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

Obama said: 'Iran and North Korea are tiny countries that pose no real threat to us'. And Obama's plan calls for one or two US combat brigades to leave Iraq each month, with all troops out by the end of 2008. He did that ....right? So what else is there to debate?


[edit on 2-8-2010 by nocents]

Honestly what is the point of a debate, they both lie through their teeth.

reply to post by Stormdancer777

Ahhh...but if they both "lie through their teeth" on international TV....

See the beauty in that?

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.

Of course, you wouldn't be fooled, right ? But the poor weak minds would.

Elitist much ?
Me, I believe in education, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of opinion.

A live debate is not very different from an exchange of diplomatic statements in the newspapers, only it's live, direct and straightforward. Better.

Originally posted by nocents
Obama said: 'Iran and North Korea are tiny countries that pose no real threat to us'. And Obama's plan calls for one or two US combat brigades to leave Iraq each month, with all troops out by the end of 2008. He did that ....right? So what else is there to debate?


[edit on 2-8-2010 by nocents]

I see you just joined. Good choice of names "no sense".

What you are doing is called derailment...where you try to politically bait someone into changing the topic.

Obama as a Senator supported a bill for withdrawl that would have had the troops out sooner. That bill failed to pass. You are confusing those statements with his plan as President to withdrawl troops, which has in fact moved more slowly than he proposed, but that whole bit of unrelated rhetoric...derailment. I am sure you will hear the word again as you continue to post here on ATS.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

Ahhh...but if they both "lie through their teeth" on international TV....

See the beauty in that?

You have a point,

lol

However people will believe them.

Originally posted by Manouche

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.

Of course, you wouldn't be fooled, right ? But the poor weak minds would.

Elitist much ?
Me, I believe in education, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of opinion.

A live debate is not very different from an exchange of diplomatic statements in the newspapers, only it's live, direct and straightforward. Better.

Elitist? Do you have the Glen Beck political dictionary at your side?

My point was that in Iran the News is run by the government...thus allowing them to edit out any refutation that the POTUS might offer and Ahmadinejad to say what he likes with the comfort of knowing any rebuttal could be edited out.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
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.

I think you have the "right" lean.

Why debate with someone who lives in their own reality?

In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that like in your country. ... In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have this.

I see so many say that Obama is a puppet but that term also applies to his Iranian counterpart 10 times over.

reply to post by maybereal11


Not at all. There has been much talk of translation not being accurate and such.
My point is Irans lil dictator could play nothing but Obama sound bites the whole debate and leave the winner.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by nocents]

reply to post by maybereal11


I wish I'd see both leaders explaining their views, articulate clearly their demands and disagreements face to face.
Not one second did i think about the iranian public as I never thought they'd get an unbiased view. Iranians don't have a choice, their situation is worst than ours. I don't like our choices degraded to iranian standard.

Originally posted by maybereal11
Puhleeese!!!

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

Reminds me of our MSM.

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

The recent arrest of wikileaks editors should ring a bell or two that United States is not following what it preaches.

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

If you truly believed Ahmadinejad is a nutjob then you would promote letting him speak on public platform so people can ridicule him, but inside you know he is not and maybe that's why you are scared of open dialogue.

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.

Freedom of speech has never stopped POTUS from speaking with Saudi Arabia or Israel both of which are also the most oppressive regimes in the world.

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

Is that all, Billy Mannings got 54 years in prison for exposing the corruption, lies and fraud of Afghanistan in United States, so your point is?

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

Internet censorship - ACTA acts, witch hunts of freely speaking people like Oliver Stone, Helen Thomas does not sounds a solid group for freedom of speech in USA. Let's not even talk about the human rights claims otherwise I will be forced to bring up Abhu Gharib tortures,rendition flights, killing without trial by US forces, imprisonment without trial by US military courts in black sites.

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...

Reminds me of the recent crackdown by United States providing aid to Gaza and going upto the extent of Germany banning the IHH which provided Flotilla aid in Gaza. Indeed silencing of groups is taking place allover the world.

