Sorry if this has been discussed in one of the hundreds of posts so far. And I also apologize if I am just missing something obvious, but my mind is still fried from the episode, and I don't think I am as sharp as half the people on here.

But my question is (and I know I will have a tough time explaining myself here) how could Charlie have saved Claire if Desmondo wasn't around?

Charlie was with Desmond (as well as Hurley, Locke, and Sayid) about a mile away from the beach (according to what Charlie told Desmond when he was questioning him). Now in the show we see Desmond have one of his "flashes" and run off to save Claire (actually Charlie).

Now without Desi's meddling flashes, Charlie would still have been a mile away on the beach conferencing with Locke and Sayid. How would he have known that Claire was drowning, thus trying to rescue her, thus dying while trying?

And please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to nit pick, I love this show. Just a questionthat has been nagging me all night.

Sorry if this has been discussed in one of the hundreds of posts so far. And I also apologize if I am just missing something obvious, but my mind is still fried from the episode, and I don't think I am as sharp as half the people on here.

But my question is (and I know I will have a tough time explaining myself here) how could Charlie have saved Claire if Desmondo wasn't around?

Charlie was with Desmond (as well as Hurley, Locke, and Sayid) about a mile away from the beach (according to what Charlie told Desmond when he was questioning him). Now in the show we see Desmond have one of his "flashes" and run off to save Claire (actually Charlie).

Now without Desi's meddling flashes, Charlie would still have been a mile away on the beach conferencing with Locke and Sayid. How would he have known that Claire was drowning, thus trying to rescue her, thus dying while trying?

And please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to nit pick, I love this show. Just a questionthat has been nagging me all night.

No, If desmond hadn't asked Charlie to come with him Charlie would have been on the beach, would have tried to save Claire and would have drowned :)

That, plus even if there was just a dead body in the water when Charlie got back, he still would have seen it and gone in, and since he can't swim, would have been a goner.

Or maybe Claire would've actually been able to survive without any outside help.

No, If desmond hadn't asked Charlie to come with him Charlie would have been on the beach, would have tried to save Claire and would have drowned :)


Do we know that going to get Charlie was even Desmond's idea? I got the impression that it was Locke's idea to single out Charlie and Hurley and break the news of Eko's death to them first. That is of course speculation.

Charlie didn't even know Claire had taken a walk or was anywhere near the beach. He was in the tent scouring through Sawyer's stuff and as far as we know Claire didn't yell out. How would he have known she was even in the water?

I'm assuming the alternate reality or flash that Desmond saw was a very different scenario in which somehow, Charlie drowned. So when he got a flash of Claire drowning, he also got a glimpse of Charlie drowning so he ran to beat him there. The whole thing may have gone differently, but Desmond had the vision and just ran.

I just had a spooky idea of Desmond somehow channelling Charlie's 'dream'. :D

Thiking it over it also could be that this isn't the incident that Desmond 'saw'. Remember what happened in the bar? He was so sure he knew what was going to happen and he was right...it was the timing that was wrong. If I were Charlie I would stay away from the water for a while. :D

My question is: If Desmond was saving Charlie's life, saving him from not drowning, then was he also saving Claire's life aswell.

Because if Charlie had died trying to save Claire (in this alternate reality) then how would have Claire survived? She was unconscious and floating really far out in the ocean.

Unless someone else would have saved her? Jin? Paolo?

It's a strange one. You'd assume that Desmond lured Charlie away and that without Desmonds influence Charlie would've still been on the beach, therefore leaving him in a position to possibly see Claire himself.

I'm not totally sure that Desmond did purposefully lure Charlie away from the beach though, since it wasn't until they were inland that Desmonds seemed to have his flashes.

That's a good point...but Desmond didn't 'see' Claire's death and didn't seem to be as concerned about that as he was with Charlie. I have no idea why.

How she would have been saved otherwise I don't know...unless someone is trying to take her out as well and leave Aaron completely alone. That opens up all kinds of interesting possibilities.

This might be a case of 'save Charlie AND Claire' and save the world.

I think he was also saving Claire's life but it's Charlie's death he keeps seeing as if he knows that's the focus. Maybe Desmond knows somehow that Charlie's survival is important to the island events.

I think he was also saving Claire's life but it's Charlie's death he keeps seeing as if he knows that's the focus. Maybe Desmond knows somehow that Charlie's survival is important to the island events.

