as we've seen americans jump for joy over the killing of osama bin ladin is this an eye for an eye mentality that's the new american way and what does this mean for the war on terror. we know. that our ability to do she wouldn't you know. it sounds like china and the u.s. have a sweet relationship at least for today this as leaders from the two countries powwow in washington d.c. to talk money among other things so is this the u.s. keeping its friends close and its enemies closer.

and the world is alive with the sound of music as celebrations take place to remember the day nazi germany was defeated so sixty six years later what has happened to that sense of worldwide collaboration. good afternoon it's monday night four pm here in washington d.c. a more a lister you're watching r.t. well in a little more than a week since the united states killed osama bin laden we have seen several images crowds chanting usa outside of the white house we've seen celebrate story dance party songs at the internet about his killing so was this the new american way and those images aside do americans think his killing was a victory for the u.s. in the war on terror laurie harkness of the resident dot net took this question to the streets of new york city take a look. with the

killing of osama. a major victory in the war on terror this week let's talk about that and i guess really think it was a victory i don't know kind of silly agree with everyone rejoicing in the streets but i mean i think it's a good positive step for the country so how is it positive that if it's making a celebrated contest but positive just from the perspective that it's one less horrible person out there in the world one less terrorist in the world that we have to worry about i think there'll be affect on their side and for us we just have a lot better why do we need to feel better about it what do you think that does for us closure complete closure the whole psychology their psychology about it like if bill's good looking is dead. stuff i don't really need a podium and isn't there always kind of a need for that in society results from i just hope it will since people say and

some people are saying might not be i hope if you're a do you think that we the president owes it to the world to prove it or do you think that you know he is right in saying you know i did what i had to do i think there's certain things they shouldn't take i don't tell return to a public because i think sometimes because you know from some of the government things you could cause a panic probably is you know maybe one of the prime anime's of the u.s. but it's it's it's it's hard to you can't celebrate if it's someone dies you know so what do you think of the people that are celebrating and waving the flag and cheering it shouldn't do that you know even though i mean i'm i'm a i'm not certain that i. took a that the they killed but i'm going to be celebrating i think it's symbolic i think that's progress. it's retribution i think he did some bad things and he had

to pay for food do you think that it's going to make a difference in terms of terrorist action from this point out. there might be some more retribution from them. but is it worth it is it worth killing someone if it means mark yelling. it's. not it could have. been so then was it worth it. in a way yes. another. negative as well. but it was necessary to kill him well i don't know that's always a bad start. whether or not you think the killing of osama bin laden with a major victory in the war on terror the bottom line is at least now there is none left in the world. and from our earlier i spoke with brian bakker national coordinator of the answer

coalition i asked him what happened to turning the other cheek and what he thinks this reaction the cheering crowd i mean it's all about here's his response it's part of a culture of trivializing war and trivializing suffering it's part of a kind of a junior will stick campaign also designed to make the american people look like we're treating the great suffering that's taking place not just at september eleventh but in afghanistan in iraq as if it's just like a victory after a football game and i think it creates the impression that the american people are shallow and superficial but i actually don't think it speaks for the majority of americans you know here we are in the sixty sixth anniversary of russia a soviet union lost twenty seven million people dead people who really know war don't act like this this is the kind of cruel ization of war that makes it look like war is just a video game war is on t.v. war is just something that can be trifled with at the same time you say that this

argue that this could be used not to wind down the war on terror more quickly but to ramp it up i'm curious what evidence you're seeing of this in washington because it seems like there's. tied on strong argument on both sides of that camp and wash well and one way you can make a logical argument if if the war in afghanistan was really about osama bin laden and about al qaeda and osama bin laden is dead and is less than one hundred people according to leon panetta of the cia director one hundred less than one hundred in afghanistan according to his testimony you would say well maybe the war should should go down should be ended but in fact the war in afghanistan is not about osama bin laden it's about creating a network of u.s. military bases throughout this important region geo strategically important region where there is great natural gas and energy resources same with iraq nothing to do with have control of him but there we have fifty thousand u.s. troops still occupying a country and prepared to occupy for a long time so if you look at the logic of the or that or the rationale for the war

