he blamed henry kissinger for nixon's problems and took everything out in henry kissing kissinger.total nonsense. >> wrong, wrong, wrong -- >> that never happened -- >> entirely -- >> you're absolutely wrong and you're the man behind this whole business with trump and with this goosifer and the russians and you have the nerve to get on television and make these wild accusations when you're on television before predicting exactly when the wikileaks information would come out -- >> because it's the end of the hour, roger, you have 30 seconds to respond. >> bill is wrong about all of that. i would be happy to go toe to toe in any public forum he chooses. i suggest we keep it civil, that's all. >> it is certainly interesting to see you both here having read the memo of your last interview so many decades ago and i appreciate you both sharing views, the point. we'll be right back. swings. sure we could travel, take it easy... but we've never been the type to just sit back... not when we've got so much more to give when you have the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant. ameripr

kissinger would say yes, we realize you have to do that. you need to maintain your credibility in the third world. kissinger actually want china to maintain their credibility in the third world at this point. they think it could be useful against the soviet union. it is a complicated dynamic. they are always central to chinese foreign-policy. there was a changing and moderating of its tone. >> there is one dimension -- >> i do islamic history. time in sudanh of in the early 60's. was one of the countries that had recognized the people's republic. it had a very small embassy. one of the things that i found that sudan had a dirt well organized, very influential communist party. the chinese embassy people seemed to have no interest at all in working with the local communist party. it really wasn't particularly pro-soviet. -- dion -- is >> i think that is a good question. recollections would be very fascinating to hear more about. let me say, this is the. there. one of the reasons that china kept a relatively hands-off attitude toward the commu

helmut .ohl honorary leadership again she paid tribute to his achievements when he won the henry kissingerrize. he said not one word about her. how much is angela merkel like her one-time mentor? >> tell us more about the relationship between them. very different people. catholic from the west of germany and deeply ofedded in the tradition capitalism and europe. east, a woman from the from a protestant and by the way communist background, who has no emotional relationship to anything helmut kohl stood for. they are very different people and you saw it in the way angela merkel has handled europe -- badly, in my opinion. she is a nationalist. a protestant nationalist from prussia whereas he was a european. imagine twordly more different types of people. >> tell us a little bit about because the key moment in their relationship was the party donation scandal in 1999. tell us about her intervention and that crisis and whether that intervention was courage or opportunism? >> it was both. timepenly said it at the that we should not be afraid to clear this whole thing up. that is what she did. sh

henry kissinger would have been thrilled. been in effect president of foreign policy, president of all defense policy. because in what you described it all flows into the national security adviser. and if the national security adviser doesn't have to check with the president, doesn't the national security adviser on these matters become president. >> i don't know any national security adviser or secretary of defense -- i would bet secretary mattis and general mcmaster are in that category. they don't want to operate as free agents. they don't want to operate without the input from the wlous, the inner agency. they are used to a normal orderly national security process. they don't like freelancing they want organized fms process. they want buy in from the commander in chief. they would want that. i think the problem is really a policy problem which is that the president has to date been unwilling to push russia out of the way in the skies over syria. and as a result what you've seen is you've seen iranian drones, syrian fighte

christian will introduce a one thend, is co-sponsored by woodrow wilson center's dish program, and its kissinger's -- institute as well as gw history department. with that, christian will and should is today's speaker. thank you. thank you eric. welcome to all of you. apologies for the slight lead. .e have since been covering the they've been patient with us in the past -- running over session. i feel good about giving them a .ouple minutes extra for set up be aware, you wille

. >> what about cantor -- kissinger?. >> donna was very impressed one very graphic aspect getting up at 50,000 feet he realized his left lung was not pressurizing and so i already told you when exposed to extremely low pressures blood boils so his hand started to swell up so of course, the proper response would be to read you back to the ground to say i have lost pressurization i am coming down. that he toughed it out but that he and the london he went up to the altitude to make a free fall now with his ascent he actually passed out because the timing was off remember showed you that box he was sitting on? it got stuck in only takes a few seconds to get the timing off they started it when he shed jump but because he had difficulty getting off the bench he was about five seconds late so the chute that was supposed to stabilize them opened too early and he wasn't stabilized so he spun and lost consciousness and fortunately the automated systems deployed the parachute and he landed safely unconscious but safe so that jump wa

