likewise, if you take society -- it is true we had an experiment with hiroshima and nagasaki. but we cannot afford to learn from another major nuclear exchange because there might not be anyone to learn from. so there are some things we have to be wise enough to know were a little different than any other generation. to me, that means it is more important to study the humanities and think through the arts and to participate in arts endeavors. and i worry a lot that school systems throughout the country are giving less attention to some of the subjects. >> finley lewis. >> to follow up on that congressional report. [inaudible] that is a basic foot hold that the congress has in elementary and second grade -- and secondary school education. as a matter of public policy, if you were in congress, how would you use the reauthorization of that bill to deal with some of the problems you are discussing today? >> first, i would like to stress i am a little beyond the presumption of advising another member of congress. i do my best not to. all i can tell you is that i think we have no ch

in a summit hall alongside images of attack of hiroshima and nagasaki.ran's supreme leader called the u.s., the world's only atomic criminal and the iranian president demand the u.s. be kicked out of the watch dog agency, the iaea. those who possess or use nuclear weapons he said should be suspended. with the conference iran is trying to fight increasing isolation on the nuclear issue. inviting as many countries as possible to push back what it dismisses as a u.s.-led campaign against iran. the u.s. accuses iran of developing nuclear weapons pushing russia and china to agree to sanctions. iran insists the program is peaceful. one of the problems we have with you and your leaders, he said, you talk more than you listen. >> today would be a opportunity for our nation -- >> reporter: coming days after president obama's only summit on nuclear security. president ahmadinejad's conference provided a sometimes ruckus counterpoint. >> it's a jam boar ee of the government, saying the great satan responsible for all evil in the world. >> reporter: what effect that

the bomb that obliterated hiroshima was a canna. -- canon. there's not that much more to it than that. this material, unfortunately, is easy to smuggle. and hard to detect. the nuclear material needed for a nuclear bomb would fit easily in a suitcase. hence, insecured nuclear material anywhere is really a threat to everyone everywhere. so where are the biggest risks? that nuclear material might be stolen and fall into terrorist hands? this is a global problem. it's not limited to any one country. certainly not just the former soviet union. as alex mentioned, there's enough nuclear material in the world to make a huge number of nuclear weapons. there's about 1,600 tons of highly enriched uranium, some 500 tons of plutonium separated from spent fuel. even a tiny fraction of that getting into the wrong hands could cause a global catastrophe. it exists in dozens of countries. in hundreds of buildings. but not thousands of buildings. not tens of thousands of buildings. so securing these stocks is a big job. and a complicated job. but it's potentia

especially after hiroshima and nagasaki. hence we have done so much what we can to hold it at bay. it is far harder for us to imagine that the explosion of a billion pistons ever minute can be doing damage on the same kind of scale but that's us. big. and that question of how we become less big in some kind of graceful way is the most interesting question that we face. the most interesting political question, the one that will define the next period of time. the one i think that washington has yet to successfully grapple with and is going to have to if we're going to have some kind of future. now, the clear beginning politically for how you make this transition start to happen, for how you begin to get the world to wise up a little bit is to finally go about the business of putting a real price on carbon. of making fossil fuel bear the cost for the damage that it exacts on the environment. and when that happens, when congress or the united nations finally gets it together to do that in a serious way, then we may begin to see real -- real work towards this trend. we see around the e

that was the nuclear bombs dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki. they have a lot of power. from the beginning, they monopolized his energy and used it to dominate other nations. by making wrong policies up to this day, they have prevented this energy to be used for the purpose of peace, welfare, and in a positive direction. recently they issued a statement to justify possessing nuclear bombs. they adopted a number of measures and made a number of policies. all of those policies were against peace and humanity and were in line with nuclear proliferation. first of all, the production of nukes, if the country possesses nuclear weapons, will it actually stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons or not? it will boost the production of nuclear weapons. when the country possesses nuclear weapons, others say they have this why should we not? it has been 60 years the city have been working towards nuclear non-proliferation. however, all the policies they have made have been encouraging nuclear proliferation. is it possible that some country has nuclear weapons but asks others not to

that was the nuclear bombs that dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki. it was then when actually nucleus and knewically eye -- nucleii have a lot of power. from the very beginning they monopolized this energy and used it to dominate other nations. and by making wrong policies so up to this day they have not, they have prevented this energy to be used for the purpose of peace, welfare and in the positive direction actually. you see, recently they issued a statement to justify possessing nuclear bombs. they adopted a number of measures and made a number of policies, all of of those polics were against peace and humanity and were in line with nuclear proliferation. first of all, the production of nukes itself, if a country possesses nuclear weapons, will it actually stop nuclear defense? no. it will, ironically, lose nuclear defense. actually -- well, when a country pezs nuclear weapons and others are -- possesses nuclear weapons and others are watching, others may say, okay, they have this, why shouldn't we? it's been 60 years that they say we are working

and likewise, if you take society, it is true we have an experiment with hiroshima and doctor sake, but we can't afford to learn from another major nuclear exchange. because there might not anyone to learn from. again, so that if something's we have to be enough to know we are a little different than any other generation. and to me that means it is more important to study the humanities, to think through the arts and to participate in the arts endeavors. and i worry a lot that school systems throughout the country are giving less attention to some of these subjects. >> just to follow-up on that, as you know, no child left behind, that's the basic foothold that the congress has in elementary and secondary school education. as a matter of public policy, if you are in congress what would you like -- how would you use the opportunity, the reauthorization of that bill to deal with some of the problems that you are discussing today? >> well first, i would like to stress i am a little beyond the presumption of advising another member of congress. i do my best not to. and so all i can tell you

