henry kissinger testified before the committee. he said that the large russian stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons unmatched by a comparable american deployment could threaten the ability to undertake extended deterrents. and former secretary james schlesinger called this imbalance russia's tactical nuclear weapons, he casted eight the frustrating, vexatious and increasingly worrisome issue. and in the past, many current members of the united states senate have expressed their concerns with russia's tactical nuclear weapons. even vice president biden when he was a member of this body, when he was on the foreign relations committee, spoke and said, we were hoping in start iii to control tactical nuclear weapons. they are the weapons that are shorter-range and are used at shorter distances referred to as tactical nuclear weapons. well, mr. president, as i look at this and work through this, it seems that clearly this administration did not make tactical weapons a top arms control and nonproliferation objective in the new start trea

kissinger and clark clifford. holbrooke aspired to be a great man himself. his signature achievement negotiating an end to the war in bosnia at the dayton peace talks in 1995. that ended a religious and ethnic war that had raged among the former yugoslavian nations. tearing europe apart leading to ethnic cleansing against minority muslim, rapes and genocides until he negotiated a peace treaty signed in paris at the end of 1995. >> this the best alternative to continued war. >> reporter: he served as ambassador to germany and then to the united nations under bill clinton. a close adviser to john kerry, holbrooke was known to have aspired to become secretary of state had kerry been elected. instead of next democrat to occupy the white house was barack obama who offered the state department job to hillary clinton. clinton carved out a special envoy role for holbrooke awarding him the toughest assignment of all, pakistan and afghanistan. his difficult relationship with afghan president hamid karzai became an obstacle.

but without the language, former secretary kissinger still supports this treaty. so all i can say is, i think there's a legitimate concern which is expressed in this amendment, it's a concern which has existed and needs to be addressed, as former senator biden said when he was debating a treaty, but not to kill a treaty by expression of a legitimate concern. and so that's what i think the issue here is, not whether or not the language in the risch amendment expresses something which is legitimate but whether or not the absence of that concern being expressed in the treaty should be enough to vote for this amendment and to kill this treaty as a result and to force it back to an open-ended negotiation which we have no idea where that would lead. so i hope we defeat the risch amendment not because we disagree with what the concern is but because, understanding that concern, we don't want to do damage to the treaty and kill a treaty which does so much for the security of this nation. i yield the floor, and if i have any time left, i yield the balance of my time. the p

henry kissinger, who incidentally believes that the treaty should be ratified. he said the argument for this treaty is not to placate russia. that is not the reason to approve this treaty. under no conditions should a treaty be made as a favor to another country or to make another country feel better. it has to be perceived to be in the american national interest. so what are the two big arguments for the treaty? well, we've got to get the verification regime in place because the russians might cheat. by the way, they're our new best friends and we have to keep it that way. dr. kissinger has written before about this matter of what should motivate you to ratify or to do an arms control treaty. he said every arms control treaty has to be justified within its own four corners. you can never say that a reason to do it is to make the other country feel better or to gain some kind of leverage with the other country or to gain its cooperation some way. it is illegitimate and doesn't work. he's made that point precisely with respect to that treaty. he's a proponent of

a henry kissinger joke? i got to start reading this stuff before i come out here.ne of the biggest revelations is hillary clinton asked u.s. diplomats to spy on other country's diplomats. and if they had any extra time, to spy on her husband too. a lot of it is very gossipy. moammar gadhafi of libya apparently has a ukrainian blonde nurse on his arm everywhere he goes and uses botox, which is fun to know. this weekend, the state department is rushing to assure their allies that i guess they didn't mean anything that they said about them behind their backs. but this is a major embarrassment for the government. because besides the classified information, which obviously was also give an idea of what we really think about these various leaders from around the world. for instance, french president nicolas sarkozy, they called him an emperor with no clothes, which is not a compliment. they gave them nicknames. for instance, british prime minister david cameron is known johnny little lips. the president of iran, mahmoud ahmadinejad is known as scruffy mcwindbreaker. chin

