generals who've fed us 18 years of feudal endless war... the greatest strategic blunder in American history... nine illegal wars — wars are supposed to be declared by Congress... the decision by the Obama administration to reinterpret the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force Act to give it the right to act as judge, jury and executioner and assassinate U.S. citizens.
  • When all else fails... You must manufacture an existential threat. Terrorists at home. Russians and Chinese abroad. Expand state power in the name of national security. Beat the drums of war. War is the antidote to divert public attention from government corruption and incompetence... The US is a de facto one-party state where the ideology of national security is sacrosanct, unsustainable debt props up the empire and the primary business is war. ...An economic crisis means a political crisis. And a political crisis is traditionally solved by war against enemies inside and outside the nation. The Democrats are as guilty of this as the Republicans.... Wars can get started by Democrats... and perpetuated by Republicans. Or they can get started by Republicans... and perpetuated by Democrats...
    The war industry, with its $768 billion military budget, along with the expansion of Homeland Security, the FBI, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the National Security Agency, is a bipartisan project. The handful of national political leaders, such as Henry Wallace in 1948 and George McGovern in 1972, who dared to challenge the war machine were ruthlessly hounded into political oblivion by the leaders of both parties.
  • The disputes with Republicans are largely political theater, often centered around the absurd or the trivial. On the substantive issues there is no difference within the ruling class. The Democrats, like the Republicans, embrace the fantasy that, even as the country stands on the brink of insolvency, a war industry that has orchestrated debacle after debacle, from Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq, is going to restore lost American global hegemony. Empires, as Reinhold Niebuhr observed, eventually “destroy themselves in the effort to prove that they are indestructible.” The self-delusion of military invincibility is the scourge that brought down the American empire, as it brought down past empires.
    We live in a one-party state. The ideology of national security is sacrosanct. The cult of secrecy, justified in the name of protecting us from our enemies, is a smoke screen to hide from the public the inner workings of power and manipulate public perceptions. The Democratic courtiers and advisers that surround any Democratic presidential candidate – the retired generals and diplomats, the former national security advisers, the Wall Street economists, the lobbyists, and the apparatchiks from past administrations – do not want to curb the power of the imperial presidency. They do not want to restore the system of checks and balances. They do not want to challenge the military or the national security state. They are the system.


  • The International Criminal Court's (ICC) mandate to investigate war crimes has thus been hampered by the unwillingness of the world’s sole superpower to commit to the organization.... Recent statements...suggest that the United States is now preparing to go to war against the ICC itself, motivated largely by an effort to silence investigations into alleged American war crimes committed in Afghanistan, as well as alleged crimes committed by Israel during the 2014 war in the Gaza Strip....The unwillingness or inability of U.S. courts to seriously investigate war crimes carried out by American citizens is part of why the ICC mandate in Afghanistan has been viewed as an important effort to bring a minimum level of accountability over the conflict.

Quotes removed from J through M

edit

When this article was a regular target for the LibraryClerk sockfarm, they added many COATRACK not-very-quotable passages of editorializing about how terrible certain things are, e.g. the USA, Hillary Clinton, and the West in general. I started cleanup before but only got to the end of letter H before getting side-tracked. I am putting the quotes I removed here so others can check if I have made the mistake of removing any notable, quotable passages closely related to the general topic of "war." HouseOfChange (talk)!

  • When the Korean War ended in 1953, it ended with an armistice, which is a temporary ceasefire, that recommended within 90 days of signing the agreement, there should be a political conference held to discuss the permanent settlement of the Korean War. Well, to this day, 70 years later, that has not happened.
    And so the war is unresolved, which means that tens of thousands of troops on both sides have been in a constant state of readiness for war. And that’s been going on every day for almost 70 years. The US still has 20,000 troops there. This is not a normal situation, is what we’re trying to say through the report. All sides have been pouring billions of dollars into a perpetual arms race, that is about the destruction of the other side. And people live in constant fear of war; now, it’s potentially nuclear war. So what we’re saying through this report is, let’s end this abnormal, outdated armistice situation. Let’s end the unresolved Korean War, which is the longest US overseas conflict. And replacing the armistice with a peace agreement is the best way to do that.... I do believe that for far too long, Washington has been asking the wrong question on how to resolve the conflict with North Korea. And that question has been, “How do we get rid of North Korea’s nuclear weapons?” Well, that assumes that the problem actually began with North Korea’s nuclear weapons...
  • What we’re saying with the report is, let’s step back and ask a different question: How do we actually get to peace, and prevent the risk of a nuclear war? And our solution is to get to the root of the problem, and that is the unresolved Korean War. So I just want to stress the urgency of this issue. Secretary of State Tony Blinken has recently said that the US should “squeeze North Korea,” and cut off its access to resources, to get North Korea to the negotiating table. On the other hand, at North Korea’s Workers’ Party Congress last month, Kim Jong-un said they will continue to develop nuclear weapons unless there is a fundamental change in US policy... So I believe that unless something shifts, the stage is actually set for another nuclear standoff. And I believe it’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when. But, as we know, we are currently grappling with multiple crises—the pandemic, climate change. We cannot afford another nuclear crisis like what we saw in 2017.. So what we’re trying to say is, President Biden’s theme is to “build back better.” The best thing that he can do to reduce the threat of nuclear war with North Korea, and build back better on the Korean Peninsula: End the Korean War with a peace agreement.

