. >>> the nagasaki atomic bomb museum has unveiled renovations that show some of its exhibits in a new light. the collection featuring the impact of nuclear weapons has been digitized. the renovation work started last summ at projecto commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of world war ii. >> reporter: it becomes more and more important to provide information through documents and exhibitions in order to pass on the legacy as time on. >> one new exhibit projects video images on a diorama of nagasaki. it illustrates how the shockwave and the heat caused by the bomb spread through the city. another features digitized images from an 11-meter scroll depicting the devastation of the city in the days after the bombing. translar: i can now see more exhibitions than before, and they are easy to understand. >> photos and paintings have also been digitized to allow visitors to select and view them using a touch screen device. >>> japan's imperial residences will soon be welcoming more visitors. the imperial household agency has decided to increase access to palace grounds in tokyo and the a

contain uranium 235 and plutonium, the very same materials used in the bombs dropped on mir tshuma and nagasaki. >> people were in spitting distance of living there. there was a restaurant that abutted it. there's, i mean, there was a dairy farm that abutted it that everybody got their milk from. this has been very scary. and who cares? i do. i love this area. i love these people. this is -- this is -- this is our country. this is our home. >> all these ones that have the tabs on these are significant events, talks about burials. >> after years of documenting health problems, it took another 14 years to force the current owner of the sites, babcock and wilcox to pay $92 million in settlement money to about 200 residents. we asked, but v.n.w. wouldn't talk to america tonight about why. petey said the answer is obvious. >> oh my goodness, yes. i mean look, a reasonable prudent person could stand in the town of apollo and see where the plant that wasn't even designed to be a nuclear plant, it's not rocket science. >> but compensation money didn't solve the underlying problem. amino kept pushing, f

an implosion that was used on nagasaki.he first type is much easier to devise than the second type, the implosion type. the first proposition that comes from this conventional wisdom is that terrorists can only do the first type. so that means terrorists can only make a true yield weapon, not a dirty bomb, with uranium. second, with plutonium, if they do not have plutonium of a certain high percentage of -- plutonium 239 and instead must suffer through the handicap of designing a weapon with even 242, they willd get enormous spontaneous neutrons emitted and they will get pre-ignition and it will be terrible. , since highe burnouts you'll has more of the even isotopes in it, the kind of fuel that would be reprocessed in japan or russia, that is the only kind of stuff available. so at the end of the day the conventional wisdom says, both the weapons design and high burnouts you'll, the plutonium thing is self-limiting. it cannot reuse. it doesn't fit in the first design and it won't even work in the second design. the problem

it's projected completion roughly around 2045 in time for the 100th anniversary of hiroshima and nagasakineither party, certainly none of the candidates to my knowledge, questioned whether this is going to be money well spent, why we need an expanded arsenal, how this plays with regard to the professions by the, what, last 10 presidents, all of whom have indicated they would like to see nuclear weapons eliminated altogether. it is another blind spot, it seems to me, in our political discourse that is deafening. nermeen: another point you raise that is missing from the debates is the fact, as you say, u.s. forces are today active in 147 countries around the world. you ask why their troops in so many countries, saying this question really cannot be posed because to answer it, is to expose the real purpose of american globalism, which means, of course, that none of the candidates will touch it with a 10 foot hole. good you tell us what the answer to that question is? , while u.s. troops are stationed in 147 countries and what it says about the real purpose of american globalism? >> if we com

it's projected completion roughly around 2045 in time for the 100th anniversary of hiroshima and nagasakineither party, certainly none of the candidates to my knowledge, questioned whether this is going to be money well spentwhy we ed an exnded arsenalhow this playsith rard to the pressions by the, at, last 10 presidents, all owhom hav indicad they wld like see nuear wpons eminated altogeth. its anotheblind spot,t seemto me, our polical diourse th is deafening. neeen: anotheroint youaise th is missg from t debes is t fact, ayou say, s. forcre today activin 147 cotries arnd the wld. yo ask whyheir tros in so many cntries, sing this questioneally caot be posed becae to ansr it, iso exposehe real rpose of amican gbalism, ich mean of coue, that nonof the ndidatesill toucit with 10 foohole. goodou tell what thanswer that qution is? , whilu.s.roops ar statiod in 147 countri and what it says about the real purpose of american globalism? >> if we compared why they are b,country a versus country the immediate rationale is going to differ. but when we consider that profile, the global profile that

reagan reacted strongly to the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki. he supported the immediate abbo ligs of the weapons. at one point, he planned to read the anti-nuclear poem set your clock to u 235 at a public rally until the r warner brothers intervened and said if you like your contract you're not going to read this poem. reagan did like his contract so he opted not to read the poem. as he became more politically active, he maintained his criticism of neuroleer policy. the schad lshd doe campaign in 1968, he compared nuclear destruction to two werners in a saloon pointing their guns at them forever. it would force accommodations to a toxic geopolitical standoff. reagan did not moderate this after assuming the presidency. speaking with representatives of the vatican, he referred to the weapons as the last epidemic of mankind. talking to the u.s. troops in camp liberty in 1983, he argued that nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. and then promised to continue to pursue one of the most extensive arms control programs in history. he made

warhead capable of doing having more firepower and weaponry from world war ii including russia and nagasaki. that warhead could have blown up and killed hundreds of thousand of people in arkansas. it didn't go off. it still blew up. people were hurt but what caused it? somebody dropped a bolt. and the bolt bounced and put a hole in the tank and the tank started leaking, and that reduced pressure and pretty soon the thing could have blown up. i can't give you all the technical reasons but there it was. this is a serious thing. of course they said the bomb was perfect. the machine was perfect but the human beings were in error. human beings are always going to be in error. we're creating machines when in the hands of human beings can go wrong and will go wrong. only a matter of time. not just secretary perry said we made it by luck, without a nuclear catastrophe. robert mack -- mcnamara said it, and others have said it that we made it by luck. that is political philosophy based on luck, that is not good enough. it is also well to remember something i noticed, there are a lot of dumb ideas tha

there is a designed weapon that was used on hiroshima and used on nagasaki that cannot be made for thelutonium and the second can be plutonium. it's much easier. they can only do the first time. so that means they can only make a weapon a true yield weapon. if they do not have the plutonium of a certain percentage and instead must suffer through the handicap of designing a weapon with even isotopes that 242 then they will get enormous and they will get the ignition and it will be terrible and therefore since it has more of the isotopes that kind of fuel that would be processed in japan or russia that the only kind of stuff available so the end of the day the conventional wisdom says the plutonium thing is self-limiting it doesn't fit in the first design and it won't work in the second to sign. now, the problem here is that his technical nonsense. would you like me to explain why its technical nonsense? i can't. >> question. >> i want to address the second and third -- >> can you identify your self? >> i am the former chairman of the tennessee valley authority if i claim to fame is i'm

reagan reacted strongly to the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.orted the immediate abbo ligs of the weapons. at one point, he planned to read the anti-nuclear poem set your clock to u 235 at a public rally until the r warner brothers intervened and said if you like your contract you're not going to read this poem. reagan did like his contract so he opted not to read the poem. as he became more politically active, he maintained his criticism of neuroleer policy. the schad lshd doe campaign in 1968, he compared nuclear destruction to two werners in a saloon pointing their guns at them forever. it would force accommodations to a toxic geopolitical standoff. reagan did not moderate this after assuming the presidency. speaking with representatives of the vatican, he referred to the weapons as the last epidemic of mankind. talking to the u.s. troops in camp liberty in 1983, he argued that nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. and then promised to continue to pursue one of the most extensive arms control programs in history. he made a tv mo