Did “Dead Hand” (The Russian Doomsday Machine) actually existed and if yes what is its status today?

Sayan.

I've seen you on the television many times discussing google law suits, new cell phones, etc. Which do you prefer to discuss more – history or tech?

What's the craziest thing you've ever discovered in your research???

Hi Nick –

Smartphones have gotten exponentially better in the last couple years – what do you think the next big innovation will be on that front?

You're a senior editor at a magazine – how worried are you about the survival of the print industry in a digital age?

How relevant is a discussion on the cold war in an decade of wars on terror?

Nick, few years ago I was hoping that by today there would be some signs of a technology that would allow our mobile devices to be charged wirelessly (and that we would pay for this service using some kind of roaming electricity account). This would free us of wires, chargers and, more importantly, processors with limited power that are geared towards saving energy rather than performing well.

Since technology exists for more than a hundred years (invented by Nikola Tesla) what is it that stops companies form comercializing it and when do you think we will have such a technology?

In recent times US and western world polices have become highly opposed by the Arab and Muslim world,is it because of unlimited support they give to Israel and its policy of continued occupation of Gaza and west bank in middle east?.

I think this is a very appropriate discussion topic, especially since we are about one week from the anniversary of the Oktoberskaya Revolutsiya (The October Revolution) in Russia. My question is: do you think the 'Cold War' mentality that exists in both the Kremlin and in Washington will ever dissipate?

Do you see Vladimir Putin amending Russia's constitution and return to the position of President?

How is today's Russia with its psuedo-democracy any different from the Soviet Union?

Do you think the world is a more dangerous place today or during the Cold War?

How do you think the current crop of US diplomats and foreign policy officials compare with the Cold War actors like Kennan, Nitze and others? Are they up to the challenge?

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, public health sunk–leaving thousands dead from diptheria, polio, hepatitis, flu, typhoid, cholera, dysentary, AIDS, TB, syphilis, gonorrhea, alcoholism, drug abuse, suicide, and childhood mumps–even though the Soviet Union had once boasted one of the best healthcare systems in the world.

Do you think public health in America is threatened?

What were some estimates of the USSR's GDP. Was it a very important factor in determining whether or not the Union was considered a global hegemony? Or was it the Union's military capabilities that mattered the most.

Do you think that Russian will agree that Brazil take place in security of U.N. ?

The existence of Soviet Union was a threat to America than rest of the rest of the world, more than a decade after its collapse is the world any safer?

Why President Roosvelt and Mr. Churcill did not open a war front in the Balcans consigning de facto East Europe to Soviet army?

Hello,
I would like to ask you question about russian intelligence service in time of second world war in comparison with today. Do you think that russian intelligence practics have changed after 1991?
Thank you very much for your answer.

Hi Nick,

Don't you think that the Cold War was a good thing in a way? There was a healthy competition to show that your people live better than the ones in the county you are "enemy' with. Governments at both sides did their best to improve the quality of life of their citizens, decrease work hours, improve health system....sometiimes I believe just to show the "other side" that their people are better off in their own country. There was a LOT of propaganda involved in BOTH sides too.
Do you think there was ever a REAL threat from either side?

What lessons did the Soviets learn, if any, durning their invasion of Afghanistan? And what can we, as Americans, learn from their mistakes?

I'm interested in learning Pashto and the culture of Afghanistan. Do you think that this approach has a more winning number than the Soviets approach during the 1980's? And if so, what government agency would be interested in training veterans for this new approach?

A Russian engineer once told me that for her the real reason for
the end of the Soviet Union was the Arpanet. Her reasoning was
that the Arpanet accelerated the weapons R&D cycles due to the
rapidity and informality of information sharing, whereas in the Soviet
Union, even to copy a spec out of a components catalog required
a sign out with a supervisor who was watched by the KGB.

The Soviet leadership, already severely stressed by the Cold War,
now faced an untenable choice. To imitate the networking that
was so effective in the U.S.A., one had to bypass the cumbersome
routines that came with police state security measures.

So the Soviet Union leadership realized that to do it our way was
to abandon oversight in its most privileged intelligencia, its weapons
designers. They added it all up, which it didn't, threw in the towel
in the slow motion of Glasnost.

That was my friend Irena's thesis, Ph.D. Physics, University of
Moscow. Comment?

I would like your comment also on this; Robert Service in his
recent biography of Stalin suggests that judging Russia by
its proclaimed ideology of the moment is to miss the central
point that has made governing Russia so problematic for
centuries, too big, too diverse.

Now Russia faces Islamic fundamentalism as we do, and
its last stand in Afghanistan was its own reaction to what
it perceived as a domino theory threat, that all of the south eastern
areas of the Soviet Union, each heavily populated with Moslems,
would fall away as a group. It was Bin Laden and his highway
building that defeated the Soviet Invasion, so we do have that
part of the problem in common. But to understand Russia
today, if one follows the advice of Robert Service, is to keep one's
attention focused on what to him is the constant issue, size
diversity. I do agree with this point of view, as I did with Irene's
unusual take expressed in the letter previous.

Your thoughts on this? Is Russia, even in its reduced size,
governable without having to resort to military violence?

One last thing, in response to an earlier comment.

The Cold War is relevant in two ways, as example, and as
continuing fact. It changes its face and its popular mythology
struggles to keep up.

So may I suggest this baseline for the Cold War; it was, and
so it remains, all about nuclear weapons. They are what must
remain cold if nothing else in warfare does. Now the problem
is worse than ever, because the controls are so heavily compromised. But as long as a nuke does not go off, then the Cold War, our best friend, abides. Disarming would be nice, however.