HouseOfChange (talk) 21:24, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • 'Spreading Democracy' is a euphemism for maintaining the Empire: the expansion of the most powerful state in human history, which oppresses and violates the most basic rights.
    • Angela Keaton, as quoted in “Exclusive Interview: Anti-War’s Angela Keaton on Women, War and the Ethics of Empire” by Anthony Wile, The Daily Bell, posted July 1, 2012.
  • How stupid are all who deny hope! How blind are those who affirm the advantage of wars! How few are the consciousnesses that can perceive the regeneration of the planet by way of culture! Certainly, those who do not comprehend creativeness by means of higher measures will perish in the same old upheavals. Those who do not comprehend the new ways are greatly in need of understanding the Epoch of Maitreya. (Trimmed only the phrases marked with strike marks says HOC)
    • Morya, ' Hierarchy, 390, (1931)
  • Let us not forget that mass killings, whether in war or in the slaughterhouse, equally pollute the atmosphere and violate the Subtle World. It must be realized that every conscious killing shakes the entire surrounding atmosphere. Moreover, these actions strengthen the forces of darkness and chaos, breaking the rhythm.
    • Morya, Hierarchy, 390, (1931)

Quotes removed from P onward

edit

Just a reminder, the topic of this article is "war," and the mission of WQ is to showcase notable, quotable (typically brief) remarks organized by topics. HouseOfChange (talk) 22:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 
What’s the cadet motto at West Point? You will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do. I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. It’s — it was like — we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment. (Speech at Texas A&M University on April 15, 2019) ~ Mike Pompeo
  • The story starts March 18, 2019, in a big Air Force combat operations center in Al Udeid in Qatar. And there we have, it almost looks like mission command for NASA. You have banks of computers, big screens, all of them watching the air war against the Islamic State... on this day, a lot of people in the command center are watching a drone that was flying up overhead. Now, what they saw was a field that was just littered with a tangle of cars and makeshift tents of debris of the leftovers from weeks of combat. But also within there was a lot of people. And the drone hovered over and focused in on a group of women and children who had found refuge down by the river against a steep sand bank. The drone, it lingered for several minutes, slowly circling with its cameras focused on these folks, either sleeping or just laying down low to take cover from whatever combat might be coming. And the people in the operation center were calmly watching this when, suddenly... an American F-15 attack jet came right through and dropped a large bomb dead center into this group of women and children... killing nearly all of them.
  • In the early 1970s, senior generals of the SADF asked the council for "aggressive" chemical and biological warfare agents and help in starting a chemical and biological warfare industry. council for Scientific and Industrial Research Director J. W. de Villiers objected to the chemical and biological warfare proposals because he felt that Africa was not the kind of continent for chemical and biological warfare and that it was too "complex" and too expensive to develop. In 1974, de Villiers wrote a ten-page report in which he estimated that it would cost 500 million rand (more than US$500 million in 1974 dollars) to build a chemical and biological warfare program. De Villiers concluded that the Soviet Union was too well armed with chemical and biological and nuclear weapons and would retaliate against any chemical and biological warfare attack. De Villiers's skepticism reflected a widespread concern among military analysts about the usefulness of chemical and biological weapons in Africa given the heat and the possibility that shifting winds could blow chemical agents onto one's own troops or spread biological agents into one's own population through food and water.
  • The US now has training camps featuring imitation “Arab” urban districts, and has picked up the Israeli practice of entering a dense neighbourhood not via the street, but by crossing through homes – a parallel pathway to the street, running from one interior room to another by carving holes in contiguous walls, and dealing with the inhabitants as they come across them.
    They have learned, above all, that the city itself has become an obstacle. And while it is true that they can simply bomb a city to pieces – as we’ve seen with the bombing of Aleppo and other cities by Syria’s government and its allies – we have not recently seen the total destruction of the Hiroshima nuclear attack or the fire-bombing of Dresden.
  • Many democrats, liberals, traditional conservatives, and even some leftists continue to tell themselves that the election of Joe Biden was the first step toward restoring U.S. standing in the world after the damage caused by Donald Trump. And in a variety of ways — many stylistic and some substantive — that perspective has merit. But when it comes to national security policy, the U.S. has been on a steady, hypermilitarized arc for decades. Taken broadly, U.S. policy has been largely consistent on “national security” and “counterterrorism” matters from 9/11 to the present....
    Biden’s election slogan was “America is back.” The truth is that “America” never left. There will be no major departures from the imperial course under Biden. While the drone wars continue, and the shift back to Cold War posturing in Europe and Asia accelerates, Biden will maintain the hostile stance toward left movements and governments throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. On climate change, Biden will reverse some of Trump’s most extreme stances, while still placing the profits of major corporations and the military industry over the health of the planet. The militarization of the borders and the maltreatment of refugees will remain, and the vast domestic surveillance apparatus will endure. The stark truth is this: The interests of the War Party trump any political disputes between the Democrats and the Republicans.
  • The formula that food is the way to derive peace actually should be more properly understood in reverse. The answer to my question of why we have so many hungry people on the planet when there is no need for that is that it is a deliberate decision that some human beings make in order to appropriate the resources of others, or, as in the case of one of the hot spots on the planet right now for hunger, which is Yemen, it was a deliberate strategy to disrupt the food system specifically to weaken the country in the pursuit of the war between proxies, Saudi Arabia and Iran. And so, it’s important to remember that hunger does not always happen because of natural disasters, which is a mental model that most of us fall back upon; it is often the result of things that we actually do to each other deliberately.
 
