Today, India is a nuclear weapons state.
A. P. J. Abdul Kalam
India can live without nuclear weapons. That's our dream, and it should be the dream of the U.S. also.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, like other countries in the region, rejects the acquisition of nuclear weapons by anyone, especially nuclear weapons in the Middle East region. We hope that such weapons will be banned or eliminated from the region by every country in the region.
Abdullah of Saudi Arabia
What the United States has to do is send a clear message to Iran that they will not be able to develop nuclear weapons. Why endure the difficulty of sanctions if they are not going to be able to develop nuclear weapons anyway?
Alan Dershowitz
I would much rather we concentrated on the immediate, still-potent dangers, such as nuclear weapons, runaway climate change, and so on. Sort those out, then worry about Hal 9000.
Alastair Reynolds
American envoys came to see me before the crisis in Iraq and asked me to say that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq. I refused. They even told me that things would go well for Belarus in terms of investments, etc. All I had to do was to support them. I told them that I couldn't do it because I knew that there were no nuclear weapons there.
Alexander Lukashenko
We are not a gigantic state, we do not have nuclear weapons, but our army is sufficiently capable to respond to any threat... Therefore, we will protect our patch of land, our statehood, and our independence.
Iran's continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, support for international terrorist organizations, and abhorrent human rights practices pose one of the greatest threats to global security.
Allyson Schwartz
All mankind is now learning that these nuclear weapons can only serve to destroy, never become beneficial.
Alva Myrdal
In 1947 I defended my thesis on nuclear physics, and in 1948 I was included in a group of research scientists whose task was to develop nuclear weapons.
Andrei Sakharov
Our world faces many grave challenges: Widening conflicts and inequality. Extreme weather and deadly intolerance. Security threats - including nuclear weapons. We have the tools and wealth to overcome these challenges. All we need is the will.
Antonio Guterres
The total elimination of nuclear weapons remains the highest disarmament priority of the United Nations.
The only sure way to eliminate the threat posed by nuclear weapons is to eliminate the weapons themselves.
Israel has many hopes, and faces extreme dangers. The most prominent danger is Iran, which is making every effort to acquire nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, and establishing an enormous terror network together with Syria in Lebanon.
Ariel Sharon
We have evidence that Iran makes a reactor to possess nuclear weapons.
Our nuclear weapons are meant purely as a deterrent against nuclear adventure by an adversary.
Atal Bihari Vajpayee
We have an active program. We have nuclear weapons, we are a nuclear power. We have an advanced missiles program.
Ayub Khan
A world free of nuclear weapons will be safer and more prosperous.
Ban Ki-moon
We have a legal and moral obligation to rid our world of nuclear tests and nuclear weapons.
When we put an end to nuclear tests, we get closer to eliminating all nuclear weapons.
People understand that nuclear weapons cannot be used without indiscriminate effects on civilian populations. Such weapons have no legitimate place in our world. Their elimination is both morally right and a practical necessity in protecting humanity.
We have a legal and moral obligation to rid our world of nuclear tests and nuclear weapons. When we put an end to nuclear tests, we get closer to eliminating all nuclear weapons. A world free of nuclear weapons will be safer and more prosperous.
We must eliminate all nuclear weapons in order to eliminate the grave risk they pose to our world. This will require persistent efforts by all countries and peoples. A nuclear war would affect everyone, and all have a stake in preventing this nightmare.
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.
Since Europe is dependent on imports of energy and most of its raw materials, it can be subdued, if not quite conquered, without all those nuclear weapons the Soviets have aimed at it simply through the shipping routes and raw materials they control.
In the 1990s, the United States offered to help North Korea with its energy needs if it gave up its nuclear weapons programme.
My entry into the environmental arena was through the issue that so dramatically - and destructively - demonstrates the link between science and social action: nuclear weapons.
At the height of Iraq's clandestine nuclear weapons program, which nearly succeeded in building a bomb in 1991, Tuwaitha incorporated research reactors, uranium mining and enrichment facilities, chemical engineering plants and an explosives fabrication center to build the device that detonates a nuclear core.
The U.N. Security Council ordered Iraq in April 1991 to relinquish all capabilities to make biological, chemical and nuclear weapons as well as long-range missiles.
In addition to deep divisions on issues such as trade, climate change, Middle East peace and nuclear weapons, Trump's attacks on leaders such as Trudeau and Merkel and disrespect for NATO and other institutions are prompting a reassessment by allied governments and publics.
If Iran and North Korea, by some horrible, devilish, nightmarish scenario, got together and went to war at the same time, one against Saudi Arabia and one against South Korea, I don't know what we would do about that. I don't know that we could stop them short of using nuclear weapons.
The world should be very clear about making sure that Iran does not get nuclear weapons, period.
So I think we should stay focused on the real problem in the Middle East. It's not Israel. It's these dictatorships that are developing nuclear weapons with the specific goal of wiping Israel away.
As far as a nuclear weapons-free zone, you know, when the lion lies down with the lamb, and you don't need a new lamb every day to satisfy the lion, then we might have this kind of transformation in the Middle East.
The greatest threat facing humanity is a radical Islamist regime meeting up with nuclear weapons.
I can tell you one thing, Iran is closer to developing nuclear weapons today than it was a week ago, or a month ago or a year ago. It's just moving on with its efforts.
The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons.
The Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons would be infinitely more costly than any scenario you can imagine to stop it.
There's an abiding interest by the United States, by the American people, and by anybody with his eyes set in his head, to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Chemical weapons, biological weapons, and nuclear weapons should never be used.
As a state sponsor of global terrorism and supplier of weapons to terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons capabilities.
If we are really anxious not to have nuclear weapons in Iran, the first thing is to call an international conference on abolishing all nuclear weapons, including Israeli nuclear weapons.
We may yet work up to some serious shooting war, or maybe some acts of urban genocide committed with rogue nuclear weapons. But if that were the case, why would we call that '9/11'? If Washington disappeared in a mushroom cloud, we'd give that huge event a different name.
Nuclear weapons continue to occupy a unique place in global security affairs. No other weapons, in my opinion, anyway, match their potential for prompt and long-term damage and their strategic impact.
U.S. nuclear weapons that are available for presidential use are targeted against broad ocean areas.
You probably don't need more weapons than what's required to destroy every city on earth. There's only 2,300 cities. So, the United States, by that criteria, only needs 2,300 nuclear weapons - well, we've got more than 25,000!
The professed function of the nuclear weapons on each side is to prevent the other side from using their nuclear weapons. If that's all it is, then we've gotta as: how many nuclear weapons do you need to do that?
Nuclear weapons remain a costly distraction from the real security threats we face, like climate change.
The world has placed chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in a separate category because their use constitutes a crime against all humanity.
There are some people that will be deterred by the fact that we have nuclear weapons... But those people are the folks we can deal with anyway.
