Mazie Hirono Quotes

Nuclear weapons are infinitely less important in our foreign policy than they were in the days of the Cold War. I don't think we need nuclear weapons any longer.

It is not viable for one country to demand a right to increase and upgrade its nuclear weapons capabilities while asking others to eliminate theirs.

The other countries did not share the same concern the United States had in the early '90's - that North Korea actually had an ongoing nuclear weapons program.

There is only one thing worse than one nation having the atomic bomb -- that's two nations having it.

It's very difficult to convince other countries that they shouldn't pursue nuclear weapons programs if we ourselves are actively developing a component of a strategic defense system.

I think one country with nuclear weapons is one country too many.

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.

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

Everyone knows that Israel has nuclear weapons, but no one is talking about it. The world doesn't want nuclear weapons - not in Israel, not in the Middle East and not anywhere in the world.

The nuclear weapon is obsolete. I want to get rid of them all.

Challenging the integrity of the non-proliferation regime is a matter which can affect international peace and security.

A world without nuclear weapons would be less stable and more dangerous for all of us.

The Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons would be infinitely more costly than any scenario you can imagine to stop it.

Nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation are not utopian ideals. They are critical to global peace and security.

We can do better than condone a world in which nuclear weapons are accepted as commonplace.

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

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.

In a nuclear age, each of us is threatened when peace is not secured everywhere.

If we wish to convince countries like Iran that the development of nuclear weapons is not in their best interest, we need to demonstrate that maintaining or enhancing our own arsenal is not in our interest.

There are nuclear-weapons-free zones in several parts of the world already, except that they're not implemented fully, because the U.S. won't allow it.

Unlike some of our neighbours, India does not believe in dirty bombs. We take non-proliferation very seriously.

I remember some of the limited debate I did back in high school in the late '70s, early '80s: nuclear proliferation was always the big topic, and it's bad. We don't want to see it.

The world cannot afford a nuclear Iran.

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

We have to get rid of those nuclear weapons.