Example collocations logo

Weapons in sentence

2993 examples of Weapons in a sentence

The US is not allowed under the UN Charter to organize an alliance, fund mercenaries, and smuggle heavy weapons to overthrow another country’s government.
Iran’s Nuclear Grass EatersMADRID – After long years of failed international efforts to end Iran’s cunning drive to develop nuclear weapons, the question today is no longer whether the West can prevent the nuclearization of Iran’s military arsenal, but whether the Islamic regime collapses first.
Indeed, nuclear weapons appear to be the regime’s only real route to self-preservation.
The deal, which instituted a version of Sharia law in the region in exchange for a commitment that militants would lay down their weapons, was blessed by the comparatively liberal Awami National Party (ANP), which governs the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), where Swat is located.
Moreover, six Asian states have nuclear weapons.
In most African countries, the military is weak and insufficiently equipped to handle this new threat, whereas terrorist groups are often well-funded and deploy committed combatants equipped with state-of-the-art weapons.
With a (declining) population and GDP of just 2% of the world totals, Russia is very “small,” although its possession of nuclear weapons is a factor that must be taken into account.
There is a profound conviction in the West that an Iranian regime such as this must want nuclear weapons, and that it is acting accordingly.
We know that Iran has made progress with the centrifuge technology essential for producing the enriched uranium needed for nuclear weapons.
No one can say for sure that Iran’s regime has formally adopted a nuclear weapons program.
In addition to interstate conflict and the proliferation of weapons – particularly weapons of mass destruction – new challenges have emerged, such as terrorism and the involvement of non-state actors in internal conflicts.
Israel has never acknowledged having nuclear weapons, let alone the size and scope of its arsenal.
Yet American and other intelligence services and strategic-research institutes around the world all agree that Israel possesses nuclear weapons.
In the Yom Kippur War, as Syrian forces threatened to break the country’s defensive lines, Israeli decision-makers recoiled even from threatening to use nuclear weapons.
After consultation with his staff, Bush responded that, absent a plutonium extraction facility, US intelligence could not confirm that the plant comprised a nuclear weapons program.
First, the US should take the lead in helping to develop and maintain international laws and institutions to organize collective action to deal with not only trade and the environment, but also weapons proliferation, peacekeeping, human rights, and other concerns.
Yes, it is conceivable that Bush did not have accurate information about whether Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
The more Russian gas we burn, the more money Vladimir Putin has for military modernization and “hybrid warfare,” when Russia augments conventional forces with irregular troops and cyber weapons.
The very existence of these weapons seems to have played some, albeit incalculable, role in the decision to deploy them.
One is hard pressed to find any analyst who believes that Israeli air strikes could do more than set back Iran’s program for a few months while unifying fractured Iranian opinion around support for nuclear weapons.
The Syrian Game ChangerWASHINGTON, DC – Reports that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government may be preparing chemical weapons for deployment, presumably against its citizens or neighbors, have triggered alarm bells worldwide, and thrust Syria’s civil war into a new, more dangerous phase.
But the possibility that Assad’s increasingly desperate regime would deploy chemical weapons – as Saddam Hussein’s government did against Iranian troops and civilians, as well as Iraqi Kurds, during the Iran-Iraq War – cannot be discounted.
American policy toward Syria should now be guided by the specific objective of preventing the deployment of chemical weapons in and around Syria.
The coalition should undertake contingency planning to secure Syria’s stock of chemical weapons after the collapse of Assad’s regime, and prevent any further chemical-weapon deployment.
The two countries’ collaborative response to the latest threat demonstrates that, with respect to chemical weapons, American and Russian strategic interests are closely aligned.
A chaotic post-Assad transition in which chemical weapons end up in the hands of Islamist extremists – or, worse, a radical Salafist takeover of the country – would threaten both countries, giving them a powerful incentive to strengthen their cooperate.
Everyone, everywhere is keenly aware of the power of our weapons.
They were right to be skeptical about US claims of an imminent danger from weapons of mass destruction.
It has participated in United Nations peacekeeping efforts in Mali, prolonged its engagement in Afghanistan, supplied weapons and training to forces in northern Iraq, and provided reconnaissance flights and other assistance to French military strikes against the Islamic State in Syria.
One reason is that, notwithstanding Trump’s bluster, the US has very few realistic military options: North Korea could use conventional weapons to wipe out Seoul and its surroundings, where almost half of South Korea’s population lives, were the US to strike.
BackNext