Ahmadinejad VS. Bush: Iran Issues Debate Challenge

Originally posted by krossfyter
if he is really big sh-it why doesnt he (iran) just challenge the us to an armed conflict in a neutral battle zone?
[edit on 30-8-2006 by krossfyter]

Challenging USA with armed conflict would just reinforce the 'bad guy' image that Iran has been given, and i'm sure Iran don't want any more of that.

Sure they could agree to have a big war over it or they could just agree to have a war of words. I know which one i'd rather see...

Originally posted by krossfyter
give me a break. pick on someone your own size ahmedinejad... for real.

A superpower should never have to stick up for their president in that way. Surely they should have a leader who is 'up to size'.

As I said in another thread (now closed) I think that Ahmadinejad thinks that the role of "pet enemy" of the US, once played by Cuba, must be played by Iran.

I saw some weeks ago a documentary about Fidel Castro, and one of his former comrades who after was imprisoned, said that Fidel Castro saw that the only way to put himself and Cuba on the world's spotlight was to defy the biggest world power, the US. The best way of doing it was aligning himself with the Soviet Union, the US policies would do the rest.

I think that Ahmadinejad wants to do the same thing. He does not need to be a friend of Russia or anyone else because he only needs to keep on saying one or two dubious phrases once in while to have all the world's attentions pointing in his direction.

This challenge was another way of drawing attentions and at the same time put Bush in a worst position towards the ones that are not clearly on Bush's side.

PS: if the debate really ever took place, how would they speak to one another, through translators? Or would Ahmadinejad speak English? Or would Bush speak Persian (I think its their official language)?

Originally posted by longgone
So then kross fyter,

You are of the opinion we are to hard on our President if we expect him to run the gauntlet. Did Kennedy backdown from Kruschev? No he won as a poker faced
American should. Bush would lose the first time he smirked or babeled on.

i didnt vote for him. kennedy is kennedy.
admadinejad would never challenge kennedy.
but he challenges bush to an oration fight? whose a chump?



[edit on 30-8-2006 by krossfyter]

Mod Note: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by malganis

Originally posted by krossfyter
if he is really big sh-it why doesnt he (iran) just challenge the us to an armed conflict in a neutral battle zone?
[edit on 30-8-2006 by krossfyter]

Challenging USA with armed conflict would just reinforce the 'bad guy' image that Iran has been given, and i'm sure Iran don't want any more of that.

Sure they could agree to have a big war over it or they could just agree to have a war of words. I know which one i'd rather see...

of course because a war of words is a lot easier to have with bush.... not armed conflict. i was making a point. its not even a challenge. come on challenging bush to war of words is like a an MMA fighter challenging a person that only hits his bags in his garage to an armed fight. its not even a challenge. its chump stuff. and people say this is a brillant move? i dont get it. its far from it. maybe it is in another universe over the einstein rosen bridge... but not here. well at least in my opinion of course. lol

Originally posted by malganis

Originally posted by krossfyter
give me a break. pick on someone your own size ahmedinejad... for real.

A superpower should never have to stick up for their president in that way. Surely they should have a leader who is 'up to size'.

i wish we would... really. but i didnt vote for bush. so im exepmt.
i voted for someone who would of been up for size in a challenge like this.



[edit on 30-8-2006 by krossfyter]

Bush should accept. Yeah, he might get crushed. But let's look at the up side of this if he does accept. If he goes out there and challenges Admadinejad and talks a little trash (which id personally love to see), Bush's ratings might go up. Ratings don't really mean anything but he might get some temporary support against Iran if he stands up and acts like a man and takes on this challenge.

ACCEPT IT BUSH!!!

The problem pretty princess, is bush doesnt have the mental capacity to openly debate on the fly.

Imagine him trying to explain why israel is allowed nukes, allowed the military supplies from america, allowed to attack lebanon and gaza over kidnapped soilders... yet iran cant reserach nuclear materials.

If bush accepted, debated he might have a small rise in support, but that would plumet when the dust has settled, becuase the US would of realised that the US government cant cope with the problems that are emerging in the middle east.
Thats not to damaging, that was already known.. the damaging part is the bulk of american servicemen in the middle of the crap heap... and the promises and guidlines made by the USA to the world, that they will not stop the course in IRAQ, that they would not allow IRAN nuclear weapons and that they are really there for the freedom of the people, not the defense of israel.

Bush's approval would plumit, he would lose support, and Iran will realise with the USA having no support it is difficult for them to intervene.

It just gives the advantage to Iran, when the balls in there court.
Not a good move.

Either way bush is stuffed... for so long he's told the world he wont allow Iran nuclear weapons.
Is he going to dissolve the remaining credibility of the USA by retracting that comment, and folding on the issue?
Or is he going to use the military route, dreaming it will solve all his problems...

More than likely, Iran and Iraq will join as a hornets nest.. with the US squarley stuck in the middle

I say we accept the challenge then in the middle of it drop 839 nukes on Iran. We win!

Mod Note: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Every time I've read an interview with Admadinejad, I've actually found myself almost nodding in agreement with him at times. Scary! I stop short when he trash-talks with "wipe Israel off the map" and I feel he too has been deceived by the real string-pullers in the region and therefore has a somewhat distorted yet understandable view of the overall situation. I can see where he's coming from.

I think he came across as honorable and intelligent and sensible in that 60 Minutes interview, and the interviewer came across as arrogant and smarmy. But at the end of the day, both Admadinejad and Bush have no real power - they are puppets to a wider administration silently manipulating both sides of the coin for their own geopolitical gain. Since the media are owned by these shadowy puppeteers, we will never be told this. We will forever be fed the hate speech.. the "for us or against us".. "good guys vs the terrorists".. "left wing vs right wing".. "islam vs christianity".. anything to split, divide, unite. Good for business and good for their stocks..

while watching the gerbil would be very funny I would like to to see Dick Cheney take up the offer.

tvnewslies.org...

www.whitehouse.gov...


