Best 544 quotes in «nuclear quotes» category

There are three things in this world that will survive a nuclear explosion: Twinkies, cockroaches and Dean Ambroses.

The reason the world is in the spot it's in is because North Korea entered into an agreement and then did not keep up their terms of the agreement. They received aid in return for promising not to develop nuclear weapons. They took the aid, they ran with the aid and then they developed a nuclear weapons anyway.

The reduction of nuclear arsenals and the removal of the threat of worldwide nuclear destruction is a measure, in my judgment, ofthe power and strength of a great nation.

There is a driving force more powerful than steam, electricity and nuclear power: the will.

There is an international treaty framework for this. It's the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Most countries in the world are members of the treaty.

There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he [Saddam Hussein] seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. I also agree with President Bush that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must be disarmed, to quote President Bush directly.

There is no safe amount of radiation. Even small amounts do harm.

...there is no safe level of exposure to ionizing radiation, and the search for quantifying such a safe level is in vain.

There is no such thing as a survivable or local nuclear war.

There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable.

There is nothing worth having that can he obtained by nuclear war - nothing material or ideological - no tradition that it can defend. It is utterly self-defeating.

There isn't a single American city, in my estimation, that has sufficient plans for a nuclear terrorist event.

The Republicans finally got some good news over the weekend. The North Koreans set off a nuclear bomb. Thank God. It was so powerful it knocked the Mark Foley story right off the front page. And knocked him off the page he was on, too.

There is only one way to get rid of nuclear weapons... use them.

There was a concept a long time ago that you would do a different type of reactor called a "fast reactor," that would make a bunch of another element called plutonium, and then you would pull that out, and then you would burn that. That's called "breeding" in a fast reactor. That is bad because plutonium is nuclear weapons material. It's messy. The processing you have to get through is not only environmentally difficultly, it's extremely expensive.

There was plenty of evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons, by the way. That is not in dispute. There is plenty of evidence of that.

There was a lot of protest after Bravo, from countries like India, for example. India was the first country which came forward and proposed at the United Nations that all of these nuclear tests should be stopped, that there should be a complete ban on nuclear testing.

The risk of just one terrorist with just one nuclear weapon is a risk we simply cannot afford to take.

There will never be a nuclear war; there's too much real estate involved.

The risk of an all-out nuclear holocaust destroying all life on the planet has diminished, but the danger of actual nuclear weapons use has increased.

The right of an individual to refuse to kill, to torture, or to participate in the preparation for the nuclear destruction of humanity seems to me to be fundamental.

The Russians and the Chinese have been absolutely clear they don't want to see Iran with a nuclear weapon.

The second touchstone for America I think unquestionably was pushing to conclusion the program we had with the Russians to control the Soviet nuclear arsenal. I tend to think that more than anything else, that will come back to haunt us.

These nuclear plants are more dangerous than people realize.

The solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind.

The sheer folly of trying to defend a nation by destroying all life on the planet must be apparent to anyone capable of rational thought. Nuclear capability must be reduced to zero, globally, permanently. There is no other option.

The single biggest threat that we face is a nuclear weapon or some weapon of mass destruction. What that means is that we have to be extraordinarily aggressive and vigilant in controlling nuclear proliferation.

The single greatest problem the world has is nuclear armament, nuclear weapons, not global warming.

The South Africans decided that they would like to prove to the world they did not have any nuclear weapons and their decision was not doubted because it was the end of the Cold War, it was also the end of apartheid.

The spread of nuclear weapons is the greatest threat facing the country-and I would argue facing humanity.

The survivors (of a nuclear war) would envy the dead.

The trend in the world right now is - not just in developed countries, but in developing countries including China and India - there is a movement to build more and more nuclear plants.

The thing that makes countries want to pursue some kind of nuclear deterrent is precisely the fact that they feel threatened.

The talk about balance, nuclear balance, seems to me to be metaphysical and doesn't seem to be real at all.

The time is not far off when many nations in many parts of the world of many political shades and commitments will possess nuclear or even thermonuclear weapons.

The true beauty of nature is her amplitude; she exists neither for nor because of us, and possesses a staying power that all our nuclear arsenals cannot threaten (much as we can easily destroy our puny selves).

the use of nuclear weapons is Iran's right.

The ultimate source of happiness is not money and power, but warm-heartedness

The US in some ways has been the best. Who figured out shale gas? Although that wasn't a good thing [for CO2 levels], it was very innovative. It's led to low-cost energy. Who figured out nuclear power? Largely the United States. Once you get past the steam engine, which is mostly British, then the US has been at the center of most of the energy things that have happened.

The use of a mere dozen nuclear weapons ... would be a human catastrophe without parallel. ... Because so few weapons can kill so many people, even far-reaching disarmament proposals would leave us implicated in plans for unprecedented slaughter of innocent people. The sole measure that can free us from this burden is abolition.

The U.S. had about 10,000 nuclear warheads. It is estimated that the U.S. is heading towards having 6,000 nuclear warheads in the year 2012.

The U.S. has in its stockpiles more nuclear bombs, chemical and biological weapons, more aircraft, rockets and delivery systems in number and sophistication than the rest of the world combined. Included are twenty commissioned Trident II nuclear submarines any one of which could destroy Europe.

The whitewashing of windows can provide very effective protection against fire resulting from the heat-flash from nuclear explosions.

The world should contemplate a nuclear weapons-armed Iran with the greatest of concern.

The world has been gradually reducing its nuclear arsenals. Testing must stop so that progress on the destruction of nuclear weapons may begin.

The world's deteriorating ecology poses as great a danger to mankind today as did the nuclear standoff between the superpowers at the height of the Cold War.

The world's state sponsor of terrorism is now on path, sanctioned by the United States, to create nuclear weapons. We are going to make it possible for them.

The worst part of what we heard Donald [trump] say has been about nuclear weapons. He has said repeatedly that he didn't care if other nations got nuclear weapons, Japan, South Korea, even Saudi Arabia. It has been the policy of the United States, Democrats and Republicans, to do everything we could to reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

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

They assert that their program is purely peaceful. . . . We want them to demonstrate clearly in the actions they propose that they have truly abandoned any nuclear weapons ambition.