you would say well yeah maybe it can end but i think we see the mood here after the killing of osama bin laden is a little bit like the mood after september eleventh when you argued that when and their coalition was formed because you were concerned about using nine eleven and use foreign policy interests to intervene in central asia as we saw i'm curious if you see any added and it's actually happening now if the tenor is being used to further advance the war on terror yes indeed the bush administration all of its officials are out on the airwaves in in the united states saying seeing our policies i've succeeded at long last after a decade of torture worked the invasions the hot pursuit the renditions it all worked in other words this is just one big giant success story of course there are a million iraqis dead tens of thousands of afghans died ninety two percent of the afghans a surveyed recently in southern afghanistan had never heard of the world trade

center there's a lot of suffering going on but we the bush administration and now obama who is it got that these policies were succeeding and so why trifle with success if it's working keep it. going at the same time you heard rumblings within the obama administration and this will be used to buy down the afghan war. war more quickly and become kind of an exit strategy at the same time this is a war that is costing two point four billion dollars per week there is around it there are military contractors that spent a lot of money in washington that benefit from it it wouldn't be so easy to cut and run it doesn't seem who would push against that or who has a vested interest in continuing well they could end it in they could end it quickly just like they did finally in vietnam they could leave for the war would be over in the blood with the blood shed we would largely stop in washington have military contractors as strong and that they were stronger but i i think the point is correct but there is an incentive to keep going the war perpetuating more and

that's the trillion part of the u.s. economy per year the one part of the economy that's not being cut there's a lot of profit that's being made by war but there's also the idea i think and this is more dominant although perhaps not a lot more dominant the u.s. doesn't want to look like it lost in afghanistan the obama administration doesn't want to have the perception of a defeat by an armed insurgency even though they're losing and they can't win and so i think their ideas just to keep going keep going keep spending those one hundred twenty eight billion dollars per year or a lot of incentive a lot of profit and then avoid the defeat maybe quote to a later period but they're not planning to lieut. brian becker national coordinator of the answer coalition now meanwhile today marked the start of a summit for two of the world's dominating forces the u.s. and china it comes at a time when the u.s. faces record debt and much of that debt is owned by china our case christine preserve our attended the u.s. china strategic and economic dialogue and shows us how the relationship between the

two countries have evolved and evolving so. they say you should keep your friends close. and your enemies closer and as far as where china fits perceptions continue to evolve at this year's u.s. china strategic economic dialogue an attempt by officials from both the u.s. and china a friendship we each recognize that our ability to work together it's important to the overall health and stability of the global economy friends the people of china and the united states in the same global village. on the west decides we own the east the purpose to open communication on concerns like the debt ceiling in the u.s. and the rate of currency appreciation in china and joint concerns about the environment we both have a great stake in carving find a change and charting a clean and secure energy future currently china is the second highest producer in

the world of renewable energy technology the u.s. ranks seventeenth the overriding theme for day one of the us china strategic and economic dialogue which will respect and understanding that just because there is competition doesn't mean there can't be cooperation or competition is not bad competition it's healthy is good. this is the reason why i've held the view for so many years we continue to hold the view that a rising china is a positive development it's a far cry from the dialogue of recent times were tough decision makers in the u.s. have been told that an increased power means an increased threat one that will eventually need to be dealt with by war i mean way to avoid this war i believe it's going to require and we're going to be able to get away from it in any case some kind of arms race with china china is going to keep building improving its capability each year the pentagon comes out with this report military and security

