union in the 1980s to just mention a few. i would suggest that what happened was something deeper. and it was reflecting how the united states and others approached afghanistan over these many years. there was the assumption that a national government and an institution were being strengthened. there was an assumption that there was broader by into the transformations that were taking place. there was an assumption that the military and security forces which numbered up to 330,000 were becoming more functional every year. and there was also frankly a misreading of the tele— band for a long period in which certainly is a terrorist group and as insurgency they received a lot of attention but perhaps a lot less on what it was doing politically and the level of support it did have in certain parts of the country. so as we look back, i don't think you can take the assumptions that were made three or four months ago and put the blame on misreading then. because the eroding stalemate, the changes on the ground taking place were oc

if guerilla fighters could topple the mighty soviet union, why not the united states? the world saw the results. now it's the united states being driven out of afghanistan by a group of islamic fighters. bin laden is dead, but a new generation of extremists may be learning the same lesson today from the land often called the graveyard of empires. and there are not only american citizens still in afghanistan. there are also interpreters who worked with american forces and other vulnerable afghans. and there are efforts underway by private individuals, veterans to reach out to their friends, their former colleagues in afghanistan to try and keep them safe, to try and keep them hidden and sheltered until they can get the right documents and potentially evacuated out of the country. nbc news, doha. >> as that two-decades-long war comes to an end, it brings with it a range of emotions. we traveled to fremont last night. some are hopeful for a new beginning, but some are not. one man we spoke with says that the taliban killed close family members right in front of him when h

union and china and it set us back in the cold war and it emboldened our enemies for a generation, we continue to be in a war against islamic extremism we have been since 1979 with iran that is going to continue and that's what's on my mind protector marines by doing the right thing, protector civilians and get them out but recognize we are going the wrong way and stopping islamic extremism and were going to have to change direction and it will cost american lives more if we kept bagram air basin done the right thing in this particular case. charles: i want to follow you said folks you know are stranded there and there has already been a blame game going on i've seen it on tv and social media suggesting that these folks had plenty of time to get out and hoping president biden doesn't go down that path, but what do you say to those blaming americans who are stranded in afghanistan for being stranded and afghanistan. >> we work dozens of families or dozens of individuals, six families in particular we were able to get out what happened in the last 3 - 4 days, even though several of our

they defeated the soviet union in the 1980s and now us. that are emboldened. not only do they have the means to do something with the weapons, they have the will and they think they've got the divine inspiration to do it. what about the other countries in the region? are they going to help? usama bin laden himself said "somebody has to choose between the strong horse and know we course, so always choose the strong horse." of the united states, in this situation, is that week horse. the hostages will be traded around like what happened in lebanon in the 1980s, where a hostages taken by one family, then traded to another for money, for whatever, to be taken out, and then used against the united states whenever they see a reason or an advantage to do so. the chinese and russians are licking their chops. united states is disorganized, dysfunctional. it's at a humiliation on the world stage and the chinese is thinking "this should be our time. maybe, we should do expansion on the south china sea, threaten taiwan more aggressively." the russians are going to do the

if guerilla fighters could topple the mighty soviet union, why not the united states? the world saw the results. now it's the united states being driven out of afghanistan by a group of islamic fighters. bin laden is dead, but a new generation of extremists may be learning the same lesson today from the land often called the graveyard of empires. and there are not only americans still in afghanistan. there are many translators who worked with american forces and there are many, many efforts, often by veterans, private groups, to try and stay in contact with those people, keep them safe, keep them hidden until the airport can open up, they can get their documents and potentially they can be evacuated from the country. >> so many people anxious to see what happens next. chief foreign correspondent richard engel, thank you. >>> sheinelle joins the table now. breaking overnight, another big story out west. >> yes, good morning. the so-called caldor wildfire, one of dozens racing across the west, is growing quickly and threatening lake tahoe. thousands of homeowners and tou

india moved away from neutrality in the cold war when it actually tilted toward the soviet union, which is one reason we tilted towards pakistan. it goes back and forth. india now sees china as a threat, and it sees the same thing we see in pakistan, a large and growing chinese presence chinese assistance to pakistan in the next -- in the past few years for its nuclear weapons program. we need to tighten up with australia and japan, and really put to pakistan as clearly as we can, give up this flirtation with terrorism. if you do, there is a real prospect for cooperation. but we will not go on any longer pretending. tom: what form of relationship would you advocate, after your travels to central asia, does biden need to go to new delhi now? mr. bolton: he needs to go soon. we have issues with india, too -- and their dependents russian weapons systems which they have relied on and purchased for decades going back to the cold war. and i think a lot of the political class in india will have to wake up to the fact that the neutrality, which was never really neat during the cold war, is no l