I imagine if Charlie survives long enough he will be able to do something or prevent something that will finally break the loop

I would say that he's just saving Charlie because it's something anyone would do... save someones life, if given a chance. I don't think Desmond feels he's fulfilling any divine goal. Just like if that lady had told him the dude with the red shoes was gonna get crushed, he would have pulled him out of the way, just common sense kindness.

As far as Claire dying or not... maybe she Isn't That Important, and destiny is often cruel and twisted. Maybe 'Destiny' wants Charlie dead and it doesn't care how that happens, including using a dead Claire as bait.

The island sure seems to want Charlie dead though

The hanging by Ethan
The lightning strike
The drowning
The plane full of heroin

The island sure seems to want Charlie dead though

The hanging by Ethan
The lightning strike
The drowning
The plane full of heroin

Yes it does which is why I think the old lady is just another version of the island trying to do its will. I think ultimately humanity and compassion have to win out over island destiny, which is why I think Charlie has to live.

Its basically the old predertermination chestnut, do we have control over our actions or is everything we do predestined, every action an inevitable consequence of what has gone before. Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain) spent most of his life obsessed with this whole dilema.

Essentially it boils down to is there such thing as free will?

I don't think it is that difficult to imagine that Charlie, Desmond and others would have begun walking back to the beach. Someone would have seen Claire out there and people would have started screaming from the beach. This they would have heard and started running to help. Charlie would have realized who it was (like he did) and swam out to try to save her and then drowned.

Desmond knew the only way to prevent this was to run immediately and get there far enough in advance so that Charlie swimming out would have been a moot point. We can argue about whether Claire would have survived or not, but I'm going to suggest that Desmond's actions got Claire out of the water a minute or two faster than she would have had he not. This may or may not have had an effect on her surviving. His vision suggests not. I think we can take it on faith that his vision was correct and Charlie would have died in the process and not Claire.

I agree with div2n. Here's how I see it happening without Desmond.

Locke tells Hurley and Charlie about Eko. They begin walking back to the beach. As they get back, someone spots Claire in the water. Charlie sees Sun witht he baby and realizes what happened. Charlie runs in and Jin is not far behind.

They get to Claire at the same time. Jin is a strong swimmer. He grabs Claire and begins bringing her back to the beach. Even though, in the non-Desmond scenario, Claire is in the water a bit longer (the time it takes Locke, Hurley and Charlie to return to the beach), she is still revived (this time, by Locke or Sun). But Charlie gets caught in the riptide and drowns.

Desmond sees this. He knows.
1) It is possible to save Claire.
2) If Charlie reaches Claire, he will drown.
He can't wait for them to return to the beach. If he does, Charlie and he will end up reaching Claire simultaneously and Jin might not even be there this time. He has to get there well ahead of Charlie. So he runs out ahead to save Claire alone.

Note that even with the head start, Charlie almost makes it to Claire at the same time as Desmond.

They get to Claire at the same time. Jin is a strong swimmer. He grabs Claire and begins bringing her back to the beach. Even though, in the non-Desmond scenario, Claire is in the water a bit longer (the time it takes Locke, Hurley and Charlie to return to the beach), she is still revived (this time, by Locke or Sun). But Charlie gets caught in the riptide and drowns.

That sounds almost exactly like a repeat of the JoAnna incident in Season 1...except in that one of course the 'rescuer' was the one in trouble and was the one saved.

No, If desmond hadn't asked Charlie to come with him Charlie would have been on the beach, would have tried to save Claire and would have drowned :)


Nice.
Desmond told Charlie to leave the beach and walk deep into the woods, knowing he had to get him away from the spot where claire was to lose consciousness.

In retrospect I'm also finding it weird that Desmond told Claire to move away from the tent when he knew that Charlie was the one really in danger (from the lightning). Has clever old Desmond already figured out that wherever Claire goes Charlie is sure to follow? :biggrin:

Desmond had the vision AFTER he called Charlie and Hurley to talk to Locke and Sayid. Then he ran to save Claire before Charlie hit the water. If not for the vision, the five guys would keep on talking and would be none the wiser abut claire's drowning as they were too far away. I guesss the OP is very right. I think this is just a piece of bad writting in an otherwise excelent episode. UNLESS Desmond is lying, but he was to drunk to.