henry kissinger. "i recommend ratification of the treaty," he says. "it should be noted i come from the hawkish side of this debate so i'm not advocating these measures in the be a strct. i try to build them into the microcosm of the national interest." this morning george shuttle, colin powell, kissinger scries written an op-ed piece in the "washington post" make the case. let me say this: those who have raised questions about this are as concerned about our national security as anybody else. they believe, i'm sure, as i do, in the same goals: let's keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorist organizations and rogue nations. let's stop the spread of nuclear weapons. and ultimately let's try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons on this planet. i think everybody here that's involved in this debate are people of good will. and my fervent hope is that in the coming couple of weeks, as we conclude this session of the united states congress, that we'll find way to have on the floor this treaty, which is so widely supported, and be able to, all of

it looked like everyone was for it, including henry kissinger. >> the main reason was, they included in the preamble a sentence saying there was an interrelationship between offensive missiles and defense of weapons, meaning anti-missile defenses. in the decade preceding the bush administration had concluded the treaty of moscow eight years ago and there was not a syllable of any connection between them. this was a return to an era of the cold war where you would limit defenses because the russians are afraid it would degrade the value of their nuclear arsenal. that is a mistake because our only hope in the 21st century of defending ourselves against robes will be missile defense. you do not want anything in a tree that restricts that. >> i listened to that debate, particularly the debate on wednesday, and heard simply lieberman, senator mccain, speaking to senator corker, to clarify the charges that were made. the ambiguity in the preamble is what they focused on, contrary to what you said. >> this is a political achievements of great significance. the president's position, he preva

henry kissinger, george schultz, james baker, yourself, lawrence eagleburger, colin powell, condoleezzatary of defense william cohen. jim baker is on the list somewhere there. >> yeah, he is. >> doug, mr. secretary, let me go to doug on this question. what's the problem with this? why are you questioning it? >> i think a number of those republican officials that you mentioned also raise questions about the treaty. the treaty establishes a link, what they call an interrelationship between offensive force reduction and missile defense. this is something the russians have been asking for for years. they tried it when i helped negotiate the predecessor treaty. the bush administration said, no, that's harmful to the united states, bullet the obama administration said yes. the other thing, the treaty has counting rules. complex counting rules that have the effect of imposing penalties on the united states if we want to convert long-range nuclear systems into long-range conventional systems. >> the pentagon says it's better to create new rockets. if you're going to use it for conventional purp

. >> great strategic thinkers, very few, think of kissinger, brzezinski, i didn't know as a child hethe sop of dean rusk and ended up in vietnam as a very junior aide in the the embassy, you had these large, large figures during the vietnam war, ended up the junior assistant to kissinger at the paris peace talks, all these years of diplomacy, none of us thought that this would be the end, keep thinking, hoping he was a survivor much i want to say a word about katy. >> his wife. >> katy martin, a great human rights advocate, great human rights journalist and author, theirs was an extraordinary love story, a 21st century love story, many different continent a lot of travel. she and his children are really sacrificed because everyone knew that richard holbrooke was pushing himself too hard. and the end, really, job the killed him. >> diplomat's life. 13-hour flights all the time. no sleep. you don't know what time zone you are in. this is -- this is not easy. >> in fact, he had a very long and difficult last trip to afghanistan and in fact, decided not go to lisbon for the nato summit b

and there's also this exchange between the president and national security adviser henry kissinger.ho have some other all of you who have some other name at the top of your list of worst presidents need to write the word "nixon" over whatever name you mistakenly have listed as the worst president in history. will you marry me? oooh, helzberg diamonds. yeah, well he must have saved some money with geico. reminds me of the gecko mating call. really? how does that go? shoo be doo be doo. geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. oh, my gosh. [ male announcer ] we know diamonds. oh, my gosh. [ male announcer ] together we'll make her holiday. that's why only zales is the diamond store. where you'll pay no interest if paid in full by january 2012. n g site help makey zales is the diamond store. you a sharper trader? mine can. td ameritrade can. they've got trading specialists i can call for help. and paper trading. free practice trading that helps me hone my technique. complex options. and free tutorials. online or in person. can a trading site really make a differ