developments involving the people's republic of china the findings often use to intensify military spending we are now looking at a power in the western pacific that can stand up to assist if there's a problem in response military spending is now more than the rest of the world combined six times more in china. as a result the u.s. debt has ballooned to more than fourteen trillion dollars much of that debt is owned by china if that is time when many of the countries neighborhoods look like this an urban areas like this still first sun including the mainstream media the military is often the first priority when it comes to spending beijing is rapidly modernizing its strategic nuclear forces and developing space weaponry china is developing ten varieties of ballistic missiles some of which will be able to strike the continental united states but critics say the threat from china is

not the people's liberation army the threat from china is it's growing economic might like every economist you talk to in washington now it is the same the you one so is going to be. the the actual currency of the world maybe by two thousand and twenty so the economic policy of washington should lead and not the pentagon so. friend or foe only this day top leaders here are on all sides with this message building mutual trust and respect will help us solve shared problems but that view may change again when it comes time to play defense secure more money and more power for the military in washington christine freeze out r.c. . and join me now for more is lawrence korb senior fellow for center for american progress thanks so much for being with us who are with you so much to talk about with this summit i just want to start with the economic issue because we see china being concerned over the u.s.

deficit and debt which they fund to a large extent and the u.s. can curb that and we see the united states having that same kind of concern over china's currency they want it to raise more rapidly it's kind of always the same song and dance nauruans but you have said before that they are locked in mutual assured depression i am wondering if this is economic and if you think that this is just lip service because they essentially need each other well they do because if china doesn't lend us money to deal with or the officer problem then we can stimulate our economy enough to help people buy chinese products so we do need each other and the fact of the matter is that's a good thing because as we both need each other neither of us is going to do anything that would create unnecessary tensions or even you know any type of thing that might lead to armed conflict between us speaking of armed conflict why were their military officials there this year for the first time do you think it's

supposed to be to deal with any issues that have the potential for miscalculation what are those miscalculation a miscalculation is could be we have forces deployed in the in the pacific and we don't want to try to do something that they are you know direct and you can stay out of china you have the fact of matter what our ships and their ships are out in international waters. what happened incident remember about a decade ago we had the chinese buzzed in american aircraft and they ended up in the plane crashing in and we had to land on high then so what you're trying to do is basically set up the rules of the road and to understand where each are coming from because it's important for the chinese to know why we deploy our forces where our forces are what the you know the rotations are what the upper hand here with the united states going to rely on china to fund its debt well right now until we get our economic ousmane right of china has one leverage and they would otherwise

but it's not completely because as they say we have to buy from china and if their economy doesn't keep growing they're going to have problems with their with their country so you say right now they have a little more leverage in that and that regard that the united states needs and so then some of these people that come out saying that the united states has to have an arms race with china or keep spending so much militarily do they have a point or is this kind of just been evaluated and it was the u.s. it's been sent six times what china spends you know i mean this is a straw man and there are people in our country whole always looking for enemies and potential enemies and they see the rise of china like the rise of all the great powers they compare it to the situation we have with the soviet union after world war two and up until the ninety's but no china is not i mean for example china's been very helpful to us with north korea. not a self those we might like the one sort korea gets out of hand too much to lean on and they didn't veto the resolution to for the united states and nato to apply

force in in libya so and we need each other it's is not like the cold war when the soviet union never borrowed a length each other money you know during that competition but you know it's a different relationship with china they i think in the long term they're going to have a lot more problems and they realize they're terrified about the so-called jasmine revolution. already you know the arab spring because they don't want that to happen in their country but at some point given what we call the social media it's going to be very hard for them to maintain the same type of water chronic system and going back to to military spending does the united states focus on increase military spending in this constant pushing constantly look for an enemy in order to justify that ultimately undermined where that money could be going and to use china's example they're investing in infrastructure their high speed trains go two times as fast as the united states they are the second producer of renewable energy compared to the u.s. seventeen so is the u.s.

