Charlie Rose

liyqff  05/23/2011 09:30 PM Report

welcome to our website.

????????????????

http://www.fashion-long-4biz.com

????????????????

::???**?????**?????**??

?????.::???**?????**??

?????::???**?????**??

?????.???**?????**??

????????**?????**??

?????.??**?????**??

??????http://www.fashion-long-4biz.com

????????~~~~~*^_^*

***********************************************

We specialized in the exportation of sport shoes ,

and other products

(clothing, bag,sunglasses,watches,belts,etc )

????????????????

http://www.fashion-long-4biz.com

????????????????

IKE SHOX+AIR MAX+TL3+OZ+NZ ONLY $30--35

UGG TIMBLAND+LACOSTE SHOES+ED HARDY SHOES$30--35

DIESEL T-SHIRT,GSTAR T-SHIRT,CA T-SHIRT,50% OFF FOR SALE $12--15

DIOR SUNGLASS,DG SUNGLASS$12--15

http://www.fashion-long-4biz.com

aTypicalProgressive  08/18/2008 01:43 PM Report

Robert Kagan quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and claims to be a swan. He is a neocon. We won't get fooled again.

Bob  05/21/2008 01:37 PM Report

I am confused. Robert Kagan writes a book and appears dispassionately discusses the failures of the Iraq war. William Kristol's smile beams in the picture on his New York Times Op Ed column. Richard Perle is a frequent guest speaker and writer. Shouldn't these people be tried for treason for duping the American public into a pointless war?

Mike F  05/21/2008 07:50 AM Report

Once again an architect of the Iraq catastrophe cites his mistaken belief that Saddam had WMD to justify his support for an invasion that has gone hopelessly wrong. Will no one remind these people that the UN inspectors were on the ground trying (and failing) to find WMD when they were essentially told to get out so that the invasion could begin? Have Kragen and co forgotten the name Hans Blix? This carnage could all have been avoided had we given the inspectors the time to do their job. But no--we were hell bent to got to war. Well, we went all right--now how do we come home?

Bob  05/20/2008 04:08 AM Report

Kagan was one of the chief architects of the Project for the New American Century who led us into Iraq. Now he sounds like a reasonable analyst with balanced views. How quickly the leopard changes its stripes. He must think we are really stupid. Fortunately, I trust the law will catch up with these war criminals.

We Forget Quickly  05/19/2008 09:13 PM Report

Finally someone has said it. The Bush Administration and Neocons were duped into going into Iraq by the Clinton administration. The error and folly of the war should be blamed squarely on others. Don't forget, after 911, Hillary Clinton was foaming at the mouth to attack somenone, anyone. Even now, she wants to "obliterate" Iran. The Democrats are the war monger. The Republicans have been foolish and reluctantly have been tricked to war. Thanks Mr. Kagan for your clarity.