every republican with any brains going back to scowcroft to schultz to kissinger, kissinger, dr. strangelove, they're all for this treaty. all of them for it, are we going to get it signed, ratified by the congress before they go to christmas? >> i think that they will and the reason is iran. this has not been enough, part of the discussion. we need russia in order to contain and isolate iran. and that's what ultimately this is about. if this treaty doesn't go through our relations will russia go into the crapper and we have a real problem. >> but they'll wonder who is calling the shots over here, david. >> i'm usually pessimistic about the senate doing the right thing. >> yeah. >> but in in case i think because of the overwhelming support, when you have the chairman of the joints chiefs of staff, you have bob gates a republican. >> and 67 votes. >> and everybody else who jonathan has mentioned say that we must do this for kyl and demint to hold it up under the banner of protecting christmas is about absurd as it's got then year so i'm hoping that it will pass in the next week. >

often at the side of great figures like kissinger and presidential counselor clark clifford, he aspired to be a great man himself. his signature achievement, negotiating an end to the war in bosnia in 1995. that ended a religious and ethnic war that had raged, tearing europe apart, leading to ethnic cleansing against minority muslims, rapes and genocide. until he negotiated a peace treaty, signed in paris at the end of 1995. >> this is the best alternative to continued war. >> reporter: he served as ambassador to germany and to the united nations under bill clinton. a close adviser to john kerry, he aspired to become secretary of state had kerry become elected. instead, the next democrat to occupy the white house was barack obama. clinton carved out a special envoy role for holbrooke, awarding him the toughest assignment of all, pakistan and afghanistan. his difficult relationship with hamid karzai became an obstacle, and he never forged a close partnership with president obama. married to author and journalist connie martin, holbrooke at the end was on hillary clinton's side on duty at

the end, i think it was clever to bring other politicians like the former president bush and henry kissinger into the discussion. they did -- they support the new start treaty with russia and when they said we will support the treaty, other republican politicians, senators in the senate also supported the treaty. >> president obama has signed a law allowing gays to serve openly in the military for the first time. the new lot overturns the don't ask, don't tell policy which forced game men and women to keep quiet about their sexual orientation or face dismissal. the ban will not be lifted immediately. the president and his top military advisers determine how to implement the law. students across italy have been taking to the streets to protest university reforms treated thousands joined demonstrators in the capital and other cities and police blocked off parts of central rum to block a repeat of last week's violent clashes. the prime minister's government says it will save billions of europe while strengthening higher education. the upper house is due to vote on wednesday. in ivory coast, the

former secretary of state henry kissinger said, "the treaty does not unduly restrict our ability to deploy an effective missle defense system." and, finally, former secretaries of states, kissinger eagleberger and collin powell wrote in "the washington post" that new start preserves our ability to deploy effective missle defenses. the testimonies of our military commanders and civilian leaders make clear that the treaty does not limit u.s. missle defense plans. so i know we have a lot of experts in the senate on this issue, but i certainly believe that the experts who have spoken there about the lack of an impact on our ability as a country to develop a missle defense system are people who should be believed because they know what they're talking about. now, the other thing that i think it's important to point out, and i know senator kerry did this earlier, but with respect to the resolution of ratification and some of the concerns that senator demint raised on the floor this evening, i just want to read what is in this resolution of ratification. this is language that senator demint had a

a friend of kissinger, kerry, and both clintons, he served under every democratic president since jfk. his most recent assignment, as president obama's special representative to afghanistan and pakistan. and in that job, he was constantly reminded of his first job as a young man in vietnam. >> the american public needs to be clear on why we're in afghanistan. this is not vietnam. this is not the balkans. it's not iraq. it relates directly to our safety at home. >> reporter: at different times, he was a journalist, a banker, an ambassador to germany and the u.n. mentioned for the nobel peace prize, mentioned as secretary. mentioned often in the media, thanks to his vast contacts. he strongly believed in america as a force to lead the world. he could be abrupt, aabrasive, and charming at the same time. he led with a combination of brains and heart, until the latter gave out. a torn aorta, 20-plus hours of surgery, 40-plus units of blood. a three-day struggle to survive until his death last night at the age of 69. and he spoke until the end about what motivated him. >> we have american m