we know the former soviet union had a very extensive program. we know countries like north korea possibly china and others have the ability to develop biological weapons and that's really part of pandemic preparedness, to make sure we think about these threats, have counter measures for certain agents that could be used as biological agents and we have to remain always vigilant against it. we have a biological weapons convention, many countries signed onto that but we know the soviet union developed biological weapons in defiance. that is something we have to continue to fund and think about and it should be integrated and melded with pandemic preparedness. dagen: al-qaida still in afghanistan actually has bioweapons labs, bioweapons in development, 20 years ago. so there's that. i eye dress. digress. dr. tony fauci said he backs the idea of covid vaccine mandates for school children, for kids to attend school. there's -- we're still waiting for approval of use of these vaccines in kids under 12. public school district in culver city, california

union. it lacks the global reach of the united states, but is still ranked as a world's number to military power. if a good reason, it continues to be a major concern to western powers and close european neighbors is demonstrated its ability to project force abroad with its deployments of forces to syria and where it can't directly send troops. moscow still managed to reach a battlefield through messen reason, the ukraine, libya, and central african republic. or russia's military expenditure increased by 2 and a half percent to 2020, to reach almost $62000000000.00, putting it behind india, china in the united states. that's according to the stock home international piece, research institute ross, or is the 2nd biggest exporter of conventional weapons with 20 percent of the market. the united states maintains its lead with 37 percent. and despite the pandemic military sell held up according to the moscow times, its order book remained at a level of $50.00 to $55000000.00. in 2020, in 2019201

so let's face it and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the priorities was to show how different we are. so space on television and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians and say, ha ha, you gone to that we can. and this process is now read such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old province used to do women, you know, in the fifty's. so even the 60, just affectively acting on behalf of the state and sometimes completely creativity . you can pick up more or less any paper, whether it's a writing tabloid, or well as liberal guardian, and on key issues. the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners are punishing them for many other alternatives on television because of the development of technology. you can see news from on our t on 0 sewer on. numerous have a channel that exists that monopoly is being broken, but obviously only for the privileged people or people who can do is not everyone in the world as a com

the media in the west has been deteriorating and degenerate since the collapse of the soviet union. let's face it. and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the priorities was to show how different we are. so space on television. and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians and say, are you gone to that we can. and this process is now reach such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old province used to do women, you know, in the fifty's. so even the 60, just affectively acting on behalf of the state and sometimes completely creatively, you can pick up more or less any paid. but whether it's the right rig tabloid, or whether it's a liberal guardian and on key issues. the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners are punishing them for many other alternatives on television because of the development of technology. you can see news from on our t on 0, sue on numerous i've a channel that exists so that monopoly is bein

union. it lacks the global reach of the united states, but is still ranked as a world's number to military power. if a good reason, it continues to be a major concern to western powers and close european neighbors is demonstrated its ability to project force abroad with its deployments of forces to syria and where it can't directly send troops. moscow still managed to reshape battlefields through messen reason, the ukraine, libya, and central african republic. or russia's military expenditure increased by 2 and a half percent in 2020 to reach almost $62000000000.00, putting it behind india, china and the united states. that's according to the home international piece. research institute. russia is the 2nd biggest exporter of conventional weapons with 20 percent of the market. the united states maintains its lead with 37 percent. and despite the pandemic military sell held up according to the moscow times, its order book remained at a level of $50.00 to $55000000.00. in 2020, in 20192018. rus

let's face it and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the prior piece was to show how different we are. so space on television and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians and say, how you can do that. we can and this process is not reach such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old prophets used to do women, you know, in the fifty's or even the 60 just affectively acting on behalf of the state. and sometimes completely creatively, you can pick up more or less any paid, but whether it's the right rig tabloid, or whether it's a liberal guardian and on key issues, the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners are punishing them for many other alternatives on television because of the development of technology. you can see news from on r t on 0, our sewer on numerous i channels that exists that monopoly is being broken, but obviously only for privilege people or people who can do or not everyone in the world as a comp

