At the same time, we must ensure that the treaty is verifiable and does not compromise our ability to monitor nuclear we...
Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman.
The reason we have to maintain this large inventory is because we no longer have the ability to produce nuclear weapons ...
This treaty makes significant changes to the verification regime that was in place for nearly two decades under the orig...
On balance, would it be fair to say that the very modest concessions we made in the treaty are far outweighed by the nee...
Secretary Gates testified that it is not our policy to develop missile defenses to counter Russia's deterrent, because t...
There's been some confusion, during the previous hearings on this treaty, about the relative importance of reducing the ...
So, to use your language, it preserves the balance that we had before.
A single weapon would have a devastating impact.
I would like to use this hearing to get some clarity on what is really needed for us to maintain a credible deterrent.
Some of my colleagues on this committee who oppose this treaty do not seem to have taken this call for action to heart.
It's my understanding that nothing in this treaty prohibits us from building new warheads, if needed.
To adequately deal with North Korea's and Iran's nuclear aspirations, we need full cooperation of other nations, particu...
The treaty would reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal without constraining our ability to defend our Nation, while fos...
I'm concerned that calls for maintaining a large arsenal are based on a misunderstanding of the potential impact of any ...
There has been a lot of discussion about the ways in which ratifying this treaty will enhance our national security.
Its ratification would also offer proof to the international community of the commitment of the United States to fulfill...
Should we be concerned about the kind of message we'd send to other nations, for example Iran, about the United States-R...