- you have the foreign-policy establishment of the republican party that supports it, from henry kissinger and condoleezza rice and george w. h. broche. why is it you cannot get support for something like that from the republicans? >> a significant number republicans decided they would filibuster anything that did not fit their order of business. i have never seen a letter like this. i read it before. i will not read it again. but i have never seen a letter like this. 42, that is enough to block the senate from acting. you need 60. 42 senators signed a letter saying they will stop any legislative business that does not follow what they want to get done. so they are setting the agenda. what they're saying is that you have to do the taxing first and you have to do the government funding second. but we are not going to let anything else come first. even if you can i get those done. even if there is a week we waste trying to negotiate something on those items. there it is. we will not let the senate function on legislative business on until their priorities are dressed. i have never seen that

secretary of state henry kissinger, and so on and so on. we have in "the washington post" this comment as signed by henry kissinger, george schultz, james baker, lawrence eager berger, e, they say the leaders made clear that the treaty does not limit u.s. missile defense plans. i think the biggest danger to our country is not acting on this, mr. president. if we don't act, that's a danger to the national security of this nation. and i am very pleased to see the incredible bipartisan support outside this chamber, and i hope inside this chamber. i'm hopeful, i'm very hopeful. but we will find out in the next coming days. i wanted to also talk about the two very critical votes that we cast here moments ago that's so important to large segments of our community. on the dream act, which would give a path of legality to students who are outstanding in their community, who want to join the military or go to college. this was an important bill. because of a filibuster, we needed 60 votes. we got a hefty majority, 55 votes, but the republican filibu

. >> and then there was this about his own national security adviser, henry kissinger. we long have known that nixon was critical of him. >> the nixon library says there are still some 400 hours of tape conversations still to be released. >>> when we come back tonight, the small boy who picked up a book and hasn't put if down. you'll understand why when you hear what was inside. clock? try thermacare heatwraps, for all day relief without pills. i was surprised, thermacare worked all day. you feel the heat. and it relaxes and unlocks the muscle. you've got to try it. [ man ] thermacare, more effective for back pain than the maximum dose of acetaminophen, the medicine in tylenol. go to thermacare.com today for a $3 off coupon. thermacare. no pills. no pain. just relief. the middle of this special moment and i need to run off to the bathroom. i'm fed up with always having to put my bladder's needs ahead of my daughter. so today i'm finally talking to my doctor about overactive bladder. [ female announcer ] if you're suffering, today is the day to talk to your doctor and as

corner what are your thoughts well i think it well when you have people from colin powell to henry kissinger to bill clinton endorsing the start treaty it is a no brainer and prime minister putin is correct that it would be stupid for the republicans to continue to block it but then again they want to block everything i think they're boxed into a corner now because our national security is at stake not only dropping the twenty thousand that are out there publicly that the intelligence community doesn't want to use a number but it's roughly twenty thousand or even more that both countries have down to some more reasonable number but the inspections the inspections that are necessary so that rogue terrorists don't get at these nuclear weapons that would be a disaster if you have terrorist to get at these weapons so for all of those reasons it's a must for the world's security to pass this treaty and i believe that republicans will come around because they too want this charity in the safety of the world it is or they've been dragging their heels so far one of the motives being of the open arms

a whole lot of republicans, senator, people from henry kissinger on back and on up since then, say we ought to ratify this thing. that it's a good thing that helps us to keep an eye on what the russians are doing. you have held it up, up until now. why? >> i haven't held it up. leader reid can bring it to the floor any time you wants to. i have no ability to hold it up. i haven't even said whether i'm for it or against it. all i've done is try to get the administration... >> schieffer: are you for it or against it? >> what i've tried to do is get the administration to focus on the modernization of our nuclear facilities and weapons, because when you go down to the very low levels that this treaty would take us, you've got to make very sure that what you have left works and is safe, reliable and secure. the administration is now i think a lot more focused on that. they recognize it's going to cost a fair amount of money in the future. when i see how the resolution of ratification turns out after amendments are offered to that and proceed a little bit down the road regarding modernizati

