Charlie Rose

rayechka  06/03/2009 05:53 PM Report

Reply to meneghin:

I watched this interview with great interest and was rather disappointed. It seemed to me a big deal was made of the fact that Goarbachev and Regan made a connection and were actually "talking". Isn't that what ordinary normal people do every day, talking to each other including people we don't even like? Weren't these the two most important leaders in the world? What we expect of our leaders needs an upgrade.

I guess you do not remember what the situation was like in those days. It was not a normal situation. The fact of them even "talking" was extremely important. When Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in 1985 the USSR and the US had not met for high level talks in 6 years. So the summit in Geneva was indeed an enormous step. The early 1980s was a very critical time in the Cold War, comparable to that of the 1960s.

I think we also need an upgrade of the level of education of our citizenry-so that they have an idea of what is going on and what happened in past history.

Rafal  04/27/2009 09:52 PM Report

Such a boring interview. I`m wondering what is he doing presently.Visiting universities with similar lectures?

doodahdaze  04/26/2009 11:50 AM Report

"That's the problem with being right".?!

Wow! You are really confused. aren't you?!... "Depending on the issue, I'm blah, blah, blah." - What does that mean? You're thoroughly "Modern"?!LOL... When are you going to show us the moon?. Professor.

Mirror  04/26/2009 11:35 AM Report

Again, zero. You just congratulated yourself for nothng. That's the problem with the right wing: dim, uneducated, self-serving and outright stupid. You bore me.

doodahdaze  04/26/2009 11:25 AM Report

Actually, in the spirit of PBS and Mr. Rogers, "Can you say, check-mate?." - Me-yes, I have used the power of logic (I'm sure you're going to tell me what kind) to dislodge and separate you from your weapon; I could go in for the kill, but I don't want to stain the floor; so I will let you live to fight another day. Now run along.

Mirror  04/26/2009 09:52 AM Report

You still have an absolute zero to say.

doodahdaze  04/26/2009 06:35 AM Report

Ahh, so now the smoking mirror resorts to name calling to emphasize his pointless point (Ohh, I don't know, I'm not too sophisticated, Latin attacks of a hypocrite nature, perhaps?. No?). Good Heavens man! Get a grip on your over inflated ego; Enough of reading for readings sake, why don't you try comprehending what you read for a change and be specific. Your comments sound like LSD riddled inspired lyrics of an acid rock nature time gone by (a lame attempt at covering your incompetence and many holes in your arguments; indeed.). It's time for you, Mirror, to now look into the mirror, and ask, "who now, really IS the idiot?."... If you could only improve your communication skills, perhaps I could explain to you what is true and what is not true about what you are reading, and then you won't have to be that idiot you see in the mirror anymore. Good day.

Mirror  04/25/2009 06:58 PM Report

You poor thing, still had nothing factual to say. Time for you to read at long last. I advise taking a look at all the biographies, testimonies and commentary by the participants of the Salt II in 1986, download the Reykjavik Files, read some Alan Weisman who cites all witnesses and parties involved. It all comes down to Richard Perle derailing the best attempt at disarmament. As to SDI, its inefficiency and costs: a quick look at the MDA's site and opinions of the physicists that have been long known are a good source. As to your own source, doodah, you remain inept to produce anything more but opinion, in your case, indeed, idiotic, not sourced, based on nothing. Read, idiot. It's good for you!

doodahdaze  04/25/2009 06:31 PM Report

Mirror, with a resume like that, one would expect you to follow it up with intelligent, objective facts; But instead you do quite the opposite, only spewing unintelligible, subjective untruths (unproven opinions) (in typical hypocrite fashion, mind you.). One doesn't have to be bitter or Alex Trebek to see that... And that is not an attack of any Latin kind, it is a "factual" statement of the truth; that is what you requested?., isn't it?... Me-yes, upon reexamining your comment, I do see that it is. So having satisfied my obligations, I will conclude with no further comment. It's time for dueling practice.

meneghin  04/25/2009 03:51 PM Report

I watched this interview with great interest and was rather disappointed. It seemed to me a big deal was made of the fact that Goarbachev and Regan made a connection and were actually "talking". Isn't that what ordinary normal people do every day, talking to each other including people we don't even like? Weren't these the two most important leaders in the world? What we expect of our leaders needs an upgrade.

