Charlie Rose Science Series
Click here to watch previous episodes of the Charlie Rose Science Series
03/20/2008
Richard Perle, Fred Kagan
A discussion about the war in Iraq on the five year anniversary of the invasion
Keywords:
A discussion about the war in Iraq on the five year anniversary of the invasion with Richard Perle and Frederick Kagan, both of the American Enterprise Institute.
DVD
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Audio
Audio available through Audible.com.
Audio available through Audible.com.
Transcripts
Transcripts available through Voxant.
Transcripts available through Voxant.
34 comments and NOONE stepping up to defend these gentlemen? I think that speaks VOLUMES about their collective points of view and how it is 180 degrees from the way this nation feels. The fact that these guys can come on to a show like this 5 years later and still claim the things they do in light of the post-mortem information and the outcome of the war is just simply mind boggling...Oh, wait, its time for your daily glass of cool-aid Mr. Perle! Down the hatch.
Charlie needs to read this critique of his show from Glenn Greenwald: "Rose was as adversarial and argumentative -- angry, even -- as he ever gets with anyone, because he plainly did not anticipate, and did not like, that he was being exposed to such hostility towards our Freedom-spreading, Liberty-loving Liberation of the grateful, lucky (dead and displaced) Iraqi people. To see how scripted and narrow the American media's discussion of Iraq continues to be -- as Americans are told that it is a matter of mandated orthodoxy that they believe that the Surge is Working (so much so that John McCain actually demanded yesterday that Hillary Clinton "apologize" for daring to question the pronouncements of the High, Honorable Commanding General, David H. Petraeus) -- watch the entire interview and consider how those views are never heard. For those who do not watch, I will excerpt just a few of the illustrative exchanges, beginning with this opening exchange: snip (here we have Glenn's comments on Rose not expecting or liking a contrary Iraqi viewpoint) I think the behavior I describe is subtle and, as I said, relative to how Rose treats most of his guests. He interrupts far more than normal, persists in trying to impose the narrative that the invasion would have been a positive act for Iraqis in the absence of "mistakes," and generally controls the conversation far more than he does with other guests. Compare his respectful, one could even say reverent, treatment of Fred Kagan, Richard Perle, Leslie Gelb and George Packer."
Mr. Rose has never had a real debate or discussion about Iraq on his show over these last 5 years. He claims to have viewpoints from the right and left but really the viewpoints are from the same narrow "beltway" viewpoints that have been consistently wrong. When anyone dares to provide a substantive outside viewpoint (a viewpoint I would argue more closely reflects events on the ground both in the U.S. and in Iraq) Mr. Rose shows frustration and closed mindedness. It's for these reasons I have found it difficult to watch "Charlie Rose" for over five years now. In retrospect, I've been tacitly boycotting his show because I've come to realize how skewed the guests and perspectives on his show really are.
Agreeing with most of the comments, I have only one point to add: Charlie Rose can bring guests like Perle to provide a "different" point of view. But when doing so, I would expect Mr. Rose to challenge Perle's inaccuracies and blatant biased comments. They are "scholars"! It is a disappointment that Mr. Rose cannot show the same journalistic stringency as with other guests.
I cannot bear to tune in any longer as I have observed for a very long time your wish to promote the bush/cheney mountain of lies and deceit. Surely when the "chickens come home to roost again", it's programming like yours that continues the farce of what this is all about & that aids in the public refusing to look inward & decide we are the instigators in a large part of the killing and mayhem that has gone on for far to long under the guise of America the GREAT. American imperialism as promoted by the American media has become so accepted & bought into that it will lead to our national demise. How many Iraqis have been killed by bush policies plus 4000 Americans that we know of. Shame on you Mr. Rose for providing these corrupt killers to have a voice.
Love you Charlie--usually--and your black eye and bandage only enhances your debonair image, and adds a bit of Pirate mystery-- However--giving any kind of public platform to Mr. Perle, who has been discredited at multiple points in his career, the Iraq fiasco being only the most recent, really reinforces the argument often heard around town among thinking folk-- that Charlie Rose too often succumbs to the "any star is worth circling" temptation, whether that star still burns with an honest true flame, or is in it's death throes (I can deeply hope Mr. Perle and his colleagues are in collapse)-- Some of these interviewee choices often remind me of a famous speech by John Gielgud in the movie "Plenty" about a civil servant who has overplayed the syncophant card.--Look it up.
I wished Mr. Rose had included Michael Scheuer, the author of his recent book, "Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam after Iraq". He is a 20-some-year CIA veteran who headed the agency's Osama bin Laden. In the book, he concludes that the presence of our troops is only strengthening al-Quada and its allies, and bringing more Muslims to jihad, and advocates immediate withdrawal of American troops.
According to Richard Perle, the recent report demonstrated that , although Saddam Hussein had no direct links to Al Qaeda he did have links with individuals who were affiliated with organization s who were affiliated with Al Qaeda. So the logic is the country which is affiliated with an individual who is affiliated with an organization that is affiliated with my enemy is my enemy. Did I get that right?