and now i know why kissinger stopped at three. four may have been one too many. but i would go to the comic-con vengeses and see people over the course of a few days and they were into reading. none of them had the novels i wrote. i like telling stories, but maybe i wasn't in a forum people were agreeable to. i had a friend who had history in that genre, and he convinced me that i should tell a story in a different way. >> did i explain it correctly? >> yeah. >> is there a character like you in this? >> there is a guy who bears a striking resemblance, and that was my session. -- my suggestion. i think we are at the bonus material. there is a better picture -- look at that. that's nasty. that's downright nasty. >> if i had a character in a comic book, i would make that character have sex with lots of women. >> yes. i don't know. why limit yourself to women? >> i am used to memwiors that have to be honest. this is the first time i have had a real love interest. >> where can people get this? >> mi where -- anywhere the books are sold. or go to 12 gauge .com. >> my f

this is something than any kissinger -- that henry kissinger and acknowledged. they warn about the risk of substituting the tyranny of judges for that of the government. historically, the dictatorship of the virtuous has also led to which chance. that is the dictatorship of the virtuous that is created and supported by benevolence. obama talked about fundamentally transforming america. another is an observation used as an epigraph. it is seldom that liberty of any kind was lost all at once. american troops away from the idea of government and has been gathering force for decades. as one fares, so fares the others. it is also something that we visit upon ourselves. one of the main points of this argument concerns the psychological change, the extensive government control. it involves a process of innovation. in exchange for the challenges and liberty and freedom and self-reliance. it becomes more and more difficult. difficult but not impossible. i like to think that last tuesday's election was an illustration of the james madison and conservation. in the last res

but without the language, former secretary kissinger still supports this treaty. so all i can say is, i think there's a legitimate concern which is expressed in this amendment, it's a concern which has existed and needs to be addressed, as former senator biden said when he was debating treaty, but not to kill a treaty by expression of a legitimate concern. and so that's what i think the issue here is, not whether or not the language in the risch amendment expresses something which is legitimate but whether or not the absence of that concern being expressed in the treaty should be enough to vote for this amendment and to kill this treaty as a result and to force it back to an open-ended negotiation which we have no idea where that would lead. so i hope we defeat the risch amendment not because we disagree with what the concern is but because, understanding that concern, we don't want to do damage to the treaty and kill a treaty which does so much for the security of this nation. i yield the floor, and if i have any time left, i yield the balance of my time. the pre

every republican with any brains, kissinger, they're all for this treaty. are we going to get it ratified before they go to christmas. >> i think we will and the reason is iran. we need russia in order to can tan and isolate iran. that's what ultimately this is about. if this treaty doesn't go through, our relations with russia go into crapper. >> they'll wonder who's calling the shots over here, david. >> i'm usually pessimistic about the senate doing the right thing. everybody else who jonathan has mentioned say we must do this, for kyl and demint to hold it up under the banner of protecting christmas is about as absurd as it's gotten. >> thank you and by the way, hop p happy holidays. tea party leaders are already angry with the republican leadership in congress. why they're mad, next. a lot of fighting on the left the last two weeks. enjoy the fight on the right. this is "hardball" only on msnbc. [ male announcer ] got a cold? [ coughs ] [ male announcer ] confused what to get? click on the robitussin relief finder. click on your symptoms. get the right

i make the basic assumption that henry kissinger, george schultz, jamgs baker, condoleezza rice and lawrencegleburger, hard nosed people would have spotted a flaw in the nuclear arms treaty if one exists. i assume questions on the treaty of matters of verification, missile defense, modernization have been answered satisfactory. above all, not to fall back into the hostility between moscow and our country that prevailed. we do not need a second cold war on top of the threat we face from terrorists. we need the strongest possible alliance between america and russia. we need russia to build a tougher pressure on tehran to prevent iran's development of a nuclear weapon. the stronger the washington/moscow alli

