Seventeen years after the Cold War, how can it be in the Unites States' national security interest for the President of Russia to have only a few minutes to decide whether to fire his nuclear weapons or lose them in response to what could be a false warning?

We need a dialogue with the Iranians, and it is going to take both carrots and sticks. We employed very tough economic sanctions, and they are having an effect. But we also have to give the Iranians an idea of what the economic and cooperative possibilities would be if they did give up their quest for a nuclear weapon.

If you think you're a leader, and you look over your shoulder and there ain't nobody following you, man, you're just takin' a walk.

You have to pay the price. You will find that everything in life exacts a price, and you will have to decide whether the price is worth the prize.

We are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe, and the threat is outrunning our response.

The Iranians know that if they develop nuclear weapons, they will be in tremendous jeopardy from military capabilities of their neighbors and of the United States. I am not predicting what will happen in 2013, but I do think it is a crucial year. I hope we can make it clear to the Iranians that we do not object to them having peaceful use of nuclear power. But when they enrich Uranium to a 20 percent level, people think they are going for the bomb. Their uranium enrichment program is a real danger.

Seventeen years after the Cold War, how can it be in the Unites States' national security interest for the President of Russia to have only a few minutes to decide whether to fire his nuclear weapons or lose them in response to what could be a false warning?