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

page: 6
92
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

No. The "god" factor is a smokescreen. This has more to do with someone using cherry-picked information to insinuate and conclude that we need to make absolutely no attempt at progress toward the future because some cultural and historical issues can't ever possibly be addressed or overcome in open dialog and negotiations.




posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 

So make sure they have good and impartial translators on each side. I'm almost certain they are both more than aware of the issues, subtleties, and nuances that can be lost in translation. There are ways to overcome that.

And yes, peace is, in a way, surrender. Surrender to differences, surrender to the idea that we need wars, surrender of the mindset that seems to always take us to war.

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



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


hahahaha i would like to see the iranian leader TRY

i'm no fan of obama, but he's just so darn good at rhetoric!

[edit on 8/2/2010 by indigothefish]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
double post oops

[edit on 8/2/2010 by indigothefish]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by indigothefish
reply to post by Ben81
 

i'm no fan of obama, but he's just so darn good at rhetoric!
[edit on 8/2/2010 by indigothefish]


Is he? I don't think so.
If everthing is prepared - yup. If not so - Nup.

Only someone who speaks FROM THE HEART may be good at speaking freely. Watch him speak freely - then you change your mind.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrMasterJoe

Originally posted by indigothefish
reply to post by Ben81
 

i'm no fan of obama, but he's just so darn good at rhetoric!
[edit on 8/2/2010 by indigothefish]


Is he? I don't think so.
If everthing is prepared - yup. If not so - Nup.

Only someone who speaks FROM THE HEART may be good at speaking freely. Watch him speak freely - then you change your mind.


i always speak freely from my heart

i would simply dominate Obama on any debates
watch me


if he doesnt want to debate with Amhadinejad
i will debate with him



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
if either of these guys came out of a debate looking like an idiot, it sorta would be a reflection of how we are as a species.

i don't want anyone embarrassing themselves on international tv that is being transmitted outwards to the entire universe.

makes us look bad, especially if we aren't learning anything from it as we should be.

would it make for great tv? maybe.

it would bring new meaning to the "reality tv" angle.

what could these two agree upon?



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by Ben81
 




I am merely saying that, from an outsiders point of view, you guys appointed a leader for your country and here you are (almost) chanting the Iranian national anthem. I think that's ironic..


I think it is better to trust neither one..(
what a typo!!!
)

Peace

[edit on 2-8-2010 by operation mindcrime]


Yea, I think it is weird.

What planet am I on?



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Visitor2012
And since Ahmadinejad wants this to be on television, forces Obama's hand IMHO. How could a peace talking U.S. President, refuse such an offer to end war and reconcile differences? Isn't that the Democracy he so desires to spread? hehe

Every second that passes, and every B.S. excuse or maneuver this Government makes, in response to this move by Ahmadinejad, brings our Government's true motives and intents to light.
[edit on 2-8-2010 by Visitor2012]


Put simply, Ahmadinejad's rhetoric is inconsistent, loosely tehered to reality, and often for the benefit of the extremist religious leaders in Iran.

He has denied the Holocaust, called for the obliteration of Israel and every day is taken less seriously by both his Middle-eastern Neighbors and the international community as a whole.

A public conversation with the POTUS will give him huge credibility and a chance to espouse some carefully chosen rhetoric, regardless of any refutation or factual evidence the president may provide.

Such a public event will be heavily edited for consumption by Iranian citizens at home to further his own Iranian agenda.

There is absolutely no reason ANY US President should engage in such inanity with someone like Ahmadinejad.

Unless my guess is incorrect, you seem to be eager to try and position this as an anti-Obama spin piece and if that's the case I could care less and am wasting my time trying to have an intelligent conversation.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81.

Only someone who speaks FROM THE HEART may be good at speaking freely. Watch him speak freely - then you change your mind.


i always speak freely from my heart

i would simply dominate Obama on any debates
watch me


if he doesnt want to debate with Amhadinejad
i will debate with him



um, ya. i don't know Ben. are you sure? to understand someone's (anyones) positiion you need to have some measure of respect for them and their postitions, i think.

and as of this moment, it is hard to ignore some facts we can learn from your personal profile. www.abovetopsecret.com...

i'm sure you may know at least one thing these two may not, but whether you are willing to share this information or reserve it as use of a tool to achieve your own measures of "success" is still unknown to me.

saying you are ready to debate either of these individuals..., what issues would you be willing to debate them on?

these guys are not steps on a staircase to the top. who they represent should be the top, and not steps whom they tread upon to reach their current stature and positions, i think.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by maybereal11

A public conversation with the POTUS will give him huge credibility and a chance to espouse some carefully chosen rhetoric, regardless of any refutation or factual evidence the president may provide.


the teacher requests a little help.

the teacher is always a student....

can you help me with my own ignorance and tell me what is meant by "POTUS"?

thanks,
et



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
i bet the us may try to make a lame excuse to not debate, such as a terrorist strike

well if they don't want to speak in close quarters they can just do it from far distance.
and on live tv. but the us may also want to cover that up to.
you know, we cant let the world hear about this debate on solving world problems..

but we all know who the real culprit is here

and iran is just the one stepping up.