. >> the white house has welcomed the support of our prominent republicans, including henry kissinger and james baker. in a op ed, they wrote, quote, it reduces the number of nuclear weapons that each side deploys while enabling the united states to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent. the chairman of the foreign relations committee was optimistic the treaty would be ratified in the lame duck session. >> it's my hope that these conversations that we're having and the process that is in place is going to produce hopefully a positive outcome. >> but jim demint is threatening to filibuster and many colleagues are prepared to block it. the wikileaks release of classified state department cables reveals mistrust. one cable quoted a spanish source portraying russia as a mafia case criminals have access to the kremlin. if russia and nato cannot agree on missile defense, russia will have to counter the nato system and increase its own nuclear arsenal. >> it's not us who are moving forward our missiles to your territory. it's you who are planning to mount missiles at the vicinity of our borrow

he had a kissinger-ian mind.s strategically like few other men and women i have dealt with. he can be tough but he is my friend. >> do you have a christmas message? >> yes. as my grandpop would say, keep the faith. this country is so strong, so big, so resilient, nothing, nothing at all can damage its ability to move forward. a lot of people are hurting. i remember the year, a christmastime when my dad lost his job and he told us we had to move. it is horrible. you know what? you know what? we'll come back. and in the meantime, keep in your prayers all those people going through really difficult times. >> our men and women in uniform. >> look, jill was -- to be honest with you, i tried to -- i hoped to spend christmas in iraq. it is inappropriate to go while the government is still being formed. our thoughts and prayers are with them. for thanksgiving we had young men and women who are amputees for the holidays. we will spend christmas at walter reed. these are incredible kids. all you moms and dads and sons and

henry kissinger has a very long statement. i won't read the entire one. but he says "for all these reasons, i recommend ratification of this treaty. i do not believe this treaty is an obstacle to a missile defense program or pho tkerpbgzation. rejection this have treaty would indicate a new period of pherpbl policy has start -- of american policy has started that would have an unsettling impact on the international environment." here you have somebody who has been deeply involved in foreign relations for so many years, saying in essence -- and i am not quoting him here but i'm summing up what i read -- would be a radical departure from america's foreign policy if we were not to do this. james baker, secretary of state for president george bush, and he writes, "new start appears to take our country in a direction that can enhance our national security. it can improve washington's relationship with moscow regarding nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. a relationship that will be vital if the two countries are to cooperate in order to stem nuclear prolifer

people like henry kissinger and george shultz are not just supporting the treaty but saying that thise first of a number of steps to steadily reduce all the nuclear arsenals lambda world, eliminate the major threat to us, and in so doing working on the countries like iran and north korea. you consider example of that. goneat new website have gons up, securityconsensus.org. it is a group of retired military and former security officials from both parties that argue that now's the time to take this step by step reduction of nuclear weapons. we can do with a lot fewer nuclear weapons, save money, and improve security. host: ellen on the line for independents. thank you for calling. largestthe world's deposits of uranium is located outside of virginia. there's a movement to mine the uranium. with this treaty stop them from going forward? guest: no, it would not. there are no restrictions in mining uranium. it's very common to its as common as tin in the earth. we have uranium. we also import uranium from canada. we no longer need any more uranium for our nuclear weapons. the reason people

bush, george shultz, jim baker, jim schlesinger, henry kissinger, colin powell, condoleezza rice, stephen hadley, howard baker, lawrence eagleburger and frank lucy. many of these officials serve at a time when states were related to russian nuclear arms were even higher than they are today. during the cold war, uncertainty over russia's intentions and weapons advances, this cost us 10s if not hundreds of billions of dollars. and industry developed devoted to parching soviet military capabilities. this is one of the biggest if not the biggest expense of our intelligence budget each year. the fact that we could not judge soviet military capabilities lead us to elevate our spending on weaponry. called of a sense of caution. these times predominated by contradictory risk assessments and rumors about dangerous new soviet weapons systems. we were constantly worried about missile gaps destabilizing arms deployment or soviet technology--all of this came at tremendous cost to the american taxpayer. and the psyche of the nation which lived under the threat of mutual assured destruction. i firmly be

george shultz, henry kissinger, james baker and on and on our in support of this treaty. plus virtually all at the united states military. there are a few outliers that may have their own reason. so i play it? why do we pass the s.t.a.r.t. treaty at the time when the soviet union was collapsing and when there was major anxiety over where the world would go. and now, when we know russia wants to move closer to the united states, russia wants to develop a relationship with the unit states, this could be positive for both countries. here is a treaty which improve the cooperation between both nations. why would we not support it? >> one quick word about reciprocity. we have a national security working group that senator kyl is a member of. and every time he wanted the briefing, we got the security folks appear to provide that briefing. what we wanted to go to geneva, that was sort no. but there has been real effort on the part of the administration and senator kerry and all of us to accommodate senator kyl throughout here. and reciprocity is got to be a two-way street. the pu