it would take henry kissinger 10 to unravel the various friend my enemy is my or is my enemy situations and alliances that we have in syria beyond. host: from the book, you write the following. turn of the s the 21 the century the united states accounted for almost three times global trade as china. the return of china and 15 other growing nonwestern economies which together account half of the world's population is dramatically global power the structure. how so? others, if right of you look at the beginning of had about a america ird of the world economy. to between a quarter and a fifth. in 17 years. 2020's, by the end of rump's second term or his successor's first term china will have over taken the united and the united states will be below 20% of the world economy. is he rise of others reconfiguring where the power goes globally. it is shifting east. the center of gravity is shifting east. this is not necessarily a bad thing. millions are being lifted out of india, china and africa. that is a part of the global america has upheld. but it does have geopolitical implications. americ

bath time kissinger these charges. they are. our whole idea of sexual abuse. is at the heart of the tune. in the court proceedings now offer me an opportunity. to play online i am. the cardinal was missing thursday's mass having taken a leave of absence to defend himself. the vatican expressed respect for the australian justice system. prepared to stand by their man. cardinal pell has openly and repeatedly condemned as immoral and intolerable the acts of abuse committed against minors. for years the seventy six year old has been accused of mishandling cases of clergy abuse back when he was an archbishop. victims groups see this court summons as a step in the right direction. george pal is a powerful symbol in australia. and he's made himself now powerful symbol internationally as well. and he wants bad attention he seeks that attention if. he is held accountable it gives hope to survive those around the world. that anybody can be held accountable no matter what position i hold. in twenty fourteen speaking before an australian commission cardinal pell had made

nixon and henry kissinger saw israel as a military power, they prove themselves as an asset for united states in the cold war. we could use it to put pressure on the allies of the soviet union. if they want to relieve the pressure, they have to come to us. the soviet union cannot help him the with that. only we can. we were not quite there in 1967, but that is the beginning of the idea that israel is a benefit to the united states and not a liability. that is quite an important turning point. a couple of other thoughts on the turning point and then i will toss it over. as you hear me talking, soviet union, united states and so 1 -- -- and so on, it was another world. it was the height of the cold war and a proxy arena in the cold war. that world is gone. something else happened in 1967. the biggest winner in 1967 was not the israelis. it was the saudis. it is interesting to think about of where we are today, because arab leadershe which had no recognition of israel, no negotiations with israel and no peace with israel. that was the public slogan. of khartoum. behind the scenes, the rea

if this were nixon and kissinger , i would say this is a strategic clever good cop-bad cop but it looksarray in the administration and they ought to line up their ducks to mix metaphors. >> olivier. the largest american military base is in qatar, the heart and soul of the campaign against isis. qatar is friends with turkey, an important nato ally. this is really worrisome rift beyond the white house and the state department. >> lisa there appears to be a rift between the white house and the state department on this in that soundbite we played earlier in the show. how do you see the president reconciling this? >> i don't know but i look to tillerson obviously as the former c.e.o. of exxon, he is very familiar with the gulf states and the leaders there. so i think he is a good person to be at the helm in trying to fix this but this is indeed a family squabble. we have interests in qatar with the military base, you know, so it's probably more of a wait and see now and sort of see how this plays out. >> all right. let's proceed to the grim judgment we call the week's win ners and loser. >>

for the concept that you saw in the -- later saw in the nixon administration where nixon and henry kissinger saw israeli military power which was as hillel explained, you know, proved itself in '67 as an asset for the united states in the cold war where we can use it to put pressure on the allies of the soviet union and if they want to be relieved of pressure from the israeli military they have to come to us. right? soviet union can't help them with that. only we can help with that. now, we weren't quite there in '67 but once you get to the land for peace idea, that's the israeli power is a benefit to the united states strategically and not a liability which is an incredibly important turning point. just a couple of other thoughts about the turning point and then i'll pass it over to liel. one is -- i mean, really as you hear me talking, saying soviet union, united states and so on, it was another world, right? height of the cold war and this was a middle east was a proxy arena in the cold war and that world is gone. there's something else that happened in '67. the biggest winner in 1967 was

