just 50 days after his death it was reopened as the ussr's number one department store. >> it reflected all major events in russian history. starting with the technical progress of the late 19th century, world war i, revolution, the great terror of the 1930's. nowadays it hosts 400 boutiques, cafes and the cinema. 15 million people visit every year and building on its eve eventful past the management is confident of increasing that number in the future. anticipate. take a stand. be mobile. defend your position. be independent. meet every challenge. surprise people. be a leader. be a credit. understand the world for "france 24". >>> hello and welcome to "newsline." it's monday, august 12th. i'm catherine kobayashi. >>> more than 30 people were killed. at least 13 civilians, including 7 children, were killed in an air raid on friday in the northern city of racka, where rebels are mostly in control. an intense bate

there were actually a number of generals and admirals about loof and half split between the former ussrnd the united states, and they formed a group, and they attempted to brings to the public's attention the continuing danger of maintaining these weapons. it was in the news for a short while, and it disappeared, and i assumed these guys gave up any exasperation because nobody paid any attention to them, but the fact is these weapons still exist. they pose the greatest threat we can imagine to people all over the world, and especially to us in this country. i would say people need to get their priorities straightened out that system terrorist with a bomb on an airplane is not even in the same universe with the exchanges of the big h bombs. >> we have one more question in the audience we'll take, and i would just say my answer to them is, you know, if they can't keep me safe without securing my liberties, then i'm going to fire them and hire somebody who can. yes? >> fourth amendment rights analysis starts with defining the zone of privacy or the expectation of privacy. it seems that our

we are on a hair trigger opposition with the ussr. both sides with tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, thousands of them on long range and intermediate range missiles, if even a small proportion of those were encased in an exchange of nuclear weapons, they would have destroyed the entire world. that was a real threat because even if we were all the sweetest angels, there were accidents. accidents on several occasions very nearly triggered all-out nuclear war between the ussr and the united states. but the cold war is now over. but not really. pressure still has thousands of icbm site with nuclear weapons. operational, returnable in just a few minutes to any side in this country. if somehow things should deteriorate, technology should develop the glitch, we could have a devastating exchange of nuclear weapons. it is not at all of of of ronald possibility. about ten years ago there were actually a number of generals and admirals, about half and half split between the former u.s.s.r. and the united states. they formed a group. they att

since theyears soviet union disappeared, none of the major powers has stepped up to replace the ussr or engaged in a major military buildup, and the geopolitical power games of yore. china does not appear to be building up a blue-water navy the way the soviet union once did. comments from michael hersch "national journal." caller: i am proud to say my oldest brother was in vietnam as a marine, and he was an officer, yes. but he got shrapnel in his leg, and i was in high school when he came home, and i buroke the barrier when he came off the plane, and i hugged him and hugged him. but he had a family and everything, and thank the this, a man that he worked with figured out what he was going to do him and he took a gun to the park and was going to commit suicide, and that man saved his life. we here in america, we are americans because of those men and women. i am a volunteer at the vets hospital here in madison, and i love it. i cannot tell you enough about it. they want to talk, and i let them talk. treatedamed of how we them when they got home. i cannot say enough about the military

it is science fiction, but i'm landing on the planet ussr in 1960 and behaving as if that is a set of aliens who need the tools of science fiction to explain them. >> host: previous guest on the series was robert mccrumb of the observer saying writers in britain can't be just writers, they have to be writers and something else. do you have a day job? >> guest: i do. i'm a writer and a teacher of writing. i teach e equivalent of a course, but halftime, tuesday and wednesdays, every week at goldsmith college. it's a good place to go. >> host: what is that? >> guest: part of the university ever london founded long ago by gold smiths that we have not done any of the beating out of the pressure metal on the anvil for quite some time. we're good on art, good on writing, good on web design, and i do that, half the time, the other half of the time i'm at home or a cafe, i'm writing. i am bad at working at home, i like the gentle background hum of other folks getting on with their lives and business, and then i can concentrate. >> host: "unapologetic" coming out on paperback in the u.s. later