I can't Imagine obama participating in any debate;
for one thing how will he work it with the telepromptor
and another thing is that it would be too public and therefore too difficult/open and obvious to sell us down the river and disrespect us like he usually does,
well maybe not the last part cuz he realy doesn't care what we think (for another year anyway)

Originally posted by Manouche
reply to post by maybereal11

 

I wish I'd see both leaders explaining their views, articulate clearly their demands and disagreements face to face.
Not one second did i think about the iranian public as I never thought they'd get an unbiased view. Iranians don't have a choice, their situation is worst than ours. I don't like our choices degraded to iranian standard.

I tell you what...IF the US went over and set up some kind of overriding transmission station that would ensure that the Iranian people got an unedited broadcast of the discussion...then MAYBE...maybe it should be considered.

Absent that, any public debate is nothing more than handing Ahmadinejad the credibility of equal standing with the President of the United States...and giving him a tonnage of film footage to be edited to his advantage for propaganda purposes within Iran.

Originally posted by Unst0ppable0ne
Obama, the world needs something like this. A change of style. Communication... It would also give us insight into Iran.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

ROFL! That's a riot!

If you were to ask Obama, to instantly give you the Capital of Utah, South Dakota and Mississippi, he couldn't.

The moron thought there was 57 States.

And before you get all huffy.....just imagine what you'd be posting if Bush had to have a teleprompter shipped to everyplace he's expected to open his mouth.

Obama wouldn't DARE agree to meet "I'm a dinner jacket" one on one. He would get his figurative a$$ kicked.

Originally posted by nocents
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Not at all. There has been much talk of translation not being accurate and such.
My point is Irans lil dictator could play nothing but Obama sound bites the whole debate and leave the winner.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by nocents]

Uhhh. Are you saying that Iran doesn't supress free speech? It's just been a misunderstanding with regards to translation? You do know they have arrested dozens of journalists and bloggers ...right?

reply to post by Helmkat

The Iranian counterpuppet has a slightly different job than the president of the United States.

* Head of Government and Cabinet
* Head of the Council of National Security
* Head of the Council of Cultural Revolution
* Sends and receives all foreign ambassadors
* Selection of Vice Presidents

en.wikipedia.org...

He also stands as a sort of check and balance and buffer and messenger between the supreme leader and the government and is a liason between the two.

He is also very popular with the youth of Iran...taking such courageous steps as speaking out for the outlawing of veils. lol



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

reply to post by DCPatriot

The moron thought there was 57 States.

Plus he lied about snooki on the view , claimed he didn't know her, when in fact he did,

Originally posted by Helmkat
Why debate with someone who lives in their own reality?

In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that like in your country. ... In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have this.

I see so many say that Obama is a puppet but that term also applies to his Iranian counterpart 10 times over.

He was lying. Like a politician.
Which leader Obama will talk to if he doesn't want to speak to liars ?
How is it that Obama wouldn't win a debate with Ahmadinejad ? He's perfectly trained with the medias, he's used to talk in public, in front of journalists, in front of TV cameras. He's a master at it as most american politicians obsessed by image and communication more than by ideas and policies. Did you see the presidential debate in Iran this year ? It looked like coming out from the 50's ! It's Ahmadinejad that would manipulate us in a live debate whereas we're used to western politicians performing tricks ?

Originally posted by name pending

Originally posted by maybereal11
Puhleeese!!!

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

Reminds me of our MSM.

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

The recent arrest of wikileaks editors should ring a bell or two that United States is not following what it preaches.

There is a lot to your post...so lets start sorting out the BS here...

WTF are you talking about? Please provide a link or News source to any Wikileaks EDITORS being ARRESTED.

You used the plural...any one will do...

If you are talking about the Intelligence Analyst who leaked the docs...He didn't work for Wikileaks, he worked for the US government.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by maybereal11]