Ahmadinejad VS. Bush: Iran Issues Debate Challenge

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
In a move that I can only stand up and applaud; Irans president Ahmadinejad has issued a debate challenge to Bush directly. In a live TV debate with one condition: No Censorship. Iran of course is facing the Aug. 31 deadline to comply with the UN resolution backed strongly by the US.


Iran's leader calls for TV debate with Bush
POSTED: 8:46 a.m. EDT, August 29, 2006

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on U.S. President George W. Bush to participate in a "direct television debate with us," so Iran can voice its point of view on how to end world predicaments.

"But the condition is that there can be no censorship, especially for the American nation," he said Tuesday.

Ahmadinejad blamed "special concessions" granted to the United States and Britain as "the root cause of all the problems in the world."

"At the Security Council, where they have to protect security, they enjoy the veto right. If anybody confronts them, there is no place to take complaints to."

His comments came during a news conference, currently taking place in Tehran, during which he is expected to respond to a United Nations ultimatum to suspend uranium enrichment or face possible sanctions.

Although he has yet to directly address the U.N. deadline, Ahmadinejad said '"nobody can prevent" Iran from its right to a "peaceful, nuclear program."

rest of story here at cnncom



This is something I wanted to see from the very start. A direct debate on this issue. I highly doubt that Bush would consider doing it. But why? Why deny this oppotunity to use real diplomacy? What does the US have to lose. This Challenge says alot, to me, about Irans desire to lay the cards out on the table. With the no censorship clause(something the US media is completely guilty of constantly and without reprieve) there is no way in the world the US is going to accept the challenge. It will be most interesting to see what transpires after this.
Stay toned...

thank you for your time,
TONE23

[edit on 8/29/2006 by TONE23]




posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Politically its a very clever move because if it is turned away it makes the Bush administration look 'scared' of a live, uncensored debate.

They will never accept an uncensored live TV debate offer though. Too many skeletons in the closet.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 08:23 AM
link   
The response I expect from Bush will be that the United States does not negotiate with terrorist.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra
Politically its a very clever move because if it is turned away it makes the Bush administration look 'scared' of a live, uncensored debate.

They will never accept an uncensored live TV debate offer though. Too many skeletons in the closet.


absolutely correct IMO.


The US has too much too lose out of this. I thought the move was brilliant on the part of Iran. And really will make the US look pretty bad if they dont accept it(at least from Irans perspective) And If the US accepts then Iran IMO has the upper hand because, like you said, too many skeletons in the closet. Bush will open his mouth and a bone will come tumbling out.


Personally I dont think Bush and the American Govt. have the Cajones to face this challenge... Ill say it even though this is going to draw some ire I am sure... they are cowards. Bush is the biggest coward out of the bunch. No censorship and Live debate... hell Bush got crushed in his debates with Kerry for cryin out loud(no fan of Kerry here) he is going to get his arse handed to him against Ahmadinejad.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Bunnypants would never be allowed out to an unscripted debate. A moderately educated teenager would likely run rings around him. His handlers just wouldn't allow it, Tricky Dicky would make damn sure of that



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Talk about no censorship?

Well, well, well. I wonder why Ahmadinejad made it a point to directly mention no censorship? Maybe because from the story I posted at the top of this thread was just that; censored. earlier on CNN.com the story said this:


"But the condition is that there can be no censorship, especially for the American nation," he said Tuesday.


and now I found on the BBC.


"I suggest holding a live TV debate with Mr George W Bush to talk about world affairs and the ways to solve those issues," he told reporters.

"The debate should be uncensored in order for the American people to be able to listen to what we say and they should not restrict the American people from hearing the truth."

rest of story here


Funny how CNN chose to leave out a good portion of the text in their "quote". This is exactly what I have a problem with. Hell, he probably said even more but how would we know at this point? This is why he wants a debate without censorship.


and they should not restrict the American people from hearing the truth


Indeed, there is a great deal of "truth" that needs to be shed upon the American people. And I am one of them.... I second the call for uncensored, unscripted, and direct debate between these two leaders. If Bush is the "decider" and leader of this nation then maybe he should frickin start acting like it..... get your arse out there Mr. Bush and talk your way out of this potential war... Lead for once in your pathetic career!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



[edit on 8/29/2006 by TONE23]



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Ahmadinejad is obviously far more intelligent than Bush. He has a Ph.D for one. Second, he actually knows how to speak in public. Third, all you need to do is listen and watch bush to know he's a moron.

Ok, so this is defenitely a great idea on Iran's part. It would be dumb for Bush to accept because he will look like a fool, but if he declines, he looks like a wimp. Ahmadinejad would call Bush out on everything which he accuses Iran of trying to do including the nuclear energy issue. He's going to make bush look like the tyrant for surpessing universal technology to the developing world. He will make bush look like the war monger.

