Charlie Rose

Dadl  07/08/2008 12:11 AM Report

I echo what that others who have served with or for "H.R." have said. He's a tremendous soldier, intellectual, and he literally oozes sincerity and integrity. I've known him for about 20 years and have never, ever known him to lie or obscure the truth. In fact, Mr. Flaten and Bonnie, he was so out of favor with the seniors in the Pentagon that there was a lot of us wondering if his honest stance hadn't cost him his future in the Army. Look up "Crack in the Foundation" which takes the Rumsfeld Pentagon to task over the direction it was taking our modernization. But then, the reality is neither of you want the truth, you just want viewpoints that reinforce your own closed-minded stance. So just listen to Al Franken and forget Charlie Rose--you might here the truth and it might not be what you want to hear.

Independent08  06/19/2008 04:59 PM Report

I respect everyone's right to make comments, however, I found some of them dissapointing. I know Col McMaster and I can vouch for his integrity and innate desire to make the world a better place. To suggest he is an actor or puppet means you have lost the ability to listen to someone speak from their heart and their experience. That more than one person gave a personal attack gives me less hope that we will ever listen to each other, which is when we will come up with the best solutions. Why watch the news or educate yourself at all if your mind is already closed? Here is a man who has experience, is a phenomenal leader, and sacrificed time away from his family that he loves dearly, to spend time in Iraq working hard day and night to be a positive difference to the population there. A question for all of us - what sacrifices have we made to follow our belief on how to make the world a better place - if the answer is via a blog, maybe we should talk to each other instead. To Eagle and NineteenDelta - thank you for your service.

eagle rising  06/18/2008 10:15 AM Report

It is a shame that the public has become so critical of our military leaders that they demonize them regardless of their background. A military leader who believes in what they are fighting for and has a positive message concerning the war in Iraq, is automatically a "spin doctor". I am an active duty Soldier, I have twelve years of service, nine as enlisted and three as a warrant officer. I am a veteran of both OIF I and III. If you do not know anything at all about army warrant officers then the one thing that you should know is that we have a reputation for straight talk. I have no need to "spin" anything. So here it is. I served under Col McMasters for two years in Germany when I was a young Sergeant. I can tell you that he is greatest leader that I have ever had the pleasure of serving under. He is a common sense leader, who inspires all who serve with him. He has a reputation throughout the army for speaking the truth, whether it is a popular truth or not. His love for his country and dedication to duty spread quickly through the ranks of our Battalion soon after he took command. I would gladly serve under him anytime,anywhere. The mindset that he instilled in me as a junior leader has greatly contributed to the success that I have had during my career. I can only hope for the chance to work for him again sometime in the future. For those of you who have said these nasty things about him on this site, I will not reply with the same. I will only say that I feel sorry for you. Because of your political views and preconceived ideas about the war, you have missed out on an opportunity to learn what is going on in the war from an insightful leader with experience on the ground. I guess you would rather listen to the Monday morning quarterback on your local TV station who bases his opinion on what they have read and heard, instead of this Colonel who has walked the streets of Iraq.

Nailed It  06/06/2008 12:03 AM Report

Greg -

What NinteenDelta Smith is saying about how many Iranians we have captured over the past few weeks and months is true. Check out Voices Of Iraq -

http://www.aswataliraq.info/look/english/index.tpl

It is the news agency directly out of Baghdad. They have been VERY critical of the American / Iraqi policy in the past. There are reposts DAILY of Iranians and weapon smugglers that are captured and captured by IRAQI forces.. American forces have very much taken a back seat in many operations. IF you would like another source check out Multinational Forces Iraq for more information on the daily activities.

Greg  06/05/2008 11:07 PM Report

Nineteen, thanks for your service to the country.

I appreciate your comments and the reply to my question, but I see no evidence from any source that several Iranians have been captured each week. I recall several news items telling of several Iranians, in total, being captured. Most, not all, were released. The recent operation in Kurdistan, which was supposed to result in the capture of multiple Iranians, almost turned into a shootout between Kurdish peshmurga and US troops, who bailed, no Iranians in hand. Fill me in if you have credible sources.