union in the middle of this, they stop and talk about cancer. just gives you a sense of how strange the nazi party rule deal at this critical moment, there focused on otto warburg and cancer science. any explain it in this book. it is truly bizarre. patty: yes, i thought so too great was absolutely fascinating. almost hard to put somewhere in your head up in any way that is what happened. and now, let's continue on. might be getting my timelines well, he left the lab and he moved the u.s. for a while and drove this foresight is absolutely crazy was a very kind soul that was just didn't know what to deal with otto warburg. tell us what happened and why it happened. and that would happen after. sam: swept the cement i just told you about, otto warburg is totally focuses on cancer he will be protected. say makes it to the end of the work and amazingly, not only to be survived, but in 1942, bombs start to fall, i'm sorry 1943, near his institute that essentially moved to new institute which is sort of refurbish mentioned. famous place in the german

let's face it and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the priorities was to show how different we are. so space on television and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians and say, are you gone to that we can. and this process is not read such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old prophet used to do women, you know, in the fifty's. so even the 60, just affectively acting on behalf of the state and sometimes completely creativity . you can pick up more or less any paid, but whether it's a right rig tabloid, or whether it's a liberal, guardian and on key issues. the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners punishing them for many other alternatives on television because of the development of technology. you can see news from on r t on 0. so on numerous i channels that exists that monopoly is being broken, but obviously only for privilege people or people who can do or not everyone in the world as a computer or a te

this was the first time there had been a meeting between us and the soviet union. but then when we got over there and meetings started, the press couldn't get into the meetings. they couldn't talk to my husband or gorbachev, so they can't traded on me more than was necessary. susan: is that exactly two? karen: it is not exactly true. it is very interesting. these two women were so alike in some ways. first of all, soviet first ladies, at least back then, were usually a mystery. the average citizen did not know much about them. sometimes they did not even know what their first names were. gorbachev was very different. a brilliant, outspoken academic, very close to her husband as nancy reagan was. very fashionable. she would show up in paris at the p.r. cardin -- pierre cardin fashion shows. she was criticized for the same things that nancy reagan was criticized for, being ostentatious or too aloof. you might think these two would get along, but some of that first meeting, which by the way was the first time an american first lady and a soviet first lady had met sinc

and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the prior piece was to show how different we are so space on television. and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians. and say, how you can do that, we can, and this process is not reach such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old problem used to do women, you know, in the fifty's. so even the 60, just affectively acting on behalf of the state and sometimes completely and creativity, you can pick up more or less any paid. but whether it's a right rig tabloid, or whether it's a liberal guardian and on key issues. the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners are punishing them for many other alternatives on television because of the development of technology. you can see news from on r t on 0, sue on numerous i've a channel that exists that monopoly is being broken, but obviously only for privilege people or people who can do this. not everyone in the world as a computer or a t

so let's face it and it's obvious that while the soviet union existed, they put up, you know, the, one of the prior p supposed to show how different we are. so space on television and in the mainstream newspapers was allocated to some dissenting voices as if to mock the russians and say, ha ha, you gone to that we can. and this process is not reach such a stage that the mainstream media actually is behaving more and more like the old prophet used to do women, you know, in the fifty's. so even the 60, just affectively acting on behalf of the state and sometimes completely creativity . you can pick up more or less any paid, but whether it's a right rig tabloid, or whether it's a liberal, guardian and on key issues. the line is virtually the same. i think some of our readers and listeners are punishing them for many other alternatives. on television because of the development of technology, you can see news from on our t on 0, our sewer on. numerous, i've a channel that exists that monopoly is being broken, but obviously only for privilege people or people who can do or not everyone in th

this is the territory, the legendary oxford sha masood stood off the soviet union for 10 years and had no trouble brushing the taliban aside after, after the soviets left. whether they can do it again. i don't know that the taliban national army is now one of the best equipped in the world given all of our equipment that they've taken over. but i think looking to help that resistance might be a possibility. my focus would be to phone number one, just making sure that that the taliban keep their commitments, which i don't for a minute think they will. but we need to be prepared to take steps to make sure that neither al qaeda nor isis, nor anybody else really do establish those rear bases, those privilege sanctuaries. we watch that happened in the 1991 taliban was in charge before. and we obviously paid a steep price for the other. the other thing to watch is on pakistan, very concerned is we've just discussed about their nuclear weapons. and i think we have to be prepared to take preventative action. if we see those weapons begin to move in a way that indicates they might be about to g