I simply could not bear to watch more than a couple of minutes of this revolting display. Why does Charles give these guys a forum. Perle's analytic inadequacies have been on parade for years. It was bad enough to see Charles cave before these loosers back in 2003. To have them revist the show on the 5th anniversary of the foolish and tragic debacle that they helped to instigate, is clost to unforgiveable. These people have been wrong about everything for years. Are they suddenly going to be right about something? Are the thousands of dead going to rise and welcome Perle and his ilk as liberators. Shame, shame, Charlie Rose for providing a forum for these discredited, dangerous, fools.
Like other neocons without military experience, Perle gave priority to Iraq instead of Afghanistan. Why do we get such fools as leaders? We need a gallows that can hang Perle on one of a rope with the other end around the neck of Cheney. These guys would have better been working at Enron instead of in Washington.
The tens of thousands of peoples who have died in Irag since five years are REAL peoples having a REAL life of their own, not walk-on actors of an epic movie displaying the greatness of the american values, neither pawns on a gameboard for the pleasure of more or less bright peoples (a big naïve smile on their face) who want to play strategy games with the destiny of human beings. Why is it that this is still discussed as if it was kind of a sport event? It's a tragedy which should not inspire anything but sadness, disgust and shame to anyone who cares for the peoples of Iraq. Otherwise how could it be believe that all this was done for the good of the Iraqis? Do you really care about the Iraqis? Do you know the Iraqis? Do you know what they want? Or are you fantasizing, for the sake of your own glorious national image of missionnaries, what they should be and what they should want as pieces of a grand US project for the planet !?
Richard Perle is HONEST in everything he said. I even read some confidential reports about saddam's relations with major UFO terrorist organizations. I also see perfect sense in Mr. Kagan point about the civil war. When people demand water, food and electricity it can't be that they are in a civil war because they would be fully occupied with it. perfect sense.
It's truly sad that Richard Perle continues to mimic President Bush's line of "That's my story and I'm sticking to it". Richard Perle not only continues to be unapologetic for his role in the false run-up to the Iraq war but also continues to make vague references to links between Saddam and terroists. Richard Perle ignores the real links between Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia. It is common knowledge that most of the Al Qaeda recruits in Iraq are Saudis and that the Saudis provide direct funds to Al Qaeda. Perle won't even acknowledge the fact that practically all of the 911 aircraft hijackers were Saudis?? Perle ignores the findings of the 911 Commission which stated that there is no direct link between Saddam and Al Qaeda or any other 911 terrorists. Let's not forget that Richard Perle used his Pentagon position to lobby both for war and for turning postwar power in Iraq over to Ahmad Chalabi, the long-time Iraqi exile, who was a prime source for false intelligence used to justify the need to go to war. I could barely listen to Perle without feeling the urge to puke.
I'm sorry, but I am unable to listen to Mr. Perle or Mr. Kagan anymore after 28 minutes.
Circular logic and also "what goes around comes around," since after their incredibly hubristic posturing over the last 6 years, these two guys (especially the incomparable Richard Perle) no longer enjoy a shred of credibility from the public. We may indeed wonder why Charlie still invites extreme commentators like those two hopeless nincompoops. There are other people around who could make a better defense of the US situation in Iraq today. If you are a liberal, or against the US occupation of Iraq today, you should rejoice; these two guys definitely are a turn-off for anyone who might still doubt that we are in quaqmire over there.
The American people are upset about the loss of life in Iraq and about the injuries. When Richard Perle spoke about his goals for the war, why didn't Charlie Rose ask him specifically about the soldiers and others who continue to be killed and hurt.
As with all cowards, get others to fight and die for you. That includes Perle, Kagan, Lieberman, congress and the president. They don't even scuff their shoes while suffering goes on around them. Sick.
circular logic is a wonderful thing; looks like we're in iraq forever.
How sad! Two one-time power guys who had a chance to do right, may have thought they were doing right, seeing everything go wrong with resultant humongous costs in both lives (our dedicated troops and the Iraqi civilians) and treasure ($$$$$$$$$$$$$) AND they sit there SPINNING their tale. Pinnochio and Charlie McCarthy would have been pleased at their performance.
These two have absolutely no credibility and I know that Charlie is trying to be balanced but give me a break. Everything they've said in the past has either been totally wrong or just colossal lies. These people really shouldn't be given air time before a national audience.
Mr Kagan in reality is a court jester cloaked in the mantle of a military historian. His description of the lack of planning for the outcome of the invasion of Iraq left the word incompetent hanging in the air unsaid as the only conclusion to draw. It would be like saying only a little bit pregnant.
For all Mr Kagans detailed examination of the past and current situation in Iraq a simple truth emerges which needs little explaination. That truth is that Iraq needed a cooling off period where some calm prevailed. A chanch for a knocked out country to get back on its feet and catch its breath. Iraq is an exhausted country that desperately wants to return to some sort of normalacy.
At this late date Mr Perle is still persisting in his delusional thinking to save face? Mr Perle HAS NO CREDIBILITY to save. What Mr Perle and others of his ilk have proven is that they are incompetent. One wonders if being a Greeter at Wallmart is beyond their abilities.