[edit on 31/8/2006 by Sauron]

Originally posted by RiotComing
Every time I've read an interview with Admadinejad, I've actually found myself almost nodding in agreement with him at times. Scary! I stop short when he trash-talks with "wipe Israel off the map" and I feel he too has been deceived by the real string-pullers in the region and therefore has a somewhat distorted yet understandable view of the overall situation. I can see where he's coming from.

He's just saying what he thinks the American people want to hear..and you and so many others are falling for it. Clearly he's outsmarted you.

Mod Note: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by PrettyPrincess0188
I say we accept the challenge then in the middle of it drop 839 nukes on Iran. We win!

you cant be serious?



Mod Note: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 31-8-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by PrettyPrincess0188
I say we accept the challenge then in the middle of it drop 839 nukes on Iran. We win!

lol I know this is a joke but the fact is, it's based on real views! If Bush thinks he's not getting anywhere with words he knows he has the largest military in the world to state his points for him!

Originally posted by PrettyPrincess0188
He's just saying what he thinks the American people want to hear..and you and so many others are falling for it. Clearly he's outsmarted you.

Well after reading a post saying 839 nukes should be dropped on Iran, who knows what the heck you've been swallowing.

For those unfamiliar with posting etiquette, I suggest reading these posts:

Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link

It is not necessary to quote an entire post or to quote the post just above yours.

A few points, if I may?

1.)

original quote by: Riot Coming

I think he came across as honorable and intelligent and sensible in that 60 Minutes interview, and the interviewer came across as arrogant and smarmy. But at the end of the day, both Admadinejad and Bush have no real power - they are puppets to a wider administration silently manipulating both sides of the coin for their own geopolitical gain.

*(Note RiotComing- I only used this quote for relevance. my following comments are not directed toward you; just points in general)


I am sure that he feels himself, in fact, to be honorable. There is no question to his intelligence. Just as Bush feels himself to be honorable and righteous in his cause. The problem with both of them is that neither of them wants to admit to the hypocrisy of their respective selves and governments. That is why, at the end of the day, neither of them can stand up to a real candid debate. Both(countries) are guilty of actions that would hold up to an ethical review. Just as both countries do things that would pass those guidelines. I mention ethics because Ahmadinejad mentioned "truth". And when push comes to shove neither of these two, no matter how intelligent or lack thereof, could bear the scrutiny of a full ethical review.

2.)

original quote by: ArMaP
As I said in another thread (now closed) I think that Ahmadinejad thinks that the role of "pet enemy" of the US, once played by Cuba, must be played by Iran.

I agree. I ran is definately trying the "martyr" approach. Iran feels as if enough attention is drawn on them(positive or negative) then they can get the upper hand.

3.)

original quote by: Sauron
I would like to to see Dick Cheney take up the offer.

Man.... How many time would he say the F-word in that debate....the FCC would make a fortune....

thank you for your time,
Tone

Of course Iran will try to get the upper hand, and by using Jr.'s own tactic of pre-emption... diplomatically. As it should.

While Iran may be using the martyr approach, they definitely have the upper hand and the former president is visiting the US as we speak.

Former Iran president faces snub in US


Mohammad Khatami, Iran’s former president, embarks on a ground-breaking tour of the US this week to promote his vision of the role of religion in east-west reconciliation. But prospects for a breakthrough in US-Iranian relations appear bleak, with the Bush administration declaring it will not speak to him or attend his events.

Mr Khatami, a Muslim cleric who no longer holds an official position, will attend a UN conference in New York next week, led by Spain and Turkey under the Alliance of Civilisations initiative. He will also speak at the Washington National Cathedral, becoming the highest-ranking Iranian politician to visit the US capital since the 1979 Islamic revolution. Harvard and Georgetown universities will also host him.

...while conservatives in Iran are broadly in favour of launching dialogue with the US, hardliners in the US have expressed outrage at the Bush administration’s granting of a visa to Mr Khatami, noting he was in office in 2002 when President George W. Bush denounced Iran as part of an “axis of evil”.

Analysts said it appeared that Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, and Nicolas Burns, under-secretary, were in favour of allowing the visit to go ahead, but did not have the will or political muscle to capitalise on the opportunity presented.

US spokesmen said officials would not meet Mr Khatami and would turn down invitations by the Washington cathedral to attend his address.

The boycott is in line with the Bush administration’s general rejection of high-level diplomatic engagement with countries deemed hostile to the US, notably Iran, Syria, Cuba and North Korea.

Karim Sadjadpour, Iran analyst for the International Crisis Group, said it would be a mistake to see Mr Khatami’s mission as part of a public relations effort by a weakened Iran worried about international sanctions. Iran was extremely confident in its position in the region and with regard to the nuclear dispute, he said. “They believe time is on their side.”

They don't paint the visit in a very good light. Nor Condi and the State Dept, neither. Indeed, Where's Karen Hughes?, isn't this her job? Jimmy put out a hand, and I think Khatami knows how often the US has tried to screw them over. But the fact that he's here and they're describing it as a religious outreach tells me that they know how to play the game too.

Naturally they'll turn down invitations to attend his address, the camera doesn't flatter red faces much, now does it? Wonder if CSpan will cover them?



"We are great with TV but we are getting crushed on the P.R. [Public Relations] front." ---President George W. Bush