years and years ago, somebody asked henry kissinger what he thought of the iran-iraq war. them can't lose. i am starting to feel that way about this. i don't want the president to lose, but i am sick and tired of his thin skin and his needless vindictiveness. and i am sick and tired of the left, not just the unhinged left, but the resistance left in congress opposing everything this president does. i'm just sick of both sides. they both have to start to act like grown-ups. the president does, and joe scarborough and a mika, who are being portrayed as somehow innocent victims of all of this, you don't call the president of the united states a shmuck on national television and get away with that. the president doesn't tweet what he tweeted and get away with that either. >> bill: and now just there from bernie. good to have you on our program today. bernie goldberg there live with us and we will see you next friday. >> shannon: right now, president trump hosting the president of south korea at the white house. as the media walked in to cover these two in this meeting just mom

the vice chair of kissinger negotiate helped to and manage richard nixon's first .ntry into china years he said that security is at the top of the list of issues that the european leaders are going to be talking about in this summit. there are a lot of uncertainties about internal security in the eu and how to deal with the united states as a potentially less reliable out like him and how to deal with president putin's interference in elections throughout the eu and in virtually every country, trying to weaken eu governments, the cohesion of the eu, weaken nato. it is clear that there is a russian strategy. >> on day one of this two-day ,ummit in brussels, donald tusk one of the specific decisions he announces that the eu would extend russia sanctions for another six months. those are the sanctions are put in place after the annexation of crimea. a big issue ifis you are in central europe or eastern europe and one the entire eq is looking at. brexit is probably the biggest deal certainly for the u.k., but this is where they are on day one, and we will see how it proceeds in the weeks of

those well-known mushy people, ronald reagan, henry kissinger, and james baker, george w.ularly used the concept of the community of nations as what the united states was trying to uphold. when we step away from that, our adversaries have to suspect that we're going to do less for other nations. other nations are going to feel more strongly that they have to take matters in their own hands. and we saw that experiment. we saw that experiment after the first world war when nations pulled away from each other. when the united states didn't join the league of nations. when britain and france stood for maximizing repa racials from germany rather -- reparation from germany rather than trying to create some kind of internationalcies tefment this is a potentially catastrophic philosophy. and it comes at a home when we have the very serious terror threats that you talked about, and i suspect ultimately more consequential we have the challenge of integrating into the global system arising china. my colleague, graham, at harvard has an important new book out on the trap talking about

henry kissinger never knew about the tapes. >> two people told me about it before it became public. i called bradley at home at 9:00 on saturday night i believe and said nixon taped himself. what should we do? then said i wouldn't bush one on it. it is a b plus story. i won't work on it. i took sunday off and monday they called butterfield. they answer the question. am i telling the truth? is the president telling the truth. what else happened? the prosecutors immediately subpoenaed the tapes. nixon is early advised to destroy the tapes. lers are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. dental professionals recommend using an electric toothbrush. for an exceptionally fresh feeling choose philips sonicare diamondclean. hear the difference versus oral b. in a recently published clinical study, philips sonicare diamondclean outperforms oral-b 7000, removing up to 82% more plaque and improving gum health up to 70% more. its

go back to the days of henry kissinger, they are all kinds of back channel communications.t's not at all uncommon. it's not uncommon for white houses, which sometimes want to burger on the diplomats in the state department. who wouldn't mind, that there were some channels that could be thought of leakproof in this environment? >> tucker: that's the un-american part of it. apparently, jared kushner was so worried about our government's own intel agencies leaking the content of his conversations, those intel agencies took that conversation, spied on them talking, and link the content. >> apparently so. >> tucker: what bothers me, it's all implication. if you will leak something about somebody, telus with the crime is. be explicit. you met with this person. today's mccarthyite. >> we discussed this. if you tried to design someone who would be absolutely detested by the nation's media, we could not do better than donald trump. he is everything news media don't like brady is rich, he is brash, he's unexperienced, he's pretty conservative. he's all these things. i think that the

one of the great successes of richard nixon and henry kissinger's policies is they were able to wouldan sphere while simultaneously preserving an alliance with the shah of iran. two seismic events altered the middle east. the first was the iranian revolution of 1979. which ushered a radical revisionist power into the region, and then triggered a reaction from countries like saudi arabia. iran's promise to spread its version of islam led the saudis to ramp up their own efforts to spread their own ideas and influence. the next earthquake was the american-led invasion of iraq in 2003. which destabilized the fundamental balance of power. you see, iran's ambitions had always been kept in check by s saddam hussein's iraq, which had fought a bloody eight-year war against it. with saddam gone, iran's influence began to spread in the region, especially within the shiites of iraq where it is now the most important external influence on the baghdad government. if the trump administration wants stability in the middle east, it should help to broker a new balance of power. this cannot happen purel

