Skip to main content

About your Search

WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
2017 7
2010 4
2011 2
2018 2
2013 1
2012 0
2014 0
2015 0
2016 0
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
Feb 4, 2013 8:30am EST
example where i think i was wrong, where i'm sure i was wrong. when george bush, the first george bush, went into to kuwait to kick the iraqis out of kuwait he was right. i voted against that because i was afraid, ironically, that george bush, the father, would act the way george bush, the son, did and go too far. >> a powerful iraqi army invaded its trusting and much-weaker neighbor kuwait and moved south to threaten saudi arabia. our goal's defined and familiar. iraq must withdraw from kuwait completely immediately and without condition. this is not, as saddam hussein would have it, the united states against iraq. it is iraq against the world. >> and in libya many observers noted that both american and european companies would be happy to see a more pro-western government in charge. >> you can argue that in terms of the u.s. and western economic interests the fact that libya is again pumping lots of oil and helping keep the price of oil down means who cares how these places are governed? that's for the libyans to decide and maybe that's the sensible answer. if we tried to go in and c
Sep 10, 2010 9:00pm PDT
had problems, and then george bush, the first, had tiananmen, uh, then george w. bush had the incident with the airplane on hainan island in 2001. >> spy plane landing... >> so it's been a pattern. i think it's interesting to observe and we'll see if it stays true, but thus far, president obama's administration's had a relatively smooth transition. anything can change. >> do you think the legacy of the relationship, on both sides, actually, has something to do with making it difficult to manage? in the united states, there are many, many americans who still perceive china as an enemy in a very, you know, old fashioned sense of being an enemy. and they think about vietnam and the vietnam era and all of that, uh, and the communist revolution and so on. and maybe in china, as well, the perception of the united states as being the enemy, with all of those years of propaganda that were disseminated. so is there a legacy thing, and is there anything we can do about that? >> i think legacy plays into it, and in particular, it tends to inform our campaigns, and in sometimes unhelpful
Jan 14, 2011 9:00pm PST
international affairs at george washington university and a blogger for foreign policy magazine. and malou innocent. foreign policy analyst at the cato institute. thanks to both of you for being with us. marc, is the united states safer today than it was ten years ago before 9-11? >> yes, i think it is. if you'd asked me that question five years ago, i probably would have said, "no." i think we made a lot of very damaging decisions in the years immediately after 9-11 but then in, in the second half of the bush administration, i think they corrected course and did a number of things that i think have made us a lot safer. i think we're doing much better now in the battle against al qaeda. al qaeda, i think, is much more marginal than it used to be to, uh, to mainstream arab politics and it's much less able to mobilize anger against the united states. >> what did the u.s. do in terms of changing policy during that, the second five years that you mentioned? >> i think it, it did a number of things. uh, it corrected course in what used to be called "the war of ideas." it did a much b
Jan 21, 2011 9:00pm PST
, associate professor of conflict resolutions at george mason university, and a former negotiator during the conflict between ethiopia and eritrea. thanks to both of you for being with us. >> thank you. >> terrence, is the horn of africa the next afghanistan for the u.s.? >> no, i don't think so. it certainly, uh, does not need to be, and, and shouldn't become. there's a surface resemblance, in that both the horn of africa and afghanistan have very weak states, and, uh, protracted conflicts. but, uh, the conflicts in the horn of africa, i would suggest, ought to be understood in the regional context, as conflicts in the horn of africa, and not globalized. not to be seen as arenas in a global, uh, global war in terror, or some other global national security interest, because the drivers, the dynamics, the actors are predominantly regional and are more interested in each other, and in very local goals, rather than to defeat the united states on some, you know, some broader political agenda. >> is the control over whether the conflict is globalized or not in the hands of the united states?
