russia relationship in the united states but the point also has to be made that there are enemies of an improved u.s. russia relationship also in russia and and i think this agreement by getting this agreement ratified we will open the doors for greater cooperation in the future ok if i go to you i mean i would like to repeat the question the republicans willing to throw away all of the improvements that we've seen in this bilateral relationship because it really would throw a wrench into the works because they'll be there and do you agree with the ambassador there are people in the political establishment in russia would say yes see you can't trust these people who see you can't ok and it feeds upon the extremes on both sides unfortunately the extreme in the u.s. seems to be mainstream go ahead. very much hope that it will not happen dead people both sides understand again i hope to fade if you'd be a pro but if not you still have a very important list. joined interest and sort of point out we have succeeded in finding a close understanding between the two countries i should note so

the first conflict is between the united states and russia. the russians say, if you improve your missile defenses, we get to withdraw from the treaty. now, the state di state departmt signing statement says don't worry, we're only going to improve our -- we're only going to protect against regional or intermediate-range threats. but the white house at the same time talks about having a letter from the president or a statement from maybe the secretary of defense or somebody that says, but we are, in fact, going to go forward and develop these kind of missile defenses, which would, in fact, qualitatively improve our position vis-a-vis russia. and so not only do we have a disagreement with russia, we have a disagreement within our own government about our own intentions. and i don't think the senate can ratify a treaty with all of this uncertainty out there. we don't know what this country intends to do, and there are enough confusing signals that there's not only potential for dispute between russia and the united states, but between the united

deploying members of the united states armed forces and united states allies against nuclear attacks to the best of its ability. policies based on mutual assured destruction or intellectual intentional vulnerability can be contrary to the safety and security in both countries and the united states and the russian federation share a common interest in moving cooperatively as soon as possible away from a stratigic relationship based on mutual assured destruction. in a world where biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them are are proliferating, stratigic ability can be answered by stratigic defensive -- enhanced by stratigic defensive measures. accordingly the united states is and will remain free to reduce the vulnerability to attack by constructing a layered defense system cable -- capable of countering vehicle. the united states will welcome steps by the russian federation to develop a fundamentally stratigic posture that no longer views robust stratigic defensive capabilities as undermining the overall stratigic balance and stands ready to cooperate with

in the united states, most of the patents were originated in the united states. but in 2009, for the first time, 51% of u.s. patents were awarded to non-u.s. companies. to fifth place in international patents during that time. the world is some form rank 48 in mathematics and education. chinese universities are leading in the '80s. china has moved from 14th place to second place in published research articles, now just behind the united states. eight of the 10 global companies with the largest r&d budgets in the world are established r&d facilities in china and theythese are facts from the gathering storm report. an american company, applied materials, recently opened the world's largest private solar r&d facility in china. there is other evidence of chinese innovation, particularly in the energy field. china has installed the largest high-voltage capacity lowest loss d.c. line and high-voltage ec lines in the world now. it has plans to integrate back down. it has broken ground on 30 nuclear reactors of roughly 50 being built in the world. the united states is bu

but it's not appropriate for today, when the united states and the russian federation, for all of our differences, are not devoted to one another's destruction and when one of the greatest threats to our national security comes from rogue states, like iran and north korea, which are developing nuclear weapons and increasingly better means to deliver them. in today's world, with so many new and constantly evolving threats, the united states can't be limited in the development, deployment, and improvements of missile defense systems that we deem to be in our national security interest. i'm concerned, as are many of my colleagues, that the russian government believes this clause from the preamble confers a legal obligation on the united states which constrains our missile defenses. ever since president reagan proposed a strategic defense initiative, the russians have sought to limit our strategic defensive arms. they've sought to limit our missile defense programs through legal obligations, and, failing that, through political commitments or agreements that could be cited to confer futur

