“Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U. S. was too strong.”
1960s, A Time for Choosing (1964)
Context: As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
1980s, First term of office (1981–1985), Address on the Strategic Defense Initiative (1983)
Context: The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and defend against aggression — to preserve freedom and peace.
Since the dawn of the atomic age, we have sought to reduce the risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking genuine arms control. Deterrence means simply this: Making sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States or our allies or our vital interests concludes that the risks to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he won't attack. We maintain the peace through our strength; weakness only invites aggression.
This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works. But what it takes to maintain deterrence has changed. It took one kind of military force to deter an attack when we had far more nuclear weapons than any other power; it takes another kind now that the Soviets, for example, have enough accurate and powerful nuclear weapons to destroy virtually all of our missiles on the ground. Now this is not to say that the Soviet Union is planning to make war on us. Nor do I believe a war is inevitable — quite the contrary. But what must be recognized is that our security is based on being prepared to meet all threats.
There was a time when we depended on coastal forts and artillery batteries because, with the weaponry of that day, any attack would have had to come by sea. Well, this is a different world and our defenses must be based on recognition and awareness of the weaponry possessed by other nations in the nuclear age.
We can't afford to believe that we will never be threatened. There have been two world wars in my lifetime. We didn't start them and, indeed, did everything we could to avoid being drawn into them. But we were ill-prepared for both — had we been better prepared, peace might have been preserved.
The Soviet Buildup For 20 years, the Soviet Union has been accumulating enormous military might. They didn't stop when their forces exceeded all requirements of a legitimate defensive capability. And they haven't stopped now.
“The only way there could be war is if they start it; we're not going to start a war.”
Declaring what he would tell Yuri Andropov, head of the Soviet Union, were he in the room; in an interview http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/120683c.htm for People magazine (12 June 1983)
1980s, First term of office (1981–1985)
“In peace, prepare for war. In war, prepare for peace.”
Sometimes erroneously prepended to the opening line "The art of war is of vital importance to the State", but appears to be a variation of the Roman motto "Si vis pacem, para bellum". It's not clear who first misattributed this phrase to Sun Tzu. The earliest appearance of the phrase in Google Books is 1920, when it appeared in a pharmaceutical journal, but no attribution was given then.
Misattributed
Lyrics to Onward, Christian Soldiers (1871).
The Yoga of Nutrition, Editions Prosveta, 2012 ebook edition, pp. 24 https://books.google.it/books?id=jnoVCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT24-25.
“For those of you praying tonight.. Please pray for peace, not revenge…”
“The fruits of victory are tumbling into our mouths too quickly.”
To an aide, 29 April 1942, as quoted in Pearl Harbor: From Infamy to Greatness.
Time Enough for Love (1973)
“When the power of love overcomes love of power the world will know peace.”
This quote has been attributed to Hendrix on the internet, and is flatly denied to have ever been said by him, without presenting any evidence as to why, beyond such unsupported, derisive and denigrative statements such as the author rants about others making in "WHAT HENDRIX NEVER SAID : They Don't Want to Know What He Really Said and Demand a Slacker Fantasy Instead" (22 March 2010) by Michael Fairchild, at rockprophecy.com http://www.rockprophecy.com/hendrix_quotes_hoax.html. Whether or not he ever spoke them, they are very similar to those reportedly of British Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone, quoted in The Forbes Book of Business Quotations (1997) edited by Edward C. Goodman and Ted Goodman, p. 639: "We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will replace the Love of Power. Then will our world know the blessings of peace." A similar quotation he provides of Sri Chinmoy predates any currently located source of either the Hendrix or Gladstone attributions, yet he accuses Chinmoy of simple plagiarism of Gladstone (or "Gladwell" at one point). From Chinmoy's book My Heart Shall Give A Oneness-Feast (1993) he quotes: "My books, they all have only one message: the heart's Power Of Love must replace the mind's Love Of Power. If I have the Power Of Love, then I shall claim the whole World as my own … World Peace can be achieved when the Power Of Love replaces the Love Of Power." An even earlier statement of Chinmoy is found in Meditations: Food For The Soul (1970): "When the power of love replaces the love of power, man will have a new name: God."
Disputed
Variant: When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.
After the invasion of Iraq -and after sending his tanks and artillery home- Mattis sent this message to the Iraqi leaders in every area his men served in, as quoted in Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq (2006) by Thomas E. Ricks; as excerpted in Armed Forces Journal (August 2006) http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/fiasco/
“After a great war, history is written by the victors and legends develop which glorify them.”
from p. 35 of "The Third Reich and The Atomic Bomb [Review of The Virus House by David Irving]" in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Pp. 34-35, June 1968), translated from the German by Margaret Seckel.
Libertys Declaration of Purpose (1881)
Context: LIBERTY enters the field of journalism to speak for herself because she finds no one willing to speak for her. She hears no voice that always champions her; she knows no pen that always writes in her defence; she sees no hand that is always lifted to avenge her wrongs or vindicate her rights. Many claim to speak in her name, but few really understand her. Still fewer have the courage and the opportunity to consistently fight for her. Her battle, then, is her own, to wage and win. She — accepts it fearlessly and with a determined spirit.
Her foe, Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jcrdaen/1/1/1_KJ00006742072/_pdf
Education for Peace
When she was attacked by a serious fever epidemic which had engulfed Japan in 1917 and this occult experience was widely publicized after the epidemic had abated, quoted in "Japan (1916-20)", also in “Yogi-doctors” and Occult Healing Arts:Towards a Post-colonial Anthropology of Holistic Therapeutics at Sri Aurobindo Ashram http://www.isa-sociology.org/publ/E-symposium/E-symposium-vol-1-1-2011/EBul-Mar-11-Paranjape.pdf., p. 8
In allen Völkern, in denen Juden als Geduldete lebten oder heute noch leben, erwiesen sie sich als Störer des inneren Friedens und damit als Vernichter natürlich gewordener Volksgemeinschaften. Das Alte Testament der Bibel, von dem die Juden behaupten, dass es ihre Geschichte enthalte, ist zugleich die Geschichte von Völkern, die von den Juden materiell und geistig zugrunde gerichtet wurden. Der Jude hat sich aber nicht allein als Störer der natürlichen Entwicklung in den Völkern erwiesen. Er ist auch der Vernichter des Friedens unter den Völkern.
Stürmer, October 17, 1940