union, has a pretty searing history of its own in afghanistan and its own failure, failed invasion in the 19805 thatjust led to catastrophic consequences. afghanistan is not a nation that wants to be occupied. history has shown that. the british much earlier failed. this is a very complex region and it simply does not, it is not a country that can be conquered and restructured, re—engineered in western paradigms. thank you all. let's move on. this week has seen the centre of london full of demonstrators from the extinction rebellion movement protesting and calling for the end of the use of fossil fuels. some question whether the demonstrations will achieve anything and many suggest the gap between government rhetoric and actual actions though is even wider than ever. activists, for their part, have been accused of vandalism after pouring fake blood into the fountain outside buckingham palace. justin, you are our chief environment correspondent. you are absolutely the perfect correspondent! what effect do you think, if any, extinction rebellion�*s actions are really having in movin

and the soviet union. while these de space has, of course, opened up more than 70 countries, now have space programs. and increasingly private companies happened leading the way. or each helens has this report from cornwall. in a modest hanger on the scruffy edge of a regional u. k. airport lies a new chapter in space. exploration. this is virgin orbit launch, a one, a rocket deployed from a plane that will take satellite to space and space for cornwall. the new key airport expects this to happen for the 1st time. next june. getting here hasn't been easy. it's been a long journey locked with up and downs. we've had funding issues. we had breakfast, we've had changes and administration. we've had a panoramic, we've had this airport almost having to be shut because of the pandemic. we've had a lot of challenges, but we've overcome all of them to get to the point where we're so close to launch. for the 1st of these virgin orbit will use space for cornwall as little more than a runway to take off from that con

let's face it, russia, formerly the soviet union, has a pretty searing history of its own in afghanistan and its own failure, failed invasion in the 1980s that just led to catastrophic consequences. afghanistan is not a nation that wants to be occupied. history has shown that. the british much earlier failed. this is a very complex region and it simply does not, it is not a country that can be conquered and restructured, re—engineered in western paradigms. thank you all. let's move on. this week has seen the centre of london full of demonstrators from the extinction rebellion movement protesting and calling for the end of the use of fossil fuels. some question whether the demonstrations will achieve anything and many suggest the gap between government rhetoric and actual actions though is even wider than ever. activists, for their part, have been accused of vandalism after pouring fake blood into the fountain outside buckingham palace. justin, you are our chief environment correspondent. you are absolutely the perfect correspondent! what effect do you think, if any, extinction rebellio

union. we made efforts to bring russia into the west into the organizations of the west and so forth. and they have they evidently didn't work. and so here we are now and and not only the russia. we're we are now in and it pretty much of a war environment with china. china of course i was one who fought like hell to get china into the wto because we thought that would that they would become a more responsible international player. once they were admitted to these important international organization. so to get into the wto that made a lot of promise. but they didn't keep those prompts. and that's not that's not good. so here we are today. i think there's room today for doing the kinds of things that we did during the reagan and george h.w. bush administration because we're right back into the same environment. now of course with this audience and the theme of this conference and with your spectacular career as a lawyer before you became such a success in washington, dc. and when i interviewe

union. it lacks the global reach of the united states, but is still ranked as a world number 2, military power. if a good reason, it continues to be a major concern to western powers and close european neighbors is demonstrated its ability to project force abroad with its deployments of forces to syria and where it can't directly send troops. moscow still managed to reshape battlefield through messen reason, the ukraine, libya, and central african republic. well, russia's military expenditure increased by 2 and a half percent to 2020, to reach almost $62000000000.00, putting it behind india, china in the united states. that's according to the store, home international piece, research institute ross or is the 2nd biggest exposure of conventional weapons with 20 percent of the market. the united states maintains its lead with 37 percent. and despite the pandemic military sale held up, according to the most times, its order book remained at a level of $50.00 to $55000000000.00. in 2020, in 2019

