<p>Recently there was somewhat of a historic interview between 60 minutes
correspondent Mike Wallace and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Personally, I think Mike Wallace had a relatively bad interview that reflected very poorly on the United States. Intriguingly enough, it seemed that President Ahmadinejad took a very constructivist stand rather than a realist approach on foreign policy and IR.</p>
<p>“The time of the bomb is in the past. Today is the era of thoughts,
dialogue and cultural exchanges.”
-Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on “60 Minutes” with Mike
Wallace, Aug 13, 2006</p>
<p>Two days later an editorial in the Wall Street Journal by Bret Stephens
critiques the interview. Noting Mansour Ossanloo the leader of the
independent trade union representing the workers of the Vahed Bus Company in
Tehran. “A year ago, President Ahmadinjage security forces raided one of
their meetings and cut out a piece of Mr. Ossanloo’s tongue. Now he speaks
with a lisp. Is this how “dialogue” is conducted in the Islamic Republic of
Iran.”</p>
<p>Check out the interview, there are five parts but feel free to respond.</p>
<p>i saw some of the interview the day it was on tv. i though he and the 60 min dude were gonna go at it. haha. but that guy is crazy. he can sure talk himself out of anything.</p>
<p>How do you fight someone that isn’t afraid to lose everything and more than willing to do anything? You have to worry about your own safety, and with this nut you can’t quite be sure what he will do to you.</p>
<p>He is amazingly clever and this disturbs me a lot. He was in control of the interview and was very smooth–he is a dangerous man. Wallace was not in good form during this interview–you could see that Ahmadinejad’s cunning answers were getting the best of him.
The most interesting part was when his aides handed him a sheet of paper, presumably to tell him to end the interview soon. Wallace asked him what the paper said, and the dictator responded, “Oh, they were just telling me to fix my coat.” I found it amusing that he came up with a clever response quickly…but he did the same when asked about his denial of the Holocaust, etc. Smooth, glossing-over responses.</p>
<p>I watched that whole interview. In my opinion Mike Wallace didn’t sound very professional. I thought they would start a fight at one point.
I thought that the Iranian president would accidentally say something stupid in the middle and I was surprised at some of his answers.</p>
<p>Yeah I felt the same way as stuck. Mike Wallace totally lost his cool and was downright rude. You don’t tell a democratically elected president of a foreign country to give shorter answers or to “speak English.” Wallace did that in his interview with Vladimir Putin as well. Lack of respect. ESPECIALLY because this Iranian leader holds some seriously morally questionable views (on the Holocaust, etc.), you don’t want to lose your cool and the moral upper hand by appearing as though you’re the stereotypical disrespectful American.</p>
<p>i completely agree with you guys. his interview was so…entertaining. i mean, they guy obviously is dangerous and has some disturbing ideas, but he was so relaxed, somewhat witty, and almost charming in a very scary and bone chilling way. i can see how he would be in power. it’s so frightening to think what he’s capapble of. i mean, i was laughing during the interview at his jokes. </p>
<p>what the hell happened to wallace. i wish reporters would be like that with our own president sometimes.</p>
<p>He was willingly elected and his people love him. Doesn’t sound like a ruthless dictator to me.</p>
<p>And reading the WSJ for commentary on the middle east is probably the worst thing you can do, it’s basically like watching Fox news, way too biased. And i’m a subscriber to the WSJ myself.</p>
<p>That guy is as dangerous as Khomeni or any other mullah. WSJ has the best op eds. Fox news is biased, yes, but so is NBC, ABC, and CBS. Funny that those are always so ‘mainstream’.</p>
<p>which is why I get most of my news from differnent places: BBC and several local news channels. They all tell a different side of every story, which is a good thing.</p>
<p>He is most definitely not as dangerous as Khomeni as he does not wield any religious power in Iran. He is solely a political figure who is still subject to the pronouncments of the Mullahs.</p>