that was the nuclear bomb dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki. it was then when, actually, a nuclei had a lot of power. from the very beginning, they used it to dominate other nations. and by making wrong policies. so after this day,

of the united states right now pointing at this city, among others, warheads of the size of the hiroshimaarhead. that are not counted. anybody who tells you they will get them in the next treaty has a. they would like to sell you -- has a bridge they would like to sell you. >> good to have you with us. the question was from this young lady. >> i have to put the microphone on. while there may be one sitting off our coast, we also happen to have one of our own cited on them. >> i would like to ask if you could comment on the notion of strategic stability in china. the chinese have never officially had policy of mutual balance. does it have some further implications? thank you very much. >> repeat that for me. >> the question was, what do you think is the sense of the strategic concept of the chinese in the nuclear posture review? what is it that we are imputing to them as far as theories of deterrence and the like? >> i think that it had to be recognized and expanding possibilities and the modernization of their forces. while the numbers are not great now, i do not see any restraint being i

warheads of the size of higher oshe ma warhead that are -- hiroshima warhead were not counted. i don't think this is a sound basis for national security policymaking. peter, i know you have to go. thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> good to have you with us. the question was to this young lady. yes, ma'am. >> the mic. i got to put the mic up. while there may be one sitting off our coast, we also happen to have one of our own -- so -- in shalla as they say. >> i would like to ask if you could comment on notion of strategic -- in new n.p.r. in china because chinese have never officially had policy of mutual balance so does it have some further implications? thank you very much. >> repeat that for me. >> the question, as i heard it was what do you think is the sense of the strategic concept, i guess, of the chinese in the n.p.r., the nuclear posture review, what is it that we are imputing to them in terms of their theories and the deterrence and the like? >> i think it had to be recognized of -- in expanding capabilities and the modernizeation of their

the destruction power of nuclear-weapons is 1000 times what it was at hiroshima and nagasaki. host: chantilly, virginia. david is on our democrat's line. caller: how are you doing? i would like to actually second the comments of the previous gentleman. we go around preaching non- proliferation of nuclear weapons -- and we have israel and others who are not members. if iran is an issue -- but there are other -- i do not know why countries like saudi arabia and others just sit around not wanting to deal with the issue. we are at a stalemate. host: do you thanks -- you think it was a mistake mr. netanyahu not to be at the conference, the nuclear proliferation conference held in washington? caller: here is the thing. i am sure they were invited. but i do not think he gives a hoot, if you want my honest opinion. he has always been very antagonistic. i think the way his administration has treated other members of the diplomatic corps, particularly the ambassador, i think, to turkey, it shows a complete disdain for other members. host: about five more minutes of calls today. the 15th

responsibility reminded us in vivid terms what a nuclear strike would mean, and i quote, a single hiroshima-sized bomb detonated in new york city col kill over 250,000 people and cause somewhere between $2 trillion and $10 trillion in damage. they continue, a large-scale nuclear exchange with russia would kill more than 100 million americans in the first half hour. it would block out the sun and in a matter of days, the average temperature would plummet 18 degrees faren height to levels not seen on in depth. agriculture would seize to exist throughout the northern hemisphere and billions of people would starve in the following months. . that's why the new start must be the start and not the end of our commitment to eliminate nuclear weaponry once and for all. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. mr. poe from texas. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker. i bring you news from the third front, that being the southern border with our neighbor mexico. the first front being iraq, the second front being afghanistan. we're engaged in three conflicts, thre

a number of atomic bombs in nagasaki and hiroshima made the catastrophe and killed hundreds of thousands of people and now you have 9000 and you want to reduce them by 600 over a number of years? you're just reminding other nations of that. iran may or is accused of possessing one nuclear bomb in the next several years. if one nuclear bomb is so dangerous to the world, how about these 9000 bombs? you say that your arsenal can decimate the earth for several times. why are you stockpiling these arsenals? is that for human rights? on these policies -- all of these policies are against humanity. the greatest betrayal of nuclear weapons has been that they have equated nuclear energy with nuclear weapons. who says that nuclear energy means nuclear weapons? they, themselves, have defined it that way just because they are going to monopolize that prevent other nations from acquiring clean nuclear energy. this is the greatest betrayal to humanity. they are depriving humanity of a great blessing which can be used in industry, agriculture, medicine and other sectors. of course, the betrayals and tr

this new book on hiroshima the one that cameron is interested in making possible a movie on, i've gone into that, an extremely good book. i have been reading michelle malkin culture of corruption which is a very good book. another good study of president obama that is very valuable. so i read very generally and i read fiction as well as non-fiction and some older fiction. recently been going back and reading a lot of the old crime books. maltese falcon and those forties' novels. i love that riding. i read very broadly all the time. >> to you know yet for sure next nonfiction project will be? >> talking with simon shuster about a couple different projects. i'm thinking very seriously about another book on oil. remember i wrote to a stranglehold, very controversial where i said it will is not dinosaurs soup, it's not -- it is abiotic not made by fossil fuel. i like to a dance that in another book. and simon shuster is talking with me about a book on obama, maybe another kind of comprehensive book on obama after a couple of years in office. evaluate the biographical details and how they a