Shaft  05/19/2008 05:03 PM Report

It sure is nice to hear from those espousing the "Neo-Con" ideology and what their thoughts are. It's funny that the term "neo-con" is hated much by the very "neo-cons" than by those of us who resent their new ideology. If they had succeeded in Iraq, all those "neo-con" ideology espousers would have come out of their holes to claim the title proudly, now that they have failed miserably they are all dissociating themselves from that term they were happy to flaunt prior to its failure. It is very interesting about "neo-cons" and their new ideology, from Mr. Kagan I learned that he accepts mistakes, which is a good sign. This is the only "neo-con" who accepted responsibility for wrongly thinking about Iraq prior to the invasion. The senior neo-cons are still defying their ideology is responsible for the failure of America and the ensuing chaos afterwards even as we see all those millions of displaced and homeless, not to mention the hundreds of thousands dead Iraqis. It just makes you wonder how strong an ideology grip one by the head. We thought a commie is the strongest ideology; well after the death of communism the new and unrelenting ideology Neo-Conism has taken the spot. I am glad the American people are waking up to such erroneous ideology and the ensuing consequences. Now that we have seen what their limitations are, I would like to make some of the basic flaws as a result of Neo-Conism ideology. Had we had left Saddam in power we would not have needed to think about Iran now, he would be there to counter the growing threat by Iran. It's funny how we helped defuse one of Iran's fears from Saddam by removing his regime at the expense of much American blood and bankrupting treasures loss. Recently, the same finger wagging big nose beady eyes from Iran was able to visit Iraq after we clean up his main concern, saddam. The issue of other powers rising is natural; those with reckless power throwing nations are destined to decline while those frugal and conservative in saving their powers are destined to rise. Since the end of WWII the world existed in relatively safe equilibrium that the actors are known to all in that system. The fall of the soviets has certainly burst that existing equilibrium and set a new equilibrium with majority of the player become the US, so much a for a new neo-conism ideology failed to establish and maintain a new set of equilibrium. That flawed ideology run wild in the offices of the neo-cons in the background of the Democratic administration massaging their hands as if looking to heat their hands while salivating and drooling at the same time about post Clinton administration and the future and who will be the first victim blessed with the wraz of the new found neo-conism ideology. Well, the only one that made sense at the time was Iraq, who is sitting on top of a black gold, once they conquer that black gold goose the cash flow will finance their next victim and beyond. Thanks to the new equilibrium has no dominating element at the time, the US variable is losing steam as while some of the conservative and frugal power dispensers are looking to get their portion in the new equilibrium to be set soon. I am still hoping the damage in Iraq is over and we will have greater stake in the pie as the new powers are scrambling to define the new equilibrium. Thanks Mr. Rose for the nice conversation with low ranking neo-conism ideology espouser who pitched on Sen. McCain's bidding for the White House. Thanks we know who is going to be the next President of the Free-World. Don't you mind a little color spice into the new equilibrium to be set. :wink-wink:

Chuck Pell  05/19/2008 11:37 AM Report

I made some notes and was prepared to comment on the recent appearance of Robert Kagan. It turns out however that apparently everyone saw through this guy as if he were made of glass and I would only be repeating what edvard gustaf, KT and please go away have already contributed. What a difference between the views of Kagan and Michael Rose.

TABS  05/18/2008 05:24 PM Report

Mr Kagan forgot to mention that fundlementalist Islam's Jihad is in reality their resistance to the intrusion of Liberal Democratic ideals and culture into their society. They are merely just saying no to Micky Mouse and Coca Cola.

Vadim Stolz  05/18/2008 05:18 PM Report

"We are liberal" - "they are autocratic." Before, they said: "we are good Chritians and they are evil heathens." Or: "we carry the burden of the white man, we are civilizers, and they are children of darkness." It's the same old story. The same old genocidal drive, from crusades to Columbus to Plan Barbarossa and Auschwitz.

Who is to decide? What if Russians and Chinese want to be "autocratic"? What if the brainwashed Westerners are not at all "liberal," but are standing with one leg in fascism? Impossible? Just look at this fascist agent of the Mossad, rationalizing a new world war. Who gives him and his ilk the opportunity to fill monopolistic press with their garbage? Idealistic Atlantic elites? Or the Atlantic elites who want to preserve their power over the world and see the rise of Russia and China threatening it? What is especially conspicuous in this talk and comments above is that not a singe word was said about hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people killed, maimed, and tortured by the "liberal" American power. A terrible international crime--deserving Nurenberg nooses for Bush, Cheney, and their henchmen--has been committed and new ones are being prepared, including here on Rose's show that normalizes and spreads this fascist drivel. Yet very few people are left in this country who can comprehend the trivial criminality of this system that no longer can be dismantled from the inside and will have to be destroyed by other nations.

please go away  05/18/2008 03:38 PM Report

Kagan - let me help here: difference between how the world saw us in 1974 and 2008 #1, when we found proof that Nixon was a criminal we threw his ass out. #2, we forced the govt to get us out of Vietnam by rigorous dissent. So the world back then could see that when we made serious errors, our citizens fought back and forced action. People associated with these miserable failures were PUNISHED. What did we do? Re-elect the criminals who lied to us. And what do we see today? This goofball Kagan refusing to take responsibility for his own bellicose stupidity and still pushing his dope. If Zakaria and Kagan say "well who knew the adminitration could have done things so badly?" then they are both full of crap. There were plenty of signs that the administration was just chock full of morons with deep prejudices and vast ignorance and if you two didnt see it that is YOUR limitation. So if you refuse to own up to your own junk and clean up your thinking then why in hell would I read your book and why in the world would anybody listen to you?

