Ahmadinejad challenges Obama to TV debate on solving world's problems

page: 3
92
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Sounds like a great ego trip for the two gentlemen.

Isnt this typical human thinking? We turn a discussion about world problems into a challenge so there is a winner and a loser, instead of both parties being able to together come up with solutions. And we want it on TV so the other guy can be as embarrassed as possible in front of the entire world.





[edit on 2-8-2010 by Copernicus]




posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 

ALL modern day presidents use ear pieces or teleprompters.

That meme is a riot...just hilarious.
 

reply to post by Copernicus
 

I think that if they were to have a truly open debate, we'd all win.

And just think how fun it would be for all the pundits and media to run around making idiots of themselves in trying to declare a winner.

Think of how much fun Israel and the media would have mistranslating Ahmadinejad's words. Hell there could be enough fodder there for internet rumor for years!


[edit on 8/2/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by Ben81
 


ALL modern day presidents use ear pieces or teleprompters.

That meme is a riot...just hilarious.



that for sure ...
but during a live debate between 2 peoples ...
no answers can be arranged/scripted
only the questions



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
I think that if they were to have a truly open debate, we'd all win.

And just think how fun it would be for all the pundits and media to run around making idiots of themselves in trying to declare a winner.

Think of how much fun Israel and the media would have mistranslating Ahmadinejad's words. Hell there could be enough fodder there for internet rumor for years!



You could be right. Well, as long as the debate would not be commented by some mass media schmuck and not have constant commercials and interruptions so its possible to really focus and think while listening, I would probably watch it.


[edit on 2-8-2010 by Copernicus]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Copernicus
 

Is this thread about a winner and a loser...Nope
It is about dialog, solving problems, communication...
What does it say in the marriage manual about successful relationships?....
COMMUNICATION
The reason for not freely debating as honest men is...

When someone on a thread challenges a posted statement,
do you respect the poster who doesn't reply with a reasoned debate?

Leaders lead.
Not accepting an honest challenge in front of the forum of the peoples
shows that one leader isn't leading..if he isn't leading
who is.?


[edit on 2-8-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


You may be right, but Obama will never accept. Not only is he not the real leader of anything, but the risks involved for him to lose the debate are not worth the gains for him of winning the debate.

I also wish leaders would have straight up talks like proposed on the world scene, but there is so much ego involved from the United States that it will never happen.

I hope he will prove me wrong.


[edit on 2-8-2010 by Copernicus]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Hey, I'm all FOR this debate.

Hell I'd be all for throwing all the world leaders into an MMA octagon and letting them fight it out rather than sending other people to war for them.

But seriously, anytime we can solve things intellectually, with our minds, in an open forum, it's a win for everyone. Well...except maybe for the MIC...but we can retool and retask them with solving our energy problems.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I find this interesting but, for reasons other than most have already posted.

The first thing I thought of when I read this was when Saddam Hussein offered basically the same thing to GWB.

About a month later we were at war with Iraq.

Now, I'm not saying this will be the case with Iran. I'm just saying that was my first thought when I read the title of the post.

It will be interesting to see how the white house responds.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seventytwo
reply to post by gallifreyan medic
 


And what about Israel?
Israel would be opposed to this I'm sure, this could cause a Huge diplomatic row..


My gut tells me Obama is not a Zionist. But you're right nonetheless...Israel would throw a huge hissy fit. I bet they'd even call Obama (gasp) antisemitic.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
What is the point of such a debate?

Ultimately the Mad nutjob puppet will only continually reply 'its Allah's will, its' Allah's will' to any solution offered by President Obama. A complete waste of presidential time and airwave.

The nutjob puppet didnt earn his name by chance but by reputation. Even the Almighty throughout centuries had NEVER wiped out the jews, but to only punish them.

Here, we have a nutjob calling not only for the destruction of jews, but ALL infidels meaning you and me. He had done nothing to still the voices of his bootlickers continual chants of 'Death to Jews, Death to Americans and Death to infidels', but to further inflame and support such chants with his regular diatribe before the world's press.

This is a pyschopath who had stepped out of the line of human decency. There can be no arguing or debating with a psyschopath, because it's already too late for he had tipped over, and nothing will change his or his masters mind.

