Today, India is a nuclear weapons state.

We have to get rid of those nuclear weapons.

We woke up one day, and Pakistan had nuclear weapons.

We must abolish nuclear weapons, or they will abolish us.

Nuclear weapons can be dismantled, but they cannot be uninvented.

I think one country with nuclear weapons is one country too many.

A world free of nuclear weapons will be safer and more prosperous.

If the Iranians were to have a nuclear weapon they could proliferate.

The sole purpose of nuclear weapons must be to deter their use by others.

Chemical weapons, biological weapons, and nuclear weapons should never be used.

Some amount of fear of nuclear weapons is necessary for nuclear deterrence to work.

A world without nuclear weapons would be less stable and more dangerous for all of us.

We should learn to tolerate nuclear weapons of North Korea just like we did the Soviet Union.

Our nuclear weapons are meant purely as a deterrent against nuclear adventure by an adversary.

Once Iran gets nuclear weapons, they may believe that they are no longer vulnerable to either.

I really believe the nexus of terrorism and nuclear weapons is the world's most ominous threat.

The world should be very clear about making sure that Iran does not get nuclear weapons, period.

The only thing that kept the Cold War cold was the mutual deterrence afforded by nuclear weapons.

I worry about a democracy having nuclear weapons as much as a dictatorship having nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons offer us nothing but a balance of terror, and a balance of terror is still terror.

In the late 1950s a major topic under discussion was whether Canada should acquire nuclear weapons.

The lesson of the Cold War is that against nuclear weapons, only nuclear weapons can hold the peace.

India can live without nuclear weapons. That's our dream, and it should be the dream of the U.S. also.

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

The total elimination of nuclear weapons remains the highest disarmament priority of the United Nations.

The larger picture here is that a North Korea with nuclear weapons adds to the larger proliferation risk.

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

Although September 11 was horrible, it didn't threaten the survival of the human race, like nuclear weapons do.

For the sake of future generations, we must continue to work together to realise a world without nuclear weapons.

The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons.

Women don't go to war to kill other women. Wars and armies and nuclear weapons are essentially heterosexual hobbies.

To me, nuclear weapons are the secret crisis of our time. Frankly, everyone needs to reread John Hersey's 'Hiroshima.'

The Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons would be infinitely more costly than any scenario you can imagine to stop it.

Nuclear weapons are intrinsically neither moral nor immoral, though they are more prone to immoral use than most weapons.

It would be our policy to use nuclear weapons wherever we felt it necessary to protect our forces and achieve our objectives.

I want to move to a world of no nuclear weapons but I want to do that through multilateral disarmament so that we all disarm together.

This is the reality of nuclear weapons: they may trigger a world war; a war which, unlike previous ones, destroys all of civilization.

The entire United States is within range of our nuclear weapons, and a nuclear button is always on my desk. This is reality, not a threat.

I've repeatedly voted for sanctions against Iran. And I think all options should be on the table to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.

The purpose of nuclear weapons is to deter. The mission of deterrence to make all parties in possession of nuclear weapons never, ever use them.

To nourish children and raise them against odds is in any time, any place, is more valuable than to fix bolts in cars or design nuclear weapons.

It is not viable for one country to demand a right to increase and upgrade its nuclear weapons capabilities while asking others to eliminate theirs.

It's very certain that North Korea is developing nuclear weapons for offensive purposes. They don't need nuclear weapons to defend their own country.

I think the world is safer without Iran with a nuclear weapon. The world has got the potential to be safer if we fully implement the Paris agreement.

Indeed, the very first resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations - adopted unanimously - called for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Of course I've got lawyers. They are like nuclear weapons, I've got em 'cause everyone else has. But as soon as you use them they screw everything up.

I do not agree that South Korea needs to develop our own nuclear weapons or relocate tactical nuclear weapons in the face of North Korea's nuclear threat.

Proliferation of nuclear weapons to terrorist organisations is far more dangerous than proliferation of nuclear weapons to states, even states like North Korea.

Bush is actually encouraging the spread of nuclear weapons because the one thing I do know is if Iran did have nuclear weapons they wouldn't be threatening them.

It was because of my deep concerns about nuclear weapons that I went to Hiroshima. And then I was astounded in Hiroshima to find that nobody had really studied it.

Share This Page