Jacob K. Javits Quotes

Some people believe that the nuclear bomb should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, since it scared the major powers away from war by equating it with doomsday.

If we are to be destroyed we will do it ourselves by warfare with thermonuclear weaponry.

The present basic philosophy is nuclear deterrence.

In a world which is armed to its teeth with nuclear weapons, every quarrel or difference of opinion may lead to violence of a kind quite different from what is possible today.

The notion that our only strategic choice is MAD (mutually assured destruction)—which means nothing less than an unstable pact to commit instant and total mutual suicide in the event of war—is irrational, immoral and unnecessary.

We do not believe that a nuclear war should be fought and we do not believe that a nuclear war can be won.

A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.

In the Cuban missile crisis [1962] we had 5,000 nuclear strategic weapons and the Russians had only 300.... Even though we had a 17 to 1 advantage, we were deterred. Even if only ten percent of their missiles got through, tens of millions of Americans would have died. We could not use our nuclear superiority.

We will use nuclear weapons whenever it serves our vital interests.

Nuclear weapons are only good for deterring. It is insane that two men, sitting on opposite ends of the world, should be able to decide to bring an end to civilization.

To have the ability to destroy all and not to do it was one of the hard tests humanity passed - but only just - in the middle of the twentieth century.

The only use for an atomic bomb is to keep somebody else from using one.

Even with the best intentions, you can have a nuclear war, a nuclear holocaust, through miscalculation, through accidents.

I remember fear and I remember the potential of nuclear war.

The trick in nuclear strategy is to maintain stability by balancing potentials and thus to discourage events from converting the hypothetical to the actual.

As for the assertion that nuclear weapons prevent wars, how many more wars are needed to refute this arguments? Tens of millions have died in the many wars that have taken place since 1945.

The only thing that kept the Cold War cold was the mutual deterrence afforded by nuclear weapons.

I'm still bothered by the threat of nuclear war.

If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make the rubble bounce.

Nuclear war is such an emotional subject that many people see the weapons themselves as the common enemy of humanity.

That was the era when we might have destroyed Russia completely and not even skinned our elbows doing it.

In nuclear war all men are cremated equal.

This means that the only function of nuclear weapons, while they exist, is to deter a nuclear attack.

We have a moral imperative to keep up the search for something better than mutual assured destruction.

For every security measure, there is a counter measure that breeds further insecurity. The acquisition by Pakistan or Iran of a nuclear capability neutralizes the security achieved by Israel’s own nuclear capability. Non-governmental terrorism neutralizes governmental military superiority. Chemical weapons neutralize the security of cement walls.