"Observe the nature of today's alleged peace movements. Professing love and concern for the survival of mankind, they keep screaming that… armed force should be abolished as a means of settling disputes among nations, and that war should be outlawed in the name of humanity. Yet these same peace movements do not oppose dictatorships; the political views of their members range through all shades of the statist spectrum, from welfare statism to socialism to fascism to communism. This means that they are opposed to the use of coercion by one nation against another, but not by the government of a nation against its own citizens; it means that they are opposed to the use of force against armed adversaries, but not against the disarmed.
Consider the plunder, the destruction, the starvation, the brutality, the slave-labor camps, the torture chambers, the wholesale slaughter perpetrated by dictatorships. Yet this is what today's alleged peace-lovers are willing to advocate or tolerate—in the name of love for humanity."
Ayn Rand (1966) ["The Roots of War," Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, 36.]
"All the reasons that make the initiation of physical force an evil, make the retaliatory use of physical force a moral imperative.
If some 'pacifist' society renounced the retaliatory use of force, it would be left helplessly at the mercy of the first thug who decided to be immoral. Such a society would achieve the opposite of its intention: instead of abolishing evil, it would encourage and reward it."
Ayn Rand (1963) ["The Nature of Government," The Virtue of Selfishness, 129.]