A Quote by Dmitriy Ustinov
If the present White House leadership runs the gauntlet of common sense and the people's will for peace and challenges us by starting MX missile deployment, then the Soviet Union will respond by deploying a new intercontinental ballistic missile of the same class, with its characteristics in no way inferior to those of the MX.
Quote Topics
Quote Author
Related Quotes
A missile is a missile. It makes no great difference whether you are killed by a missile fired from the Soviet Union or from Cuba.
The vote on the Peacekeeper is also a vote on Geneva. Rejecting the Peacekeeper will knock the legs out from under the negotiating table. (On importance of the MX missile)
If you really believe the number one priority of our government is the protection of our people, then the idea of being defenseless against an intercontinental ballistic missile or any other type of weapon system that puts us in jeopardy is not acceptable.
The U.S's first ballistic missile test was a complete disaster. The Atlas Missile Program, which began in the early 1950s, attempted its first ballistic missile launch on June 11, 1957. The rocket flew for 24 seconds before blowing up. It took two more years before the first successfully armed test flight took place.
The point is, once they have a missile that can hit the United States, we are now back in the kind of game we used to worry about with the Soviet Union, only the Soviet Union was more mature about this whole thing than I think the North Koreans will be.
We still have sanctions on Iran for its violations of human rights, for its support of terrorism and for its ballistic missile program. And we will continue to enforce these sanctions vigorously. Iran's recent missile test, for example, was a violation of its international obligations.
I would say it's a lot easier to develop a decoy system than to develop the intercontinental ballistic missile itself. I would think that any country that could develop the missile could develop quite a decoy system. It doesn't have to be terribly sophisticated.
Those of my generation who grew up in the midst of the Cold War had a very, very strong awareness and very much were sort of influenced by the demonization of the Soviet Union, whether that was through the Cuban Missile Crisis or duck-and-cover, or any of those things that so affected us then.
North Korea is a direct threat to the United States. They have been very clear in their rhetoric we don't have to wait until they have an intercont- intercontinental ballistic missile with a nuclear weapon on it to say that now it's manifested completely.
There are areas where we have common interests with the Chinese or the Russians and where we have common interests fighting terrorism, seeking to limit the D.P.R.K. nuclear and ballistic missile program. We'll work very closely with them, there are opportunities for trade with those countries.
Under Obama-Clinton, our ballistic missile defense capability has been degraded at the very moment in the United States history and its allies we are facing the strongest, most heightened missile threat that we have ever, ever had.
A missile attack is federal. A missile attack is not a local responsibility. Confirmation and notification of something like a missile attack should reside with the agency that knows first and knows for sure: in other words, the people who know should be the people who tell us.
Here's why nuclear defense makes sense. And I know something about this. A missile can take an airplane out of the air. A better missile can take a missile out of the air.
The same advice my commanding officer at Patrol Squadron 17, Cmdr. Robert J. Quinn, gave me before I was grilled to be given the responsibility to lead a crew of 12 all over the world, ready to stop a Russian submarine preparing to wipe out an American city with a nuclear missile: ‘Always remember that common sense and communication will solve 95 percent of the challenges you face in the Navy and life.
We propose to rebuild the key tools of missile defense starting with Navy cruisers that are the foundation of our missile defense capabilities in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
In order to preserve a balance, while we aren't planning to build a missile defence of our own, as it's very expensive and its efficiency is not quite clear yet, we have to develop offensive strike systems. They [U.S.] should give us all the information about the missile defence, and we will be ready then to provide some information about offensive weapons.