KT  05/18/2008 12:42 AM Report

Thanks for having Robert Kagan on, Charlie.

I appreciate you confronting Kagan about his Iraq warmongering and accountability, but you're missing something very important. You let him wriggle out.

Mr. Kagan is a unfettered militarist. He loves war and conflict, and couches it in "spreading democracy." And when everything goes to Hell, as it has, he plays the cowardly weasel.

Charlie, he signed his name on the PNAC letter to Clinton in 1998, advocating attacking Iraq. Why do you allow conflation of having policy differences with Iraq, with unilaterally invading?? He's a neocon. He, and his brother Fred, were intimately involved in the efforts to invade on false pretenses.

And, most importantly, DESTROY any and all honest dissenters.

You have to ask the follow-up: "If you only know what everyone else knew, why were all dissenters attacked vociferously and destroyed by your side...?"

Charlie, people's lives are depending on you, and others in the media, to not allow Kagan and his ilk to build a case for further invasions. Don't let more people get killed or maimed by elective wars.

edvard gustafson  05/17/2008 09:42 PM Report

"I don't live in an alternative reality!...

The honest answer is that I don't know".

Indeed.

After listening to Mr. Kagan it is clear to me that he does live in an "alternative reality" of geopolitical mindgames that are every bit as dangerous to "ordinary citizens of the world" as was Saddam. This insistence in setting up "us vs. them" categories is so old school (ideological bullshit). The United States is not qualified to teach the world about democracy, trustworthyness, or (as has been demonstrated)...competence.

We can't even get our own act together. George Kennan had it right in his book "Around the Cragged Hill"...we need to get our own house in order. Our foreign policy is naive and dangerously uninformed. Tim Weiner's "Legacy of Ashes" does a good job of pointing that out! Zbigneiw Brzezinski's book "Out of Control" blames the deaths of millions in the 20th century on "ideology".

And you, Mr. Kaplan say we should get back to "ideology" as a tool to define us, democracy/freedom lovers vs. those nasty authoritarian capitalists. We apparently are, as linguist Deborah Tannen would say, an Adversarial Culture. To the dismay of the innocents of the world...

If Mr. Kagan is an advisor to Mr. McCain, and writes his speeches, then you have made it clear to me that I cannot vote for Mr. McCain.

Thank you for providing the "Tipping Point" (which I am now reading...by Malcolm Gladwell. It is a very good book...as was his "Blink".)

Lena Herzog  05/17/2008 05:12 PM Report

And, by the way, with friends like these WHO needs enemies?!

Both the United States' and Israel's security is compromised because of these idiots. It can only be made worse by bombing Iran (which they are dying to do). Should that happen radicalization of the Islamic world, disgust of the rest of the world with the US as well as destruction of the economy (the oil prices will be more than whiskey's) - all will be complete. Congratulations, morons! Again, with friends like these...!

Lena Herzog  05/17/2008 04:48 PM Report

Must we listen to the likes of Kagan and all the rest of the neocons? After they've gotten every single thing wrong? Why even give them any air time except to hang them in the square of the public opinion? They keep coming back like a bad smell with their appalling agenda, why help them, Charlie? A very excellent treatment on the revolting alliance between evangelical christians and the neocons is on this link (the recent Fresh Air) http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13

