Alan Cranston Quotes

The catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons require that it be treated as a top priority. Disarmament will work better than any alternative in reducing the risk of use.

Maintaining a U. S. Nuclear Arsenal presents only one benefit today: deterring the use of nuclear weapons by others. Thus, there is simply no reason for nuclear weapons to play a central role in U. S. Defense Policy any longer.

I'm determined that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.

The Islamic State is dangerous, a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic is even more so.

The nuclear bomb is the most useless weapon ever invented. It can be employed to no rational purpose. It is not even an effective defense against itself.

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.

There's no question but that a nuclear Iran, a nuclear-capable Iran is unacceptable to America. It presents a threat not only to our friends but ultimately a threat to us to have Iran have nuclear material, nuclear weapons that could be used against us or used to be threatening to us.

We are categorically against proliferation of nuclear weapons.

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

In the end, for all of Obama's grand rhetoric on ridding the world of nuclear weapons, history has doomed him to preside over the emergence of two rogue nuclear regimes (North Korea and Iran).

I believe we should use all means necessary to prevent the acquisition or fabrication of nuclear weapons by countries or groups hostile to the U. S. We should act in concert with our allies who are similarly working to protect their countries.

We must take steps to prevent further nuclear weapons development or modernization.

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

It is of the greatest importance that people and governments in many more countries than ours should realize that it is more dangerous to have access to nuclear arms than not to possess them.

In the past, science has often been able to provide adequate protection against new weapons it has given into the hands of an aggressor, but it cannot promise such efficient protection against the destructive use of nuclear power

Every thinking person fears nuclear war, and every technological nation plans for it.

We keep our nuclear policy somewhat ambiguous because of national security.

… use of high yield nuclear weapons invariably created adverse public opinion … Greater emphasis should be placed on small atomic weapons.

Look: I don't want to live with a nuclear Iran. I would like to make it uncomfortable for them to seek it.

You've got the North Koreans building weapons; you got the Iranians building weapons. You've got - the Pakistanis already have at least 100 nuclear weapons. Do you think there's any serious effort in this country to come to grips with that?

Our mission was to make sure that the bad guys, basically, did not get nuclear weapons.

I agree that a nuclear Iran is extremely dangerous, and I believe that it must be prevented.

Let me be crystal clear: There is no such thing as 'limited use' nuclear weapons, and for a Pentagon advisory board to promote their development is absolutely unacceptable.

Iran would have become a nuclear power had President Obama not united most of the world in boycotting Iranian oil sales, which crippled Iran's economy and forced it to negotiate. Other presidents tried to stop Iran's nuclear program. They failed. Obama succeeded.

What is the only provocation that could bring about the use of nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. What is the priority target for nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. What is the only established defense against nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. How do we prevent the use of nuclear weapons? By threatening to use nuclear weapons. And we can't get rid of nuclear weapons, because of nuclear weapons. The intransigence, it seems, is a function of the weapons themselves.