A discussion with Jonathan Schell of "The Nation"

with Jonathan Schell
in Current Affairs, Books
on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 * * * * *

play

E-mail this video:

Distribute this video:

Share on:

Close
Description

A discussion with Jonathan Schell of The Nation and author of The Seventh Decade: The New Shape of Nuclear Danger.

Video Share Options
Share
Buy Amazon DVD
Keywords:
Supreme Court
Jonathan Schell
Presidency
he Nation

In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:

itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/8936

Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.

Close
  • Comments 6
    Post new comment
    1. dan  02/14/2008 12:47 PM Report

      He said the Arab nations are greatly worried by Israel's atomic capabilities. If so, they haven't registered much worry for the past 40+ years. It seems they've only started publicly contemplating building a-bombs after it became clear Iran would not stop trying.

    2. DT  02/14/2008 12:30 PM Report

      Was sufficiently impressed by this first encounter with Mr. Schell that I went to Charlie Rose archives and dug up his debate with Michael Ignatieff.

      A debate about war against Iraq

      Show Date: 02/25/2003

      Jonathan Schell

      Michael Ignatieff

      Brilliant stuff by both men. Highly recommend the program to others.

    3. David Chowes  02/13/2008 03:52 AM Report

      Re: Jonathan Schell: Concisely -- two trains are running an exponentialy high speed on the same track directly towards each other. The first train as reflected in Mr. Rose's 'Science Series' has the real potential to increase the quality and longevity of people now living and those in the future; the other train reflects (the probably) destruction of humans and, in fact, the very viability of any species on this planet. Whether it be global warming, nuclear proliferation, continings warfare, biological warfare... If I had to bet what happens, I would say P = .9 (within, 50 years or less) that it will be all over! But, if I win, I get

      nothing because I won't be around to collect my bet; nor, will anyone I wagered with be left!

    4. TABS  02/13/2008 03:46 AM Report

      Hmmm Can you imagine that the United States of America went to war with Iraq because President George Bush DIDN"T LIKE Saddam. The rest of the reasoning is just a Carl Rovian, Madison Avenue sales pitch to incite the American people to a fever pitch. A justification if you will. No one on the right or left of the political spectrum can fathom such a simply inane reason to go to war, it has to be something far more complex. For instance the Military Industriall Oil Complex Cartel or Saddam was sending WMD's to Al Qadea. Take your choich,it just can't be so simple as George Walker Bush didn't like Saddam Huessin.

    5. TABS  02/13/2008 03:19 AM Report

      So many people have tried to figure out the why of Iraq? On the left it is the mantra of oil and GW's oil patch buddies. On the right it is the stubborn belief that AL Qaeda and Saddam with his WMD's were buds. Yet none of this really puts the pieces of the puzzle together. One begins to believe that the Administration itself doesn't really know the reason why the US went to war with Iraq. The only thing that can be postulated is that GW and the rest of the Admin didn't like Saddam. Saddam didn't sit when the US told him to sit nor stay when the US told him to stay. He was just a bad dog who would not do what the US told him to do. So he had to go. Simple!

    6. Lets do it  02/13/2008 12:33 AM Report

      Bought his book on line through Kindle. Wise perceptions. Rare. Do wish he hadn't claimed Iraq was about abolishing WMD's. Iraq is a combibation of M-I complex and oil. It and other policies will indeed proliferate them as a (by?)product. McCain, the jingoist, will have the same effect with his continuation of more stolid Shrubbishness. A natural reflex to world bully.