In truth, the only ones who truly deserves to be wiped out are the animals - the radicals from ALL religions, including atheism, that do not respect the sanctity of precious human life, and force others to take up arms to defend themselves, human brother killing brother human.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Hey Ben81,
You obviously, nor should you being a Canadian, listen to many of Barry's speeches. Ummm, ah, ummm That's without teleprompter.



he always need one i know that ..
the reasons... i beleive some speechs may be to important being listenned by millions of peoples... you cant have any risks to make any little mistakes in them


You must have missed the most "popular" of the speeches where he pronounced "corps" (e.g. Marine Corps) as CORPSE (i.e. dead body) numerous times.


but during/before the elections ... they cant possibly go debate with a teleprompter its impossible ..
Obama was pretty good VS Mccain during those public live debates

Did you actually listen and/or watch those debates? ummm, ahh, ummm, ah, eh......?


but he wont stand any chances VS Amhadinejad


Agree with you on that one. But for the reasons that were mentioned by other posters above.
He can not: 1) tell the truth 2) stand up for the USA. He will just bow down apologize, kiss the persian's butt or kiss his ring and bow profusely.
Please see my first post (first page) on this thread for an example of his conversations without a teleprompter.

(one note: I'm sorry and I don't mean to be critical or demeaning but please take your time typing and use the spell checker, the little red lines.
We all make mistakes I know I make my fair share. Thanks
)

73's and S&F,
Tom (KC5ILU)



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by MagesticEsoteric
 



Missed opportunities'

The Iranian leader, who maintains that US policy favours its rival, Israel, said that former US President George W Bush had never taken Iran's offer up because he was "scared".

Washington also refused a similar offer last September.

"We are ready to have high level talk based on mutual respect and dignity... but if you think you can brandish a stick so that we accept all that you say, that will not happen," he said, in front of a cheering crowd. Source


Not the first time he's offered this to Obama and he did offer it to Bush.

I don't recall Saddam Hussein ever making a similar offer, but maybe he did.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I would love to see this! Unfortunately, I don't think that will be happening.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Yes I agree with all of what you have pointed out!
The moment when he (ob) mention that he would be open to any open talks with any nation in his acceptence speach, lead me to think we may have a winner here. Damn I was blind sided on the result of that quote as well.
Only goes to prove, we are on the wrong side of adquiring peace with anyone.
This will prove how much balls he has if he accepts.. or not.
But I think we already know the answer to that..

Profit before peace, at the expense of life.. A$$backwards!
We live with Born again Idioits that are in control.
Sad!

Jesse



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
That was a prudent political move on his part. I doubt Obama will accept of course. But good job to him for trying.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


hmmm...interesting although for some reason, Saddam's offer was still my first thought when I saw the title of the post and I'm not sure why.

Oh, I went back earlier to double check the timeline between the offer and invasion. Saddam made the offer of debate on 2/24/03 and the invasion began 3/19/03.

Again, I'm not saying this is the same situation. It was just what popped into my crazy head and, to be honest, my brain is still not functioning quite right....It was a weird weekend.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by tomdham
 


ahahahah
CORPSE!!! thats funny
those mistakes are made by the mind ... when we read at something
especially in long speechs
but compare to BUSH .. he was something with his "NOOKELAR" ... NUCLEAR words

english is not my first language ...
i would make many mistakes ahaha

if you come back on a mistake .. it make it worst than the mistake itselft

at least when you write you can push Delete or re-edit your text at the end
thats why even with telepromter .. its still hard to avoid mistakes
thats why I LOVE LIVE DEBATE .. when you answer live to your opponent from a direct question or remarks
its less complicated to answer with your mind and thoughs....
listenning to a ear piece or any teleprompt would be much more harder
there is no way they can go debate with these telecomunication equipment



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
NOWW HAPPENING ... OBAMA SPEECH LIVE !!!

LIVE ON CNN ... Obama speaks to disabled American veterans

maybe he will say yes to the Amhadinejad debate request

i will listen to it



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I really hope this will happen, but i am sure it won't. The faceless government of usa won't let it happen, since it would expose how little their "leader" actually knows.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Seventytwo
 


Lol I'd actually pay to watch this debate too. I think governments should have more open debates instead of all this talk behind closed doors then blaming each other said blah blah blah.

Though as entertaining as it was the UK election debates showed the true character of terse politicians. That is they basically just lie and think they know what we want and want hear..though something tells me Obama won't step up to this...a debate in a neutral area with an audience would be good. Question is who picks the audience and questions ?



new topics
top topics
 
92
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join