Charlie Rose

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/29/2011 04:16 PM Report

Good one Charlie--he brings up Qaddafi's acquiesce as a result of the conquest of Iraq and you counter with the possibility of the Arab Spring bringing down Saddam Hussein.

Yes Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi was a threat to us and his own people BUT just one month before attacking Libya the president asked Congress to increase U.S. aid for Qaddafi's military to $1.7 million.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/24/did-qaddafi-deserve-funding-foreign-aid-scrutiny-amid-mide ast-unrest/

Is our foreign policy as mentally ill as our war policy?

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/24/did-qaddafi-deserve-funding-foreign-aid-scrutiny-amid-mide ast-unrest/#ixzz1QhZ7zuTp

Gingerzilla  06/28/2011 12:06 PM Report

I posted on the 60 min interview before that it had an error and now it seems that you have removed it? Will it be returned so that we can watch it? Great interview BTW I just want to see more :)

doodah  06/27/2011 06:29 PM Report

Yeah, robd!

JohnGelles  06/27/2011 06:55 AM Report

Rob ~

What do you think a Gulag is? Does size, scope and impact mean nothing to you? Have you any conception of the weight of horror that our times have known that stemmed from Fascist, Communist, and Bathist rule? True, the Bathist rule in Syria and Iraq is minuscule compared with Fascism and Communism. But "Gitmo', Abu Ghraib and Bagram as US gulags" is a phrase that compares a pimple to a massacre.

The American Congress voted to change the regime in Iraq because it was rotten to the corps and was at war with us in the air space we were protecting.

Later we went to war, not on that account, but to prevent more and worse 9-11's.

The men you attack went to war to protect you and your family. They may have waged a preventive war you would have avoided. But they were our government -- you were not.

History has more than one side. This particular history may not be well presented for a long time. Rumsfeld will have helped to write it better, perhaps, than the way he wanted to finance it.

JohnGelles  06/27/2011 06:32 AM Report

Rob ~ You need a brain transplant not a shower.

You need to have been born an Iraqi, not an American. You need to have watched the Bathist tyrant's sons feed humans into meat grinders to understand a scintilla of history that we have been born into. Your are truly moronic.

But why attack the man when it's ideas we are discussing. Rumsfeld's idea was doing right with the wrong amount of effort. Colin Powell had it right. If you confront evil, do it with all your might and fast enough to avoid too many errors by your own side which are part of every war.

robdverity  06/25/2011 03:37 PM Report

This needs to be capped off with the best:

mutex 06/21/2011 01:36 PM Report Rumsfeld has to be one of the most arrogant, self-serving, smarmy politicians in a sea of such creatures. He doesn't suffer fools gladly because he is the king of the fools. They all want to keep kicking the can down the road in regard to the cost/benefit analysis of the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions so they don't have to take responsibility for these boondoggles which are wrong on every level from the practical to the moral.

When the history of this period is written it will remember 'Gitmo', Abu Ghraib and Bagram as US gulags. It will remember Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld as reactionary cowards who perpetrated untold unsuffering on huge numbers of people and set this country on the road to both moral and financial bankruptcy in the process. They created a narrative and political environment that we are now apparently tied to for at least a generation and which only sinks us deeper into hypocrisy and failure.

Rumsfeld now wants to equate knowing how to make chemical and biological weapons with having them. It is preposterous to believe that this was justification for preemptive invasion. Just how does Mr. Rumsfeld presume that Iraq would 'forget' how to make such weapons? How did these hypothetical weapons pose any threat to US security? Why are there two sets of international laws...one for the US and its allies and one for everyone else? What moral justification is there for US possession of 'weapons of mass destruction' and why does no one preemptively invade us?

Of course Rumsfled's answer to any and all such questions is a condescending smirk in combined with some self-absorbed gibberish about unknown unknowns that nobody could be expected to know.

Now I need to go take a shower. Just watching this interview makes me feel greasy and unclean.

JohnGelles  06/25/2011 11:28 AM Report

CORRECTION:

and LESS bravado with more investment than Rumsfeld wanted to put into changing history.

JohnGelles  06/25/2011 11:24 AM Report

Rumsfeld, Chaney and Bush were a team that never ran for president thinking they would fight a war. They ran thinking they would Republicanize our mixed economy to be more like Reagan liked than like Bobby Kennedy may have wanted.