i mean, obviously, the ussr was a major bulwark, and, by the way, for this book i read a very interesting -- when americans took baghdad, they took saddam's private archives. saddam used to tape all his conversations. there is a terrific conversation in the saddam archives where his top leadership is sitting around in 1991 in january, and they are saying the americans are just not going to bomb us. one of his smartest advisers said the issue is not the american issue, where are the soviets? soviet union hadn't fallen yet. where is where are the soviets? why are they going to along with that? actually, forget '91. by the '80s the soviet union had actually become less of a bulwark for pop list struggles around the world. soviet union had gone into deep crisis. in fact, the other set of documents i read for this book, i don't quote enough of them, is the politboro discussions around afghanistan which are available at the national security archives in washington d.c. those are fascinating, because there you have the senior leadership at one point saying, you know, well, at one point saying we

integration for the last 13 or 14 years intensively and even before the wake of the disintegration of the ussr in 1991 with the european union decided. my question would be to what extent do you also consider the unionution the european has built up? >> quick russian. -- question. it is a good example of responding to the contemporary challenge. it sought to bring together civilian and military components and tothe uk to prepare be able to execute that capacity in these settings. it is much smaller by definition and by scale. it is aiming meet in the same director. euer member states in the are similarly responded. it is for us to respond in an integrated fashion. >> in the back. >> thank you. thank you for your persistence. weapon working at this a long time. thank you for your skepticism. -- and have been working at this for a long time. i want to drill down. you talked about everything clearly over the years about what needs to be done. i challenge is who is the leadership on this? not only on the congressional side but in these fields. -- i want to know who is the leadership on this? which

even in the wake of the integration from the ussr in 1990. [inaudible] the european union decided to work on civil military integration. my question could be to extent do you consider the institutions the e.u. build u up for the conflict management in your research? >> great question. i think the stablization unit of the united kingdom is a good example of responding to this contemporary challenge. that has bring together civilian and military component and the ministry of defense within the u.k. to prepare and to be to be execute that capacity. to execute in a setting. much smaller by definition and scale. but it's aiming at the in the same direction in, i think, other member states in the e.u. are similarly responding. and to some extent looking for us to respond in a integrated fashion. >> okay. in the back. johanna then -- [inaudible] >> thank you. johanna from csis, thank you for your persistence. we have been working far long time. jim, thank you for your skepticism. i want to drill down on the reality of this. i think you outlined ever

institutions for several military integration and even before in the wake of the disintegration of the ussr in 1991 with the european union decided his work on civil military integration. my question would be to what extent do you also consider the institutions the european union has built up for civil military integration than the conflict management in your research? >> right question. the stabilization unit in the united kingdom is a good example of responding to this contemporary challenge. that has started to bring together civilian and military components within the u.k. to prepare it to be able to execute these settings. it's much smaller by definition and by scale. but it is same in the same direction. they think other member states and e.u. are similarly responding them to some extent, looking for us to respond in an integrated fashion. >> in the back. >> thank you. csi has come a thank you your persistence. thank you for your skepticism. i want to jot down a little bit more on the realities of days. he is outlined about what needs to be done. my challenges who is the leadership on

both the ussr and the united states were interested in afghanistan. they both were competing to enlarge their influence in the country, and somehow because of the counterbalancing of those two forces, there was a frequent afghans were sort of in control of their own destiny. and during that period you saw modernization and change in afghanistan that was more rapid and more sort of dramatic than you've seen anywhere, you know, in this country. that period ended when the pendulum of trying to swing back and forth between the inner afghanistan and the outer world just, it started to swing so fast and so far that it finally crashed and the country's government to a coup by a small communist group which was then quickly was followed by the soviet invasion. and i would contend that from that day to this we are still in the after effects of the soviet invasion. the soviet invasion pretty much destroyed the fabric of the country. you know, the 6 million refugees that it does out of the country, the destruction of the villages, the tearing apart of the tribal

. >> host: do we tend overvalue our contribution to the allied effort and undervalue of the ussr? >> guest: i think we do. i think that's a good point. i try toik mat point whenever i can that soviets did mo of the killing, bleeding, die for the alliance. they had 26 million die during the war. unimaginable for us. i think there is a tendency frequently to overlook the soviet contribution. of course, the world war ii immediately turnses to a cold war and the soviets become the adversary. there's little profit in acknowledging the soviet role when thed aer adversary during the cold war. i think seventy years after the fact it should -- if not for the russians the war certainly wouldn't have been won as quickly as it was. and for every russian soldier that died. it was one american soldier that didn't have to die. >> host: steve is in california. hi, steve. >> caller: hi. thank you for writing it. my question about it -- it was just answered. so i'm going go off on to the -- [inaudible] and ask about the political pressure in the u.s. congress to stop the war after the 100 hours in