Quotes About Diplomacy

Some people have said, in so many words, that I'm kind of wooly-headed in believing that the Iranians would see not having nuclear weapons as more in their security interest than not.

Wars should be fought with words, not bombs, not weapons. And calm words. I think that wars should be fought over a chessboard and a cup of something to drink.

Israel will not tolerate a situation in which Iran has effective control of non-conventional weapons that can be used directly against the state of Israel.

I still believe that any country understands that if they use nuclear weapons, they will be wiped out of existence. They could be irrational in many ways, but I don't think they're irrational to the point that they're ready to annihilate their own country.

If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, then almost certainly Saudi Arabia will do the same, as will Egypt, Turkey and perhaps others in the region.

President Obama has made it clear that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

We need to make it very clear to the Iranians, the same way we made it clear to the Soviet Union and China, that their first use of nuclear weapons would result in the devastation of their nation.

I feel relieved that we discovered that Iraq did not have nuclear weapons.

There's an abiding interest by the United States, by the American people, and by anybody with his eyes set in his head, to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction, yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security - and indeed to continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use.

Whether weapons exist in Iraq, Saddam Hussein or post-Saddam Hussein, it is a serious enough issue that require that we continue to go and make sure that Iraq does not have weapons.

We have a legal and moral obligation to rid our world of nuclear tests and nuclear weapons.

When we put an end to nuclear tests, we get closer to eliminating all nuclear weapons.

It is truly vital for the United States to assure that it is not attacked with weapons of mass destruction; to prevent wars in other countries from spreading onto American soil; and to maintain access to global sea lanes on which our economy depends. Beyond that, there is little or nothing in the world that should draw the United States to war.

My journalistic mission was straightforward: to await the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Nobody knew quite when this would be. But the diplomacy - the meetings in the U.N. security council, the allegations about weapons of mass destruction, the martial language of Tony Blair and George W. Bush - all suggested a war was brewing.

Our experience shows that security does not lie in weapons or fences or armies.

We are categorically against proliferation of nuclear weapons.

In the 1990s, the United States offered to help North Korea with its energy needs if it gave up its nuclear weapons programme.

I'll remind you that the West signed a deal with North Korea, said it would make the world a safer place, and, of course, all the words evaporated, and North Korea acquired nuclear weapons.

Israel specifically does not want Syria to hand over weapons, chemical or conventional, to Hezbollah.

Everyone knows that Israel has nuclear weapons, but no one is talking about it. The world doesn't want nuclear weapons - not in Israel, not in the Middle East and not anywhere in the world.

Nuclear weapons are infinitely less important in our foreign policy than they were in the days of the Cold War. I don't think we need nuclear weapons any longer.

I don't think you can perpetrate war crimes with defensive weapons, with air defense systems.

We should not approve an agreement that fails to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and does nothing to address Iranian behavior that threatens our allies and our interests.