The war came out of nowhere. A terrorist operation got lucky. America tried to reform its homeland security system. And the idea of regime change in Iraq, already approved of by a Democratic president ans Congress, was there to be considered for what it was worth.

Saddam had tried to deceive some that he had more weapons than he may have had. He certainly had motive and opportunity to create such weapons and use them -- just as he used weapons against our pilots who flew to create protection for Kurds and Shiites.

I hope history will find good reason to applaud our change of that disgusting regime. History should not applaud our failure to it with greater anti-IED robotic weaponry. We had the money and engineers to have saved lives and destroyed the Baathist grip on Iraq.

Colin Powell should have been Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld should have been Vice President. Chaney should have been retired as I was. In his second term, Rumsfeld should have retired. Rice should have been the first female Vice President.

Anyway I voted for John Kerry. Like John Kennedy and John Gelles, the name was right. I have not yet bought the Rumsfeld book. I hope I do -- and that I really read it. Meanwhile, the Arab Spring has turned to Summer. And I may vote for Jon Huntsman -- more of a Dove than I might like -- but his name is right and he may lead us to energy independence; infrastructure modernization; educational effectiveness (via games); health care via more nurses, doctors and corpsmen; and bravado with more investment than Rumsfeld wanted to put into changing history.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/25/2011 04:12 AM Report

On Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld said the same thing on "The Daily Show" which no matter how many times he says it, it is still very questionable.

http://youtu.be/PmhOObtdcrI

"It has been well known since last fall that the Bush administration was actively seeking intelligence that would show Iraq had two things: weapons of mass destruction and a connection with al-Qaida. When the CIA and DIA failed to come up with the goods, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and a handful of his top aides formed their own intelligence network to search more carefully."

http://www.slate.com/id/2086924/

Check out "Frontline" on this.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/25/2011 03:58 AM Report

CLASSIC!

Charlie Rose (first question): What do you want us to know about Donald Rumsfeld?

Donald Rumsfeld: It is not about me . . .

Perhaps we should close our eyes when we look at the cover of his book:

http://www.amazon.com/Known-Memoir-Donald-Rumsfeld/dp/159523067X

Also, "I write about it in the book" is an answer that makes one wonder if he is afraid he might contradict himself during the interview.

Finally he says he has had no time to read the President's book. How about speed reading? How about Amazon reviews? How about the Table of Contents?

Come on man.

MelbourneFL  06/23/2011 09:27 AM Report

Outstanding!!!

A key interview to understand how we are dealing with the attacks on American citizens after 9-11. This is Charlie Rose and Donald Rumsfeld at their finest. I have admired both and followed their careers because they are the very best at what they do. They constantly inspire me to be courageous, and to work hard to understand how to make the world a safer and better place. Best of all, you can experience the joy of watching two people at the top of their game, doing what they do best. I thank them both for taking time to do this. And thank you Charlie for posting the entire interview. You just can’t find this kind of information anywhere else!!!

avidwatcher  06/22/2011 11:41 PM Report

Kudos Charlie!

your stellar perforamance was extroadinary as usual, but I applaud that although this was the first time i've ever seen you "this confrontational" you weregracious enough as usual to spare donald's life.

you're always the best

keep the good work charlie

doodah  06/22/2011 07:46 PM Report

Ole Rummy, is an honorable man and deserves more respect then most people walking around with sh*t for brains speaking their little and inferior minds. Though, his Achilles heal was his stubbornness; he wanted so badly to transform the future of warfare by doing more with less (That's accomplishing more with Less American Human Life to be put at risk). So went the invasion, but his Big Unknown, and Failure. He was Totally Incompetent, about How to deal with the Policing of the territory. It went on for several years longer than it should have, and if I had family or friends who were killed or maimed during that period of 'Lame Duck' 'Vietnam Style' of military leadership, I'd be Pissed as Hell at him. But I sincerely think he was trying his best, but in the end, was Incompetent.

Why doesn't anybody interviewing him get his take on that? That's the obvious Question. But nobody talks about with him.