author, biograver are you ready franklin einsteinen kissinger and this fall da vingy. >> presidential pull it'ser prize winning jefrd, jackson, fdr churchill. apologies if i left anyone hout walter isaacson to you to start us off. how do you keep yourself appraised of how far off of plumb, dead center normal we have grown? >> this is a totally uncharted waters here. every single day something is coming along. and i almost find it puzzling that there is not more of a rebel onin washington who is are going to be judged by history. we can look how eisenhower. was judged it's almost like the frog in boiling water, we've been inured to things unthinkable it seems to me day in and day out whether it's about the character of the president and the way we have to explain it to kids or the way the government is being operated. >> john meacham you can go all your life and not hear more than one mention of the frog in boiling water experiment. yet i used in conversation today to describe exactly what's going on. same question to you. >> new orleanswork new jersey being l.b.j once say the presiden

and that was not just because of the terror, not just because of kissinger. you know better than me what was in favor of missile defense. it won by one vote in the environment of the street nonwar. nixon came to a conclusion that you have no choice but to negotiate. it doesn't mean he was wrong. but political considerations were at least as important as the deterrence. let me now go in a totally different direction and agree with you. i think when we are talking about major strategic moves, like what we're discussing now, beyond technology, it's a very major strategic move to change the world power. we should ask ourselves not only where we're going to be after our move but where are we going to be after possible and even likely responses. we're not good at that. we are now preoccupied with russian interference in american elections. there is no doubt in my mind that there was russian interference. some of us were predicting that interference for years. after the united states and the europeans decided to interfere in the russian political process, supporting

don't be surprised if henry kissinger still has his. extremely careless. nothing.he uk prepares to leave the european union. the exit of the european union. check this out. the new toy hitting shelves. i use what's already inside me to reach my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2,

meanwhile, yesterday putin met with former secretary of state henry kissinger in moscow. this according to the kremlin. >>> the white house is responding to a request from congress involving president trump's discussion last month that there were tapes of his conversation with former fbi director james comey. in a joint statement the leaders of the house russia investigation called on the white house to clarify whether there are any "recordings or documents" and they threaten to subpoena to fine out. initially the white house sent congress a letter pointing to the president's follow-up tweet from last week where he did rule out the possibility of recordings only saying he did not personally make or have that. that wasn't enough for the members of the intel committee. now the white house issued a new letter clarifying it has no recordings and just a side note here, nbc news has confirmed with national security advisor sizan rice had agreed a closed interview with the house intelligence committee. no date has yet to be announced for that meeting. >>> and there is fall-out t

home makes a target for your family to be separated and often types that the gateway, black female kissinger, your basketball to work as a teacher, social wore, thing that women are often interested in doing and being, now no longer on the table. how do we make our community and other communities more aware of the ways in which black women are being criminalized and no one notices. >> thank you so much. >> sounds like a good study. >> somebody else just got online and i want to say if wore going to do this, people have to say their question, 30 seconds, and then move on so we can get everybody's voice in. >> you know, there needs to be a good study around the nexus. i already know what it is but people dent believe it until it's a good report, but you really have to read the book. you really have to read the book because i'm there with you. >> poster child -- >> kemba smith, yes. >> i'm a middle school teacher on the upper west side and also work for the new york city teaching program. so my question is, in regards to an organization that has zero senior staff of color, but employs must peop

an office once inhabited by the likes of brent scowcroft and condoleezza rice and henry kissinger.hat? >> listen, i'm not sure what the status of mr. flynn is. we have got to subpoena out to him, we received some information. clearly, though, lawyers for general flynn have been asking everybody in town for immunity. i don't have any idea whether general flynn at this point is working with the fbi or not. but clearly because of the number of contacts that general flynn had with the russians, with the turks, maybe with others now, it has been reported, i think it is important to get whatever information that he has out into both the investigation and into any criminal proceedings. >> and so far, are you getting along with your colleague, senator barr? >> senator barr and i have a very strong working relationship, we're friends, we're both under enormous pressure. there are some on his side that want this just to go away. there are some on the democratic side that think the president is guilty before we finish the investigation. and our job is to keep this train on the track running f