Anton Grambihler  05/17/2008 11:49 AM Report

Why is an immigrant Citizen allowed in the highest levels of the United States Government? All people in the Executive Branch or appointed by the President need to be Citizens born in the United States of United States Citizens. Any one with Dual Citizenship must be counted as a non-Citizen. Why does Robert Kagan NOT speak out against the Illegal Israeli invasion and occupation of Palestine Land? Why does Robert Kagan NOT speak out against the Israeli inhuman treatment of the Palestine People? Does he support the "Right of Return"? for the Palestine People? Does he support the "Right of Return"? for the Europeans? Does he support the right of Israel to Kill United States Citizens? Does he support the right of Israel to bomb United States Ships such as the USS Liberty and have it not count as an act of war? Is Robert Kagan really an Israeli Citizen posing as a Citizen of the Untied States and working against the best interest of the United States and for the best interests of Israel?

Alice  05/17/2008 11:49 AM Report

Robert Kagan is just another dual loyalist. Let me take that back, his only loyalty lies with Israel. Scum like him pushed dumb Bush into war because Israel perceived Iraq as a threat, PERIOD. Now the same scum are pushing us toward war with Iran. They all belong in JAIL just like their pal Pollard.

Christopher  05/16/2008 11:26 PM Report

But his observations on how China and Russia see the Burma crisis is totally accurate. It is refreshing to see that someone is denoucing China and Russia (autocratic capitalism). I retract some of the harsher comments I made in previous post (though his analysis of the middle east is way off in the beginning of the show)

Kurt  05/16/2008 11:17 PM Report

Charlie should have at least questioned Kagan's foreign citizenship and very questionable national allegiance.

Christopher  05/16/2008 11:08 PM Report

How is Iran a great power... The Iran craze is taking up groud with intellectuals!

But he is right about military force being a primordial aspect of US foreign policy. I think his statement about maintaining a good army was accurate. But his statement about needing "more troops" to do the job in Iraq, the success od the Ahfgan mission. First of all, how many more troops Bob. You legitimize this screwuup? And the US did not win Ahfganistan Bob, the Taliban still runs a lot of the country. I don't think people who follow foreign affairs seriouly will buy this book.

Charlie, a bit more critical of the guests please...

Camille  05/16/2008 05:02 PM Report

He really thought that the middle east would be happy to be conquered by the neo-cons? I long for the day when people like him are laughed out of public view. Kagan has lowered the bar for American academic intellectualism.How vain. What an idiot.What school did he go to? I wanna not go there.

Anton Grambihler  05/16/2008 04:22 PM Report

Why is an immigrant Citizen allowed in the highest levels of the United States Government? All people in the Executive Branch or appointed by the President need to be Citizens born in the United States of United States Citizens. Any one with Dual Citizenship must be counted as a non-Citizen.

Why does Robert Kagan NOT speak out against the Illegal Israeli invasion and occupation of Palestine Land?

Why does Robert Kagan NOT speak out against the Israeli inhuman treatment of the Palestine People?

Does he support the â??Right of Returnâ?? for the Palestine People? Does he support the â??Right of Returnâ?? for the Europeans?

Does he support the right of Israel to Kill United States Citizens?

Does he support the right of Israel to bomb United States Ships such as the USS Liberty and have it not count as an act of war?

Is Robert Kagan really an Israeli Citizen posing as a Citizen of the Untied States and working against the best interest of the United States and for the best interests of Israel?

fccm  05/16/2008 03:15 PM Report

Robert Kagan is a neoconservative cancer. This co-founder of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) still has no clue that his ideology is a complete and utter failure. Now Kagan is pushing his latest twisted writings "The Return of History and the End of Dreams" in a futile attempt to defend his idiocy.

The world is saying "Hell NO" to his warped perceptions of reality and to his fellow neo-cons' global ambitions. The world is voting with their most powerful weapon; money. The world is increasingly trading in Euros, against petrodollars, and bringing the US to its' knees without firing a shot.

Kagan, Kristol, Cheney, Rumsfailed, Wolfowitz, et al, associated with PNAC have grossly failed in their objective of continuing US hegemony. These fossil-fueled terrorists were so bent on using US military force to achieve their misguided objectives, that their "hammer" to solve everything, solved nothing, and set the US back a century with irreparable damage.