Although there is historic animosity between the Arabs and Persians (and the Shiite Kurds), Iran is propping up both the Badr and Sadr groups. A marriage of convenience. The question is, which is more powerful, Shiite IRaqi nationalism, or Shiite Iraqi religious allegiance?

G

NinteenDelta Smith  06/05/2008 09:44 PM Report

I served with this man back in the Desert Shield and Desert Storm, in the 2nd Sqdn 2nd ACR (He was E troop the tankers, I was G troop in a Bradley), and my nephew served under him when he was in Command of the 3rd ACR out of Ft Carson in Iraq in OIF, in Tal Afar province

Bonnie, your scurrilous and mindless libel show the prolbems with your position: you are filled with hate and irrationality, and refuse to hear the facts. You are more concerned with namecalling, hatred and power than fixing the problems our nation faces. Calling him, essentiall, a "spin master" and a stooge shows that all you are is a scurrilous liar, not worthy of shining his shoes.

And to you Mr Flaten, please crawl back into the cesspool from which you came. Actor? Try multiple combat commander and veteran. And he was a front line commander in the only major tank to tank battle of the 1st gulf war. Directly engaged the enemy along side of his men. Go look up "73 Easting". I was there, I was in the same regiment and squadron, and we fought through some hard dug-in Republican Guards tanks, one of the few places the Iraqis stood and fought in Desert Storm.

All in all, you anti-war people have to be some of the most vile, irrational and ignorant people I have ever seen.

COL McMaster is a genuine intellectual and cav trooper, and is honest about the mistakes make by the US military command in Iraq in 2004-6. He was highly effective as a combat commander back in 91, and again in this war. He is well known for documenting the failures of military leadership and civlian problems durign the Veitnam war. COL McMaster is the type of miltiary leader we need. Nor more standing ther and telling politicians what they want to hear - tell them the truth instead, no matter how hard it is.

Had the Generals listened to those like COL McMaster, and been completely honest with the President, we'd not have had Iraq go nearly into a full blown civil war the way it did. Thank God they listened to COL McMaster and Gen Petreus and are now winning, militarily, politically and economically.

Greg - the Shia are Arabs, the Iranians are Persians. And having been there, I can tell you that is a significant split. That is why the Iraqi Shia can be seperated form the SHia in Iran. Not to mention that the holiest sites in Shia Muslim culture are all in Iraq in the hands of Iraqi Mullahs. If there is anything that does bind the Iraqi factions it is their hatred of Persians -- this is why so many of them turn in the Iranians working with the militias, as witnessed by capture of several of them a week for months now.

So read further than the maintream news sources - there is a lot they are not reporting, and these are significant things you should know in order to come to a fully informed judgement about Iraq now.

Nailed It  06/05/2008 06:21 PM Report

I don't care what side of the fence your on in regards to the Iraq war - This interview is SPOT ON! It doesn't get any clearer then this.

This is WHY we need to stay and let the Iraqis finish the job. And they are.

Shame on those of you who are questioning Col. H.R. McMaster's resume and his Military service. He is not in his position to ride any side of a political agenda. He is in his position to PROTECT our nation. Just as all of our military members are.

You don't have to look further then Iran to see exactly where the problems of the world begin...That in FACT become not only the worlds problems but OURS as a nation. Not as Right VS Left, Democrat VS Republican or In the Service or Civilian. If you are an American, YOU TO are at war.

Kirk Taylor  06/05/2008 11:21 AM Report

To all, I echo George's comments. COL McMaster's credentials as an officer and intellectual are beyond question. As a retired Army officer, with time served in Iraq, I can assure you that his description of the evolution of operations in Iraq was by far the most lucid, consice and candid I've heard to date. Skeptics... If you really want to understand for yourself, as opposed throught talking heads with agendas, what is going on Iraq? Go back to start and re-view this interview. Let your opinions/positions pivot off the idea that what you just heard was a truthful depiction of how things were, how they evolved, and how they are. Failing to do so will place in a position of ignorance. Just because the truth differs from the impressions you previously held, does not make it any less the truth. Do yourself a favor, and accept this interview as ground truth, you will be far better for it.

