Best 544 quotes in «nuclear quotes» category

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

All nations that have nuclear weapons think that they are responsible and it is the other guys who are irresponsible.

All nuclear weapon states should now recognize that this is so, and declare - in Treaty form - that they will never be the first to use nuclear weapons. This would open the way to the gradual, mutual reduction of nuclear arsenals, down to zero.

All the waste in a year from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk.

Almost every way we make electricity today, except for the emerging renewables and nuclear, puts out CO2. And so, what we're going to have to do at a global scale, is create a new system. And so, we need energy miracles.

Al Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we're spending in Pakistan, we're spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?

Although North Korea's position differs (from Tokyo's), Japan's basic stance remains unchanged ? to seek sincere responses from the North Korean side to resolve the abduction and nuclear issues.

A man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes.

A man you can bait with a Tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons.

American nuclear weapons would almost certainly start being removed from Britain within 12 months of a Labour government gaining power.

American strategic [nuclear] forces do not exist solely for the purpose of deterring a Soviet nuclear threat or attack against the U.S. itself. Instead, they are intended to support U.S. foreign policy.

As a boy I was a hermit crab, but I soon came out of my shell. Now I am a pincer crab, and soon I will be at my full power as a deadly nuclear lobster.

And I thought about the psychic numbing involved in strategic projections of using hydrogen bombs or nuclear weapons of any kind. And I also thought about ways in which all of us undergo what could be called the numbing of everyday life.

A nuclear-weapons armed Iran is not in anyone's human-rights interests. That is a direct threat to the lives and the livelihoods and the stability not only of the region but beyond.

And the fact of the matter is there were thousands of people that went through those training camps in Afghanistan. We know they are seeking deadlier weapons - chemical, biological and nuclear weapons if they can get it.

A nuclear armed Iran makes the world less safe, less stable, less secure.

Anyone who says that Iran will commit suicide with its nuclear power is a moron and has no business in discussion.

As far as the nuclear is concerned, I agree. It is the single greatest threat that this country has.

As far as U.S. intelligence knows, Iran is developing nuclear capacities, but they don't know if they are trying to develop nuclear weapons or not. Chances are they're developing what's called 'nuclear capability,' which many states have. That is the ability to have nuclear weapons if they decide to do it. That's not a crime.

As a part of preparing those lawsuits, learning about those lawsuits, I learned about the various nuclear issues in parts of the nuclear production process I guess you'd say.

As for total disarmament, there are almost 50,000 nuclear weapons in the world today; even if they were banned, not all would be destroyed.

As long as nuclear weapons exist, the chances of survival of the human species are quite slight.

Ask every politician and leader: What are your plans to end poverty? What are your plans to protect the climate? What are your plans to eliminate nuclear weapons? To answer these correctly is to bring love into action.

At another location, we found barrels of chemical material that was intended for use as biochemical weapons. Everyone talks about there being no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but they seem to be referring to completed nuclear bombs, not the many deadly chemical weapons or precursors that Saddam had stockpiled.

As long as some of us choose to rely on nuclear weapons, we continue to risk that these same weapons will become increasingly attractive to others.

As long as we rationalize nuclear weapons as "necessary" in order to save American lives, then nuclear weapons will never be gotten rid of.

As long as the two nuclear superpowers maintain arsenals in the tens of thousands of nuclear warheads, there is no way they can with any consistency urge that other nations not be allowed to acquire theses weapons.

As nuclear and other technological achievements continue to mount, the normal life span will continue to climb. The hourly productivity of the worker will increase.

At the point when continuity was interrupted by the first nuclear explosion, it would have been too easy to recover the formal sediment which linked us with an age of poetic decorum, of a preoccupation with poetic sounds.

A world without nuclear weapons may be a dream but you cannot base a sure defence on dreams. Without far greater trust and confidence between East and West than exists at present, a world without nuclear weapons would be less stable and more dangerous for all of us.

Brazil does have every right to develop its own peaceful nuclear programme.

Before Chernobyl or without Chernobyl the nuclear power was the safe thing.

Before I even came into office, I said that preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon was a priority.

"Bobby Tom told me he’s not afraid of the Chargers’ defense." "Bobby Tom’ll tell you he’s not afraid of nuclear war, so I wouldn’t put too much stock in his opinion.

Both we and the Soviets face the common threat of nuclear destruction and there is no likelihood that either capitalism or communism will survive a nuclear war.

Boys like Peter are afraid of alot of things, like nuclear annihilation and flunking algebra, but they're not afraid of wolves.

But the nuclear powers still cling tenaciously to their weapons.

But beyond all that, the question that is continually begged is why isn't America leading the way toward total abolition of nuclear weapons.

But if Saddam had been in a position credibly to threaten America or any of its allies - or the coalition's forces - with attack by missiles with nuclear warheads, would we have gone to the Gulf at all?

By far the single greatest danger facing humankind - in fact, all living beings on our planet - is the threat of nuclear destruction.

But when Warren has spoken on national security, she has invariably spouted warmed-over, banal Democratic hawk tripe of the kind that she just recited about Israel and Gaza. During her Senate campaign, for instance, she issued wildly militaristic – and in some cases clearly false – statements about Iran and its nuclear program that would have been comfortable on the pages of The Weekly Standard.

By any reasonable standard of proof, the combination of human epidemiology and track-analysis demonstrates that there is no threshold dose or dose-rate below which "repair" invariably prevents health harm.

Certainly the international community is putting a lot of pressure on Iran and making clear that its nuclear program must stop. If it stops with the sanctions, the combinations of sanctions, diplomacy, other pressures, I, as the prime minister of Israel, will be the happiest person in the world.

By unleashing an active diplomacy on its nuclear activities, Iran has effectively neutralized the European and US policies,.

Certainly the existence of these huge nuclear force was important for the ultimate confrontation, let's say, over western Europe. You just can't use them to deal with a situation like Afghanistan.

China is a major power in the Pacific and I think we are dealing with some common threats in that region: the whole issue of Korea and the stability of Korea, the whole issue of nuclear proliferation, the whole issue of providing free access to our ships that are operating in that area.

China pays a great deal of attention to the Korean nuclear issue. We stand for achieving denuclearization of the peninsula in a peaceful way through dialogue and consultation to maintain peace and stability of the peninsula and Northeast Asia.

Chemical and biological attacks are scary and will kill a lot of people but dont rise to the level of nuclear.

China, in the future, is going to have even more nuclear capability than it has had in the past. I don't believe that they have anything to fear from the United States, and I frankly don't believe they do fear the United States.

Donald Trump is a person who has been very cavalier, even casual about the use of nuclear weapons.