Certainly we have good examples, colombia, because of courageous leadership. Im not seeing a lot of democracy flourishing in venezuela or cuba, from that standpoint. Can you help me out in terms of what youre talking about . Theres no doubt that democracys not flourishing in cuba. And its part of the president s effort to pursue a new approach to see what more we can do to help the cuban people begin their own political opening. As we look back over the last several decades, whats important to remember and acknowledge about our hemisphere is this was a region that was largely ruled by authoritarian government, some military, some not, but which has found through its commitment to human rights and its ability to organize and use Interamerican Solutions like the Interamerican Human Rights Court and the Interamerican Court of human rights to develop Civil Societies around human rights issues and use that to build democracy. Whether its chile in the 1980s, our work in Central America to fa
150 years ago, on may 23 and 24 of 1865, two military processions in washington, d. C. Called the grand review of the armies drew thousands of spectators to pennsylvania avenue. President Andrew Johnson cabinet and government officials and general ulysses s. Grant watched from this reviewing stand in front of the white house. On may 23rd, an estimated 80,000 soldiers of the army of the potomac led by general meade took about six hours to pass before the reviewing stand. On may 24th general william t. Sherman led 65,000 soldiers of the army of tennessee and army of georgia on the same route. Up next on american artifacts a reenactment of the parade that celebrated the end of the civil war. [snare drums rattling] shoulder. Arms. My name is dr. Malcolm beech and im president of the United States colored troops Living History Association and im from north carolina. Today were having a reenactment called the grand review parade. This, in fact, is a reenactment of the victory parade that was
Calling from moscow already. And finally both countries are preoccupied, what i would call as a rather painful reassessesment or the roles in an world of increasing turbulence. And these differences in world views, differences in interpretation of values, different geopolitical interests and this preoccupation with ones own role is not really a recipe for success in the overall u. S. Russian relationship some what we have at that point i would argue is an amalgam of legacy issues and current crises. There is nothing on the agenda, nothing in the relationship that is particularly forwardlooking. Literally geared toward the change taking place in the world and how the two countries are going to cope with them. Without that, without the forwardlooking element, we find that the relationship is one onf a mix of competition, cooperation and indifference and without this forwardlooking element i would also argue what were seeing in this relationship is not necessarily the downside of this cyc
The gentlemen. Gentleman. I have some questions about iran and nuclear policy. In the last press conference by president obama a something in this press conference which i thought was different from the past. All along in recent months he has been talking about a nuclear bomb or nuclear weapon, specifically mentioning that a something iran cannot get. In a press conference, he went beyond that and said nuclear capability. I wonder if this is the same position, or is this something new, changing course . The second thing is for the entire panel, ellen laipson, too. The red lines, basically encouraged by the israelis, those have been gone for some time. Now there is something emerging, and that is the year 2013. I see that as a new version of the deadline. Would you say significantly year everything should be settled with iran or we go to the next option . What you think of the casual use of the year as a deadline . Ok, thank you. I think all of these different shades of gray from total
Conversation with some of your points and the points on the panel. You touched a little bit with resource scarcity and the economics of that. They seem to suggest that the increase in immigration is essential, particularly for high skilled workers. The Panel Suggests for every high skilled worker job that is added, teed up to three local jobs for American Workers are toed in that area two three local jobs for American Workers are added in that area. It suggests that americans are not taking the jobs anyway, so the only way to combat the lower skilled workers to bring immigrants. Ants onanted to hear your take some of those points and if you feel like your arguments are matching that conversation. Topliness the easiest response to that is that you should not take the argumentation of employers with needing more immigrants or more foreignguest workers as necessarily representing the factual situation because of the fact that they have a vested interest in expanding both temporary guest w