here but i mean do the palestinians have any faith left in the in obama administration in the united states at all. it was not expected that they wanted states would do anything for the palestinians it would do so many things against the palestinians that's true so since the establishment of the authority we have been harmed a lot and the united states as i said is not broke they are not states and israel are allies and they are not states that not do what it has to do against israel they have to take measures against israel if they want the solution we see the united states immediately takes measures against arabs against muslims but against israel they don't take any measures and so far they have been putting pressure on the palestinians particularly because the palestinians are so much dependent and their food on the done it in countries and they do not decide how the money is spent in the west bank partly and does so what the palestinians have to do we have to rid ourselves first of all our leadership so many of our leaders puppets for the united states they cannot do on this thing they

phony intelligence to draw the united states into the war? >> well, winston churchill was very eager to have the united states join the waragainst hitler. and, consequently, british agents were to provide intelligence that would help this happen. they told roosevelt about the fact that the germans had taken a map and cut latin america into six future nazi vessel states, that a bolivian pro-u.s. government would be toppled by the nazis, that we had 6,000 brazilian troops -- excuse me, 6,000 german troops in brazil. roosevelt used some of this information in his speeches and in his fire side chats. it was all fabricated by he british to help encourage the united states to enter the war. >> f.d.r. is yielding to churchill led to the theft of the a-bomb. >> yeah. a curious tale. in the begin, the united states and britain were full partners in developing an atmic weapon. but as time went on and the unitestates launched the manhattan project, was putting millions of dollars into this, creating the fcility at los alamos, we became the dominant part

treaty of the united states status in the a.b.m. treaty, we did not do that this time. the state department said in response to the russian unilateral statement and i quote -- "the united states of america takes note of the statement on missle defense by the russian federation. the united states missle defense systems would be employed to defend the united states against limited missle launches and to defend its deployed forces allies and parters in against regional trets. the united states intends to continue improving and deploying its missle defense system in order to defend itself against limited attack and as part of our collaborative approach to strengthening stability in key regions." end quote. so it would appear, mr. president, that the u.s. position does not contradict the russian position in the slightest. and what then to make of the u.s. missle defense plans previously announced by secretary gates, which talked about the deployment of land-base missles, poland in 2018 and in 2020 the deployment in europe of the smm-32-b

last november, senator kyl and i traveled to geneva to meet with united states and russian negotiating teams. we met at some length with rose got miller, the assistant secretary of state for arms control verification and compliance, who led the united states negotiating team. we also met with the senior members of her team, including her deputy, ambassador marcie reeves, ted warner, michel yo me elliott, kurt s e man, and mark trout. these effects and many of the other members of the united states team were very impressive in their professionalism and experience. several had participated in the negotiation of the original start treaty or the intermediate-range nuke quer --r forces, the i.n.f. treaty. several were inspectors who are conducted on-the-ground inspections in russia under start and i.n.f., or were weapons systems operators who had been responsible for hosting russian inspectors at united states bases. so this team was not composed of the uninitiated or of neophytes. they had both background and skill. they were acutely aware of the lessons learned over the past decades of ar

could the united states senate rise? with the united states senate accomplished this important goal which has meaning not just to us but to them because they have joined with us in resolution 1929 in order to put pressure on iran and not to mention long-term efforts we made with respect to north korea. what we do here is going to be an expression of our opportunity, our ability to provide leadership to the american people. let me clarify one thing at the onset of this discussion. we have enough time to do this treaty. anybody who wants to claim we don't have time and can't do it, is right before christmas and so forth, let me just remind people the original s.t.a.r.t. agreement which was passed back in 1992 was a far more dramatic treaties and the new s.t.a.r.t.. the original s.t.a.r.t. treaty was formulated in the aftermath of the demise of the soviet union. there was a huge uncertainty in russia at that point in time. the soviet union had just collapsed and yet despite all of the uncertainty, despite the complexity of

the united states as i say, we have plenty of rare earth products. in the state that i used to represent, we have rare earth products, in the state of utah. it's at what economic cost and what environmental cost. how badly do you want your own indigenous supply and source of these products. so all we're asking for is that they not use rare earth products as a trade weapon. so for example, when they had a tussle recently with japan over a fishing vessel where they kept the captain lz all of a sudden they stop shipment. >> well yeah, that's kind of how the story goes. they would tell you a different story but i think the japanese would, of course, put forth a different line so are they usinging it as a trade weapon or not. and that is of concern to us. >> rose: are they? >> well, i think in the example of japan it could be argued that in fact it was used as a trade weapon. and of course the feelings there are quite deep and they go back some years. with respect to supply lines to the united states, i don't think the evidence is clear. now is there a hol