This was the most biased show I have witnssed on Charlie Rose. Another example of mainstream media trying to sell the "victory." It was particularly disturbing after watching The Winter Soldiers gathering. You should have some of them on to balance out the misinformation of this segment. See IVAW.com or Amy Goodman's article posted on CommonDreams.com
People just tune out now when it comes to these guys. Pity. All we hear when they speak now is the neocon prayer: 'Dear lord, please grant me their oil. Just as your word says the first will be last, please let them be last. Grant me dominion over them, especially their oil and their land. Let colonialism reign forevermore. Amen.'
I was very disappointed that the Charlie Rose show would only include Fred Kagan and Richard Perle in a discussion of the Iraq War. Bravo for assembling the most one-sided, biased and dangerous opinion on the war in Iraq. I lost a little respect for the Charlie Rose show last night.
I used to be angry when I heard Richard Perle arguing for the war, now I enjoy hearing him try to worm his way around lawyerly sentences, still trying to link Saddam to a "friend of a guy linked to a network that had once supposed ties to an Al-Qaeda connection"...or something even closer ! Ah what twisted fun it is to see a human being turn into a cockroach before our very eyes.
I am somewhat amazed to see Mr Perle getting air time, to proport his wildly idealistic hawkish message. It is clear that this man has been an advocate of war, who believes that everyone that does not share his point of view, is a terrorist or suicide bomber. While I realize that as a member of this free democracy he is also allowed the opportunity to express his opinion, it disappoints me to know that at the highest levels of government in this country, his message is welcomed and heeded. I hope that in the fullness of time, he, as a member of a group of conspirators, and finally the conspiracy is revealed, history will acknowledge him for a fool of our time. - rhjkmcd
Mr. perle would have us believe that all of the suicide bombers are mentally disabled and being manipulated. It was delived like a 'Fox talking point' but it is refreshing see a republican concerned about the mentally disabled.
I'm surprised that Charlie invites Kagan and Pearl on his show to discuss the Iraq war. What claim to credibility do they have on this subject? He should at least run a warning "Nothing these guests have said in the past has proved true" across the bottom of the screen. Even putting their heads together, they'd have a tough time finding their way out of a paper bag.
man.....if pearl had even an ounce of intelligence mixed with half an ounce of responsibility behind that smug face he would be too ashamed to appear on national tv. i hope he feels ok about the 4 million refugees and hundreds of thousands killed as the result of his cheer leading. i get the distinct impression that he sleeps like a baby at night.....a very disturbing thought indeed. it is remarkable to watch a "man" speak when he shows no real evidence of actual humanity or compassion. no joke. what a scum bucket. if you are ever simply wondering "how?" "why?" in reference to the iraq disaster...just look this guy up. it is all too clear.
With apologize to Shaft, the following was shamelessly 'lifted' from previous show with Ali Fadhel and Sinan Antoon as antidotes to Perle and Kagan. Comment by Shaft on Thursday, Mar 20 at 02:46 PM Mr. Rose, you are the master of good interview/conversation. I think your two guests have finally vindicated Sen. Obama's belief that America needs to leave Iraq immediately. Oh my, What a revelation that was! For reasons I cannot understand you cut the interview short, both guys agreed that America needs to leave Iraq despite their differeces on how things should be. Iraq has never been stable since it has become a country for the last 100 years. Iraq or any of the Arab world always live with a certain livable equilibrium maintained constantly, every once and a while things go to one side but with buyouts and clever political maneuvering they were brought back to that existing equilibrium. That has always been the way Arabs live throughout history. It is within their blood to revolt against ethnicity and clan domination within the same ethnicity. You have seen Sadam Hussen's clan, they are Sunnis but their sub-clan is Al-Tikriti and all the benefits go to Al-Tikritis first followed by the rest of Sunnis, then at last to favorable Shiites and so on. Such way of dealing comes along their traditional and cultural value plus their way of life. I am not saying it is a bad thing, I am just saying that is the way Arabs live. To the credit of Sen. Obama, the two gentlemen have stated unequivocally the US need to leave and the Iraqis will fill the gap. What American Generals are trying to do is something they never had before, stability on the basis of Democracy; even their culture does not understand that notion of equal distribution. The US had prior knowledge that Iraqis way of living is maintained by a very weak bond(thread), which bends either way and is maintained thru clan bribes and buyouts. The US should leave and let the Iraqis buy each other out. At the end of the day we make a deal with the winner coming out of top.
Mr Kagan apparently ignored Mr Engles (1st segment) report saying too much internecine killing has occurred for sectarian violence to abate. Mr Perle has the credibility of his keeper Jr.(W). We have duplicated some of Sadam's tactics and on balance removing him has been blunted by our heavy handed ways. These neocons unashamedly ignored oil hegemony - the real reason for their / our arrogance of entitlement. Obtuseness squared.
Check out the Friends Committee on National Legislation, www.fcnl.org. Mr. Perle notwithstanding, I rather think we went into Iraq to steal (as in though shalt not) their oil, not to remove Saddam Hussein.
Check out the Friends Committee on National Legislation, www.fcnl.org. Mr. Perle notwithstanding, I rather think we went into Iraq to steal (as in though shalt not) their oil, not to remove Saddam Hussein.