Charlie Rose

Martin Timothy  01/15/2008 05:14 AM Report

Israel has been supplying weapons to Iran since the days of Ollie north and Iran Contraâ?¦ Believe that nuclear weapons have been on Iranâ??s shopping list for as long as Israel has had them for saleâ?¦

This is what would happenâ?¦ The Iranians nuke the US battle fleets sending them to the bottomâ?¦ The Turks form a Moslem alliance with all regional Islamic interests including Iranâ?¦ they unite with the remnants of Saddamâ??s forces in Iraqâ?¦ The Pakistaniâ??s get rid of Musharraf and join the allianceâ?¦ The Afghans go on the offensive in that land and suddenly US forces are stranded with no hope of resupply and no way of getting out, they either surrender or are wiped out.

The Ashkenazi offensive on the Homeland commences and the mercenary forces that are already in place on the mainland, round up who they want to and itâ??s off to the FEMA camps for them for processingâ?¦ to be killed. Attacks are carried out on the schools in Amish County and VA Tech style massacres, and the Ashkenazi chalk up another victoryâ?¦ War now against Israel.

Gina  12/17/2007 08:53 AM Report

Kyle, I appreciate your take on Iran and I agree with a good portion of what you wrote. However I find it hard to believe that Iran would be that irrational as to go after Iraq & Israel (at least declaring public destruction of these two countries), if indeed it turned out they were developing nuclear weapons. Iran would never be able to fend off the bulk of countries in the international community which I think would band together and come down upon them to swift justice if that happened. I do believe that Iran is a MAJOR logistical point for the terrorists through which insurgents are being dispatched which should be a major concern to look at and I do not think is getting enough focused attention. But, if Iran did develop a nuclear weapon to use and did� it would be suicidal and I think they know that�I believe that Iran, Syria, Yemen, and other middleastern countries dotted throughout that region are involved in terrorism. I am still not sure about Afghanistan nor am I sure about Pakistan.

Kyle   12/16/2007 07:20 PM Report

The Iranian Ambassador spent time lying, denying, and saying " I don't believe" to every TRUTH posited by Charlie Rose. I don't believe the Egyptians, The Jordanians,Saudis and Arab countries really want Israel to exist, really are afraid of Iran, really support a two state solution, in which they will normalize relations with Israel, in spite of the fact that these are the long stated positions by the gov'ts of those countries! Egypt and Jordan have already normalized relations with Israel and the Saudis are indeed prepared to follow King Abdullahs plan. Iran refuses to and then simply digs in their heels and says' oh poo poo we just don't believe what we don't like and don't want to believe. This is NOT a country that can be negotiated with.

He lied about Iran's direct involvement in Iraq in which they deliberately set about to prevent the stabilization of Iraq, provided arms, terrorists, and funds to Shia and Sunnis in order to foment civil war, and he has made it clear that Iran could care LESS that the UNITED NATIONS- of which Democrats always insist is the final word, has recognized and sanctioned the state of Israel. Iran refuses to accept this decision by a world body they insist should be listened to... and is now insisting that thir LUDICROUS idea of allowing ALL Palestinians to VOTE on the legitimacy of Israel is what needs to be done to make them happy! There is already a state of Israel in existence-there is nothing to vote on, but thats not acceptable to the Iranians.The Iranians cannot be negotiated with, they lie, deny, and obfuscate.

Until the gov't of Iran accepts the existence of Israel, then as long as the Arabs do, Iran must be made to under sanctions by the Arab Nations and by the US!

So here's one in keeping with the Spirit of the Iranian Ambassador" I don't believe you aren't developing Nuclear Weapons" I do believe you will use them to attack Arab neighbors and Iraqis FIRST, then go after Israel. But you won't succeed - maybe your Arab neighbors will be wiped off the planet at your hand, but when Israel and the US respond - you will wish you had stopped your nuclear program.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THE IRANIAN GOV'T FOR ONE SECOND. And neither do the Iraqi's, the Israelis, The Arabs, except Syria and Hamas who is in cahoots with them. Only fools would accept these liars at face value! I don't wake up afraid that Israel will Nuke America, or that America will Nuke any other country.

I do wake up knowing that Iran would!

.

spiked tea/blurred vision  12/10/2007 08:43 PM Report

okay - I admit it - my tea was spiked...I came in the wrong door. neverrrr miiind.