Retired Veteran OEF, OIF & Desert Shield/Storm

George William Herbert  06/04/2008 12:10 AM Report

Those of you unfamiliar with Col. McMaster should have at least googled him or looked him up on Wikipedia before commenting.

We need an Army, whether it should be in Iraq or not. We deserve a good army, and that includes military operational competence, and its relationship with the US public and government, and a level of intellectualism and introspection at the tactical level and strategic levels.

Col. McMaster demonstrated high operational competence as a midsized unit commander in Desert Storm, as a larger unit commander in Tal Afar in this war. He's engaged with the press and people throughout the government on what's happening in Iraq and why and both take and give feedback. He has written extensively in Army professional journals on flaws in the campaigns and how the military has to shift and adapt to address them. And he literally wrote the book on military / civilian government relations and responsibility from the Military perspective ("Dereliction of Duty"), looking back at how the Miltary leaders failed when President Johnson started to get us into the Vietnam War.

An educational challenge for the readers, which Charlie must have agreed to not ask Col. McMaster about as an interview condition: Why is Col. McMaster in Virginia this month and next month (and thus available for interviews), as opposed to Bagdhad?

TABS  06/03/2008 02:30 AM Report

Dear Howard....................................What I wrote is the deepest, darkest fears of a lot of people in the USA and world. Those people are opposed to Obama, as being a potential loose cannon. Hillary is likely to become the VP candidate as a check on Obama's agenda of change. To insure the status Que. Failing that a Billion or two will be spent on McCains behalf.

L.H. Flaten  06/02/2008 10:45 PM Report

I think Bush found this McMaster idiot in actors school, shaved his head and put him on Charlie Rose to pump up americans to bomb or invade Iran. And you fell for it. Mr. Rose you are an intelligent person, you have a great research staff,how in the hell can you swollow this hook. The terroists that hit the world trade towers were from our "friends" Saudi Arabia. Osoma is a sunni from Saudi Arabia. Iran has allways talked strongly to Israel publicly while secretly they have been allies.Iran has been an allie to the U.S.many times in the past. PLEASE Mr. Rose don't be a pawn for Bush and further his sick crusade that is killing innocent people!!!!

howard  06/02/2008 01:10 PM Report

Well, TABS....

I don't know who Bama is.... Obama I have heard of. But that term you used, Californication, that could be pretty useful. You know, make love not war... It may even improve the climate in Montana.

This thread is supposed to be about the situation in Iraq. But if you really want to mention Tax Bills, how can you ignore the Trillion Dollar Fiasco we have to suffer through due to this misadventure?? And haven't Dick Cheney's companies grown fat on that Trillion Dollars??

The war seems to be an unending tax on the American Middle Class, and continually sheds the blood of the Middle Class, and those of more desparate economic circumstances. How many politicians, corp leaders, and wall street types have their sons and daughters dying?

TABS  06/01/2008 08:42 PM Report

Welcome to Obamaization.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bama portrays himself as a pretty even steven type of guy,one that can put aside his own ideology for the sake of getting things done.

Even if that is true the Liberal Dems along with Bama's backers, once they get in power will push their own agenda of social change without regard for the long term consequences of their moralistic elitism. In other words like Grey Davis (recalled ex CA govenator) the CA Legislature had a mind of its own and pushed things through that that Davis told them to leave alone. BAMA WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP THEM>>>>

That is what is coming with Bama and the Dems... Just consider the USA as being Californication plus some...More Business Regs, More Taxes, More Environmental, More Bureaucracy, More Handouts, More Spending, More Appeasement and loss of sovereignty, and less choice... In other words America will sink into a post industrialized malaise, a virtual Socialist paradise on the order of the UK in the 60's....Business, innovation, and creativity simply went away due to regulation and taxes,to an eventual implosion of the system as with the Soviet Union.....

