nu tai turi kazkiek laikytis savo pagrindinio shukio ;] kiek del pacios politikos jo dar neaisku ir sunku dabar vertinti tik laikas parodys ar geras sprendimas ar ne. tikrai sunku vertinti. nu bet aisku viena kad Obama dabar renka taskus ateities gincams spresti.

ruskiu ir taip jau surudyjusios raketos nebeskris nebent vietoja susprogs ir ner ko obamai kalbeti su neuzaugom.

„Egzistuoja dvi Šaltojo karo pabaigos versijos: rusiška ir teisinga“

homoseksualistai ir kiti iškrypėliai, prašome neskleisti savo analinio sekso propagandos, kalbant apie politiką;

pastovūs iškrypėlių, kalbant apie politiką, kurių idėja yra - "įlįstį į kažkieno išangę - suteikti išangės savininkui malonumą, jį pamaloninti", propaguoja iškrypėlišką idėją, kad visi be išimties žmonės jaučia malonumą, kai "kažkas lenda į jų išangę".

deja....

....

But above all, Mr. Schlesinger is a nuclear realist. Are we heading toward a nuclear-free world anytime soon?
He shoots back a one-word answer: "No." I keep silent, hoping he will go on.

"We will need a strong deterrent," he finally says, "and that is measured at least in decades -- in my judgment, in fact, more or less in perpetuity.

The notion that we can abolish nuclear weapons reflects on a combination of American utopianism and American parochialism. . . .
It's like the [1929] Kellogg-Briand Pact renouncing war as an instrument of national policy . . . .
It's not based upon an understanding of reality."

In other words: Go ahead and wish for a nuclear-free world, but pray that you don't get what you wish for. A world without nukes would be even more dangerous than a world with them, Mr. Schlesinger argues.

"If, by some miracle, we were able to eliminate nuclear weapons," he says, "what we would have is a number of countries sitting around with breakout capabilities or rumors of breakout capabilities -- for intimidation purposes. . . . and finally, probably, a number of small clandestine stockpiles."

*** This would make the U.S. more vulnerable.**

Mr. Schlesinger makes the case for a strong U.S. deterrent. Yes, the Cold War has ended and, yes, while "we worry about Russia's nuclear posture to some degree, it is not just as prominent as it once was." The U.S. still needs to deter Russia, which has the largest nuclear capability of any potential adversary, and the Chinese, who have a modest (and growing) capability. The U.S. nuclear deterrent has no influence on North Korea or Iran, he says, or on nonstate actors. "They're not going to be deterred by the possibility of a nuclear response to actions that they might take," he says.

Mr. Schlesinger refers to the unanimous conclusion of the bipartisan Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, which he co-led with Chairman William Perry. The commission "strongly" recommended that further discussions with the Russians on arms control are "desirable," he says, and that "we should proceed with negotiations on an extension of the START Treaty." That's what Mr. Obama set in motion in Moscow this week.
The pact -- whose full name is the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty -- expires in December. But what's the hurry?

**Mr. Schlesinger warns about rushing to agree on cuts.**

**"The treaty . . . can be extended for five years. And, if need be, I would extend it for five years."

There's another compelling reason for a strong U.S. deterrent:

***the U.S. nuclear umbrella, which protects more than 30 allies world-wide. ***


"If we were only protecting the North American continent," he says, "we could do so with far fewer weapons than we have at present in the stockpile."

But a principal aim of the U.S. nuclear deterrent is "to provide the necessary reassurance to our allies, both in Asia and in Europe."

That includes "our new NATO allies such as Poland and the Baltic States," which, he notes dryly, continue to be concerned about their Russian neighbor.

"Indeed, they inform us regularly that they understand the Russians far better than do we."
----------
He reminds me of the comment of Japanese political leader Ichiro Ozawa,

who said in 2002 that it would be "easy" for Japan to make nuclear warheads and that it had enough plutonium to make several thousand weapons.

- "When one contemplates a number like that," Mr. Schlesinger says,

"one sees that a substantial role in nonproliferation has been the U.S. nuclear umbrella.
*** Without that, some and perhaps a fair number of our allies would feel the necessity of having their own nuclear capabilities."***
-----------
Finally, we chat about Mr. Schlesinger's nearly half-century as a nuclear strategist.

Are we living in a world where the use of nuclear weapons is more likely than it was back then?

*** "The likelihood of a nuclear exchange has substantially gone away," he says. ***

That's the good news.

-** "However, the likelihood of a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States" is greater.**

Teisingai boba sako, na bet jei Obama nori atgaivinti mirusius santykius tarp Rusijos ir JAV, tai savaime suprantama, kad reikia biski i sikna ilyst.