Definately spiked tea  12/10/2007 08:31 PM Report

I recognized your goofy analogy and ripped it to shreds you silly person.

ankhfnkhonsu  12/10/2007 08:27 PM Report

Actually it was rhetorical, you very silly person.

Any student of history, or anyone with a brain, for that matter, could easily recognize the analogy. Of course, you being as intellectually challenged as you apparently are, judging by your terribly insightful, expansive and and uproariously funny commentary, have quite a hurdle to surmount.

Do try to put an entire thought together, old boy. You can do it.

Time for Tea?  12/10/2007 06:22 PM Report

It reminds you of the 1930's because you are very old and having a senior moment. And that's the nicest I can come up with in response to your goofy post.

ankhfnkhonsu  12/09/2007 06:44 PM Report

Americans are just too nice a people. They expect that the rest of world behaves in a civil manner just like Charlie does.

( Sorry Naomi Wolf comrade crowd, but anyone who believes that the U.S. is moving toward fascism is on crack).

Listen to what the Iranian refugees from the regime say, and in fact what the anti-muslim muslims say: "Listen to what these people say back home because they mean what they say."

Watch the video.

Negotiations? They only negotiate when they think they are going to get whacked. Get it.

All this latest 'intelligence' crap was cooked up by a few bow-tied State Department nerds who want to put the blocks to the administration, irrespective of how dangerous their antics are. Are you reading what senior MI6 people are saying to this garbage?

Why does all of this remind so many of us of the 1930s?

Cookie  12/09/2007 02:45 PM Report

I thought Khazaee made a good point - international pressure was not on them in 2003 so how can anything be tied together to say that it worked. Obviously the Bush administration is trying to buy a rationale for invading Iraq - anything at all that they can say it did for us i.e. scaring the Iranians. By the way, the interview cut off at the point where he was going to say why supporting Hamas was not a bad thing. I am curous to hear him out.

VOICE  12/09/2007 01:33 PM Report

Dear Charlie: You are very kind, polite and supportive in this show. One has to only look at Islamic Republic Envoy's face, in the beginning of this show and towards the end.

You made him at ease and proud of a NATION THAT DOES NOT BLONG TO HIM.

Gayland Hokanson  12/08/2007 11:04 AM Report

It actually pained me to see how adversarial Charlie was in this conversation. At one point Charlie brought up the fact that Iran was isolated from the Arab community in regard to middle east policies. The recent summit was mentioned by Charlie as evidence of how the Arab community was working toward a resolution of the Palestinian situation. It was then that his guest mentioned that Hamas was excluded. Charlie brushed it off. When will we ever get a more balanced discussion of the region?! Charlie tried to push the idea of Iran engaging with the U.S. and probed why it wasn't happening. Khazee tried to explain the past history of our exclusionary policy, how we had supported Saddam in the Iraq/Iran war. Again these comments were waived off by Charlie. In general Rose's overtalk of the Ambassador was disrespectful at the least.

Gina  12/08/2007 11:03 AM Report

Another thing. You (Rambo) types are going to have to start calming down. There is a time to be Rambo and step up the aggression, and there is a time to be circumspect and wise when dealing with international politics with foreign leaders diplomatically, but you have to have the intellect to know where the lines/boundaries are and when you can cross them. Charlie was brilliant in the way he communicated (diplomatically) with Muhammud Khazzaee which is why I was able to surmise a new opinion from the interview that I do not believe now that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, (at least publicly) You have to know how to communicate with people in order to get the best from them. When you go flying off the handle wanting to charge and attack everything that is not nailed down, we could be fighting every tom, dick, harry and dissident country out there. Calm down and use your intelligence with some common sense. At the end of the day, you have to remember, these are just a people on the planet, the same planet you live on. You should be able to resource how to communicate with them. My favorite quote is from â??Sun Tzu - The Art of Warâ??. Look it up, it appliesâ?¦â?¦

Gina  12/08/2007 10:00 AM Report

No it is true, Iran does not play by the rules of international decorum but neither did we the United States when we went over there to invade Iraq based on some bogus nuclear tank theory which only turned out to be benign 'Union Carbide' tanks.