Desmond had the vision AFTER he called Charlie and Hurley to talk to Locke and Sayid. Then he ran to save Claire before Charlie hit the water. If not for the vision, the five guys would keep on talking and would be none the wiser abut claire's drowning as they were too far away.
Not necessarily. Their conversation was coming to a close. They were probably about to start walking back. Even at a leisurely pace, it would only have been another minute before Charlie entered the camps. At the time Desmond entered the water, nobody even knew Claire was there.

My guess is Charlie would have entered the camp just as people noticed Claire in the water. While Claire would have been unconscious for an extra minute, she still could have been revived, but Charlie would have been the first to dive in, and he would have been grabbed by the riptide as well.

Desmond had the vision AFTER he called Charlie and Hurley to talk to Locke and Sayid. Then he ran to save Claire before Charlie hit the water. If not for the vision, the five guys would keep on talking and would be none the wiser abut claire's drowning as they were too far away. I guesss the OP is very right. I think this is just a piece of bad writting in an otherwise excelent episode. UNLESS Desmond is lying, but he was to drunk to.
You have an excellent point. Desmond did seem to have an unexpected flash of claire drowning once he had already asked charlie into the woods.

Yeah, I agree with that. I don't think moving Charlie and Hurley off the beach was part of the plan. Desmond didn't show signs of 'seeing' anything until their conversation was almost over. The scene probably would have played out like others before me have described. At least two people going into get Claire (Charlie being one of them) and whoever the other person was saves Claire as Charlie drowns. It puzzled me for a while too, but I think that's probably what Desmond saw and what was "supposed to happen".

Don't take everything everyone says so literally. When Hurley says they were around a mile away, that could mean anything from a quarter of a mile away to a mile away. They were probably half a mile away, a 1 or 2 minute run.

Either they'd have just been getting back to the beach when someone notices Claire in the water and Charlie is the first in after seeing Sun or something with Aaron.

Or, someone finds the group in the jungle to let Charlie know Claire is in the water. Someone is already in the water but Charlie is the first one back to the beach out of the five and goes straight in, gets dis-orientated and drowns whilst Claire is saved by the person already in the water.

It's all easily explainable.

Its basically the old predertermination chestnut, do we have control over our actions or is everything we do predestined, every action an inevitable consequence of what has gone before. Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain) spent most of his life obsessed with this whole dilema.

Essentially it boils down to is there such thing as free will?

I posted this in another thread, but if it ends up that (in the LOST world anyway), nothing we do matters since it's all pre-determined for us, then LOST would have been an absolutely meaningless, depressing waste of time ........IMO. Since the creators have posed this question, I think they intend to answer it eventually with a resounding vote for free will. I do disagree on one point, though. Free will does not have to be antithetical to causality; if I choose to do something bad to someone, that something will have an effect on the person and possibly on the person's family, all following from a choice that I made. It wasn't necessarily destined to happen - it happened as a consequence of what came before, a probably logical consequence. I tend to think of predestination as something completely random.

Desmond had the vision AFTER he called Charlie and Hurley to talk to Locke and Sayid. Then he ran to save Claire before Charlie hit the water. If not for the vision, the five guys would keep on talking and would be none the wiser abut claire's drowning as they were too far away. I guesss the OP is very right. I think this is just a piece of bad writting in an otherwise excelent episode. UNLESS Desmond is lying, but he was to drunk to.

You're never too drunk to lie :biggrin:
100%
I posted this in another thread, but if it ends up that (in the LOST world anyway), nothing we do matters since it's all pre-determined for us, then LOST would have been an absolutely meaningless, depressing waste of time ........IMO. Since the creators have posed this question, I think they intend to answer it eventually with a resounding vote for free will. I do disagree on one point, though. Free will does not have to be antithetical to causality; if I choose to do something bad to someone, that something will have an effect on the person and possibly on the person's family, all following from a choice that I made. It wasn't necessarily destined to happen - it happened as a consequence of what came before, a probably logical consequence. I tend to think of predestination as something completely random.

The thing is it's all a lot more complicated than just either you have free will or not, destiny might push you towards a certain goal but it is up to you how you get their, how long you take to get their, what methods you use. We are all going to die at some point but when and how to a degree is up to us (eat fatty foods, smoke and drink to excess and you're sure to get their quicker;) )

But if he had the flash after he told Hurley and Charlie to see Locke, then how did Desmond know that Charlie was going to die. He never had a flash of that, right?

You're never too drunk to lie :biggrin:


Now that's a quote that belongs in someone's sig. :)

But if he had the flash after he told Hurley and Charlie to see Locke, then how did Desmond know that Charlie was going to die. He never had a flash of that, right?

