Jill Stein Quotes

Today, India is a nuclear weapons state.

We are categorically against proliferation of nuclear weapons.

We are not afraid of nuclear weapons. The point is that if we had in fact wanted to build a nuclear bomb, we are brave enough to say that we want it. But we never do that.

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.

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

Barack Obama has injected fresh momentum into efforts - stalled for a decade - to bring about nuclear disarmament.

I think the American people are very smart in understanding our country is very trustworthy with nuclear weapons. We've had them from the beginning. But they have also been critical for keeping the world more at peace than it would have been if it hadn't been for the American nuclear umbrella.

Nobody wants any country to have nuclear weapons.

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.

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.

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

Under both international and domestic law, the United States is authorized to have nuclear weapons.

We still live in a world where if you have nuclear weapons, you are buying power; you are buying insurance against attack.

We have a legal and moral obligation to rid our world of nuclear tests and nuclear weapons.

I argue that for every country to have an independent fuel cycle is the wrong way to go. Because any country which has a complete fuel cycle is a latent nuclear weapons country, in the sense that it is not far from making a nuclear weapon.

We need to make it very clear to the Iranians, the same way we made it clear to the Soviet Union and China, that their first use of nuclear weapons would result in the devastation of their nation.

Above all else, we need a reaffirmation of political commitment at the highest levels to reducing the dangers that arise both from existing nuclear weapons and from further proliferation.

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.

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 have every interest in seeing that the military use of nuclear power will be contained.

The lesson of the Cold War is that against nuclear weapons, only nuclear weapons can hold the peace.

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.

President Obama has made it clear that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.