rhetoric actually undermining investment will it make it better that you really did overreact to the events of nine eleven and not only do we spend a lot of money on the wars with the regular defense project of the baseline budget has nearly doubled if you put it in constant dollars we're spending more now on average on the baseline budget exclusive of the wars that we spent on average of the cold war and again the soviet union was a major military power there was an awful lot of tension between the two countries we don't have that with china you're right i mean we have overspent on defense gotta spend enough money on infrastructure and then going to war without paying for it and so we do have our economic problems well we're going to leave it at that but i want to thank you for giving us insight into all of those myriad issues that are coming out of this summit or that you have in the city thank you that was lawrence korb senior fellow at the center for american progress well it has been sixty six years since nazi germany was defeated in world war two and russia is marking

victory to a different and for them going right here is a commemoration and celebration events are taking place all across the country including a traditional grand military parade on red square and he said now he was there and she filed this report. people are enjoying this beautiful evening after a day full of celebrations not just here in the capital but across the country really belated commemoration we saw was a moment of silence held at six fifty five pm moscow time across the country and i think it's fair to say that the biggest event to mark the holiday was the victory day parade it happens every year this year was no different people here on red square got to see a spectacular show of russia's military might it included cadets as well as a display of military hardware the fly by was a little bit less than what we saw last year for the sixty fifth anniversary you remember that it just consisted of helicopters this year but nevertheless the

emotions on red square were amazing to see really and of course it's even more incredible to see the veterans who watch this parade we had a chance to speak to some of them and heard about some of their memories about the great patriotic war. i was in the infantry so i walked my way through the entire war from starting ground to prague going to shoot i was eighteen at the start and twenty two when it finished and i met a beautiful girl world war and we got married when the war was over. i like to raise a lot of my participation in the victory parade of action for the family in moscow for the politicos in st sweetie just cheated for us they kissed us and expressed that it's. proper. we're completely happy especially as we march to the grange yeah. i joined the war ninety forty two and starting grudge was the most severe but

still always wounded it's and stands over full months in a hospital in the urals area i've been in the army all my life jay i work with the veterans i'm happy with today celebrations the parade was grand the weather was sunny and a lot of people cheered for the victory day people agree just on the streets and. everywhere thank you very. crude indeed a very solemn holiday here in russia of course some twenty seven million soviet lives were lost but like you just heard from those veterans a joyous day all the same celebrations are going to continue throughout the night certainly here in moscow people enjoying this weather strolling around carfree streets is something you don't see very often here in the russian capital and the celebrations will culminate this evening by fireworks display. and have more about what has happened to global cooperation in a sixty six years since world leaders came together to defeat nazi germany earlier

i spoke with stephen cohen he's a professor of russian and slot except he's in new york university he also wrote the book the victims were turned survivors of the gulag after stalin i asked mr cohen professor cohen why he believes after all of this time. is such a huge deal and russia but not in the united states here's what he said. it was a sacred war in the soviet union in russia because so many million people died about twenty eight million people and those people are still missing moms and dads and brothers and sisters are all the women who never found husbands all the children grew up as orphans and soviet russia we didn't have that phenomenon here secondly for russia this was a war of occupation the germans were a russia from one thousand forty one until after the battle of stalingrad when they were driven out of the country the united states never experienced the war of occupation and the enormous difference even though many men went to fight in the

war and women too they went away they went to europe americans except for those in ripley europe or to the pacific and never actually saw all or smelled or felt the war everybody's self and in the soviet union where it was a horrible horrible struggle to endure and i want to talk a little bit about that you know looking back at history in one thousand forty one when the nazis invaded the soviet union and there was that in an alliance between the soviets and western democracies of the u.s. and the u.k. why did we see such coordination and then why have we not seen the same level today get common threats and one that all those nations that i just named have had spoken about and pointed to collectively as terrorism. in one hundred forty one when in june and forty one when hitler invaded the soviet union the immediate reaction of course all across europe which was now occupied by him or in england where

