Dwight D. Eisenhower Quotes

Arms control has to have a future, or none of us does.

We are ready to cooperate with other nations to approximate disarmament, but merest prudence forbids that we disarm alone.

Disarmament has become the urgent imperative of our time. I do not say this because I equate the absence of arms to peace, or because I believe that bringing an end to the nuclear arms race automatically guarantees the peace, or because the elimination of nuclear warheads from the arsenals of the world will bring in its wake that change in attitude requisite to the peaceful settlement of disputes between nations. Disarmament is vital today, quite simply, because of the immense destructive capacity of which men dispose.

Disarmament or limitation of armaments, which depends on the progress made on security, also contributes to the maintenance of peace.

It has become impossible to give up the enterprise of disarmament without abandoning the whole great adventure of building up a collective peace system.

The core of detente [with Russia] is the reduction in arms.

It is a mistake to isolate arms control from other areas of policy.... There is a danger that arms control will be a safety valve for an otherwise overly aggressive foreign policy.

Even a total and universal disarmament does not guarantee the maintenance of peace.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative.

We ought to disarm Germany completely.

Personally, I do not believe that we shall have greater armaments in the future than we have had in the past. On the contrary, I believe there will be a gradual diminution in this respect.

One cannot abolish only a single weapon, but only war as a whole.

If peace should break out, what are we going to do with all these weapons.

We have never practiced the policy of competitive armaments.

Talking to the superpowers about disarmament is like talking to drug dealers about stopping drug deliveries.

We should, I believe, announce in no uncertain terms that we are against disarmament.

Disarmament offers the only effective way to bring militarism under control.

In the age when the atom has been split, the moon encircled, diseases conquered, is disarmament so difficult a matter that it must remain a distant dream? To answer, yes, is to despair for the future of mankind.

Moral disarmament is to safeguard the future; material disarmament is to save for the present, that there may be a future to safeguard.

Because the United States now leads the world in arms deliveries by such a wide margin, Washington has little credibility when it chides other governments for transferring weapons to U. S. enemies.

We demand a strict and sweeping reduction of armaments by land and sea so that there shall be no competitive military program or naval building. Until agreements to this end have been made we advocate an army and navy adequate for our national safety.

Disarmament can only become a lasting institution, a source of economic prosperity and an instrument of peace, when it is general, not one-sided. When it is only an individual affair it does nothing but excite the predatory and belligerent passions of the strong.

There is an urgent need for disarmament of all kinds, but especially nuclear disarmament.

Limitation of armaments in itself is economically and financially important quite apart from security.

I know of no more important subject to the peace of Europe and the world than the reasonable reduction of armaments, especially in Europe, and of naval armaments throughout the world.