There will be social redistribution of wealth from the productive to the unproductive. Who is going to wind up paying for this new experiment in socialism, big business and the wealthy won't, they will simply move off shore to avoid taxation and regulation as with the building of Fords new plant in Mexico.The American Middle Class is going to get stuck for the bill till they ain't got nothin left to give. Welcome to the world of Obamaization.

TABS  06/01/2008 08:08 PM Report

Linda Mae...dam straight....You didn't leave the Dem P they left you. The goals and aspirations of the Dem leadership would make FDR, Truman or JFK turn over in their graves. The Dem Leadership is all about Self Service and not about nation, they would burn their own house down to get back at the feeding trough of the Federal government. Just go ask Rep(D) Rahm Emmanuel of Chicago, it is all about winning.

Mark  06/01/2008 10:21 AM Report

There are two issues on Iraq that often end up co-mingled that should not be. 1) The justification for the war. That decision was made by the guys in suits and ties. 2) What to do when you are dropped into the midst of a war decided on by the group in #1. McMaster is in group #2 and is giving his assessment from that perspective.

IMO he was honest and open about the situation AS IT EXISTS. In my opinion, he is more qualified to speak than the empty suits/dresses who made policy after the war was initially fought. Too often those empty suits cower behind able men like McMaster, hoping to leech off their honor and to defame those who would question their bad decisions as if the two groups are the same. They are not - and most of those empty suits are not fit to carry McMaster's (or those soldiers like him) backpack.

Linda Mae  06/01/2008 12:28 AM Report

Howard,

I teach a citizenship class. I am aware of the sequence that places Nancy third in line. You must have listened to her repeatedly saying there is nothing good happening in Iraq. I am retired so I have the luxury of reading what is being written by Nancy and the candidate, as well as checking into both liberal and conservative sites and watching the videos on them. I watch Charlie Rose almost every night and respect him even when I think he is letting his personal preferences over ride his journalistic objectivity. I have concluded that the war has become too much a partisan issue. To support the troops makes you a Rep.conservative. To be against the war makes you a Democrat. I've been a Democrat - even served on our local DC - and I have never been so ashamed of those who wear the party hats at present. I've been involved in civil rights since 1966 - working on an agency reviewing Equal Opportunity practices. I go to the sites for the candidates. I also read - and I wish to emphasize the word read - the transcripts of interviews of Clinton and Obama. Senator Obama does not do well without his speeches. Read the Tim Russert interview to see what I mean. the Constitution is a document I stress in my class. There are only 7 Articles in the document. Articles 1, 2, and 3 tell us everything we need to know about the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches of our government. The reasons for presidential impeachment are listed in Article 2. Article 7 explains ratification. Article 6 tells us the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Articles 4 and 5 explain amendments and States, federal and human rights. We also study wars in my class. There have been distracters against most wars. I would love to consider myself a Pacifist but I know if someone faced me with the attempt to hurt my family, I'd fight them back in a second. I think most Americans feel this way. That is why I support our troops efforts to end the war in Iraq. Nancy hasn't said that from all of the comments I've heard her say. For her it's all about politics and party. When someone puts the party above all, I shake my head in shame for them. MacMaster did speak around all of Charlie's attempts to have him make a negative comment. I agree with that.

Grayson Boucher  05/31/2008 05:11 PM Report

Bonnie, chill the f--- out. As a liberal democrat who was opposed to the war from the outset, I am also generally suspicious of bias/agenda whenever talking heads in military uniform comment on Iraq. However, I found Col. McMaster to be candid, articulate, and genuine in his assessment of how the current situation in Iraq developed, and how strategies for stability and peace can be implemented using the lessons learned from prior misjudgments. While anyone can quibble with details of his theory (Col. Mcmaster, after all, seemed to be drawing more heavily from the perspective and background of a war strategy scholar, rather than attempting to speak as a field commander), his analysis was lucid and incisive, and a refreshing change from most interviews I've seen involving military brass. The U.S. Army could use more officers like Col. McMaster in their ranks.

