The First World War not only destroyed European civilisation and the empires at its heart; its aftermath led to a second conflagration, the Second World War, which divided the continent until the end of the century.
The Iraq war was always a long shot. But it was made immeasurably longer by its principal architects in Washington, including Douglas Feith, who ignored expert advice, reserved most of their effort for fighting each other in ideological battles, and regarded the Iraqi people as an afterthought.
Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.
During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man.
In July of 2004, I came out strongly against the war with Iraq because it was going to destabilize the Middle East.
Wanton killing of innocent civilians is terrorism, not a war against terrorism.
The Cold War's end pushed disarmament down most leaders' agendas. It's a sophisticated issue, which I think is one reason why it is not so hands-on to many people. It's not visceral. It's not like a starving child.
The widespread diffusion of nuclear weapons would make many nations able, and in some cases also create the pressure, to aggravate an on-going crisis, or even touch off a war between two other powers for purposes of their own.
War is never a solution; it is an aggravation.
History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap.
There are historic situations in which refusal to defend the inheritance of a civilization, however imperfect, against tyranny and aggression may result in consequences even worse than war.
There are only two cases in which war is just: first, in order to resist the aggression of an enemy, and second, in order to help an ally who has been attacked.
As a peace activist, I am dismayed by the encouragement of aggressiveness and violence by television, movies, and war toys.
What the American people want to do is fight a war without getting hurt. You can't do that any more than you can get into a barroom fight without getting hurt... Unless the American people are willing to send their sons out to fight an aggressor, there just isn't going to be any United States.
All War Departments are now Defense Departments. This is all part of the doubletalk of our time. The aggressor is always on the other side.
To those who don't know the historical truth, I would like to say today, Poland was not an aggressor but a victim during the Second World War.
Organize, agitate, educate, must be our war cry.
Once conscription was introduced during the First World War, and once Britain's wars ceased being confined to the empire or to continental Europe and began seriously threatening our own shores and safety, it became much easier to denounce any anti-war agitation and argument as inherently irresponsible and unpatriotic.
We've waged war on work. We have collectively agreed, stupidly, that work is the enemy.
The misconception that aid falls straight into the hands of dictators largely stems from the Cold War era.
