Quote

I believe in not attacking a country pre-emptively unless you're sure of what you're doing and you're working with allies.

The United Nations charter gives every nation the right to self defence, therefore when the American embassies were bombed it was a matter of time before the Americans responded by going for what they suspected were the causes of the attack.

It is wrong to say the U.S. should 'not take sides' in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

I think the whole policy of pre-emptive war is a serious, serious mistake.

Since the events of September 11, we've rightfully changed our military strategy so we're now taking the fight to those individuals who aim to do us harm, rather than waiting for another atrocious attack to happen.

If we have reason to believe someone is preparing an attack against the U.S., has developed that capability, harbours those aspirations, then I think the U.S. is justified in dealing with that, if necessary, by military force.

Preemption is the right of any nation in order to preserve its National Security; however, preemptive war is a tactic, not a strategy. When used as a strategy preemption dilutes diplomacy, creates an atmosphere of distrust, and promotes regional instability.

I want to tell you that I think this war is a great mistake.

With regards to the expansion of NATO, I see it as a mistake, even a provocation in a way.