Charlie Rose

vongleichent  02/27/2012 04:02 PM Report

wow what a man I'm absolutely admiring this former prime minister for the work that he has done...

aetas  04/10/2011 10:27 AM Report

several third world countries could do with similar leadership and direction ...nigeria may be one

GuoDu  04/04/2011 02:30 AM Report

My applause and best wishes for Mr. Lee. I hope the world will see statesmen of his calibre again in the future.

dilipkeshu  04/02/2011 08:46 AM Report

One of the best interviews I have ever seen. Lee Kuan Yew will go down in history as one of our greatest minds. As a former Singaporean who lived in the country for 12 years, I have witnessed some of the nation's greatest years of growth and evolution. Lee and his team have done a superb job.

LimEeCheong  04/02/2011 04:47 AM Report

Mr Lee Kwan Yew's is ethnic Chinese. His surname comes first, so it is Mr Lee, rather than Mr Yew.

I am Singaporean. I am thankful for the education that Singapore has provided me. Because of it, I am comfortable conversing in English with people of other countries. In my job I have to travel; I am grateful for the quality of life in Singapore.

Charlie asked Mr Lee what he thinks about when he contemplates about death. Mr Lee answered he asks himself if he has given those who depended on his decisions a better life. Mr Lee gave himself a B+. I think it is fair to say many Singaporeans would give him an A+.

Thank you, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. I hope I have an opportunity to say that to you in person one day.

Ricardo_Amaral  04/02/2011 01:08 AM Report

Thanks Charlie for such a great interview - I loved this old man. We would have a better world if we had more leaders around of the caliber of Mr. Yew.

BENEZRAA  03/31/2011 04:01 AM Report

A TRUE PRIVILEGE...

... to listen to such high caliber conversation made easy in the sense that talent and hard work enable that which is difficult to appear easy and obvious. Thank you.

JohnGelles  03/30/2011 07:22 AM Report

Possibly, there is no later page to invite more comment on the President's decisions and justification for the new war in Libya.

Al Hunt had a bunch of knowledgeable people on tonight to explain why the war in Libya is both necessary and likely to end well.

The Arab Spring may very well have legs. Certainly, the President has taken a middle role out in the open and, I hole, a determined role hidden from view that will make possible more war, if necessary, to gain the elusive peace we seek. We need to knock these mercenaries out and allow a new Libyan government to begin building a nation that will help turn North Africa into a region on the mend.

And speaking of mending the remaining mess in global financial systems, it is time the President to explain that government spending to jump start green manufacturing growth inside the USA is just FINE.

The notion that ONLY current profits and the lure of future profit is safe to speed up our slow recovery is completely NUTS!

Profit is to the economy no different than government investment. The essence of success is contained in how new investment plans and executions are implemented. The government financed all of WW II -- not profits on selling candy bars.

We will have to finance the production we are missing in NEW clean independent energy systems; infrastructure upgrading, additions and repair; education and training; disease prevention and health service delivery; international peace and democracy and economic security; and all the rest.

If the President now in office, who has had more opportunity for greatness than anyone since FDR, does not rise to the challenge of achieving a rapid recovery of jobs and financial power for national defense and defense modernization, and otherwise reverse the damage done by the Reagan-Thatcher attack on democratic governance in favor of people over corporatism run amok, I will not vote for him despite our coming victories engineered by his Secretary of State. I will vote for someone like Ambassador (former Governor) Huntsman or General Petraeus or another commander in chief who is not so afraid to study effective financing that the American middle class is being killed before our eyes.

I may think the world of our lawyer President for his current backbone in North Africa. But IF he does not take the reins and move America to leadership in manufacturing, education, middle class security and morale maintenance, he will have earned his walking papers and the historical championship for missing more golden opportunities than any ten presidents before him.

laupan  03/30/2011 04:56 AM Report

This gentleman is something else. Not many people have achieved what he has and introduced in Singapore. When someone does an in-depth biography on him and his father it will be some read. What a great way to spend an hour listening to Charlie’s interview with him.

This man has long been renowned for his crisp opinions, thoughts, organization skills, diplomatic skills and strategic mind. This with the ability to express himself weaving a great story reminds me of a Reagan, a Churchill, a Roosevelt. World leaders have spoken of him with admiration, respect and praise for many years now. He is an example that there is hope for great leadership in the world which we desperately need.

Thank you Charlie for bringing him to us again to enjoy and learn, we need more program hours like this.

