test ban

First of all, no one cares about the test ban.

Third world countries insisted on a total nuclear test ban within five years.

That's not what Congress meant by a comprehensive test ban.

And this brings us back to the test ban treaty.

To him, the test ban treaty was just another wedge issue.

Neither would a test ban stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

After a year of demonstrations and protests, the test ban took effect in 1990.

Under this Soviet approach, a total test ban would be the ultimate goal.

President Reagan suspended the test ban talks six years ago.

The first deadline for the test ban treaty has passed and the second one is very close.

A limited test ban treaty would be signed on July 25, 1963.

The negotiation of a total test ban would be left as an ultimate goal.

Only a sales and test ban will remove such products from our shelves.

Only then, he said, would India agree to sign the test ban treaty.

"A nuclear test ban by itself is not the ultimate objective," he said.

Otherwise, the effort required to take each step toward a test ban may become an excuse for not getting there.

It's true that a test ban would make it harder to design new missiles.

The one real ground for opposing a test ban is that it would prevent the development of new weapons.

Nor would a test ban drive the declared nuclear powers out of business.

Or that a comprehensive test ban might not be possible - even desirable - at some point in the future.

And as you know, we've been otherwise preoccupied with the test ban treaty.

Senate debate on the comprehensive test ban treaty is likely next year.

The nuclear test ban treaty, signed on August 5, takes effect.

"This is not about foreign policy or the nuclear test ban treaty.

A test ban, they said, "would lead to the loss of expertise."