My concern with Iran is no longer the nukes, but the terrorist insurgents I believe are being trained and generated from that country into Iraq fighting against Americans. That is my concern. If indeed Iran stopped development of nukes in the year 2003, I accept that answer because when you really stop to think about it. What sense would it make for them to develop bombs to wipe Israel off the face of the map as their own president â??Ahmadinejadâ?? plainly said he wanted to do.

It would not make sense at all because the entire international community would not abide by that ever happening. There is a world much larger and encompassing than Iran by far and I believe the majority of the international community would and COULD surely wipe Iran off the face of the map. So it all makes sense that they actually did stop their development of nuclear weapons in 2003 in the face of international pressure, unless I'm missing something. Afterall, Iran is not a â??superpowerâ?? other than the control of oil, but no man â??and his landâ?? is an island to be able to single-handedly fend off the world community from descending down upon them to itâ??s own annihilation.

Tahamtaan  12/08/2007 02:17 AM Report

President Bush is claiming that pressure works, because Iran halted its nuclear program. The report says Iran halted its Nuclear program in 2003!!! How come the two UN resolution during this year and last year helped to pressure Iran to halt its Nuclear program in 2003!!!

Ahotnyik  12/07/2007 11:58 PM Report

I can only reiterate Mr. Khazaee's words about mutual understanding and respect in the relations of the 2 countries in question. I recommend Mr. Rose and all of those people who acquire their information on Iran from the publicly available media to follow many Dutch, German, Danish, and Swedish students' example: travel to Iran and spend a number of months or even better years living together with the people of Iran, try to learn their language, history and culture. This is the only way of obtaining a better understanding and perhaps respect that Iran is so thirsty to receive from the United States.

Chris Baker  12/07/2007 11:13 PM Report

Excellent and important interview by Charlie and thanks to Iran's ambassador for coming on the program for an extended interview. As we move beyond the fear-mongering of the Bush presidency it opens up opportunities for a new dialogue and understanding with Iran's clerical leaders. I believe Iraq's powerful Shiite clerics, among them Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani, are playing a role in that regard - no matter how subtle it may seem. A new US president could represent also a new opening with Iran, although it's unfortunate to see that so far none of the Republican candidates seem open to that possibility.

ankhfnkhonsu  12/07/2007 07:19 PM Report

I am great admirer of your work.

You are without doubt a gentleman and a believer in allowing all views to be expressed. However, it is important to understand that his cultured gentleman is the gentile mouthpiece of a vicious clerical fascist regime.

You really need to speak to Iranian dissidents and allow one of their spokespeople to explain about the deception of which this guy is a part of.

I have spoken to enough Iranians who have lost friends and relatives to this regime, to understand what they are all about.

Expression is important but it is far more important not permit the propagation of such insidious deception by a murderous fascist regime.

You gave him a total pass.

These people do not play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules

VOICE  12/07/2007 05:48 PM Report

Dear Charlie: These days, getting degrees from

US Universities do not change the character

of a representative of the Islamic Republic.

After all, currently,ordinary IRANIANS can not afford a roof over their heads, never mind travelling abroad!! 99% of the Iranian students educating in the West, are part of the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC ESTABLISHMENTS. ONLY THEY CAN AFFORD. THANKS TO ABOVE 80 DOLLARS OIL PRICES !

skeptic  12/07/2007 01:37 AM Report

I continually startle myself with my increasing disenchantment with our country. It's not nice to feel so unpatriotic. BUT we have 10,000 + nukes; yet we have the cajones to question Iran's denial of even WANTING nukes. We have Black Water; yet we claim Irans military to be terrorists. We preempt war 8,000 miles away; yet we claim Iran is the unwarranted belligerant neighbor. ---------------------------------------------------- Jingoism is replete through our history with contrivances-to-kill: Remember the Maine; Gulf of Tonkin; Dominos; WMD's. Side bet: That Cheney and Shrub are furious with the intelligence people with their latest Iran non-starter. How can they nurse and comfort the M-I complex without at least bombing Iran - just a little. Second side bet: We will be the first future user of nukes. We're developing "tactical" versions to broaden the possibility (pant, pant). Merry Christmas!! P.S. We're not as nice as we like to think. Which can be a fatal form of hubris. Thinking we can do no wrong even as we're fully engaged. It aint easy being me. Sympathy anyone? Or anger? Pick the healthiest.