The Threat From Saddam Hussein And Weapons Of Mass Destruction - Chemical, Biological, Potentially Nuclear Weapons Capability - That Threat Is Real.
If We Dont Continue To Pursue Alternative, Emissions-free Energy Sources Like Nuclear Fuel, We Are At Risk Of Increasing Our Dependence On Costly Natural Gas.
If We Are To Meet The Growing Electricity Demand In The United States Without Significantly Increasing Emissions Of Greenhouse Gases, We Must Maintain A Diverse Supply Of Electricity, And Nuclear Power Must Be Part Of That Mix.
Al Qaeda Is Almost All In Pakistan, And Pakistan Has Nuclear Weapons. And Yet For Every Dollar We're Spending In Pakistan, We're Spending $30 In Afghanistan. Does That Make Strategic Sense?
The Spread Of Nuclear Weapons Is The Greatest Threat Facing The Country-and I Would Argue Facing Humanity.
The Only Time I've Been Arrested Was In Opposing The Marble Hill Nuclear Power Plant In Indiana. That Was In 1979.
Bush Is Actually Encouraging The Spread Of Nuclear Weapons Because The One Thing I Do Know Is If Iran Did Have Nuclear Weapons They Wouldn't Be Threatening Them.
In A Nuclear War There Would Be No Victors, Only Victims. The Truth Of Peace Requires That All ... Strive For A Progressive And Concerted Nuclear Disarmament.
In A Nuclear War There Would Be No Victors, Only Victims. The Truth Of Peace Require That All-whether Those Governments Which Openly Or Secretly Possess Nuclear Arms, Or Those Planning To Acquire Them- Agree To Change Their Course By Clear And Firm Decision And Strive For A Progressive And Concerted Nuclear Disarmament. The Resources Which Would Be Saved Could Then Be Employed In Projects Of Development Capable Of Benefiting All Their People, Especially The Poor.
