Nuclear Deterrent Quotes

It's Russia some people would like to get rid of. They are still afraid of our nuclear deterrent. We have our own foreign policy whether they like it or not.

Scaling back the U.S. fleet of 14 nuclear-armed submarines to eight would maintain a robust deterrent at sea while generating billions in savings and easing pressure on the Navy's shipbuilding budget.

Local defense will always be important. But there is no local defense which alone will contain the mighty land power of the Communist world. Local defense must be reinforced by the further deterrent of massive retaliatory power.

Having worked for him in the nuclear weapons policy business, I can tell you that President Reagan was committed to assuring the effectiveness of our nuclear deterrent.

We will never vote for the renewal of Trident; that's a decision which will fall to be made in the next Westminster parliament. We will never vote for that.

Local defenses must be reinforced by the further deterrent of massive retaliatory power.

Look, Israel doesn't intend to introduce nuclear weapons, but if people are afraid that we have them, why not? It's a deterrent.

A nuclear program has arguably worked as a deterrent for North Korea and other states - would Moammar Gadhafi have been deposed and summarily killed if Libya had had nuclear weapons? Iranians might not think so.

The thing that makes countries want to pursue some kind of nuclear deterrent is precisely the fact that they feel threatened.

I came into politics because of a real childhood concern about the Cold War. So to me the importance of the nuclear deterrent is actually really ingrained in me.

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

Have you noticed," said John, "how countries call theirs 'sovereign nuclear deterrents,' but call the other countries' ones 'weapons of mass destruction'?

I do want to be very clear: I see our nuclear deterrent as absolutely core insurance for our national security.

My main contribution was to demolish the myths that India couldn't economically afford nuclear weapons. Of course I made these political arguments too, but the main contribution I made was a study of the cost of acquiring a credible deterrent, and show that it was within the budget of India, and it would not be an unbearable burden.

Israel claims it needs nuclear weapons as a deterrent against any threat to its existence. The Arab world in return feels that this is an imbalanced system; there is a sense of humiliation and impotence.

Iran has been calling for it for years, and the Arab countries support it. Everyone except the United States and Israel support it. The U.S. won't allow it because it means inspecting Israel's nuclear weapons. The U.S. has continued to block it, and in fact blocked it again just a couple of days ago; it just wasn't widely reported. Iran's nuclear program, as U.S. intelligence points out, is deterrent, and the bottom line is that the U.S. and Israel don't want Iran to have a deterrent.

The billions being spent on Trident replacement would be much better spent on investing in developing the infrastructure we need for a zero-carbon economy, as well as in protecting public services. To use the money on a project that makes Britain and the world a far more dangerous place is politically irresponsible and economically obscene.

The whole idea of a nuclear system is to have a deterrent where we decide if we're going to use it.

India, being a sovereign state, has the right to decide what kind of nuclear deterrent New Delhi needs in respect of international security perception.

One of Ed Miliband's shadow ministers has said he would never vote for the renewal of Trident.