Sep 3, 2010 9:00pm PDT
circumstance, i think envoys add a lot. >> let's talk for a minute about george mitchell who now is the special envoy for the middle east and previously was a successful special envoy in northern ireland and succeeded in, ah, ushering in a new era, really, ah, between the factions, among the factions in northern ireland. ah, what is it about george mitchell that, does he have some special magic, ah, some special characteristics that people think, ah-ha, he solved northern ireland, he can solve the middle east? charlie? >> well, i think there's, he first of all, is a consummate diplomat. ah, he is discrete... >> wait a minute. he was a u.s. senator. senators aren't diplomats. >> i think diplomatic skills perhaps go, ah, cover a wider range of the, of human relations than simply diplomacy. ah, senator mitchell spent a lifetime negotiating things, making things happen and was very good at it and certainly in the, um, in the senate, ah, was someone who, ah, had to maintain good relations with everyone. i think he was, was an excellent choice. >> and that's, i guess i just want to get at
Apr 23, 2017 11:00pm PDT
milwaukee named george kennan. - the wonderful thing about george is he really knew russia. he knew enough to be angry about what they stood for but he knew also enough to know that they weren't fundamentally communists. - [kathleen] after wwii, soviet behavior baffled leaders in washington. so the state department reached out to kennan in moscow for answers. - in the aftermath of the war, it became clear that it was going to be very hard to reconcile their vision of the post-war world with this dream that we had had of a united nations with this collegial relationship and a long-term stable relationship with the soviet union was just not going to happen. - [kathleen] laid up in bed from illness, kennan dictated what would become known as the long telegram. it outlined his opinions and views of the soviets. - [voiceover] i cannot compress answers into a single brief message without yielding to what i feel would be... moscow has no abstract devotion to united nations ideals. its attitude... the problem of how to cope with this force is undoubtedly the greatest task our diplomacy has.
Nov 9, 2017 12:00am PST
had a free trade agreement and george bush the first thought about having mexico join it, which meant all of a sudden we're gonna have a free trade agreement with a country with whom our median wage differential was one to 16. which is to say the median wage here versus there was 16 times poorer in mexico. - i was one of them, i was a trade official in the clinton administration. i sold nafta, i sold the round. you know i was out there pushing it, we oversold the upside, we undersold the dislocations that are involved. and if you went out right now and you asked the average american, was nafta a success? they'd say oh no, but nafta was a huge success. it created many, many jobs. it created much, much growth. and if you really want a stabilized population flows you want the mexican economy to do well. - [narrator] unions in particular have been vocal in demonizing nafta, claiming it has undermined their collective bargaining power and led to stagnant or declining wages. - we were afraid that it would accelerate outsourcing of good jobs mostly to mexico. but that also it establish
Sep 24, 2010 9:00pm PDT
the horror story that dick cheney and george bush was trying--were trying to tell us. and i think he, uh, barack obama, really, and his policies of reset, uh, really put russia back into perspective that it deserves. so we deal with them on certain issues, we don't deal with them on others. >> we'll come back to that in a minute. but let's--we spoke to some other experts as well. let's see what they said about the question of why russia's trying to reassert itself. >> under its czar, under stalin, under brezhnev, the russian economy was always a cripple. and yet, they were a major global power, uh, fearsome and terrifying. and the reason is because in russia, the economy is dominated by the only institution that efficiently works, the kgb, the nkbd, and so on. and they're able, therefore, through the use of force and terror, to transfer from the economy to the military economy any resources that they want. and so you have an asymmetry in russia, a weak economy and a very strong military. and that's exactly where putin and medvedev are going again. >> you certainly saw in the summer o
Nov 30, 2017 12:00am PST
and we would have to read the president's speeches for president bush; george w. bush; and i would read, in a speech where he would call for energy independence and getting off of oil, which has been enormously popular since president nixon said it; i would always cross it out and say: "this is neither a practical "nor even a desirable goal for policy." i was usually overruled and i won't say by who, but they went back in, he said it, and it was the loudest applause line. so, there's no escaping what we're really most terrified of, and that is gasoline price spikes, by becoming self-sufficient. - what's been important about oil policy is control over oil, not access to it. when the us invaded iraq, speaking of brzezinski pointed out that if the us can control global oil supplies it will have greater influence over its allies. - [narrator] for decades, the us has been dependent on politically unstable governments; or what some describe as unsavory regimes. activist charge that energy dependency makes washington look the other way when it comes to issues of human rights. - [roth] the
Oct 1, 2010 9:00pm PDT
life. >> let me ask you about george friedman's comment. he says, uh, iraqis may be clamoring, in effect, to have the u.s. troops remain in iraq. ed, do you think that's the case? >> i think it's very much the case with the kurds. the kurds in the north are very concerned. and keep in mind that when saddam was still in power, we were the guarantors of their security, for the most part, after the '91 war. so they're very much interested in seeing some sort of american presence. and now the question is, how does maliki and his government respond to that? >> trudy, what do you think about u.s. forces there? >> i think it depends inart on which shiite leader is prime minister, and there will be a shiite prime minister. uh, a shiite leader who wants to present themselves as a powerful nationalist might feel compelled to push for a continued build down, even though in his heart, he would know it was risky. but uh, there are shiite leaders who i think would recognize that they want some troops, not just to keep sectarian conflicts from bubbling, like in the north, but also as a sort of b
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)