I personally like the Iranian president. I watched his interview on 60 minutes, though contradicting at times, he was a very likable person. I've never had a good feeling with Bush and I can't believe my country voted for him twice. The war would have been cleaned up by now had bush been kicked out. oh well, just a few more years.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 10:40 AM
link   
i really cant see this going ahead but it would be amazing to see.

better to get the news straight from the horses mouth rather than being compiled by the organ grinder's monkey, which is all the news seems to be nowadays.

perhaps u.s. members could start hounding their main tv stations & news programs to push for this live and uncensored interview.

off topic but pretty relevant in the same light, is an interview the uk mp tony benn did with saddam hussein just before the iraq war & it really is an interesting interview. the transcript can be found here.

perhaps if bush chickens out of a live debate, then tony benn may step in for an interview with him because im pretty sure tony blair wouldnt do a live debate either



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Brilliant move on Irans part!
He has created a win/win situation for himself. As said previously, if and when Bush declines, for any reason, then Ahmadinejad wins. And if Bush says yes (yeah right), then Ahmadinejad really wins, due to the simple fact that Bush may be the worst public speaker I've ever seen.
I remember in 5th grade when everyone our class had to give their first individaul speech ever in front of the rest of the class. Just about every person (Including me), stood up there shaking, stammering, looking around.......
Bush reminds me of this when speaking. He might be smart, I doubt it, but he might be, but he is a terrible public speaker, and cannot think on his feet. It would be an absolute disaster for Bush to debate this man. Bush gives one of those looks we became so familiar with during the Kerry debates, and he would be called out on the carpet for that as well. I have to say that Ahmadinejad has actually gained a little respect from me.
I will be very curious to see how this plays out.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
sorry but i just couldnt resist adding this here....
link to what happens when you put bush live (scripted and unscripted) in front of a camera



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 11:25 AM
link   
That was so funny, whats that about how fish can co-exist!?

The ground work for the frame work for the ground work.

Priceless



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   
HAHA Ahmedinejad would so win that debate. He is a very articulate man. And anyone who has heard him speak will tell you he is obviously a very educated, intelligent person.

Bush? He has trouble forming complete sentences. Heres a guy that has trouble reading the little speeches they write for him to say to us. This guy has trouble pronouncing words that even my little sister knows how to pronounce, like "subliminal".

Ill never forget his quote "Well I think if you say you are going to do something, and then dont do it, thats trustworthyness."

Oh George....



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Surprise, surprise, Bush turned it down.........


“Talk of a debate is just a diversion from the legitimate concerns that the international community, not just the U.S., has about Iran’s behavior -- from support for terrorism to pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.


www.msnbc.msn.com...

He really is a disgrace - Imagine what Reagan would have done!



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Gosh this is sad. I mean look at this thread. We really have no respect for our President? Sad.

On the CNN site, a poll reveals that 67% believe that Bush would lose the debate. What a brilliant leadership we have.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lanotom
The response I expect from Bush will be that the United States does not negotiate with terrorist.


Bingo!!!!!!!! that is why declaring a nation and its leader Terrorist will ensure that anything coming from that labeled nation will be disregarded.

First of all Bush will never agree to something like this due to the fact that he will never allow to be exposed by his true agenda.

One thing that is very interesting is how theIran leader is implying that US is censored, when all alone his own country is been accused of censoring his people also.

That is very interesting.

And beside all the propaganda been feed by our own government Iran has the right to have his nuclear program is they desire so.

BTW Aelita we are a democratic nation and looking at our elected leaders fault is the right thing to do under our beloved Constitution.







posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
BTW Aelita we are a democratic nation and looking at our elected leaders fault is the right thing to do under our beloved Constitution.


I never said otherwise. I'm just saying it sucks, to be watching this humiliation.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Thanks for the update, lombozo


Well it comes as no suprise what so ever that Bush and his team would decline to meet. And Bush the "diplomat" marches on....what a crock... we have a President that refuses to talk. This is the second outreach by Iran to have direct negotiations with the US that has been turned down. Our govt. tells us that they are doing "everything" they can to reach a diplomatic solution. Well? I dont know about any of you, but, this is clearly not trying "everything" possible to come to a diplomatic end. If the US did it and failed that would be one thing. But, to not even try; that, to me, shows that they have no desire for diplomacy from the start. Now, the Iranians should press the matter further and not let this slip away into the forgotten realms of MSM "events" that everyone forgets as fast as it happened.

I am seriously dissapointed in our govt. today.. It saddens me that they have the Balls to send our troops over seas to kill for lies and have not the heart to engage the opposition themselves when only words are at stake and not lives. Our nation should be ashamed today to call itself a nation of democracy.. when our leaders wont even make an effort. How big of a step is it for the Iranian president comes out and calls for direct talks... that is a big thing.. the letter he wrote to Bush was the first direct correspondence in 28 years!



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
Gosh this is sad. I mean look at this thread. We really have no respect for our President? Sad.


all I can say to this is that:
Respect is earned; NEVER given. Both the Dems and the Reps have lost all of my respect.

Tell me what is to respect with this decision? What is it that you respect about the president declining to a civil debate?



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

I never said otherwise. I'm just saying it sucks, to be watching this humiliation.


Don't be Aelita, Don't be, people that holds positions in the public interest are always scrutinized for everything the do, specially when the nations interest are at stake.

He as a president knows that and I bet he care less or at least he has been trained to ignore it.



posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Bush deserves this humiliation. Well actually i wont say that. He is just a shill. A frontman. Its his masters that deserve to be humiliated, and hung. They are the enemies of America, who swear Allegiance to foreign powers like Israel and the British Monarchy. So no, I dont think Bush deserves ALL this trouble. Some, but not all.





new topics
 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join