This man was innocent...He was walking back to his house, and I shot him in front of his friend and his father. The first round didn’t kill him, after I had hit him up here in his neck area... he started screaming and looked right into my eyes... So I took...him out... We were all congratulated after we had our first kills, and that happened to have been mine. My company commander personally congratulated me, as he did everyone else in our company. This is the same individual who had stated that whoever gets their first kill by stabbing them to death will get a four-day pass when we return from Iraq. ~Jon Michael Turner (U.S.M.C.)
  • On April 18, 2006, I had my first confirmed killed. This man was innocent. I don’t know his name. I called him “the fat man.” He was walking back to his house, and I shot him in front of his friend and his father. The first round didn’t kill him, after I had hit him up here in his neck area. And afterwards he started screaming and looked right into my eyes. So I looked at my friend, who I was on post with, and I said, “Well, I can’t let that happen.” So I took another shot and took him out. He was then carried away by the rest of his family. It took seven people to carry his body away.We were all congratulated after we had our first kills, and that happened to have been mine. My company commander personally congratulated me, as he did everyone else in our company. This is the same individual who had stated that whoever gets their first kill by stabbing them to death will get a four-day pass when we return from Iraq.
  • After the close call yesterday when you called off the planned military strike on Iran, we remain concerned that you are about to be mousetrapped into war with Iran. You have said you do not want such a war (no sane person would), and our comments below are based on that premise. There are troubling signs that Secretary Pompeo is not likely to jettison his more warlike approach, More importantly, we know from personal experience with Pompeo’s dismissive attitude to instructions from you that his agenda can deviate from yours on issues of major consequence... Pompeo’s behavior betrays a strong desire to resort to military action — perhaps even without your approval — to Iranian provocations (real or imagined), with no discernible strategic goal other than to advance the interests of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. He is a neophyte compared to his anti-Iran partner John Bolton, whose dilettante approach to interpreting intelligence, strong advocacy of the misbegotten war on Iraq (and continued pride in his role in promoting it), and fierce pursuit of his own aggressive agenda are a matter of a decades-long record.