in fact, in the united states, no opportunity for access by terrorists. not so much on the other side, but clearly there is a great difference between tactical and strategic weapons, primarily because of the way that they are -- primarily because of the way that they are deploying. but senator collins said also -- quote -- "president obama's 2010 nuclear posture review echoes the concern of nuclear terrorism. the threat of nuclear war has become remote, but risk of nuclear attack has increased. today's most immediate and extreme danger is nuclear terrorism. al qaeda and their extremist allies are seeking nuclear weapons. that probably summarizes as clearly as anything the discussion i had at the outset about the difference of 40 years ago versus today and the -- and underscores what in my judgment is so important about moving this dialogue forward instead of getting -- staying in the rut of where we were 40 years ago and focusing just on numbers. well, again, it's not just the republican side of the aisle. almost two decades ago, the sort treaty, another

rivalry of the past is finally laid to rest for weeks and months the president of the united states all members of his administration the military all living former secretary of state and of defense were calling for senators not to ruin this reset opportunity for us who are sure relations and the message did resonate with many senators every senator knows when you're trying to get things done relationships matter and the relationship between the united states and russia has been critical since we fought together in world war two and will be contin and will continue to be so this is an on parallel opportunity to enhance that relationship and to say by signature and by ratification of this treaty that yes the united states of america wants to work with russia despite the huge support the treaty has received on many levels a number of republican senators nearly sabotaged it their actions provoked an avalanche of criticism from the country's top six. already experts who feared that the treaty could become a victim of political games on capitol hill the arguments the treaty adversaries broug

i'm a maryland citizen because my stepfather was in the united states air force, and the united states air force transferred him to andrews air force base. and so we moved to maryland. not because i chose to move to maryland, but because my stepfather and mother moved to maryland and they brought me with them. that's who we're talking about. that's who we're talking about. one of those principles is, i believe, that individuals who came to this country as undocumented miners and have lived their lives -- minors and have lived their lives in america should not suffer because of the actions over which they had no control that brought them to the united states. we all universally adopt that principle. no one holds children culpable for the wrongdoing of their parents unless somehow those children are involved themselves in the perpetration of wrongdoing. so this principle is well-known to all of us and ought to be followed. that is the idea behind this legislation. we talk about the american dream. we have a statute in the harbor in new york -- statue in the harbor in new york. she has a

i mean those who are seeking entry into the united states illegally will act rationally they'll assume eight you know we did this in one thousand nine hundred six they did it in two thousand and ten might as well come in now and wait it out until my next amnesty and in the process the american taxpayer will be shelling out those cost and by the way the cost of illegal immigration in the united states right now annually is one hundred thirteen billion dollars for health care education and incarceration cost we can no longer afford martin you want to jump in and reply all of that when i was first place yeah what bothers allocating what bob is advocating is the broken status quo i think all of the guests here would agree that the immigration system is broken but what bob's advocating is saying hey get back to an immigration at the back of an immigration line that never moves what this bill does and it's part and parcel of comprehensive immigration reform it's going to give these kids a path to legalization it doesn't grant them automatic citizenship they have to earn it they have to prove

if the united states intends to deploy more capable missiles either to defend europe or the united states, which it is our stated policy to do. so are we to believe that the administration will ever put this treaty at risk over future missile defense plans? that's a subject we'll be exploring in debt. -- in depth. certainly the senate gave advice to the administration not to limit missile defense or conventional prompt global strikers which is a capability that would permit us to deliver over long ranges, inte intercontinental ranges, something that is not a warhead, something that this administration and i think are very important for our future ability to deal with rogue states, for example. nevertheless, contrary to congress's instructions, the administration has subjected advance capabilities to limitations in this treaty. and we'll discuss that. eighth is something else. there are people that say there's nothing that stands between us and a world of -- a nuclear-free world. it's called zero nuclear. the president's stated goal of a world without nuclear weapons. some say that this tr