Saultxyca  03/29/2011 07:14 PM Report

Why are there so few leaders of uncommon good sense like Lee Kuan Yew? Young Singaporeans working and traveling outside their country can be easily identified by their informed intelligence, their sophistication and their charming civility — always. Senior statesman Lee Kuan Yew can take pride in that and quietly give himself an A+ (as I once got on a political science term paper on him).

Canadian-American Ms. in Silicon Valley

*

tabs  03/29/2011 05:40 PM Report

The most interesting comment Mr Yew made was,"One must be careful not to act foolishly until they close the lid on your coffin." Considering Mr Yew's age and role in the history of Singapore, one has to conclude Mr Yew is considering what they will say about him in history. As such at this late date Mr Yew doesn't want to "blow it" by making a false step and is being "careful" by second guessing his decisions. This then leaves one asking the question, that if a decades long successful decision maker is rethinking himself what is the nature of a successful decision making process? The answer lies in the ability to intuitively be able to clearly define the essence or heart of the problem to be solved and or goal to be attained. This then will lead to the solution based upon the tools one has at their disposal.

robdverity  03/29/2011 03:43 PM Report

Mr Yew came off as one smart ocho-ocho generian.

As REM's diverging of the topic: forgivable since I agree with him. Heretofore (or before Libya) Obama was still worthy of reelection consideration (if nothing more than being black was good for out international image). But, alas, his Libyan shallowness trumps any other advantage his image may have ever had. His warmongering and financial bedding-down disqualify him. His after-the-fact reasoning is specious and a buffoonery. It's time for him to go (black advantage or no). However McCains tiresome sabre rattling re Gaddafi puts Republican jingoism as no alternative either. A third choice (party) is sorely needed.

REMant  03/29/2011 12:16 PM Report

Since I have come to the conclusion that Mr Rose has been warned off continued coverage of events in the Middle East, I hope no one will be offended if I, nevertheless, repost here my opinion of the president's remarks last night:

In what is rightly characterized as a defense rather than an address, Mr Obama misrepresented both the reasons for this conflict and American values, and, as he has in the past, tried both to appear the instigator of the measures taken, yet avoid any responsibility for them, as in his now familiar "Obamulating" over health care, the stimulus and Afghanistan. In this speech, he not only underscored his belief in just and holy wars, but his lack of the knowledge, experience and ability to be president. It was entirely disingenuous, the result of the inculcation of the kind of Marxist-inspired political correctness that has been taking place in American education since the 1980's, in which Mr Obama in particular was raised, which conflates ppl like Che Guevara with Barry Goldwater. He declared American colonists sought freedom in the Revolution, when half of them only sought independence, and it was a civil war just as this is. He blamed the current regime for the trouble like Americans blame Castro, Tito and Sadaam instead of seeing the underlying differences and external influences, primary among them the economic policies of this country and Europe. After causing these problems, confounded with the notion of huddled masses yearning to be free, he declared that America had a duty to aid them. He said, too, that it was in our interest, but could come up with none. And he presented a revisionist account of recent events suited to his abolitionist views, saying the fighting was started by the regime, when it was clearly started by the opposition, and that we had moved to stop it, when we did so only to keep the opposition from losing. In the process he gave Qaddafi no choice but to fight for his life. He not only ignored the immediate dissent registered by those the US dissembled and coerced into supporting what they thought would actually be an humanitarian mission, aimed instead at the kind of regime change the US has sought since Qaddafi was labeled a Communist, but also entirely omitted any discussion of further actions or intended outcomes, hiding behind a transfer of control to our own creature NATO. And in all of this he has again flagrantly disregarded the Constitution in the same manner as those he opposes.

REMant  03/29/2011 12:13 PM Report

My next door neighbor in grad school in the mid-'70s had been sent to college from Singapore, which astonished me, and while we had few lengthy discussions, at least which I can remember, it did draw my attention to the place. I would have to conclude what they have done was probably the only way to have done it. Singapore has many ethnic groups and its only path to development was an entrepot. It is not, however unusual, and its progenitors can be be found in many parts of the world - Holland, the Hanseatic League, Venice and other large European free cities come to mind. As he said, traders have to maintain the confidence of their customers above all. It has been argued that Singapore's laws are too restrictive, but it is clearly more free than than if any one of these groups had been allowed to subjugate the others, and it has likely also prevented the loss of confidence that could only undo everything. If only repression had been used, it is unlikely the outcome would have been as good as it obviously has. As he intimated, the US has instead become a banker and policeman, more in the style of an underworld loan shark. The problem with this tho is less than that its debt will become unsustainable than that it will inevitably be spread everywhere else, and IMHO the world should be more worried about that than China's resurgence or Arab oil.