  • The United States had become a willing co-combatant in a war without any direction or clear end state...there have been a litany of war crimes... in which Saudi planes, using American munitions, bombed a school bus killing dozens of Yemeni schoolchildren. Second, the U.S. government has responded to these crimes with silences that might seem chastened, but in truth must be classified as defiant, given the bureaucratic maneuvering undertaken to obscure the United States’ unthinking complicity both to outsiders and to itself.
  • The reason why the U.S. Government must be prosecuted for its war-crimes against Iraq is that they are so horrific and there are so many of them, and international law crumbles until they become prosecuted and severely punished for what they did. We therefore now have internationally a lawless world (or “World Order”) in which “Might makes right,” and in which there is really no effective international law, at all. This is merely gangster “law,” ruling on an international level... The seriousness of this international war crime is not as severe as those of the Nazis were, but nonetheless is comparable to it... On 15 March 2018, Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J.S. Davies headlined at Alternet, “The Staggering Death Toll in Iraq” and wrote that “our calculations, using the best information available, show a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion,” and linked to solid evidence, backing up their estimate.... On 6 February 2020, BusinessInsider bannered “US taxpayers have reportedly paid an average of $8,000 each and over $2 trillion total for the Iraq war alone”, and linked to the academic analysis that supported this estimate. The U.S. regime’s invasive war, which the Bush gang perpetrated against Iraq, was also a crime against the American people (though Iraqis suffered far more from it than we did).
  • America’s leaders deceived the American public into perpetrating this invasion and occupation, of a foreign country (Iraq) that had never threatened the United States; and, so, this invasion and subsequent military occupation constitutes the very epitome of “aggressive war” — unwarranted and illegal international aggression. (Hitler, similarly to George W. Bush, would never have been able to obtain the support of his people to invade if he had not lied, or “deceived,” them, into invading and militarily occupying foreign countries that had never threatened Germany, such as Belgium, Poland and Czechoslovakia. This — Hitler’s lie-based aggressions — was the core of what the Nazis were hung for, and yet America now does it.)
 
According to Darwin, the ‘struggle for existence’ is the law of life. Why, then, were peace conferences organized? Nor have I ever heard that bears or elephants split up into two camps and annihilate one another. In the animal kingdom there are no wars within the same species. Like sadism, war among one’s own kind is an acquisition of ‘civilised man'. No, for some reason or another, man shies away from putting his finger on the causes of war. And there can be no doubt that better ways than war exist of making youth fit and healthy, namely, a satisfying love life, pleasurable and steady work, general sports and freedom from the malicious gossip of old maids. In short, such arguments are hollow chatter. ~ Wilhelm Reich
 
The suppression of natural sexual gratification leads to various kinds of substitute gratifications. Natural aggression, for example, becomes brutal sadism which then is an essential mass-psychological factor in imperialistic wars. ~ Wilhelm Reich
 
Catholic Christianity in particular has long since divested itself of the revolutionary, i.e., rebellious, character of the primitive Christian movement. It seduces its millions of devotees into accepting war as an act of fate, as a ‘punishment of sin’. Wars are indeed the consequences of sins, but entirely different sins from those conceived of by Catholicism. ~ Wilhelm Reich
  • When I hear about our young men and women who are sent off to war in the name of God and Country, and who give up their lives for no rational cause at all, my heart is crushed. What has happened to my country? we have become worse than the imagined enemy - killing civilians and calling it 'collateral damage', torturing and trampling human rights inside and outside our own borders, violating our own Constitution whenever it seems convenient, lying and stealing right and left, more concerned with sports on television and ring-tones on cell-phones than the future of the world. [...] The violent turmoil initiated by the United States military invasion of Iraq will beget future centuries of slaughter, if the human race lasts that long. First we spit on the United Nations, then we expect them to clean up our mess. Our elected representatives are supposed to find diplomatic and benevolent solutions to these situations. Anyone can lash out and retaliate, that is not leadership or vision. Where is the wisdom and honor of the people we delegate our trust to? To the rest of the world we are cowards - demanding Iraq to disarm, and after they comply, we attack with remote-control high-tech video-game weapons. And then lie about our reasons for invading. We the people bear complete responsibility for all that will follow, and it won't be pretty. [...] "Who would Jesus bomb?" This question is primarily addressing a Christian audience, but the same issues face the Muslims and the Jews: God's message is tolerance and love, not self-righteousness and hatred. Please consider "Thou shalt not kill" and "As ye sow, so shall ye reap". Not a lot of ambiguity there. [...] Here is the statement I want to make: if I am required to pay for your barbaric war, I choose not to live in your world. I refuse to finance the mass murder of innocent civilians, who did nothing to threaten our country. I will not participate in your charade - my conscience will not allow me to be a part of your crusade.
  • To fuel yet another war – this time against Iraq – by cynically manipulating people’s grief, by packaging it for TV specials sponsored by corporations selling detergent and running shoes, is to cheapen and devalue grief, to drain it of meaning. What we are seeing now is a vulgar display of the business of grief, the commerce of grief, the pillaging of even the most private human feelings for political purpose. It is a terrible, violent thing for a State to do to its people.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War&oldid=3335531"
Return to "War" page.