it's on one part of a spectrum which goes all the way to the united states where the role of the state is much less important, but they are still part of the same family of economic systems. so that's, that's one point. the second point i would make is that china has done very well with its state capitalist model, but we can't be sure, and the chinese cannot be sure that it will continue to do well. in fact, many students of the chinese economy believe that in order to sustain p the very -- sustain the very high rate of economic growth that the chinese have achieved for the last three decades, they're going to have to modify their system. they're going to have to have less government intrusion. that state capitalism that they have is going to have to have more capitalism and be less of the state. so it's not clear going forward that this model will work so well for the chinese. that, of course; only the future can tell us. >> do you see any signs yet that china -- it may be aware of it intellectually but certainly not in action -- is becoming more aware of the need to change its politi

sincerely, patricia levin good, united states marine corps. i invite you to stand with patty and become a lead in their remembrance of women in the united states military. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. that was a nice talk and it is so unfortunate the women's veterans remember our place in history if we don't chronicle our place in history nobody else is going to do that for us, and rosemary is one of the women veterans who is working so hard to come up with a place for women veterans, so we thank you for that. [applause] and we would like to present rosemary with a certificate of appreciation and recognition for her outstanding contribution to keynote speaker 2010 women's veterans appreciation luncheon. thanks again -- [applause] >> thank you. >> does anybody have any questions for rosemary? we have time for questions. yes, ma'am. >> i don't really have a question. i just want to see thank you! thank you. [applause] >> i have to say it has been an honor. a lot of [inaudible] i went to tell one story if i could. carol lynn carroll, the l

why would native peoples support the united states? well, they are peoples who are living on reservations in which they are essentially surrounded by american settlements, and early in the war, the americans tell the indian peoples we don't want you involved. they insisted that it was barbaric for the britishs to employee indians in the war, and the americans were going to take the high and low ground without employing indians. this turns out to be disastrous because they are affective in the forced warfare which is what most of the war consistents of in canada and contribute to some very embarrassing defeats by american forces that invaded canada, so come 1813, many american officers are saying, okay, we tried the high road, now we want our own indians, and they put pressure on the indians within the reservations that, look, you need our friendship, and you better come and help us. now, there are some native peoples that have their own reasons to be involved in war in part because young men want to prove themselves as warriors and kin

many grew up in the united states. they have little or no memory or resources in the country from which they came. they are hardworking young people, dedicated to their education or serving in the nation's military. they have stayed out of trouble. some are valedictorians. i ha*ep happen to know one -- i happen to know one. and honor roll students. some are community leaders and have unwavering commitment to serving the united states of america. because of their undocumented status, these young people are ineligible to serve in the military. they face tremendous obstacles to attending a college. for many, english is actually their first language and they're just like every other american student. now reaching adulthood, these young people are left with a dead end. they can't use their educations to contribute to their communities. they can't serve the country. they call home by volunteering for military service. in other words, they are dumbed down by their status. they are relegated to their -- to the shadows by their

movement in the united states. forces in the country and we know that conservatives saw very influential especially in places like the. bible belt. is a new thing. and they're trying to bury anything in the main with obama notwithstanding what they had simply. gone through his vital interests the signing of the three g. enabled the if by dual young dynamic president self united states and russia will get basically plaudits not just by. by older people as we call them in this time so good we'll of all reasonable people iran the planet because they're just and as i said bad signing these kind of three d. as and moving. along. for all. the strengths and the international stability and it's only. in the field. weapons of mass destruction. shown the cause and these are the position of the russian side as i understand it any further drastic cuts in the. forces would be impossible with all the members of. joining us. and still to come in the program the call from russia's deaf community to be heard. it's a sign of the tim

