“Frankly, we doubt the veracity and seriousness of the United States in regard to achieving results that would be acceptable to both sides in Geneva.”

Quoted in "Peace is Possible: The Politics of the Sermon on the Mount" - Page 94 - by Franz Alt - Political Science - 1985.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Frankly, we doubt the veracity and seriousness of the United States in regard to achieving results that would be accept…" by Dmitriy Ustinov?
Dmitriy Ustinov photo
Dmitriy Ustinov 4
Soviet military commander and politician 1908–1984

Related quotes

Xi Jinping photo

“I think both sides [China and United States] should work hard to build a new type of relationship between big powers. The two sides should cooperate with each other for a win-win result in order to benefit people from the two countries and the world.”

Xi Jinping (1953) General Secretary of the Communist Party of China and paramount leader of China

As quoted in "Xi, Obama vow to step up cooperation" http://english.cntv.cn/program/newsupdate/20130608/104235.shtml in cctv.com English (8 June 2013).
2010s

Donald J. Trump photo

“I would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the United States that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election, if I win.”

Donald J. Trump (1946) 45th President of the United States of America

20 October 2016

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/20/politics/donald-trump-i-will-totally-accept-election-results-if-i-win/index.html
2010s, 2016, October

Donald J. Trump photo
Noam Chomsky photo

“Until the United States prosecutes its own leaders, it is guilty of grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, that means war crimes.”

Noam Chomsky (1928) american linguist, philosopher and activist

Talk titled "On West Asia" at UC Berkeley, March 21, 2002 http://www.chomsky.info/talks/20020321.htm.
Quotes 2000s, 2002
Context: [Israel's military occupation is] in gross violation of international law and has been from the outset. And that much, at least, is fully recognized, even by the United States, which has overwhelming and, as I said, unilateral responsibility for these crimes. So George Bush No. 1, when he was the U. N. ambassador, back in 1971, he officially reiterated Washington's condemnation of Israel's actions in the occupied territories. He happened to be referring specifically to occupied Jerusalem. In his words, actions in violation of the provisions of international law governing the obligations of an occupying power, namely Israel. He criticized Israel's failure "to acknowledge its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention as well as its actions which are contrary to the letter and spirit of this Convention." [... ] However, by that time, late 1971, a divergence was developing, between official policy and practice. The fact of the matter is that by then, by late 1971, the United States was already providing the means to implement the violations that Ambassador Bush deplored. [... ] on December 5th [2001], there had been an important international conference, called in Switzerland, on the 4th Geneva Convention. Switzerland is the state that's responsible for monitoring and controlling the implementation of them. The European Union all attended, even Britain, which is virtually a U. S. attack dog these days. They attended. A hundred and fourteen countries all together, the parties to the Geneva Convention. They had an official declaration, which condemned the settlements in the occupied territories as illegal, urged Israel to end its breaches of the Geneva Convention, some "grave breaches," including willful killing, torture, unlawful deportation, unlawful depriving of the rights of fair and regular trial, extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly. Grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, that's a serious term, that means serious war crimes. The United States is one of the high contracting parties to the Geneva Convention, therefore it is obligated, by its domestic law and highest commitments, to prosecute the perpetrators of grave breaches of the conventions. That includes its own leaders. Until the United States prosecutes its own leaders, it is guilty of grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, that means war crimes. And it's worth remembering the context. It is not any old convention. These are the conventions established to criminalize the practices of the Nazis, right after the Second World War. What was the U. S. reaction to the meeting in Geneva? The U. S. boycotted the meeting... and that has the usual consequence, it means the meeting is null and void, silence in the media.

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder photo
James Macpherson photo

“Those who have doubted my veracity have paid a compliment to my genius.”

James Macpherson (1736–1796) Scottish writer, poet, translator, and politician

"A Dissertation concerning the Poems of Ossian", in The Poems of Ossian (1773), Vol. II, p. ix

Ann Coulter photo
Alexis De Tocqueville photo
George W. Bush photo

“And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence.”

George W. Bush (1946) 43rd President of the United States

Speech in Springfield, Ohio, September 27, 2004 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040927-4.html
2000s, 2004

Jerry Coyne photo

“Isn’t it time for us to stop taking this nonsense seriously? I regard panpsychists as I regard theologians: they both make stuff up, none of what they say is testable, and they both actually get paid to foist nonsense on the world.”

Jerry Coyne (1949) American biologist

Source: " Panpsychism again? https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/11/19/panpsychism-again/" November 19, 2021

Related topics