Greg  05/31/2008 04:08 PM Report

If every show on TV was as worthwhile as Mr. Rose's, think about how much better the world would be....

In response to McMasters' statements that the Shia in Iraq will suddenly disavow allegiance to Iran because they see a new, substantial, more trustworthy Iraqi government, I would like to ask him why he believes this? Given the Shiites' status as a minority in the middle east and their historic mistreatment by the Sunnis in Iraq, they have every reason to work together with Iran.

To the naysayers, like Bonnie, I would ask: why would Iran NOT try to coerce the process in Iraq in order to further their own hegemony in the area? Why wouldn't they be interested in increasing their influence, and power, in the region? Of course they are active in Iraq. Of course they would like to see a Shiite-lead Iraqi government with close allegiance to Iran. The Iranian government has a well documented propensity to fund, train, and equip terrorist organizations in the region to further their goals, of course they are doing the same in Iraq. Among many other things.

Despite my misgivings about many of McMasters' positions, he gives me an inkling of hope that our disastrous foray into Iraq may not turn out as badly as I have thought for the last 5 years. I just hope there are many more like him in the officer corps' of the Army and Marines, on the ground, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

G

John  05/31/2008 12:27 PM Report

Col McMaster was a refreshing commentator on what is happening in Iraq. As he quoted, war is an extension of politics. He was not a part of the decision process to go to war with Iraq - he merely dealt with the hand he was dealt - and dealt well with it, because he was the "clear, hold, build" inspiration that Rice used to overturn Rumsfeld's "we don't owe the Iraqis a damn thing." - (which, even if you believed - still meant we owed OURSELVES not to screw up badly.)

McMaster shows the adaptability that Rumsfeld and his cadre of arm-chair warriors lacked. It is sad that those who claimed to "listen to commanders on the ground" did not do so until so late in the war.

McMaster is an excellent soldier. Soldiers perform what their commanders order them to do, so the debate on the justification of the war is not his - it is higher up in the civilian chain. That McMaster exercised his best judgment in dealing with his situation - and that his judgment was sound - speak well of him.

I did not see and partisanship in his comments, and I hope that continues, so that he can remain a patriot whose loyalty is not to a man or a party, but to this nation and it's ideals.

Joseph  05/31/2008 09:24 AM Report

Charlie, love your show. My only comment re: McMasters is - to echo another viewer - Iran is the major problem??? He had his talking point and he wasn't going to be taken off message. My question for him would be, who the heck is funding Al Queda in Iraq??? Who is funding the Sunni insurgents in Iraq??? How come these spin doctors never want to discuss the funding sources for these other groups (Saudi Arabia), but don't have a problem about chirping Iran,Iran, Iran??! Obviously, he has an agenda.

And for Howard above: Nancy Pelosi is, of course, from Baltimore and not "Philidelphia" (sic).

Not Bonnie  05/31/2008 09:23 AM Report

oh my gosh....bonnie like so many others refuse to allow fact to influence opinion, what a goof.

Bonnie Lackey  05/31/2008 06:42 AM Report

In listening to Col. H.R. McMasters, my first thought was where did McMasters come from...how did he just surface, and how many decorations could this man have plastered on his chest??? Then it occurred to me that he was a Military, Republican, Bush/Cheney White House, PRE-ELECTION "SPIN DOCTOR"!!!

I watched his eyes and he could not, CONTINUALLY, look Charlie in the eye. He stared at the table most of the time while he spoke. This also made me concerned...especially when the garbage that he was spewing...the false information that he was stating so demonstratively.

The NEW Bush/Cheney White House SPIN is to say that all is well in Iraq comparatively to a month ago....or two weeks ago???

Al-Qaeida...was causing all of the chaos AND IS SUDDENLY UNDER CONTAINMENT??? MCMASTERS blamed IRAN for all of the woes of Iraq???

