Charlie Rose

Kourosh  03/16/2009 05:14 AM Report

@Hamid: You misunderstood Mrs. Azar. She believes that Iranians DO care more about their kids and about bread (nan) than nuclear rights.

Hamid  02/21/2009 03:50 AM Report

What about people of Iran , why none of these gents and ladies ever mentioned anything about the mass (more than 90%) of the population against this regime ? why everyone is afraid of telling the truths,and for your information Mrs Azar i just came back from iran 5 days ago and i have to tell you contrary to what you mentioned here people of Iran when they wake up in the morning they DON'T think about their nuclear rights but about their "bread" as we persian say it yes they think of how to pay their bill how they manage to buy that dress (manteau) or islamic uniform for their daughter or a pair of even cheap shoes at $20.00 for their son YES Mrs Azar this is the reality nuclear atomic or whatsoever is not their priority but their kids their food that can not be bought please get real.

Regards

Hamid

ramin  02/21/2009 01:50 AM Report

I suggest next time you invite experts who know more about the issue than yourself.

charlizecourriers  02/19/2009 05:00 PM Report

Once again something is missing from the discussiion-the people of Iran. History is not made by guests like this. Soirees on the upper east side, perhaps.

pishro  02/19/2009 03:21 PM Report

Aren't we tired of the fear mongering over Iranian maybe/maybe not nuclear technology? It is time for Israel to grew up and deal with its neighbors including its enemies in a mature manner. How long are we going to make enemies of the Middle Eastern governments who are holding the key to natural resources for the sake of Israeli's bad foreign policies? Iran would have not fallen to this theocracy in the region if it wasn't so much for the Shah& his allies, including Israel, for their systematic suppression of progressive thinkers. It is happening in Lebanon, Egypt and Saudi and we will see the back lash of it eventually. Please, lets not spread fear and before all the Arab countries fall victim to the religious right, find a solution to the soul eating conflict between Israel and Arabs. Israeli government is as religious as any other theocracy in the region at this point, their recent Gaza conflict is a very clear evidence to that.

tartufe  02/19/2009 01:34 PM Report

Just as a different, even novel?, (procotive?) thought; would a nuclear Iran change the temperament - everywhere? If Iran didn't immediately send off it's new powers of devastation, would Israel be a little (perversely) disappointed? No valid "we tried to warn you" tirades to impart? Would it possibly have a tempering affect on their knee-jerk pugilism as well? Is this a case of a it's an ill wind . . . .?

ShalomFreedman  02/19/2009 04:09 AM Report

This was in a certain sense an informative discussion. It was interesting to learn from Vali Nasr that there is great continuity between the Shah's nuclear program and that of the present Iranian regime. It was also interesting to learn that the Ahmadinejad obsession with the 'Palestinian question' is a tactic to win favor with the Arab masses, and to become dominant power in the Middle East. It was interesting to learn from Azar Nafisi that many long for a different kind of Iran one in which the cultural legacy is central. It was also interesting to hear from all three panelists that the Iranian economy has gone downhill under Ahmadinejad, and is not in very good situation.

However there is an underplaying of the nefarious nature of the regime, the fact that it is the world 's principal terror- export nation. Though Charlie Rose briefly mentioned Holocaust- denial and hostility to Israel there was no discussion of Ahmadinejad's 'staticide' plans for Israel. There was no talk about its plans for expansion, and its belief that eventually the United States , the Big Satan would be destroyed.There was connection of the nuclear program with any consideration whatsoever of its consequences for the whole area. There was in the end a chorus of agreement that the U.S. should negotiate with Iran about those things Iran wants. But what about the nature of the regime, a fundamentalist Islamic one? I was surprised that none of these Iranians, especially Azar Nafisi spoke about the total suppression of real political and intellectual freedom. All these people were 'accomodationists'. But to accomodate oneself to tyranny and to evil is not necessarily the right and wise course to take.

One more point. Polls show that the nuclear program is popular with the Iranian people. It may be the one thing the government is doing which is popular. This does not make it right. The Iranians threaten not only Israel but also Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Egypt. They are also good about talking , lying and going on with their nuclear program. More talk means more time for them to make progress on it. Their understanding of their nuclear program and the attainment of nuclear weapons is not that this is a bargaining chip but rather that its completion is a strategic goal.

pishro  02/18/2009 09:55 PM Report

Why not talk about the conflicts United States has with Iran in a historical context? Shah of Iran managed to suppress the liberal and progressive voice in Iran with the help of CIA for 30 years and now the same United States is unable to deal with the outcome of its support for Shah. As Ms Nafisi pointed out people of Iran are very much aware of the events and are smart. In fact people of Iran are the only real victims of the American politics in their country in the last many decades, they are doomed to say yey to their own government and doomed to say yey to the US of A. Modernism of Western culture being exported by the US has yet to prove itself to the people of Iran, in the light of many mistakes and short sightedness it has had historically.

umar  02/18/2009 05:15 PM Report

Just want to comment on Azar Nafisi when she says that Islam that she was aware of was Islam of Rumi and Islam of Hafiz. No doubt Hafiz and Rumi were great poets, but the Islam that I and the rest of the world is aware of is the Islam of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). If its not the Islam of Prophet Muhammad, than its NOT Islam. It may be something else, which she has every right to practice but don't call it ISLAM.

REMant  02/18/2009 05:04 PM Report

I felt about this was way too vague, the way I feel about most foreign policy discussions.