Mirror  04/25/2009 01:29 PM Report

I have no dogma, and my positions are sometimes liberal, sometimes libertarian, sometimes conservative, sometimes independent - all depends on the issue. As to being educated and enjoying it, well, bitter lemons, i do not apologize for that and, frankly, quite like it, as well as enjoying reading historical documents and treaties. All i quoted was factual, based on the testimonies of witnesses to and participants of the events discussed in the program. Ad hominem attacks always makes one sound envious and bitter, doodahdaze. I suggest reading and self-education, and countering an argument with an educated INFORMED counter-argument, rather than your own resentments. Have anything factual to say?

doodahdaze  04/25/2009 07:54 AM Report

Mirror, you're injecting a little too much of your own personal liberal dogma into that; not unlike much too many so-called "historians" of the day. Their bum licenses (degrees) issued to them by corrupt, ivory tower merlins (professors) dumbing their way down the road of life, and enjoying it way too much (their "positions" that is).

tartufe  04/23/2009 03:01 PM Report

Empires come, empires go. Schultze and Ronnie gave it a go.

esantoro  04/23/2009 01:44 PM Report

Your evening's entertainment aboard _The Pequod_ will be _The Romancers_, a senile farce directed by Charlie Rose and starring Mikhail Gorbachev and George Shultz.

"It ain't no myst'ry

If it's politics or hist'ry

The thing you gotta know is

Ev'rything is show biz [....]

Watch my show [....]

Dontcha know

We are crossing borders

The new world order is here

Make a great big smile [....]

Wonderful me!

And now it's...

CHORUS:

[....]

Goose-step's the new step today.

[Ah...gee Gorbi...Ain't nuthin', Chuck....

A rattatatat!]

Mirror  04/22/2009 05:59 PM Report

YES! good point doodahdaze! By the way. My reading of it, and here is where i get scared (at the lunacy of the people with the nuclear codes), i actually think Reagan meant it. I think, he and Nancy believed in such stuff (ETs, astrology, numerology, all that craze). Funny, that Perle did not address his "out to lunch" remark to that one, but to the one great attempt at disarmament. The one good thing Reagan did try. The one sane thing that could have happened and did not.

doodahdaze  04/22/2009 05:23 PM Report

The threat of extraterrestrial alien attack, proposed by Ronald Reagan was the key initial ice-breaker that ended the Cold War; did everybody hear that? hear Gorbachev?... You historians better take note.

Mirror  04/22/2009 04:35 PM Report

It is tiresome, all the talk about SDI, missile defense systems, whatever you call it. Obama is in a horrid position: the system does not work (ever since the conception of the idea 20 years ago, MDA and its predecessors have not intercepted a single missile they did not know everything about); it is hideously expensive, overwhelmingly unpopular in the eastern block where they want to build it and it is utterly a lie in every regard. After all, who believes that the US could be attacked by Iran via a conventional launch? Seriously. So, if it is to defend Israel, let us say so. Then, let's try and explain how this would prevent from a bad man with a suitcase just coming across the border. Or, not even a suitcase, but an envelope with some horrific stuff. SDI, even if it did work (which it does not), is obsolete on an profoundly existential level. It confines Obama's prospects to do real cooperation with Russia on something that actually matters for the security of both countries (as well as Israel): tracking down and tying up loose ends - weapons and substances that went missing in the 90s after Gorbi left and Russia got itself a drunk for a president. But there is hope now. Both countries FINALLY got themselves sober, smart leaders. Enough of the drunks like Yeltsin, or people with severe learning disability and ADD like Bush playing with the nuclear codes. Some adults are finally there. Let's hope Perle does not cackle again somewhere from his dark corner. By the way, why are those bastards still getting airtime? Consulting us. Hm. It's like having Bernie Madoff advise us from jail on our investments. Really? Should we listen? Do you think their expertise has improved?

Mirror  04/22/2009 04:13 PM Report

Take a look at the Reykjavik Files and a book by Alan Weisman "Prince of Darkness. Richard Perle" (also, all other accounts of these meetings from the participants). Both Reagan and Gorbachev eagerly wanted to "Just get rid of all of them [nuclear weapons]". Now it was not only Thatcher who hand-bagged Shultz and Reagan (which she did before Reykjavik) . Let's remember the piquant truth: it was Richard Perle who scrambled to get on that plane to Iceland and harassed his way into the process. He was the one who derailed every attempt towards disarmament. He was the one who coined the phrase "Reagan is out to lunch" when he heard that Reagan agreed with Gorbi to shed all the nukes. The irony, of course, is that the neocons have appropriated Reagan as their icon, never mind the fact that one of their own leaders so profusely pissed on his reputation and authored the most pejorative remark about him. Oh, the jokes never end.

REMant  04/22/2009 02:26 PM Report

I just have two comments about this, neither one of which have anything to do with the Soviets allowing more Jewish immigration to Palestine. The first is that public opinion has always been important to tyrants, however they have always been quite adept at manipulating it. And, altho you can look at Reagan as a hawk who showed mercy, I think he was rather the typical sort of American, like LBJ, who merely wanted to maneuver others into a position of dependence. In so doing, and also like LBJ, he contributed significantly to the accumulation of indebtedness that caused the current economic situation. I am not sure, as is being alleged these days, that bankrupting the USSR was entirely his intent, but he certainly played on their fears, and they would have been far better off to have ignored him and concentrated on strength at home, and if they wanted to maintain power, to have done so before opening up to the West.