Also pumping up Cheney's call to arms against Iran!!!!

Well, this man, this Military Man....has it all wrong. This is the same INSANE information that the Bush/Cheney White House has been SPINNING in order to prop up its reason for going into IRAQ in the first place!!!

Does anyone, other that some members of Congress, know that Halliburton, Dick Cheney's Company (He was CEO prior to becoming V.P. and has stock options that have increased in value to over 4,000% since he took office in 2000...also moving Halliburton from #17 on the Pentagon's Approved Vendor List to #1 as soon as he took office) has VIOLATED SANCTIONS WITH IRAN AND HAS MULTI-YEAR, MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR CONTRACTS WITH IRAN TO RENOVATE OLD OIL REFINERIES AND BUILD NEW ONES IN IRAN (Congressional Record,(Senate) February 5, 2007, pgs. S1051-S1053) and would not (as Senate Committee Members demanded) terminate their relationship with IRAN until their multi-year contracts were over.

Like-wise, Dick Cheney was told to terminate his relationship with Halliburton as it was a conflict of interest, which he also declined to do so. That is why Halliburton, just prior to the 2007 elections moved their Headquarters from Houston to the United Arab Emerits where there is FREE TRADE WITH IRAN!!! This was also to avoid investigation and prosecution by Congress and the Justice Department.

Do you suppose that with the push to leave IRAQ that Cheney and Halliburton are hedging their options to grab IRANIAN oil if the U.S. attacked IRAN...due to some "supposed" and probably "unsubstanciated", "act of war" in IRAQ??? Just like in IRAQ, Halliburton would have total control over the OIL FIELDS AND REFINERIES...(ever wonder how 200,000 gallons of oil are missing from IRAQ per week when Halliburton has control and they are guarded by the U.S. Military????) Now that the IRAQI government has signed big oil contracts with CHINA...(leaving the U.S. behind the proverbial oil eight-ball) that if Halliburton (Cheney) could just get their hands on the IRANIAN oil....what a lucky bunch of Texas Cusses they would be!!!!

McMasters completely avoided comments about the Shi'ite Cleric Mutada al-Sadr, whose total control over the Shi'ites in Iraq have caused 9/10ths of the chaos with the only warring factions the Shi'ites and the Sunnis...

NOT AL-QAEDA!!!

BY THE WAY....The only reason that there was any peace during the initial phases of "The Surge" was because the IRAQI GOVERNMENT with the strong urging of the U.S. forged an cease-fire agreement with al-Sadr. As soon as the time-frame for that cease-fire was over, all hell broke loose again in IRAQ.

However, it was too close to ELECTION TIME...so the Bush/Cheney White House had to cook up some other story...SPIN...in order to account for the NEW OR CONTINUED VIOLENCE. Just because THE TRUTH IS COMING FROM BBC WORLD NEWS AND OTHERS AND is not on the Republican-owned multi-media press releases or news commentaries doesn't mean that it is not true!!!

They knew that they had totally confused more than half of the American population with their untrue facts before....why not try to pull it back together with this other nonsense for this election. Most Americans either don't care anymore about IRAQ as they are once again distracted (once again...as they used immigration issues to disguise the export of millions of American jobs for cheap labor in China,India, and elsewhere before)with the economy!!!!

Instead of THE BUSH/CHENEY ADMINISTRATION concentrating on trying to make life better for the Americans that they are bleeding to death for their money, jobs, and votes....they are allowing oil companies, banks, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and other blood-sucking corporate entities to distract us from what is really happening in IRAQ and Iran...and the Millions of IRAQI citizens who are still in camps outside of IRAQ...AND that the reality of the IRAQI Government is that they are nothing but a limp U.S. puppet organization...that cannot agree on anything and has lost all of its strength and control!!!!