[edit on 2-8-2010 by togetherwestand]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I like this idea of the debate but reality is it will remain a idea only. Remember in 2006 Iran's President Ahmadinejad offered a same debate to Bush.


“Isn’t it time that international relations are founded on democracy and equal rights of the nations?” he asked. “I suggest holding a live TV debate with Mr George W. Bush to talk about world affairs and the ways to solve those issues.

“The debate should go 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.”

Ahmadinejad challenges Bush to debate

Tehran asks Bush to debate

When Bush a two term President didn't had galls for open debate with Ahmadinejad how can you think Obama who is only in his single year in Presidency will accept the offer.

For people suggesting this debate shouldn't go forward I think they are also opposed to freedom of speech and freedom of people to make their own minds instead of pre conceived notions fed by MSM. Let the people witness the debate and decide for themselves. It's way better than threatening, using covert op's, sanctioning etc. The problems can only be solved with dialog and debate not thru threats.

Infact, Obama's one of the pre election promises was to engage in open dialogue with Ahmadinejad which he still has not followed thru. This is his chance to prove he stands by his promise and show the people of the world why US is taking action against Iran and present all the reasons and justifications.

So far the charges against Iran has always been one sided by Western Politicians be it Obama, Merkel, Bush etc. by using MSM as a spokesman in a way Iran always responding to their statements which is not equally eloquently covered by the same MSM. Now this debate can offer a chance to see both views with reasonings in live, no twisting of words later....no underreporting one side of news. Maybe that's why this debate won;t go through.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by Ben81
 


Relax!!!

I am merely saying that, from an outsiders point of view, you guys appointed a leader for your country and here you are (almost) chanting the Iranian national anthem. I think that's ironic..


I think it is better to trust neither one..(
what a typo!!!
)

Peace

[edit on 2-8-2010 by operation mindcrime]


For some idealouges any Obama critic will do.

Thus as long as a nut like Ahmadinejad appears to challenge the POTUS in some way they will line up behind him and sing the Iranian national anthem.

It happens (by the same crew) whenever Russia criticizes the current administration. You get some right leaning folks suddenly singing the praises of Russia.

It is weird for sure.

Ideaology before country, before facts, before everything.

It's a disease we are suffering from.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by maybereal11]



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

can you help me with my own ignorance and tell me what is meant by "POTUS"?

thanks,
et


No worries. I didn't know what it was the first time I saw the acronym.

POTUS...President Of The United States

I think it originated as Secret Service speak or white house speak.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Esoteric Teacher
 


potus=president of the united states



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by maybereal11
thus as long as a nut like Ahmadinejad appears to challenge the POTUS in some way they will line up behind him and sing the Iranian national anthem.


I have yet to see anybody singing the Iranian national anthem, or even writing the words in their posts. All we want to see, myself included, is the POTUS openly debating another foreign leader about world issues. I don't think that's too much to ask for, seeing as how we're a world superpower and currently have his country surrounded by our armed forces.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I think that's a great idea! I would like to see this happen with other leaders as well. I would suggest televising these discussions live around the world, and at the end of these discussions, have a general public review from all the countries involved!! I would love to here what people from other countries feel about us and their leaders. All we get are sound bites and propaganda from government officials instead of the real feelings of the citizens. Why not later take a world poll to find out which leader or ideas the people of the world feel are the best ideas for peace and cooperation.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by name pending

For people suggesting this debate shouldn't go forward I think they are also opposed to freedom of speech and freedom of people to make their own minds instead of pre conceived notions fed by MSM. Let the people witness the debate and decide for themselves.


Puhleeese!!!

An unedited debate would NEVER see the light of day in Iran, though I am sure a heavily edited version would.

They have arrested dozens of journalists and bloggers for just asking questions...let alone actually reporting things.

I ask again why the POTUS should aid Ahmadinejad in a propaganda campaign?

Raping Freedom of Speech in Iran
The three journalists have been imprisoned as a result of the popular protest in June in Iran. They are among 47 journalists and other bloggers and writers currently in prison in Iran, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Tuesday, February 16th the CPJ gave these damning figures on the critic situation of journalism in the world. The figures remain blurry, since some people disappear weeks before the families eventually get to know what happened to them.
www.digitaljournal.com...

Freedom of Speech in Iran: Activist Gets One-Year Prison Sentence ...
Jan 22, 2010 ... Last week Iranian activist Abed Tavancheh was sentenced to one year in prison for giving an interview to SPIEGEL about student protests.
www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,672567,00.html

Iran Continues to Silence Free Speech and Shut Down Human Rights Work

However, since the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the presidency in 2005, Iran has aggressively targeted dissidents and nongovernmental organizations who question the country’s record on human rights and democracy. Iran continues to silence these groups, as another nonprofit has been shut down without sufficient explanation.
www.takepart.com...



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 





It happens (by the same crew) whenever Russia criticizes the current administration. You get some right leaning folks suddenly singing the praises of Russia.

I think you have the wrong lean.





top topics
 
92
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join