Thank goodness for Condoleesa Rice and Gates and General Petraeus, they reversed 'the situation' that ole Rummy left office in. But I'm sure he is also responsible for improving the military in ways that don't make headlines. And Liberals rule Perception, unfortunately for him. He should have taken the little black lady's ADVICE.

machngunjoe  06/22/2011 01:00 PM Report

Sorry 2002 he said that.

machngunjoe  06/22/2011 12:19 PM Report

This guy does not deserve respect. "Its henny penny the sky is falling" DR 2005. Well the sky fell repeatedly, and all those service men and women that he pledges to have cared about.....did nothing about it, and in many many ways caused that sky to fall. I can't watch this in full. It is full of lies and misleading information.

ShalomFreedman  06/22/2011 08:06 AM Report

This was an unusually choppy interview. Charlie Rose was more contradicting and questioning than usual. But he was nonetheless at the end gracious. Rumsfeld is a great American patriot and one who dedicated himself to national service for many years. He is a confident and strong person, and is still confident today about the U.S. operation in Iraq. Perhaps it would have worked out better had the U.S. gone in, deposed Saddam Hussein, and then gotten out fairly soon. The situation there today is extremely problematic. Just yesterday there were Sunni bombings of a Shiite area and fatalities. As the U.S. withdraws they may be leaving behind a situation which will turn into something quite horrible.

Were all the sacrifices made by Americas in Iraq worth it? I am not an expert but it seems to me that the answer is not one which should make anyone responsible for what happened there very happy.

blank  06/22/2011 03:48 AM Report

look i accepted it just help me out i need help it's serious i'm like really suffering i have a plan it won't take a lot

look i'm trying to be cool about all this and everything that happened you know what you did it's messed up

look there's no best person i didn't mean to say that he's a great person it's all just a pointless mess just be a good person in light of it all

you said trust and i did and i went with it

i think you would have to have some care and emotion and some way about what i've been going through this whole time

and help me to get out of it (i would not believe that after all of this you would just leave me to die in this situation)

why end it in such an evil way like that when things could be better and just be cool

i refuse to believe that that's what's really happening though i accept it and everything is okay (i think if you find somebody that really makes you happy there's nothing but good from that)

so i will recover just help me out of this situation since i put everything into it

(and i'm not trying to play the roll of the stalker person but you're still writing messages here)

and you're still making references

but you have to help me (i refuse to believe that you would just not help me out of this situation)\

pleeeease help me (you have to!!!!!!)

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/21/2011 09:27 PM Report

"Frontline" and Donald Rumsfeld must operate in parallel universes. Perhaps the Secretary can find time to watch a few episodes because it appears someone is not on our planet:

On the afternoon of September 11th, the Pentagon is still smoking, Donald Rumsfeld dictates to one of his aides, "We've got to see, somehow, how we could bring Saddam Hussein into this."

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/etc/script.html#ixzz1Pxp0HrBW

Just search the link above and use the word "Rumsfeld".

It is a transcript. Remember those Charlie Rose?

CarolJ  06/21/2011 09:06 PM Report

I tried to watch the full interview with Donald Rumsfeld and it won't even start when you click on the picture. Is it

just being added ro the web.

JohnGelles  06/21/2011 07:35 PM Report

I used to accuse Donald Rumsfeld of wanting to wage war on the cheap. I wanted him to insist on doing what only a President and Congress can do -- mobilize the whole national economy to win these asymmetrical wars. I was wrong. He was not empowered to do what I wanted. Were it me in his office, I claim I would have insisted on such mobilization -- and would have resigned and raised hell if I was not able to convince others I was right. But such a claim is not evidence against Rumsfeld. It may mean I was nuts -- as well as wrong.

This conversation was a winner. I ought to read his book. He ought to read the Bush book. They both ought to invite me to educate them.

Unfortunately, we who write here are powerless. In a way, they whom CR speaks, and CR too, are also powerless. Events happen. Shit happens. History moves on.

To repeat, if anything good comes of Springtime in Arabia, Bush will deserve a lot of credit for it. If it all turns out bad, it will be "just one of those things."

Some day the HISTORY we read will be extremely accurate. For now it is what it is: as Rumsfeld believes, it is known and unknown.

doodah  06/21/2011 07:31 PM Report

OLE RUMMY ! ! ! :)

We'll have to catch up later

robdverity  06/21/2011 06:09 PM Report

Reread mutex and larry. They said it better than I could.