it was terrible when nixon and kissinger pulled the rug from under a guy none of us need to have liked, i'm forgetting his name. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. and instead put pinochet in his place. and i think chile is now a stable, functioning democracy and all power to chile. we can undermine democracy too, and we have. and i'm afraid that the, to go back to this gentleman's point, the nixon years -- like the lbj years -- were not the happiest for this -- >> i think we have time for one more question and, sir, can i just say that you get to have his place at dinner with me tonight. just to you know. [laughter] in the back. [laughter] >> would you agree, sir, that the philosophy in wilson's statement that we were going to, america was going to make the world safe for democracy was, looking back now, terribly misguided to the point of disastrous for us? because you had a succession of presidents buying into this. kennedy, an example, going to go anywhere, bear any burden. bush, saying we're going to unsaid iraq, make over the modern day kaiser, make them into a democracy and do the same thin

terms of the impulse to promote democracy and human rights, you would have to go back to the nixon-kissinger lack of content in our foreign policy. to the previous point, i think the president comes in with an intuitive sense that there are elements of the international order which, you know, we foreign policy types think are very important and needs to be bolstered by u.s. power has actually made america a victim rather than great beneficiary of it, so that alliances don't necessarily accrue to our interest but countries get rich on the back of our protection, that the international economic system creates jobs overseas and not at home, that the promotion of democracy and human rights is full at home and not part of what the united states should do. the difference is not everyone in his administration believes those principles and they're really inconsistently manifested in the policy. >> and i nick nikki haley speakn different ways than donald trump. on idealism, in your interaction so far as a world leader in the cause of solving refugee crises, what do you see that's different? the obama

and kissinger later said, al haig saved the country and i saved the world. with donald trump, you and i have both heard people say donald trump may be unpredictable and mercurial may be in a scary way in national security but it's got this great national security staff, tillerson and mcmaster and mattis and that staff is not too helpful if they can't manage to get the guy to give a speech endorsing article 5 that they all expected him to give. >> i think back to the george w. bush administration when it was seen that perhaps the president was waking up to the fact that the iraqi invasion, he had been sold information that wasn't accurate and his presidency felt shaky, he brought in jim baker who was able to bring in in their mind to right the ship. you think of david gergen. coming in in a clinton administration. is there a figure in and around the administration now or maybe in republican politics that could play that kind of a role with someone like donald trump? >> no. i don't think there is one at this point because tillerson and mattis and mcmaster, the

henry kissinger says even a paranoid hass' real enemy monday and rugged vesseleddism has had some enemies. particularly during the progressive era, quite on economic critique of rugged individualism and that continues through today, and i would say there's also been a sociological critique of rugged individualism, form of self-issueness and people withdrawing from to site. it's had its up and downs, people say it is a alive. people say it is dead. so we offer you at the beginning of our book this matrix, where you can decide for yourself where you would place rugged individualism. dead or alive, and then wherever you plate it, would you say -- place it, would you that it a good thing for bad thing. president obama referred to rugged individualism as part of america's psyche, but he felt that was largely a bad thing, he would good ton -- good on to say. and then dr. loyd i believe that rugged individualism is alive, if only barely sometimes and it's good it's alive and it would better if it were even more robust. so there have been different people in history and even today who are in diff

. >> i mean henry kissinger had written books about business mark and looked, you know, at the diplomatic skills he had. >> what a great extraordinary man he was. so when you approached these, why did you take this role? >> because first of all, i love good writing. and i think-- simon was very good. you don't often get it on the screen as we all know. so i grab, also he was a wonderfully theatrical character. it was something i had never done bmplet i never played for kaiser. i don't know who has played for kaiser, actually. perhaps some german actor has done it on the box. but i don't, do you, i can't remember. >> no. >> so i thought i have to grab this because maybe nobody else has done it. my turn. >> rose: more your turn to define it, so he has some definition. >> hi such fun with him. because we don't know anything about him from the time he was exiled on, or very little, he must have mellowed, everybody mellows a little bit. and so i concentrated on that, making him more of sort of a person. and becoming a little bit more sensitive about his life played absolutely wonderfully by i