let's face it, russia, formerly the soviet union, has a pretty searing history of its own in afghanistan and its own failure, failed invasion in the 19805 thatjust led to catastrophic consequences. afghanistan is not a nation that wants to be occupied. history has shown that. the british much earlier failed. this is a very complex region and it simply does not, it is not a country that can be conquered and restructured, re—engineered in western paradigms. thank you all. let's move on. this week has seen the centre of london full of demonstrators from the extinction rebellion movement protesting and calling for the end of the use of fossil fuels. some question whether the demonstrations will achieve anything and many suggest the gap between government rhetoric and actual actions though is even wider than ever. activists, for their part, have been accused of vandalism after pouring fake blood into the fountain outside buckingham palace. justin, you are our chief environment correspondent. you are absolutely the perfect correspondent! what effect do you think, if any, extinction rebellion

union. we made efforts to bring russia into the west into the organizations of the west and so forth. and they have they evidently didn't work. and so here we are now and and not only the russia. we're here we are now in and it pretty much of a war environment with china. china of course i was one who fought like hell to get china into the wto because we thought that would that they would become a more responsible international player. once they were admitted to these important international organization. so to get into the wto that made a lot of promise. but they didn't keep those problems. and that's not that's not good. so here we are today. i think there's room today for doing the kinds of things that we did during the reagan and george h.w. bush administration because we're right back into the same environment. now of course with this audience and the theme of this conference and with your spectacular career as a lawyer before you became such a success in washington, dc. and when i inte

this is the territory, the legendary oxford sha masood stood off the soviet union for 10 years and had no trouble brushing the taliban aside after, after the soviets left. whether they can do it again. i don't know that the taliban national army is now one of the best equipped in the world given all of our equipment that they've taken over. but i think looking to help that resistance might be a possibility. my focus would be to phone number one, just making sure that that the taliban keep their commitments, which i don't for a minute think they will. but we need to be prepared to take steps to make sure that neither al qaeda nor isis, nor anybody else really do establish those rear bases, those privilege sanctuaries. we watch that happened in the 1990 s. when taliban was in charge before. and we obviously paid a steep price for it. the other, the other thing to watch is on pakistan i'm very concerned is we've just discussed about their nuclear weapons. and i think we have to be prepared to take preventative action. if we see those weapons begin to move in a way that indicates they migh

secretary of state new that a lot of business to do with gorbachev in his present of the soviet union at the time and his foreign minister. very restrained to the point who's criticized brownlee for not showing more emotion at the falling of the wall after always been in the cold war situation for over 40 years. the war had ended, we had one, why were we celebrating? we weren't celebrating because we did not want to stick it in there i since we had a lot more things we needed to get done. and i think that would be one good example. >> so after you walked in your counterpart shoes, and empathized and before you get to the table, you get to the table. it's time to start the actual horse trading as we call it. in order to be able to strike a deal you talked about not viewing it as a zero-sum game. talk about yourself many times expand upon how you kept pragmatism in front of your mind in your negotiatis. >> the times and i w was up there it's easy to politically demon ties pragmatism because pragmatism of necessity means compromise. compromise is not and should never have been a dirty wo

union. we made efforts to bring russia into the west, into the organization of the west and so forth and they evidently didn't work and so here we are now not only russia but in pretty much of the cold war environment with china. china, i fought like hell to get china into the wto because we thought they would become a more responsible international player once they were admitted to the important international organization. they made a lot of promises but they didn't keep those promises. and that is not good so here we are today, there is room today are doing the kinds of things we did during the reagan and george h w bush administration because we are back in the same environment. >> with his audience and the theme of this conference in your spectacular career as a lawyer became before you came a success in washington dc and i interviewed peter and susan and asked what was it about your training as a lawyer and your years of practicing law the translated into your service in washington when

this is the territory, the legendary oxford sha masood stood off the soviet union for 10 years and had no trouble brushing the taliban aside after, after the soviets left. whether they can do it again. i don't know that the taliban national army is now one of the best equipped in the world given all of our equipment that they've taken over. but i think looking to help that resistance might be a possibility. my focus would be to phone number one, just making sure that that the taliban keep their commitments, which i don't for a minute think they will. but we need to be prepared to take steps to make sure that neither al qaeda nor isis, nor anybody else really do establish those rear bases, those privilege sanctuaries. we watch that happened in the 1990 s when taliban was charged before. and we obviously paid a steep price for the other. the other thing to watch is on pakistan, very concerned is we've just discussed about their nuclear weapons. and i think we have to be prepared to take preventative action. if we see those weapons begin to move in a way that indicates they might be about