Yes he did. He told Charlie that he saw Charlie go in after Claire and drowning. Maybe a few seconds after his vision someone would have screamed from the beach or they would have started heading back. With everyone running back together, Charlie could have gone in first knowing it was Claire out there. Desmond saw that and ran ahead to make sure he got there first.

Its basically the old predertermination chestnut, do we have control over our actions or is everything we do predestined, every action an inevitable consequence of what has gone before. Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain) spent most of his life obsessed with this whole dilema.

Essentially it boils down to is there such thing as free will?

LOL Do you like chestnuts, Dark Angel?

LOL Do you like chestnuts, Dark Angel?

Funnily enough I am alergic to them :biggrin:

I'm assuming the alternate reality or flash that Desmond saw was a very different scenario in which somehow, Charlie drowned. So when he got a flash of Claire drowning, he also got a glimpse of Charlie drowning so he ran to beat him there.
None of the others that Desmond saw have been like that (at least, not from what we saw in the "flashback"), it's only been the one variable that changes (in this case, Charlie dying), so I don't see how Desmond could have seen Charlie at the beach when he was with Locke et al talking about Eko over a mile away. Charlie was not called away because Desmond foresaw his death. Desmond didn't get the premonition until later.

In retrospect I'm also finding it weird that Desmond told Claire to move away from the tent when he knew that Charlie was the one really in danger (from the lightning). Has clever old Desmond already figured out that wherever Claire goes Charlie is sure to follow?
This is another problem I have. Desmond saw the lightning hit Claire's roof. When the rain hit, only Claire and Aaron were there. Charlie came after, and was holding all three when the lightning hit. Again, I don't see how Charlie could have died, without Claire and Aaron getting some serious blowback themselves.

Not necessarily. Their conversation was coming to a close. They were probably about to start walking back. Even at a leisurely pace, it would only have been another minute before Charlie entered the camps.Don't take everything everyone says so literally. When Hurley says they were around a mile away, that could mean anything from a quarter of a mile away to a mile away. They were probably half a mile away, a 1 or 2 minute run.
Claire would have died without the run. I do this with my students in my driver's ed class. Very few people can run a mile in 5 minutes or less (it used to be a barrier). So if they were a mile away, then at full run it took Desmond et al 5 mins to get to the beach. 1/2 mile 2 mins ~ again, at top speed. A leisurely walk? Muuuuuuucccchhhh longer. At a full run back to the beach, Claire had already stopped breathing.

Time is of the essence, and there is no way Charlie would have gotten back in time to save Claire ~ even if he started running when he got closer to camp. A leisurely walk would have added at minimum 5 more minutes, and a heck of a lot more if it actually was a mile ~ at least 10-15. That means Claire would have been without oxygen for probably longer than Charlie was when he was hung.

That's very true. When you're talking about someone who's not breathing, or (more correctly) not getting oxygen at all, it's not a matter of minutes, it's a matter of seconds. But I think it's safe to assume that someone would have noticed Claire out in the water and starting yelling, or somehow the fact that something was wrong on the beach would have reached Charlie even a mile away. They all start running back at a dead sprint and get there only seconds after they would have had Desmond not had his vision. Someone else rescues Claire as Charlie drowns.

Claire would have died without the run. I do this with my students in my driver's ed class. Very few people can run a mile in 5 minutes or less (it used to be a barrier). So if they were a mile away, then at full run it took Desmond et al 5 mins to get to the beach. 1/2 mile 2 mins ~ again, at top speed. A leisurely walk? Muuuuuuucccchhhh longer. At a full run back to the beach, Claire had already stopped breathing.

Time is of the essence, and there is no way Charlie would have gotten back in time to save Claire ~ even if he started running when he got closer to camp. A leisurely walk would have added at minimum 5 more minutes, and a heck of a lot more if it actually was a mile ~ at least 10-15. That means Claire would have been without oxygen for probably longer than Charlie was when he was hung.

Yeah but remember Hurley said 'It was like a mile man" It's not like any one measured it, it could have been only a few hundred yards and remember Desmond could have started running before Claire started drowning

Desmond could have started running before Claire started drowning
That's brilliant. It pretty much explains any problems with the scenario.

It also fits my theory that Desmond is not seeing the future, but reading the island's mind. If the island had just formulated the plan to kill Claire (or to kill Charlie by luring him into the water to save Claire), it's possible that Desmond's actions hastened Claire's drowning.