If I had to watch and believe American News Reports...I too would know that if there were any Al-Qaeda in IRAQ...it was because of the BIG BLUNDER OF THE CENTURY IN IRAQ OF THE U.S. NOT CONTROLLING THE BORDERS...(SIMILAR TO OUR U.S. BORDERS THAT BUSH CUT BORDER PATROL BUDGETS FOR BOTH U.S. BORDERS IN 2000 thus leaving our borders uncovered...but now it's a big deal!!!) and allowing Al-Qaeda to get through to some areas but they hardly had any control or caused any havoc as did the Sunnis and Shi'ite militias themselves to each other!!!

By the way, since 2000, the Bush/Cheney White House (not the American People's White House) have siphoned over $5.1 TRILLION DOLLARS FROM ALL OF THE TRUST FUNDS including, but not limited to THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND (OVER $1.4 TRILLION DOLLARS TAKEN OUT BY BUSH), THE MILITARY RETIREMENT TRUST FUND, THE FEDERAL EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT TRUST FUND, THE RAILROAD RETIREMENT TRUST FUND, THE AMERICAN INDIAN TRUST FUND AND MANY, MANY MORE TO PAY THEIR CORPORATE BUDDIES FOR THIS UNWARRANTED WAR!!!!

ADDITIONALLY, THE BUSH/CHENEY WHITE HOUSE HAS BORROWED FROM A MINIMUM OF 12 COUNTRIES WHERE WE OWE BILLIONS, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THE LOANS FROM CHINA, JAPAN, U.K. AND OTHERS ARE BACKED BY U.S TREASURY BONDS AND OTHER U.S. OWNED SECURITIES. HOWEVER, THE MONEY STOLEN FROM ALL OF THE RETIREMENT FUNDS AND OTHER TRUST FUNDS HAVE NO PLAN TO BE PAID BACK...NOR IS THERE ANY WAY TO PAY THAT MONEY BACK!!!! THAT IS WHY THEY STARTED THE SOCIAL SECURITY SCARE!!!

SOMEDAY, MAYBE WE WILL FIND OUT ALL OF THE GARBAGE AND LIES THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS SPEWED DURING THESE HORRIFIC EIGHT YEARS OF U.S. DESTRUCTION (IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE)!!! HOWEVER, WITH DELETED EMAILS AND EXECUTIVE PRIVILEDGE DEMANDED BY BUSH AND CHENEY...THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT...THE CIA...AND THE FBI...MAYBE WE WON'T...BUT IF WE DO FIND OUT ALL ABOUT THE LIES AND SPIN, IT WILL MAKE ONE HECK OF A HORROR STORY!!! AND WE THOUGHT NIXON WAS BAD!!!!

Theodore  05/31/2008 06:17 AM Report

Many thanks for presenting this glowingly knowledgeable person on your television program. It is impossible to follow all the movements of the Army and Marines in the current major theatres of conflict (and why they are there) - Iraq and Afghanistan - without listening to Colonel McMaster's perspective. People like me believe his evaluation considering the necessity of an ongoing American armed force in those two places is something that is vital to our interests and the world polity, and is news difficult to convey. If one looks to when the territories in the Middle East were drawn, principally after WWI, one can trace the main origins of terrorism today back to then at least, and the reason the great powers drew boundaries and left those countries to their own devices for a good period of years. People knew that oil would be discovered there and the Middle East for a long time remained subject to economic control from its western neighbors. This presumed "colonialism" or "imperialism" on the part of the great powers is, without comprehension of what the great powers attempted to do - chiefly France and the U.K. - responsible for the reaction of sophisticated and deadly modern terrorism and urban / guerilla warfare in the Middle East today.

