Quotes About Nuclear weapons

It has always been clear that any use of nuclear weapons would have catastrophic humanitarian consequences.

Concrete steps are needed to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in military plans, doctrines, and policies.

People tend to forget about nuclear weapons. We think they are going to remain in silos for the rest of time. As long as they exist, they are going to be used.

The long-standing, non-partisan and publicly-declared foreign policy commitment of the United States is clear. We will do whatever is required to prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons. Our nation has not ruled out any option that may be required to achieve this objective, including the use of military force.

In addition to deep divisions on issues such as trade, climate change, Middle East peace and nuclear weapons, Trump's attacks on leaders such as Trudeau and Merkel and disrespect for NATO and other institutions are prompting a reassessment by allied governments and publics.

It's very difficult to convince other countries that they shouldn't pursue nuclear weapons programs if we ourselves are actively developing a component of a strategic defense system.

The no-first-use policy for nuclear weapons was a well thought out stand... We don't intend to reverse it.

Under both international and domestic law, the United States is authorized to have nuclear weapons.

By the time Congress is even authorized to act after the President has launched nuclear weapons, there may no longer be a civilized world in which to do so.

The United States must ensure that Iran does not attain nuclear weapons, as this poses a direct threat to our interests, including Israel, and would in all likelihood provoke a regional arms race.

Nuclear weapons remain a costly distraction from the real security threats we face, like climate change.

Britain's independent possession of nuclear weapons has turned into a political touchstone for commitment to national defense, but this is an illusion.

North Korea spends billions of dollars to make this nuke test system. If they would spend just 20 percent of what they spent on making nuclear weapons, nobody would have to die in North Korea from hunger but the regime chose to make us hungry.

Certainly, the JCPOA was not a perfect agreement. It did not deal with the threat from Iranian missiles, or their support for violent extremism. And it contains a 'sunset clause,' meaning it expires after a decade. But it was accomplishing the one goal it set out to achieve: stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Behind this monstrous shield, liberal democracy and the free market managed to hold out in their last bastions, and Westerners could enjoy sex, drugs and rock and roll, as well as washing machines, refrigerators and televisions. Without nukes, there would have been no Woodstock, no Beatles and no overflowing supermarkets. But in the mid-1970s it seemed that nuclear weapons notwithstanding, the future belonged to socialism.

People who believe in the hi-tech Ark should not be put in charge of the global ecology, for the same reason that people who believe in a heavenly afterlife should not be given nuclear weapons.

El Premio Nobel de la paz, para terminar todos los premios de la paz, deberían habérselo dado a Robert Oppenheimer y a sus colegas artífices de la bomba atómica. Las armas nucleares han convertido la guerra entre superpotencias en suicidio colectivo, y han hecho imposible pretender dominar el mundo por la fuerza de las armas.

Atominis ginklas kar? tarp supervalstybi? pavert? kolektyvine savižudybe, taigi atgras? nuo bandym? ginklu siekti viešpatyst?s pasaulyje.

North Korea. Not only does North Korean have nuclear weapons, but their leadership appears to not be rational.

All mankind is now learning that these nuclear weapons can only serve to destroy, never become beneficial.

They'll be no learning period with nuclear weapons. Make one mistake and you're going to destroy nations.

A country with fewer atomic bombs than its adversary had an especially strong incentive to launch an attack out of the blue. And for that reason, among others, a number of high-ranking American officers argued that the United States should bomb the Soviet Union before it obtained any nuclear weapons. General

The smallest attack option would hit the Soviet Union with almost two thousand weapons; the largest with more than three thousand. The vast scale and inflexibility of the SIOP led Kissinger to describe it as a "horror strategy.

Although European protest marches had focused mainly on the United States for the previous six years, it was the leadership of Western Europe who most strongly opposed creating a world without nuclear weapons.