union. it lacks the global reach of the united states, but is still ranked as a world's number to military power. if a good reason, it continues to be a major concern to western powers and close european neighbors is demonstrated its ability to project force abroad with its deployments of forces to syria and where it can't directly send troops. moscow still managed to reshape battlefields through mess. reason the ukraine, libya and central african republic rushes military expenditure increased by 2 and a half percent in 2020 to reach almost $62000000000.00, putting it behind india, china and the united states. that's according to the home international piece, research institute ross, or is the 2nd biggest exporter of conventional weapons with 20 percent of the market. the united states maintains its lead with 37 percent. and despite the pandemic, millet you sell held up according to the moscow times, its order book remained at a level of $50.00 to $55000000.00. in 2020, in 20192018. russia r

i’ge soviet union side? i've actually. _ soviet union side? i've actually, yes, - soviet union side? i've actually, yes, i've - soviet union side? i've - actually, yes, i've actually had the opportunity to meet one, soviet crew member. he came with his son to tour the museum. so they brought him into my office, just really nice guy. and as he was shaking my hand, he said "thanks for not launching". and i couldn't think of anything to say but thank you for not launching, i mean, this was... we were both so grateful to have the opportunity to meet each other and, in peace. find opportunity to meet each other and. in peace-— and, in peace. and you are two human beings— and, in peace. and you are two human beings who _ and, in peace. and you are two human beings who personally . human beings who personally could have easily have led to... ., ., , to... right, either one of us. the destruction _ to. .. right, either one of us. the destruction of— to... right, either one of us. the destruction of the - to... right, either one of us. the destr

union. so the united states decreed this government had to go and they did it by supplying arms to islamicists. basically what we are seeing now is the case of reaping what you sow. do you have any comment on that? thanks and i will take your answer offline. guest: thanks for your point. you are right. once afghanistan became embroiled in the cold war, cold war politics, that signaled a major change for everything in afghanistan -- politics, society, culture -- they're still recovering from it. afghanistan has really been at war for more than 40 years. we talk in the united states about war that has gone on for 20 years but for afghans, it has been twice that time. you have to go back to the invasion many years ago. afghanistan has really struggled to recover. it is notable that if you look at the afghan history, the country enjoys a modicum of stability. that is when you didn't have foreign countries or foreign militaries involved, meddling covertly or physically and presently on the ground

union. it lacks the global reach of the united states, but is still ranked as well as number 2, military power. if a good reason, it continues to be a major concern to western powers and close european neighbors is demonstrated its ability to project force abroad with its deployments of forces to syria and where it can't directly send troops. moscow still managed to reshape battlefields through mess. reason, the ukraine, libya, and central african republic. russia's military expenditure increased by 2 and a half percent in 2020 to reach almost $62000000000.00, putting it behind india, china and the united states. that's according to the home international piece. research institute. russert is the 2nd biggest exporter of conventional weapons with 20 percent of the market. the united states maintains its lead with 37 percent . and despite the pandemic military sell held up according to the moscow times, its order book remained at a level of $50.00 to $55000000.00. in 2020, in 20192018. russia

this is the territory, the legendary oxford sha masood stood off the soviet union for 10 years and had no trouble brushing the taliban aside after, after the soviets left. whether they can do it again. i don't know that the taliban national army is now one of the best equipped in the world given all of our equipment that they've taken over. but i think looking to help that resistance might be a possibility. my focus would be to phone number one, just making sure that that the taliban keep their commitments, which i don't for a minute think they will. but we need to be prepared to take steps to make sure that neither al qaeda nor isis, nor anybody else really do establish those rear bases, those privilege sanctuaries. we watch that happened in the 1990 s. when taliban was in charge before. and we obviously paid a steep price for it. the other, the other thing to watch is on pakistan, very concerned is we've just discussed about their nuclear weapons. and i think we have to be prepared to take preventative action. if we see those weapons begin to move in a way that indicates they might b

let's face it, russia, firmly the soviet union has a pretty searing history of its own in afghanistan and its own failure, failed invasion in the 19805 that was just catastrophic in terms of consequences. afghanistan is not a nation that wants to be occupied. history has shown that the british much earlier failed. history has shown that the british much earlierfailed. this is a very complex region, and it simply does not... it is not a country that can be conquered and restructured, re—engineered in a western paradigm. thank you all. let's move on. this week has seen the centre of london full of demonstrators from the extinction rebellion movement protesting and calling for the end of the use of fossil fuels. some question whether the demonstrations will achieve anything. many suggest the gap between government rhetoric and actual actions is wider than ever. activists have been accused of vandalism after pouring fake blood into the fountain outside buckingham palace. justin, you are our chief environments correspondence. you are the perfect correspondent to be with us this evening.