The French and British experienced the same sort of conflicts after the Great War in this same geographical area, and in palestine. It is known the treasuries of these countries were partially drained and Brits and Frenchmen suffered significant privations at home and international ingnominy due to their efforts to maintain their "spheres of influence", otherwise stated as attempts to bring a semblance of civic and political freedoms and the rule of law to the Middle East. France ended up going at it alone in these areas and eventually vacated its position as guarantor of political and administrative / legal order. This is all background, but McMaster's primary point is that U.S. soldiery needs to continue to play a role in establishing or re - establishing civic and political order in the region unless western society wants to have unfinished business in the Middle East for a long time to come. It is not as if the U.S. and its allies in the area want everyone in the Middle East to "submit" to a western style polity, it is simply an issue of converging the proper forces to help these areas build a future for themselves - something that is difficult to understand and requires more comprehension of Middle East issues than a cursory reading of Khalil Ghibran.

howard  05/31/2008 05:31 AM Report

Its really unfortunate that Linda Mae had to repeatedly attack the Speaker of the House. The Good Col McMasters was very careful not to make political pronouncements, partly because he is professional, and partly because there is a lot of blame to go around on both sides of the spectrum.

I'm suer she wouldn't like me to say McCain did this and that, that his wife is a Martian, blah, blah..... that would not be appropriate. And McMasters was trying to politely state that military strategy needs to be able to respond to the situation on the ground. And the next speaker seemed to amplify that point by stressing the that the rule of law is very important to the success of any War on Terror.

I think Nancy Pelosi will praise McMasters for candor and his expertise. And besides, she's a good Catholic girl from San Francisco by way of Philidelphia.

And did you know that she has people running against her because she decided against trying to IMPEACH Bush and Chenney?? IF she succeeds at having critics on both the Right and the Left, then she must be doing her job right....

And since she was so quick to use the "T" word, I wonder if Linda realizes that the Speaker of the House is the 2nd person in line to succeed the President. So, during wartime, Linda, the Speaker and her office is entitled to the same protection from criticism that Linda and her friends want to bestow on the Vice President!!

Rule of Law, Linda, Rule of Principle. Anything else makes us just a rabble.

TABS  05/31/2008 03:23 AM Report

Col McMaster fully understands the intricacies of asymmetrical warfare and in particular how it applies to Iraq and its neighborhood. One conclusion that McMaster didn't want to commit himself to, is the fact that with the surge it has given Iraq time to cool down and let the dust settle. It has allowed the government and society to reestablish itself, which means that even though there will be bumps in the road, Iraq is on the road to reestablishing itself as a more or less stable nation state. There is no turning back the clock, unless the political leadership in the USA ignores the the advice of those who have a grasp of the intricacies of the situation on the ground in Iraq. Then all bets are off. .

George Zaboji  05/31/2008 01:38 AM Report

Col Mcmaster is a very articulate spokesman for the bs that tries to justify our our unjustified invasion of Iraq.

Lewis Stockard  05/31/2008 01:21 AM Report

Loved the conversation with Col. McMaster tonight, here in Las Cruces, NM. It brought to mind especially the current negotiations for a "status of forces agreement" with Iraq, and that there was no mention of it with col. Mcmaster. I think it would be a great idea to report on these negotiations and to have a conversation with the pro and con sides. I don't think most Americans have a firm understanding of what this "agreement" would mean either for the U.S. or for Iraq. It's HUGE! Anyway, thanks for all your great shows; I only wish that more folks would see them. sincerely, lewis stockard

RE Mant  05/31/2008 12:29 AM Report

If you don't know why wars occur and are fought there is no way that you are going to know whether they should be fought, or how to fight them efficiently, much less win them. At no point tonite did I get any sense of that in this discussion. Saying that it is uncertain is a cop-out. I am sure that no grunt hasn't asked himself the first day in country what the f**k he is supposed to be doing there. BTW, whatever happened to the Eisenhower jacket?

Linda Mae  05/30/2008 11:47 PM Report

How sad. All of the positive comments made by someone who is trained in providing peace will be attacked by the liberal press and Nancy Pelosi or ignored by the media. Charlie, you did not seem to agree with Col. McMaster. His point of view will be attacked by Nancy. She is unAmerican. She owes our military men and women an apology for her negative comments about them. In WWII her comments might have been called traitorous. She does not deserve to remain as Speaker of the House. That she supports Obama is the reason I cannot vote for him.