Quote

There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of high explosives.

The Internet doesn't like you to learn too much about explosives.

But I think the bomb instead constitutes merely a first step in a new control by man over the forces of nature too revolutionary and dangerous to fit into old concepts.

We can be just as safe with a smaller, more efficient nuclear arsenal at less cost.

Increased and better screening for explosives is necessary - and Congress should fund it and TSA should implement it as quickly as possible - however that screening doesn't reduce the risk posed by a trained terrorist with an unconventional weapon.

Chemical weapons simply have no place in the 21st century. Progress in this vital area will help generate momentum to meet our goal of eliminating all weapons of mass destruction.

We live in a dangerous world where rogue nations are developing longer range missiles. We have to make a strong effort at developing defenses against this threat.

Last night the United States dropped four 2,000 pound bombs on Saddam Hussein. I don't know anything about explosives, but, my God, do those things even need to explode?

You can have the best technology, but you if have a corrupted, radicalized, bribed official that has access to the plane to put the bomb in the cargo, as what happened in Sharm el-Sheikh, that's a real problem.

Especially in technology, we need revolutionary change, not incremental change.