to introduce senator kerr set 4th united states secretary of state, formally the u.s. permanent representative to the united nations. professor in the practice diplomacy at georgetown university school of foreign service. the chair of the albright stoneridge group, the honorable madeleine albright. >> thank you very much, i'm delighted to have this opportunity. distinguished guests from the people's republic of china and visitors and friends. i am truly honored to be able to introduce to you today a person whose name and faith and career are familiar to anyone who has been paying attention these past few decades. john kerry first appeared before the senate committee on foreign relations as a witness about 40 years ago. his hair then was dark brown, his face unlined and his words eloquent. one of the senators boldly predicted that the young man might one day himself become a committee member. today, as you will soon see, his hair is more distinguished, his face radiates the wisdom of experience and here in his capacity, want as a member of that senate panel, but as i cha

the united states has targeted strategic nuclear weapons on many north korean sites and it's because of that that north korea's decided to acquire the target so if you want nonproliferation if you want to nuclear free world you have to stop threatening other countries with war and invasion and nuclear annihilation so as to buy the subject from an exam room so official institute of oriental studies he told us he believes china and america's respect involvements with north and south korea could lead to a global conflict. will be nightmare for many countries and first of all for the six countries we who met in the six party talks we share the common border with giving control and chang also and of course china can be involved because they have the treaty alliance to reach a business career first and they demonstrated the recently. read in the stool prevent the collapse of north korea and it will be true supercar you will treat united states and china. it's possible. for a world war can start to careen finish will unfortunately. looking ahead on this channel tonight x. american soldiers

they keep nuclear weapons because of pakistan united states gave it a material nuclear material change because that china to give additional nuclear material to and it's done and the time you have to jump in here really quickly into a short break we'll go right back to we come back after a short break we'll continue our discussion on the new start treaty stay with our team. oh. it was created to serve public interests to inform and to entertain. these days there's nothing. new media outlet there is nothing harder than revoking its license in case of corruption. involved in a community. one large corporation controlling the daily newspaper radio stations television stations the cable. public opinion versus f.c.c. . blues the marching wealthy british stock. market . what's really happening to the global economy with. headlines kaiser report. says. welcome back to cross talk about. we're talking about the should teach of harms way . but before we see what russians think about this treaty the new strategic arms reduction treaty was signed in prague this april but presidents of russia and t

all i know is that i worked very little in the united states. you could say that of domestic assignments, too. people would say, well, he would say that, would he not? but it is actually true. to be a correspondent in "the new york's times" is to have a front-row seat. i have had an enormous amount of fun in my life. i have had an ongoing paid education. honestly, had i won the lottery when i was 25, i would have wished to do exactly what i have done. i cannot think of anything else that i would have been well suited for. my father persuaded me not to go into the royal forces. -- into the royal air force as a pilot, which was my mission. many times on the golf course, he said, when i persuaded you not to do that, i was not thinking so much of your welfare. i said, what were you thinking about? he said i was thinking about the royal air force. i said, i came to the conclusion by the time you're 13 or 14, you would have made the worst officer the royal air force ever had. i was sitting myself from -- he said i was saving myself from embarrassment.

the day after the united states presidential election, november 5, 2008, president medvedev in russia stated that russia would deploy short-range missiles to the russian enclave of ca kalin kaliningra did which the united states proceeded with their missile sites. it was a threat to the administration. then in typical russian activity, issue such a threat, testing the new president, then in her january 15, 2009, nomination hearing for under secretary of defense for policy, michelle floranoy was asked by chairman levin this -- quote -- "on the european missile defense issue, do you believe that it would be important to review the proposed european missile defense deployment in the broader security context of europe, including our relations with russia, the middle east, and to consider those deployments or that deployment as part of a larger consideration of ways in which to enhance ours and european security?" ms. floronoy -- "yes, i do, sir. i think it's an issue for the upcoming defense review." that's our internal defense review. that question suggested we might not go forward witho

and provide for their children contribute to our economy and serve in the united states military and i think that's the kind of immigrant that the united states values the kind of immigration that we should be encouraging and that's what this bill does it's part of comprehensive immigration reform and the senate should act immediately to make it law ok deborah you want to add a last word before we go to the break. yes yes i do i think we have to remember the advantages of immigrants first of all number one if you look at state by state in their states studies on this in almost all cases the contributions immigrants make including illit undocumented immigrants present a net gain in terms of taxes and entrepreneurial ship is supposed to the services through education that they take you right now here trailer illegal you know what exactly are you that's exactly right down properly deborah is exactly where it to understand that they contribute in general and what we also know is when they're legalized they add more to our economy number two the fact of the matter is they at immigrant man