Essentially, the island would not have drowned Claire until Charlie got back to the beach. If Desmond hadn't started running, Claire would not have been sucked under water until Charlie & Co. returned to the beach at a leisurely pace. But because Charlie arrived on the beach early, chasing Desmond, the island bumed up the timetable and sucked in Claire early.

What doesn't add up for me is if in this vision Claire and Charlie were both drowning and Desmond was only able to save Claire (as with Jack, Boone and Joanna), couldn't somebody else have rescued Charlie? Sayid looks to be a strong swimmer.

This is another problem I have. Desmond saw the lightning hit Claire's roof. When the rain hit, only Claire and Aaron were there. Charlie came after, and was holding all three when the lightning hit. Again, I don't see how Charlie could have died, without Claire and Aaron getting some serious blowback themselves.

It's lightning, not a bomb. If it struck through Charlie, there's no reason that it would jump to Claire and Aaron instead of just going straight down to the ground. They could have been right next to him and not gotten hurt at all.

Claire would have died without the run. I do this with my students in my driver's ed class. Very few people can run a mile in 5 minutes or less (it used to be a barrier). So if they were a mile away, then at full run it took Desmond et al 5 mins to get to the beach. 1/2 mile 2 mins ~ again, at top speed. A leisurely walk? Muuuuuuucccchhhh longer. At a full run back to the beach, Claire had already stopped breathing.

Time is of the essence, and there is no way Charlie would have gotten back in time to save Claire ~ even if he started running when he got closer to camp. A leisurely walk would have added at minimum 5 more minutes, and a heck of a lot more if it actually was a mile ~ at least 10-15. That means Claire would have been without oxygen for probably longer than Charlie was when he was hung.


Desmond saw Charlie dying. Who cares if Claire died? He never foretold whether she lived or died. She could have died even after Desmond put it together, he still would have only been trying to prevent Charlie from dying. He doesn't see what happens to Claire, only Charlie. Just like the old lady who knew the man in red shoes was going to die. I doubt she knew when everyone she saw was going to die, just certain people.

And also, it wouldn't have mattered if Claire was already dead when Charlie got there after a leisurely walk. He still could have went in after her and died in the process, even though she was already dead.

I just opened a new thread for this discussion, not knowing this existing. It was closed, and I was redirected here.

I guess the question now is, is this a plot hole, or is it purposeful?

Maybe Desmond had two visions. In the first he saw Charlie drowning, but didn't see why - so he lured Charlie away from the beach just to keep him away from the water. Once they were in the jungle Desmond has a second vision - of Claire in trouble. He realized that would be why Charlie went in the water and just took off running to try to save Claire before Charlie could get there.

I don't really have anything to base this on, just a supposition.


In any case I must agree that if Charlie had gone into the water he could have died while someone else saved Claire.

The only thing I can think to add to this is the fact that Desmond was off in his timing about the football game he watched in his flashback, he knew it was supposed to happen, but his timing was off as to when or which game. Could be that his timing is off as far as when Claire was supposed to drown, that Charlie was supposed to be on the beach when it happened, but wasn't, and the drowning incident Des is referring to hasnt happened just yet...
Just my two cents

this is what you have to realize, charlie was going to die in the lightning, and that was his future. But then he got a second chance and that future changed. So then he goes out to swim for claire and he dies. We dont know all but we do know there is a one person FINAL DESTINATION going on.

Do we know that going to get Charlie was even Desmond's idea? I got the impression that it was Locke's idea to single out Charlie and Hurley and break the news of Eko's death to them first. That is of course speculation.



After rewatching this a "few" times... I think Desmond went to the beach looking for Claire. If you watch the first few seconds of the show, Des is walking out on the beach looking out at the water as though he's looking for something/someone... THEN he noticed Hurley and Charlie and tells them they have to come with him. I think it was totally his idea to take Charlie away, but I don't think it was planned.. I think it was more.. "OK, she's not out there yet, let's get him away from here before she gets stranded out there, and then I'll run back and save her... "

Ok this thread is pretty comprehensive but I thought I'd add some stuff to the mix. First of all forget the riptide, Charlie cant swim!

After reading the thread I'm convinced Des had the vision in the couple of secs before he started running, he quite visibly freaked out!

There is also a problem with the classic 'intervening in the timeline theory' I'll try to explain but its a bit of a mindbender! :)
If someone could possibly see into the future then whatever they see HAS to happen, any attempt to change the outcome will only result in the foreseen event taking place. If it were possible to change it then the forseen future (pre change) is therefore NOT the future.