hitler which was under the siege of the nazi airplanes and even in the united states which was far away was to come to the support of the soviet union because by then remember hitler's war had been going on for almost three years it was clearly understood better all the western countries were in danger collectively together and they had to come to each other's rescue so it wasn't hard for roosevelt to make an alliance with stalin for example churchill hated stalin hated stalin but said i will make any alliance with stalin because hitler is the devil he's much worse that kind of perception of a common enemy and a common danger that doesn't exist today now we can say it doesn't exist because people are short sighted but it's also the case that that kind of danger doesn't exist terrorism is not the threat not the threat that hitler's and was a member of hitler conquered the whole of europe they enter national terrorists are

not an army we've probably exaggerated their importance in talking about a war against terror when what we really need is a police action against terrorism but it is true it is true back to the united states today and kosovo that russia today are not cooperating. to the degree that they should bring on today's dangers which are nuclear proliferation terrorism poverty or international drug traffic they are not cooperating anywhere near the degree that's needed to deal with these problems but to be fair to the leaders and there's no real reason to be fair to them because they haven't led very well but nonetheless the danger today is not the same as hitler represented six years ago ok yet you do actually hear lip service paid to cooperating on some of the issues you named including terrorism you hear that between nato and russia at the met that

nato holds i'm curious if this is just kind of a talking point and pull and lip service being paid or if there are you know some real constraints to actually genuinely coordinating very closely on these issues. well i would put the answer differently i would say it's a struggle and it's a struggle that's been going on since the end of world war two but tween people in russia and then soviet russia and in the united states who want to forge a partnership an international partnership between our two countries and the people who are opposed to that they are the friends and supporters of partnership and the enemies of partnership we saw that all during the cold war we've seen it since the soviet union and it and we've even seen it since president obama and president medvedev two years ago entered into a project that they call resetting american russian relations for the better but the reality is obama faces enormous opposition in this country to the reset and so

does mad yet if in russia there are people who believe this is dangerous for the security of the two countries or of the way the other countries so much they can't be rational about the common dangers but this is an old story it goes on and it has to be fought and the enemies of partnership of good relations are very very very strong there at least their institutions their ideological factors are economic factors this is a powerful opposition are they stronger today than they were back in one thousand forty one because i know you said that that for roosevelt to have an alliance with stalin there were threats how large anime that that was ok but there was opposition within the administration there way that these people and if state department that i've read it try to sabotage giving aid to moscow so so are there larger constraints today and what are those that you just named could just be a lot more specific. if we go back in one thousand forty one if the case that for several years roosevelt had been trying to declare war against germany to come to

the aid of england which was at war with germany and he couldn't get it through the american congress isolationism was very great in the united states at that time many people felt that the war against fascism was. an american war but once ever a conquered europe bombed england and invaded the soviet union i think it was clear to every rational person that hitler was a danger to everybody that's not the case today as i said before the dangers aren't as a menacing not as dramatic not as apparent but the opposition the partnership between the two countries is partly a legacy of cold war ideology but a powerful i grossly it's partly a legacy it's partly a result of economic institutions that have a vested financial interest and an arms race and pursue it it's the lead in both countries i must say in the united states and in russia primarily security but not only a means that per for state of hostility between our two countries and remember the

educational system in both countries we often say well they still teach any american history and russian they do it's in some of the textbook i've seen them but we teach and the russian isn't in our books as well just to go back to the issue of world war two virtually no we only americans know that russia played the decisive role in the defeat of nazi germany virtually every american textbook film novel says that the united states went to europe and when it landed in normandy in june one thousand nine hundred four and defeated nazi germany that's a possible cation of history at eastern front baghdad was where the decisive battles were fought from one hundred forty one to one nine hundred forty five between soviet russia and germany so the lack of knowledge the lack of awareness and the ideology still remain having on our souls and in our political leadership and it's an interesting last and to be talking about today on victory.