i was still in service when the soviet union was enough. got to stop. and i fought that wall from this side. i mean, the area was we didn't have any downwash, but after that, there was the terrible, you see internet sign, tribal off air, which is spelled over into box down. and then the pakistani, the d t p that the hurry get all a bond box on that was formed. and the isis, they gave their franchise to the d t p who are mostly used park sunny summer bundle of issues and somebody indians. and these other people who are fighting for them. so some of these people, they're, they're very located in box on some are still located. they continue to create problems. although pakistan, things, it has won the war against terrorism. but you're only on it to a certain extent, and some of these people says off the isis, they are now being relocated, they're being energized, and they're being told to continue attack. so fox one has a lot to buddy coming to the aspect of the refugees box on still horse, nearly about $4000000.00 of con refugees, which is a major burden

union. so the united states decreed this government had to go and they did it by supplying arms to islamicists. basically what we are seeing now is the case of reaping what you sow. do you have any comment on that? thanks and i will take your answer offline. guest: thanks for your point. you are right. once afghanistan became embroiled in the cold war, cold war politics, that signaled a major change for everything in afghanistan -- politics, society, culture -- they're still recovering from it. afghanistan has really been at war for more than 40 years. we talk in the united states about war that has gone on for 20 years but for afghans, it has been twice that time. you have to go back to the invasion many years ago. afghanistan has really struggled to recover. it is notable that if you look at the afghan history, the country enjoys a modicum of stability. that is when you didn't have foreign countries or foreign militaries involved, meddling covertly or physically and presently on the ground

yes, i remember back when the soviet union fell. there is a great essay by francis fukuyama called the end of history. you know, supposedly that the west one and capitalism free market capitalism was now going to be the, the only system going forward. you know, that was wrong, but i think, i think now actually the end of history is actually, this is moral, a legitimate story here in the end, the fall of capital because it's the fall of really the 80 or 90 year post world war 2, washington consensus us style of command control using paper money. so i think that is that's now finished. so we're entering into a new era and we've, we've speculated it with people like dan collins, what that new era will be like. i think the pendulum of power will swing probably into the eurasia zone. i think that will be a certainty. so usually they can no longer project their power because nobody believes them that many more. once the monarchy, the french monarchy was gone. that was the end of monarchy. they tried to come back once and the people didn't

of course, overhanging that, you had the cold war, and you and the soviet union, and reagan took the measure of gorbachev partially thanks to misses thatcher. what we have now, is i think that if the ice age is serious, and intending to remain the leader of the three world -- free world, as to show the free world that it is doing something or enough things to maintain that leadership. so for example, let me be specific. here i am wearing my old budget hat. we had a program called the european deterrent initiative. it was very important, particularly in the countries of eastern and central europe. we cut that budget this year. to me, that is not a single leadership. we've a program called the pacific deterrent initiative, which is important to japan, korea, even taiwan, southeast asia. but we did with that one was take money from other programs that we were spending on anyway and call it an initiative. that does not really reassure people. if we want to it, and a sense to, do it reagan said, and go beyond vietnam, and focus on the big stuff, and not get caught up in trying to be a pol

yes, i remember back when the soviet union fell. there is a great essay by francis fukuyama called the end of history. you know, supposedly that the west one and capitalism free market capitalism was now going to be the, the only system going forward. you know, that was wrong, but i think, i think now actually the end of history is actually, this is world a legitimate story here in the end, the fall of capital because it's the fall of really the 80 or 90 year post world war 2, washington consensus us style of command control using paper money. so i think that is that's now finished. so we're entering into a new era and we've, we've speculated it with people like dan collins, what that new era will be like. i think the pendulum of power will swing probably into the eurasia zone. i think that'll be a certainty. so usually they can no longer project their power because nobody believes them that many more. once the monarchy, the french monarchy was gone. that was the end of monarchy. they tried to come back once and the people didn't wa

