Nuclear deterrence doesn't work outside of the Russian - U.S. context; Saddam Hussein showed that.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Russia is opposed to the proliferation of mass destruction weapons, including nuclear weapons, and in this context we call upon our Iranian friends to abandon the uranium enrichment programme.
We have got thousands of nuclear weapons in order to achieve deterrence.
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.
The lesson of the Cold War is that against nuclear weapons, only nuclear weapons can hold the peace.
You know, people have actually changed the way they think about nuclear weapons now, post-Cold War, post-9/11. The threat of nuclear weapons is not so much Russia attacking the United States, China. It's not a state-to-state - it's obviously terrorism; it's proliferation.
We were fortunate to have the Russians as our childhood enemies. We practiced hiding under our desks in case they had the temerity to drop a nuclear weapon.
Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution.
My experience is that if the military didn't want to use force and was confronted with a president that did, the military would come back with what I would call the 'bomb Moscow' scenario. They would say it had to be done with conditions that were so extreme, you obviously wouldn't do it.
Our nuclear weapons are meant purely as a deterrent against nuclear adventure by an adversary.
The present basic philosophy is nuclear deterrence.