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

>> the united states has used nuclear-weapons only twice, against her were she not and nagasaki toward the end of world war ii. afterwards japan surrendered. once we have the bomb the soviets wanted one and the nuclear arms race was on. president obama announced he is reworking america's nuclear strategy, scaling back the role of nuclear weapons in the nation's defense and putting limits on when they can be used. in prague the president and his russian counterpart signed an agreement to cut their nuclear weapons by one-third over the next seven years. president obama is pledging not to go nuclear against countries will abide by the nuclear non- proliferation treaty if it -- even if they attack the u.s. with chemical or biological weapons. the president's critics say he is weakening our defense posture per posture. you agree? >> to there are lot of loopholes. you read the fine print, well, if it is biological that is really bad we might do it anyway. iran, syria, and north korea are exempt. i think it is mostly a pr show. >> yes. as far as the reduction in nuclear weapons, that is a goo

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

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

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,

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

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