you still had the soviet union, and reagan took the measure of gorbachev, partly thanks to miss his stature, and we are -- partly thanks to mrs. thatcher, and we are where we are. i think that if the united states is serious and intending to remain the leader of "the free world," it has got to show that free world that doing something or enough things to maintain that leadership -- for example -- let me be specific. here i'm wearing my old budget hat. we have a program called the european deterrent initiative. it is very important, particularly in the countries of eastern and central europe. we cut that budget this year. to me, that is not a signal of leadership. we have a program called the pacific deterrent initiative, which is important to japan, korea, even taiwan, southeast asia. what we did with that one was take money from other programs that we were spending on anyway and call it an initiative. that is not really reassure people. if we want to in a sense do what reagan did, which is to go beyond vietnam and focus on the big stuff and not get caught up in trying to be a policeman eve

look at the soviet union in afghanistan. um, it is full of instances of big -- um -- big powers going into small, poorer countries and thinking that they can overhaul them and run them and put in the government they want. and, you know, this is exaggerating only slightly. it never works, ever. and so, the u.s., i think, had to attack afghanistan in order to go after al qaeda in 2001. the question is why didn't the united states, which is really the george w. bush administration at the time, have a plan that was something other than we're going to remake this entire society? why didn't they accept the surrender of the taliban when it was offered to them? why didn't they see that a permanent war that seeks total victory is actually more likely to end in defeat, as we have just seen, than a more limited mission in afghanistan. >> to the point that the afghan government which as you talked about this earlier and you have written about this. the afghan government asked the u.s. don't start pulling these people out because it's go

yes, i remember back when the soviet union fell. there is a great essay by francis fukuyama called the end of history. you know, supposedly that the west one and capitalism free market capitalism was now going to be the, the only system going forward. you know, that was wrong, but i think, i think now actually the end of history is actually, this is world a legitimate story here in the end, the fall of capital because it's the fall of really the 80 or 90 year post world war 2, washington consensus us style of command control using paper money. so i think that is that's now finished. so we're entering into a new era. and we've, we've speculated with people like dan collins, what that new era will be like. i think the pendulum of power will swing probably into the eurasia zone. i think that'll be a certainty. so usually they can no longer project their power because nobody believes them that many more. once the monarchy, the french monarchy was gone. that was the end of monarchy. they tried to come back once and the people didn't want

union and afghanistan, it is full of instances of big -- big powers going into small poorer countries and thinking that they can overhaul them and run them and put in the government they want. and, you know, this is exaggerated only slightly. it never works ever. and so the u.s. i think had to attack afghanistan in order to go after al-qaeda in 2001. the question is why didn't the united states, which is really the george w. bush administration at the time, have a plan that was something other than we're going to remake this entire society? why didn't they accept the surrender of the taliban when it was offered to them? why didn't they see that a permanent war that seeks total victory is actually more likely to end in defeat as we've just seen than a more limited mission in afghanistan? >> to the point that the afghan government which as you talked about this earlier and you've written about this -- the afghan government asked the u.s. don't start pulling these people out because it's going to totally collapse our government. i mean, it's a tricky situation for the u.s., and they deci

the soviet union assumed firm control in north korea. frustrating efforts of a joint commission working to unify the country. all traffic to the north was sealed off. the question of korea became a united nations concerned in 1947. un's efforts to hold supervisory free elections throughout korea are blocked in the north by the soviet union. only in the south were elections held. the republic of korea was created and the national legislature elected the provisions for north korea's representation if elections could be held there. the first president -- these were elections in the south. >> the only legal government in korea. in december of 1948 the soviet union in a surprise move announced as she had removed her occupation troops from north korea. we found ourselves compelled to do the same in the south except for a small u.s. army advisory group which remained at the request of the korean government. the question of a unified korea remained unanswered. the future of the south korean people was another anxious american. ♪♪ rip korea's

you had these former republics of the soviet union. suffice to say russia will be putting pressure on the stands. what russia wants is stability in afghanistan and a reduction in heroin coming out of there, a lot of which ends up in the arms of young russians. this vacuum will be filled by regional powers. >> going to ask the three of you to stand by. we're going to bring in richard engel. the taliban, as i understand it, is saying no more afghans can travel from the airport in kabul. what has been the reaction to that? >> reporter: there's been confusion because the way they said it was that no one can go to the airport. when it was translated into english, it was said that they are discouraging people from going to the airport. it's dark now here. we will see what happens in the morning. generally it is consistent with what the taliban have been saying. they want to stop the flow out of the country. they first were appealing to afghans saying you shouldn't leave the country, look at the afghans sleeping on the ground. it's misery. st