the acronym apm, and they started pushing vigorously for lend/lease, for aid to britain, for the united states to enter the war. fdr was no longer a fascist. now they could be cp-usa could be pro-american, right? because now america would be allied with stalin. so it was really a great day for them. "the new york times"' article on the subject is titled, "clergymen group opposes war aid." that's the american peace mobilization, clergymen group. the communists would show up to say blessed are the peacemakers, all right? their blowing up -- they're blowing up churches and people especially on the religious left, the great book i said was there a particular group that was duped more than any other, and he said, yes, progressive pastors. they're the biggest suckers of them all. and the american peace mobilization is a good example of that. yeah. go ahead. oh, he needed a microphone. >> al milliken, am media. in your analysis, how effective as propaganda do you see the way hollywood through films have picked the communist influence particularly, i depress, in the u.s.? >> yeah, great question, it's

two nuclear superpowers that goes with it for weeks and months the president of the united states all members of the of his administration all of the military all living former secretary of state and up to fans were calling for senators not to ruin this reset opportunity for us russia relations and the outcome of the world will show whether or not their calls fell on deaf ears in congress once he's going to japan reporting their well joseph syrian siani the president told the campaign group the ploughshares fund says barack obama has done well to overcome the many obstacles in the starts treaty ratification process. most of the opposition to this relatively modest treaty has been political the opposition what thought they could deliver a knockout blow to president obama they missed and he struck them down instead part of it is ideological there's about twelve to twenty senators in the car in the senate that are just opposed to arms control treaties they're arguing to the bitter end but they're a minority they're losing they were trying to run out the clock they kept making the argumen

of course the united states is free. i mean, that's one -- we're not going to ever let another country say we're not free to do something that's in our national interest. but the point, is the administration -- but the point is, the administration was unwilling to say we were committed to doing this, and i think that makes a very important point. the whole point of what we're arguing here is that the russians would like to put whatever pressure they can on the united states not to deliv deliver -- excuse me, not to deploy missile defenses that could be effective against russian strategic systems. that's been their goal for decades. i think we can all stipulate light to that. they would like -- i think we can all stipulate to that. they would like to bring whatever pressure they can bear against the united states to avoid us developing those kind of systems. unfortunately, in the negotiation of this treaty, we have opened ourselves up to that kind of pressure by, for the first time, not pushing back against the russians w

senate ratification of new start will demonstrate the united states is committed to reducing nuclear eapons, which is important as we advance our nonproliferation goals. this will assist us in obtaining international consensus regarding nuclear weapons proliferation challenges from rogue states such as iran and north korea. it will also send a positive message in achieving consensus with other countries on nuclear issues. it's important to keep in mind that the united states and russia hold over 95% of the world's nuclear weapons. if the two nations that possess the most nuclear weapons agree on verification and compliance and are committed to nonproliferation, it will improve our ability to achieve consensus with other countries. failure to ratify the treaty will have a destabilizing -- detrimental effect on our ability to influence other nations with regards to nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction. it will also send conflicting messages about the administration's emphasis and commitment to the nonproliferation treaty. additionally, failure to ratify new start would send a

the united states' policy for the last sixty years has been to seek the collapse of the north korean state and its absorption into the south. the league government is more closely aligned with u.s. foreign policy goals on the korean peninsula than say the governments of presidents rowe and president kim. in south korea. president lee is oftentimes seen as a puppet of the united states and the area around his office is called by many south koreans the news united states of south korea south korea certainly seized on any opportunity it can to escalate tensions the sinking of the south korean corvette cheonan which is immediately blamed on north korea over north korea and denials and there are many in south korea who do not believe the official inquiry then we have the artillery exchange that happened on november twenty third which has been blamed on north korea however the exchange was triggered by a south korean marine garrison on an island that lives very close to the north korean coast you consider that you consider president leaves hostility towards north korea. is a policy of confr