The world is tired of getting drilled by these neo-con unilateralists.

It is insulting that Charlie Rose provides a forum for this cancer to catapult his propaganda.

Marianne Roach  05/16/2008 01:04 PM Report

Charlie,

Robert Kagan stated on your show that the reason Kennedy approved the Bay of Pigs invasion was to prove to Khruschev that Kennedy was a strong leader and not the inexperienced President who Khruschev had met at the Vienna summit. I wish Kagan would get his facts straight. The Bay of Pigs was in April,1961. The Vienna summit was June,1961.

I think you picked up on this, but you were too polite to correct Kagan's version of history.

Larry H. Flaten  05/16/2008 01:26 AM Report

I really enjoyed you General Rose interview. He haas some gonads, unlike the interviewer who has a perpetual yeast infection. Are you afraid Bloomberg will kick you out if you state the truth, or is Bush paying you off? How much does Bush pay you to defend him?

More BS  05/16/2008 12:41 AM Report

Al Qaeda in Iraq could be an adminstration red herring. A Sunni insurgent? A Shia insurgent? An Alqaeda insurgent? WHO CARES? The results are the same. They're tribal! They're sectarian! They're scarred with centuries of hatred! They will do what they do when we leave, whether it's tomorrow or a thousand tomorrows.

RE Mant  05/16/2008 12:36 AM Report

Hubris, yes, but with a particular meaning. In ancient Athens shaming and humiliating someone was the crime of hubris, which was the prerogative of the Gods. This is far different from the attitude in the Old Testament, which I think phony evangelicals like Bush hide behind, and which may be the rationale behind ideas of universal salvation. I do not think these ppl actually fear God. They use Him for their own purposes, calling it compassion or democracy or even God's will, but which seems to be merely smug self-righteousness. This was also the attitude of Whigs, who in the 18th-19th c crusaded against bull and bear-baiting, dog and cock-fighting, drinking, misrule celebrations, pre-nuptial marriage customs, and just about anything else that had been customary among rural people for centuries. There is no doubt that this was complicit with the development of market society. From this came the pejoratives "Puritan" and "Victorian." The Civil War was as much about this as about liberating the slaves, and the same is true of all our wars since then, but in recent years they have taken on even more the character of an attempt to convert the enemy as for instance LBJ did, alternately bombing North Vietnam, and making peace, and crying over the whole thing, like a father spanking his child, saying all the while, "this is hurting me more than it hurts you." It has been called being the world's policeman, and that is fitting, because the Whigs instituted the first organized police. With respect to the future it may be well to keep in mind that we have the world's largest prison system.

die-hard  05/16/2008 12:27 AM Report

Arrogance dies hard. If the rest of the world accepts a particular condition why must we PRESUME to be the political police of the world? A second or thied class world status for the USA might be the best thing to happen for world peace.

Leo Toribio  05/16/2008 12:17 AM Report

Charlie,

I watch your show faithfully, and you have had many conversations with your guests about Iraq, and I have heard you raise questions about the wisdom of attacking Iraq, as I believe you did with Mr. Kagan. But I am appalled that the most appropriate response is conspicuous in its absence; and that is this:

We were engaged in a war with al Qaeeda and Osama bin Laden; both bin Laden and al Qaeeda are sworn enemies of secular governments.

Whatever one thought of Saddam Hussein, he ran a secular government and was, therefore, a de facto enemy of Osama bin Laden. I knew that fact when the administration in Washington was trying to convey a different impression, and I was disturbed that most other people, including those in Congress, apparently did not!

Ergo, attacking Iraq was equivalent to attacking bin Laden's enemy. If FDR had chosen to attack Russia during WWII, instead of relentlessly pursuing Hitler and the Nazis, does one dare imagine what the world would be like today -- who the victor would have been?

Yes, we made many egregious errors in our invasion of Iraq. But all of those errors pale by comparison with the foolhardiness of the invasion itself! Prudent policy, whether political or military, simply does not advocate attacking the enemies of one's enemy!

Leo Toribio