Lise Meitner Quotes

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.

Today nuclear weapons are a blunt instrument. Problems cannot be solved through bombs. They are of little use. We need logic.

I am absolutely against any violence.

I can tell you as a leader of a party that I'm fundamentally opposed to violence, fundamentally opposed to any innocent lives being taken, fundamentally opposed to any violence being perpetrated against people.

I cannot accept violence.

Making bombs will only destroy us. It doesn't matter whether we use them or not. They will destroy us either way.

The British government believes we must be resolved to disarming Saddam Hussein. It must be done before the terror weapons he possesses can be used by Saddam himself or by others with his blessing. We must steel ourselves to the consequences of that resolve and send a clear message to Saddam Hussein: You cannot win. You can only comply and disarm or be defeated. The choice is entirely yours.

Remember, weapons of mass destruction don't mean missiles.

What would happen if an angel appeared before the American president and told him there was no more need for war? Everything would collapse.

I believe the gun is no solution to problems.

To the youth who have taken up guns, I urge them to return to their parents and shun violence.

We're going to send a unified message to the rest of this country, which is that we do not accept violence in this community. If you are thinking of coming to Portland, Oregon, to engage in acts of violence, we don't want you.

I do not condone the use of violence.

I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons.

Guns, grendels, or nuclear bombs; take your pick.

To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may dislike running ''a defection agency,' but that could be the only way to obtain truthful information about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction

I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

In a nuclear war there would be no victors, only victims. The truth of peace requires that all ... strive for a progressive and concerted nuclear disarmament.

I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons.

One of the greatest concerns that I had when I became President was the vast array of nuclear weapons in the arsenals of the United States and the Soviet Union and a few other countries, and also the great proliferation of conventional weapons, non-nuclear weapons, particularly as a tremendous burden on the economies of developing or very poor countries.

As a state, as a government, in 2001 we proposed to the United Nations to empty or to get rid of every WMD in the Middle East, and the United States stood against that proposal. This is our conviction and policy.

The salvation of the world ultimately lies in moving towards universal nuclear disarmament, but that's a long distance away.

I abhor Saddam's regime, but the basis has to be disarmament.

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find - and there will be plenty.

If we had the atom bomb, we would have used it against the British.