kissinger, it is the most complex series of threats he is ever seen in his lifetime, and he is a master of dealing with these kinds of issues. we are working at, as far as the . at its for afghanistan coming very shortly. we are broader strategies we are building on having to do with nato and our allies in the civic. people as with those we make certain we are drawing strength from allies, too. we are not putting this all on the back of the american taxpayer, the american military, but it takes a lot to lock into the level of strategic thinking that we found to find something that is sustainable. shaheen.ccain: senator thank you, mr.: chairman. secretary, general dunford, undersecretary norquist for being here. i would like to pursue the question of strategy. about then is strategy in syria. has at that everybody their place and we put on the board is a map produced by the washington institute for near east policy. this weekend, it was announced that pro-regime forces have reached the iraqi border. to raise questions about our strategy to clear isis along the euphrates river valley. my

i had a discussion with harold foreign service officer who had been chief of staff under henry kissinger. he was the assistant secretary at one point. saunders was among those that was very interested israelisnasn maintaining good relations with and believed the u.s. association with israel was poisoning the relations with nasser. he told me that nasser gave a speech in 1966, i believe, in which he said, you know, it was full of fire and brimstone and defiance of the americans. if the americans do not like it, they can go drink the red sea. take a flying leap. saunders said from that moment -- i don't know why, i never researched the exact moment -- saunders told me from that moment on, the americans of the highest level were done with nasser. none of us could possibly put forward a proposal to woo nasser because he had so undermined his own position in washington. that was against the background of this war in yemen. the war in yemen was a superpower proxy fight. the americans, the saudis and the yemeni royalists were on one soviets and insurgents were on the other side. we saw it exact

it is then celebrated foreign affairs essay just before becoming national security adviser, henry kissinger said something like, i am paraphrasing, the rights and wrongs of vietnam no longer matter. other nations can gear their policies to ours only if they are confident that we will keep our commitments and therefore, we have to keep it. the question of credibility of the american commitment to was perhaps the most important issue in american policy for europe from's but sputnik to the middle of the 1950's be a for about a decade, that is all anyone ever talked about. for the night stays to make a commitment that was so cavalier seems to me on because it is in the whole thrust of american foreign-policy. that leads me to two questions i would like to ask. first, if this was a serious commitment in 1957, why wasn't it made public? this obviously was intended to .eter it from doing what it did he american conception of deterrence was to make it public, to make it visible, to engage in some version of throwing away the steering wheel so the other party knows you are going to do this. why was

secretary of state henry kissinger added that he hopes that washington and moscow agree that "it is moresure a national interesting concert, not so low." russia is threatening to bansiate if the pentagon cybersecurity from a moscow-based company. it came under scrutiny after reports it may be vulnerable to kremlin influence. global news 24 hours a day powered by more than 27 heaven -- 3700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. scarlet? scarlet: thank you so much, mark. apple celebrated the 10th anniversary of the iphone. a look at its impact over the last decade and what could be next. from new york, this is bloomberg. ♪ scarlet: this is "bloomberg markets." i am scarlet fu. julia: and i'm julia chatterley. it's time for the bloomberg business flash. more than 1000 barclays interviews will be facing an investigation on the ceo. according to people familiar with the matter, barclays was reprimanded -- barclays reprimanded him. he could lose his job and if he is foundus unfit to run a financial institution. they have a market cap that t

he and his secretary of state henry kissinger understood that if you wanted to stop the arms one, you had to put a cap defenses. because as long as you proliferated defenses, the other side's obvious and cheapest and most effective answer was to proliferate offensive weapons. that is how you handle defense. this has been the truth since castles and catapults. this is the way it works. so in 1992 when they wanted to limit the offensive weapons of each side, the strategic arms limitation talks, they agreed to the anti-ballistic missile treaty which capped the defenses each side could deploy. and that logic helped rein in the cold war and in fact when neither side had been deploying defensive, and saxons ronald reagan's day, he not only limited but cut weapons, they also started coming down steadily. like i said, we had about 15,000 nuclear weapons in the world. there used to be 66,000. so in a world without missile defense of, the number has been coming down. that will change if you start deploying defenses. how do you know? .ook at south asia the pakistanis and the indians are talking