The big question is, if is not the actual future Des is seeing, then what is it? The only logical conclusion is that Des has seen the future, its just not happened yet. CLUE: The football game, he mistook a precursor to an event for another.

Lol, there's nothing like a temporal paradox to get the grey matter churning. :)

[EDIT]
(DIABOLO237) Checked every page except the last one! seems like were on the same wavelength buddy :)

[EDIT][EDIT]
Ok, just watched it AGAIN, and I have overlooked something, If what I have just said is true then Charlie would have to be electrocuted and drown at the same time lol. (My explanation is true for the real world however)

Unless of course the electrocution wasn't fatal?

Anyways from mulling that around my head another 2 theories have occurred to me, I don't like them and I think you guys arent going to like them either but here goes.

Time loop: Ive heard lots of people going on about a time loop theory, not sure if this is what people had in mind but... What is the visions are outcomes from different iterations of the loop, In one loop Charlie gets electrocuted, another he drowns?

Programming by HF: Perhaps we see Desmond being groomed just like Juliet, HF brainwashes Des into thinking what he needs to think in order for him to ultimately end up on the island, we just see him remembering what happened before he left for the voyage.

This is really making my head hurt, why oh why oh WHY do TPTB have to screw around with time... I need logical answers to all these mysteries (especially Cerberus) or I'm gonna cry.

There is also a problem with the classic 'intervening in the timeline theory' I'll try to explain but its a bit of a mindbender! :)
If someone could possibly see into the future then whatever they see HAS to happen, any attempt to change the outcome will only result in the foreseen event taking place. If it were possible to change it then the forseen future (pre change) is therefore NOT the future.

The big question is, if is not the actual future Des is seeing, then what is it? The only logical conclusion is that Des has seen the future, its just not happened yet. CLUE: The football game, he mistook a precursor to an event for another.

Lol, there's nothing like a temporal paradox to get the grey matter churning. :)



ah theres lots of easy ways round this (helps to have a bent mind :) )

1. Desmond did see the Future as it was, it was only after his action that it was no longer the future, ie his seeing the future changes the permenance of the future.

2. The Future is not set, Desmond just sees the most probable outcome of current events (what Asimov referred to as Psychohistory). In other words what will actually happen is fluid but the probability of Charlie being hit by the lighting if Desmond does nothing is 99.999999%. If no one knew the lightining was likely to strike the chance of someone randomly building a lightning conductor are minimal so it is probable Charlie gets fried. However once Desmond is aware of the likelyhood of the lightning strike the probability that he will be able to prevent it hitting Charlie is pretty high and therefore the most probable outcome of events is no longer that Charlie gets fried but that he does not.

In my opinion, Desmond doesn't see the future. He is reading the intentions of the Island itself (or, more specifically, Smoky). That was no riptide that grabbed Claire. It was Smoky. That was no freak lighting bolt that struck them. It was generated by Smoky. My opinion, of course.

In my opinion, Desmond doesn't see the future. He is reading the intentions of the Island itself (or, more specifically, Smoky). That was no riptide that grabbed Claire. It was Smoky. That was no freak lighting bolt that struck them. It was generated by Smoky. My opinion, of course.

But why would Smokey go to all that hastle of controlling rip tides and lightning when it could have just picked up Charlie and smashed him against a tree like it did with Eko and the Pilot

Well, we don't know a lot about Smoky yet or his capacities.

He may take some time to recharge, and to set things in motion.
He may not be able to enter the beach physically, so he has to grab people in the water, or if they stray too far into the woods.

In my opinion, Desmond doesn't see the future. He is reading the intentions of the Island itself (or, more specifically, Smoky). That was no riptide that grabbed Claire. It was Smoky. That was no freak lighting bolt that struck them. It was generated by Smoky. My opinion, of course.

Yet Charlie has SURVIVED two meetings with Smokey. See my thread on the subject of Smokey here = http://thefuselage.com/Threaded/showthread.php?t=70082

If Smokey is trying to kill Charlie it is doing a piss-poor job of it.

In both situations you mention, another Lostie intervenes. For whatever reason, Smoky doesn't appear to want to reveal itself to Jack and it almost always disappears when Jack comes close. Eko stared down the monster before it could reach Charlie. Don't know what that was about

Only with his good friend, sweet lady H. This is the only way for Charlie to be able to save Claire.