the end, i think it was clever to bring other politicians like the former president bush and henry kissinger into the discussion. they did -- they support the new start treaty with russia and when they said we will support the treaty, other republican politicians, senators in the senate also supported the treaty. >> president obama has signed a law allowing gays to serve openly in the military for the first time. the new lot overturns the don't ask, don't tell policy which forced game men and women to keep quiet about their sexual orientation or face dismissal. the ban will not be lifted immediately. the president and his top military advisers determine how to implement the law. students across italy have been taking to the streets to protest university reforms treated thousands joined demonstrators in the capital and other cities and police blocked off parts of central rum to block a repeat of last week's violent clashes. the prime minister's government says it will save billions of europe while strengthening higher education. the upper house is due to vote on wednesday. in ivory coast, the

party and saying there is no chance no matter what colin powell has to say or james baker or henry kissinger has to say or madeleine albright? is there any chance this is going to happen while this congress is in session? >> the american people deserve a full daebtd on the senate floor of the start treaty. if senator reid chooses to bring that treaty to the floor -- and he could have done that over the last many months. he's chosen not to do that. if he brings that to the senate floor and we have a full opportunity to debate it, then there will be a vote, and if they get their 67 votes, then it will be ratified. >> ifill: senator durbin, there is some talk here in washington -- i heard senator kerry say it last night -- there are just a few pieces to be put in place now to get movement on start. can you tell us what those are and is there any movement? >> yes, there is and there is a positive development, i left a republican senator on the stairway and he said give us some time to debate on it, we can get up to 75 votes or more, maybe much more. that is an encouraging thing and it's somethin

he was of the ilk of a kissinger, and there's just no one there any more. he was as andrea said -- it's going to become a cliche, larger than life. but he was just absolutely focused on delivering. >> steve, what zhou think his loss means for our efforts in afghanistan and pakistan. that was his last assignment. >> i think it's very large. you know, he didn't have the security and defense portfolio, but he had the portfolio of siouxing up the skeletal structure of what might be the next country there. and dealing with trying to get agricultural change there's. and trying to build civil society and get people to feel as if they could be stakeholders in their communities. he brought together in the u.s. government about 17 different agencies and bureaus in a regular meeting. i remember talking to one of his senior -- you know, very big critics in the white house saying, i don't understand why holbrook is just replicating the functions of government that already exist. and my response was, richard holbrooke is single handedly knocking down the bureaucratic bar

henry kissinger. james baker. republican secretaries of state have said the same thing. how can it be that the republican party opposes this critical national security measure? >> well, eliot, again, i think you have to look at what other agreements are on the sidebar there. senator kyl has been involved in this issue and raised concerns publicly and privately about what has maybe been negotiated on the side that maybe we're not fully aware of. >> i know you're in the house and the letter was of course responding to the senators. john boehner has wanted to bring in this whole new spirit of cooperation. i just wonder do you feel that letter kind of undermines that spirit? >> what we're focused on is the house. what we're trying to do is set up to run this house in the more open and transparent way than it's ever been run before. >> why is it not reasonable on the tax cut issue just to raise the threshold of the rich, say, to $1 million? nobody feels sorry for people earning $1 million. wouldn't that be a compromise solution that everybody could agree with? >> i think what

i was at this event with an, kissinger, and richard holbrooke one of the keynote speakers because he was on the ground -- doing civil society development. his job today in afghanistan is much like when his career began in vietnam. i asked him about differences and similarities. he went to the differences, which really has to do with what triggered this reaction, what triggered the government in afghanistan being toppled by the united states after supporting al qaeda and asia before al qaeda but then he went through along list that were structural similarities. i think he was skeptical of our ability to do this and i think he believed the reconciliation approach, beginning to deal with the people we were fighting was going to be the only way out of this. i really wish we had a few more years with him because i think he would have been absolutely the right guy to lead those negotiations and get them to a political outcome. host: what do you think the impact will be on the afghan- pakistan strategy for the administration? guest: i think it is hard to say. it leaves a huge, gaping hole.

