Charlie Rose

Gelles  07/24/2012 09:47 AM Report

On Dennis Ross -- he is always common sensical. Like Krauthammer, he is a clear thinker and an American intellectual asset. Ross believes in government as an institution. Krauthammer believes the same -- but only when government is perfect and business is benign. Such perfection and good fortune are rare. Ross is therefore more reliable.

Gelles  07/24/2012 09:39 AM Report

How pathetic are our comments -- because they do not form an agenda for public opinion to consider?

They are no more pathetic than the human race in general and as a whole -- arrayed against our own worst enemy sitting in our mirrors.

Our comments will get better if Rose and staff will speed this archive up to always remain current -- and to provide post-send editing now.

Gelles  07/24/2012 09:32 AM Report

At midnight between the 23rd and 24th (last night) we heard one hour of fast-talking Timothy Geithner explain that only Congress has the authority to spend what it will take to recover our economic might and put our nation to work in the public interest and in time to help our own people pay their bills and support themselves and their dependents.

"Authority" he asks for. "Productivity" is what we really need IF we are to beat the current unemployment and prevent future hyper-inflation.

This is too obvious for words. Yet Rose and Geithner never mentioned our real situation -- that calls for full employment, higher middle class income, hyper-production of "national and individual needs-satisfactions, and savings and price controls (as may be necessary).

blank  07/23/2012 05:08 AM Report

i had a dream and then i woke up and realized that me writing comments here is pathetic and embarrassing

i think my whole life is pathetic

ShalomFreedman  07/23/2012 04:55 AM Report

Ross is an insider and he tells us what he knows about the situation in Syria. He does not know how it will work out better than anyone else does. He is also very judicious in saying a negative word about current U.S. Middle East policy which seems to be promoting the interests of Sunni regimes.

His remarks about Israel and its expected actions in regard to the ongoing Iran nuclear effort are judicious and measured.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  07/21/2012 03:41 AM Report

Yes Charlie,

Three questions:

1) Chemical and Biological weapon stocks--status changing?

2) Chain of command. Disruptions?

3) Moves around the country. Some signs the Military is withdrawing from where they have been.

Can we accelerate the departure of Assad.

mutex  07/20/2012 03:11 PM Report

Talking heads like Dennis Ross and Richard Haass should have to announce their agendas as a prerequisite to being on the show. This isn't objective analysis seeking to inform. It is blatant propaganda meant to advance their agenda. Given that an informed electorate is essential if a democratic republic is to fulfill its promise these guests should be exposed for the fraud they are perpetrating. It is truly disgusting that these types of conversations are what pass for news in 21st century America.

REMant  07/20/2012 01:01 PM Report

WINEP may be a respected Washington think tank, but it is also considered pro-Israel, founded initially as part of AIPAC, having ties to pro-Israel funders. Mr Ross is avowedly Jewish, a former Soviet specialist with impeccable neocon credentials. He worked under Wolfewitz in the Carter admin, advocating intervention to protect Persian Gulf oil supplies, served on Reagan's NSC and for Bush Sr. Bill Clinton nevetheless appointed him Middle East envoy in which role he was criticized for anti-Arab bias. He urged the invasion of Iraq, but again nevertheless held several similar positions in the Obama admin from 2009-2011, where he came into conflict with George Mitchell.

The US, itself, recently announced it would train and support the FSA, and probably already had. In the past few months there've been increasing reports of both foreign materiel and trained foreign fighters in the FSA. But the rebels still appear greatly fragmented, both physically and philosophically.

The Chinese and the Russians have their own interest in seeing a stable and "democratic" Syria, but are not likely to either be as fanciful as we, or as subservient to Israel, and I doubt they will cave into it. Tho the rebels would seem to have both the numbers and the money, it is doubtful this can end any better than Libya or Iraq on their terms, so it would seem incumbent on the "allies," if they really are interested in being humanitarian, to co-operate with them, and the Iranians, too, if anything meaningful is to be accomplished. I believe Annan has made just this point. As I said yesterday, as with Egypt, this puts Israel in a difficult position, but I think supposing an FSA victory will dampen its Arab opposition entirely chimerical. There is, as Krauthammer opined recently, as much reason to suppose this an Islamic awakening as an "Arab spring."