Bush, Cheney and Rummy have to rep. 3/4ths of the 4 horsemen of the apocolypse. A conflation of evil we will pay for for decades.

A definite nominee for Dante's inferno. May he roast in a (Catholic) hell.

larrymo  06/21/2011 02:04 PM Report

I suspect this man is as baffled as many that he is not behind bars . Serving business expediency behind the smokescreen of a just war while enrobed in a blood soaked flag of convenience . It is only in such a climate would thugs like him ,Dick Cheney and the laughable spectacle of Donald Trump consider taking the chance of grasping power and the chance to use brutality and deadly force without the threat of prosecution. His vanity relishes excercising his huckster devices, clearly a man who considers truth, as did Bush, an unwelcome formality.

mutex  06/21/2011 01:36 PM Report

Rumsfeld has to be one of the most arrogant, self-serving, smarmy politicians in a sea of such creatures. He doesn't suffer fools gladly because he is the king of the fools. They all want to keep kicking the can down the road in regard to the cost/benefit analysis of the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions so they don't have to take responsibility for these boondoggles which are wrong on every level from the practical to the moral.

When the history of this period is written it will remember 'Gitmo', Abu Ghraib and Bagram as US gulags. It will remember Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld as reactionary cowards who perpetrated untold unsuffering on huge numbers of people and set this country on the road to both moral and financial bankruptcy in the process. They created a narrative and political environment that we are now apparently tied to for at least a generation and which only sinks us deeper into hypocrisy and failure.

Rumsfeld now wants to equate knowing how to make chemical and biological weapons with having them. It is preposterous to believe that this was justification for preemptive invasion. Just how does Mr. Rumsfeld presume that Iraq would 'forget' how to make such weapons? How did these hypothetical weapons pose any threat to US security? Why are there two sets of international laws...one for the US and its allies and one for everyone else? What moral justification is there for US possession of 'weapons of mass destruction' and why does no one preemptively invade us?

Of course Rumsfled's answer to any and all such questions is a condescending smirk in combined with some self-absorbed gibberish about unknown unknowns that nobody could be expected to know.

Now I need to go take a shower. Just watching this interview makes me feel greasy and unclean.

tabs  06/21/2011 01:30 PM Report

No more rehashing of the rehashing till worn out and threadbare. The only thing that could be said from Mr Rumsfield interview is that the failure of the administration is that everyone in the adminsitration was a ship passing in the night each a fiefdom unto themselves. None with the least bit of curosity of what the other was doing.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/21/2011 12:35 PM Report

GREAT JOB CHARLIE!

For me much of this interview was a Déjà vu moment:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317910/

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/21/2011 12:33 PM Report

If you watched this, now check this out:

http://shadeitblack.com/

Jess enlisted in the Marines immediately after graduating from high school in 2001, and in 2004 she volunteered to serve in the Marine Corps’ first officially declared Mortuary Affairs unit in Iraq. Her platoon was tasked with recovering and processing the remains of fallen soldiers.

REMant  06/21/2011 12:05 PM Report

It seems pretty silly to be trying to revise history concerning who was behind invading Iraq, at this juncture, Charles, not to mention extremely puzzling considering what is going on at present elsewhere in that part of the world. I doubt very much that WMD really were the most important concern among this country's politicians. I have always had the feeling that if Rumsfeld weren't more concerned with improving the military than making war, like McNamara, he at least wanted it over quickly. There certainly were ppl, and I don't know if they included Powell, who, on the other hand, wanted to remake the Iraqi nation. Perhaps they were right, because Sadaam's was an oppressive minority govt. On the other hand, unlike Germany and Japan, they completely shut the old regime out, which it is largely agreed was a big mistake. Effective management, in any case, seems to have fallen through the crack, resulting in considerable loss of both American and Iraqi lives. I think that was the most important issue in the prosecution of the war, not Abu Ghraib, nor Guantanamo. IMHO that was the question in Vietnam as well, and seems to be also in Afghanistan. There has been a lot of criticism of Rumsfeld's leadership style. One thing that seems clear is he doesn't suffer fools gladly.