former secretary of state henry kissinger once said that if richard asked you to do something you should just say yes because if you say no, you'll eventually get to yes but the journey will be very painful. general david petraeus observed it is every commander's dream to have a diplomatic partner nicknamed the bulldozer. but for all of the swagger there was always his moral core, his outrage at injustice, his belief in the humanitarian mission. dick holbrooke was on this program nearly 50 times. he was my guest host when i was in the hospital for heart surgery. he twice offered to get me medevaced out of europe when i fell seriously ill. and he was scheduled to be on this program on friday of this week. we mourn his death and our thoughts are with his family, his wife, his brother andrew, his sons david and anthony and his step children, elizabeth and christopher jennings. tonight we remember richard holbrooke with conversations ant him and conversations with him. we begin with strobe talbott, president of the brookings institution and deputy secretary of state under president clinton a

and there's also this exchange between the president and national security adviser henry kissinger.u who have some other name at the top of your list of worst presidents need to write the word "nixon" over whatever name you mistakenly have listed as the worst president in history. [ slap! ] [ slap! slap! slap! slap! slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster. ♪ tum ta tum tum tums [ male announcer ] you know her. we know diamonds. together we'll make her holiday. that's why only zales is the diamond store. where you can get up to $1,000 off now through sunday. >>> after a month of silence, michael steele announced monday night that he would run for re-election as chairman of the republican national committee. in his statement steele said, yes, i have stumbled along the way, but have always accounted to you for such shortcomings. no excuses, no lies, no hidden agenda. going forward, i ask for your support and your vote for a second term. our work is not done. and my commitment

and henry kissinger and all my advisers were saying let him come. is the humanitarian thing to do.so i contacted the president and the prime minister of a wrong. i told them that i was contemplating letting him come to new york for treatment. i wanted assurance from them that they would protect americans. at that time there were about 8,000 americans in iran on working in different forces including 66 members of the embassy staff. they sent me word that they would guarantee that nothing would happen to americans if the shot came to new york provided that he would pledge not to make any political statement while in america. he didn't. and then to the surprise of myself and i think to the surprise of the president and prime minister, the militants took hostages. when the ayatollah after three days supported the capture and holding of hostages then both the president and prime minister resigned in protest. that was just the beginning of a long ordeal where they held hostages. so i don't really believe that i would have done anything differently. the main advice i got was to attack ira

called it -- i know senator mccain respects henry kissinger. i know he talked to him for advice in the course of a presidential race. he's still one of our wise men of foreign policy and state craft. and he testified to our committee that that statement, you ought to just ignore it. forget about it. it has nothing to do with this treaty. and all it does is state a truism, a fact, a reality. there is a relationship between offense and defense. and if we can't be, i don't know, sort of capable enough here and understand the nuance of this thing well enough to be able to admit the truth about something, given all of the other evidence that's on the table about where we're heading, we would make an enormous mistake to kill the treaty over a nonbinding, near irrelevant piece of text. now let me just say further, i've already pointed out that in the resolution of ratification, we've obviated the need to have this agreement. we've completely put in there language that i think clarifies. i'm happy to work with my colleague further to see if there's som

i'll turn back to what henry kissinger and others said who always warned don't predicate the support for a treaty on improving your relationship with someone. the treaty should relate to reducing arms or whatever the subject of the treaty is and not based on anything other than that or you get into always trying to piece the other side and risking that they will withdraw from the treaty. third, the president said it is about the safety and security about the united states of america. i have yet for anybody to tell me what it is, what threat we are reducing by agreeing with the russians that both of us are going to reduce our delivery vehicles and warheads. the russians don't have to reduce theirs. they can build up under the treaty. i don't think we see a big threat there. finally the president said every minute we drag our feet is a minute that we have no inspectors on the ground at the russian nuclear sites. we need to continue the good relationships, but you can't trust them, so we have to get the folks on the ground verifying what's going on right now. as i pointed out before, th