• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Bush refuses to debate Iran leader

Should Bush debate Iran's president?

  • Yes he should debate the Iranian president

  • No matter who was the U.S. president he or she shouldn't debate him

  • No-because Bush would probably not do well in the debate


Results are only viewable after voting.
Mr Sparkle said:
again with the Irony.

War is sometimes a necessary tool to remove bigger threats, which Bush removed and I commend him for it.

Unfortunately, the lack of will to remove Ahmadinejad is going to bite us all on the ass.
 
Mr Sparkle said:
:confused: but that "maniac" would be shown as a "maniac" on the world stage, there would be no denying his "maniacosity" this would potentially strenghten the case of anyone who wanted to show the world that the "maniac" is indeed a maniac incapable of dialogue or rational thought, and that he indeed has all these plans and points of view rife with extensive "maniactitude" unless the person debating him fear that he could be overwhelmed by logic or asked questions he'd be unable to answer it merely underlines the weakness of a given position.

But still WHY would Bush want to debate a maniac?

There's no logic to it.
 
tomahawk53 said:
But still WHY would Bush want to debate a maniac?

There's no logic to it.

Those on the left just want Bush to debate him so they can laugh at Bush once more. It's not really about exposing Ahmadinejad for the man that he likely is.
 
tomahawk53 said:
--I thought him saying that he wanted to 'wipe Israel off the map' was proven to be a direct quote.

--I'll have to re-read what his superficially valid points were.

--This will not be a civil debate. It may start out that way but it won't end that way (IMO). You can say that it's just my opinion but look at how the Iranian pres acts

--Or that we are easily suckered in to meaningless debates. Or succumb to peer pressure easily...

--True

--Me too

explain?
 
Be afraid of words :eek:
028.gif
 
tomahawk53 said:
But still WHY would Bush want to debate a maniac?

There's no logic to it.

:confused: I still don't get it, why WOULDN'T he? because it's a waste of his valuable time? I still want to know why people keep saying things like "this dude is a maniac" wouldn't the debate prove your point in the eyes of the world?
 
tomahawk53 said:
--I thought him saying that he wanted to 'wipe Israel off the map' was proven to be a direct quote.

--I'll have to re-read what his superficially valid points were.

--This will not be a civil debate. It may start out that way but it won't end that way (IMO). You can say that it's just my opinion but look at how the Iranian pres acts

--Or that we are easily suckered in to meaningless debates. Or succumb to peer pressure easily...

--True

--Me too

--I heard it was mistranslated. and beyond that- one quote isn't enough for me to damn a man no matter how crazy. After all, if i were a regular old good Irani citizen and i heard some "whack job" tell me my homeland was part of some looney "Axis of EVIL"....well, gee, would it be fair me to write off the guy who said it as a 'maniac'?:confused:

--I think safety measures could easily be put in palce to ensure it would be civil. And if one party did get uncivilized? well then its like everyone's been saying. They've just played they're cards in front of the world stage. Their loss is the other sides gain.

--If we had had lots of these debates in the past then maybe i'd see your first point better. But as has also been pointed out- when has a public debate on these kinds of matters ever taken place?
As for succumbing to peer pressure... if by that you mean we might appear "soft"...then yeah- that's definitely part of it.
But isn't "macho" behavior one of the main things we've accused Iran of having too much of?

--cool

---yay. i like being happy.:O
 
War Lord said:
Those on the left just want Bush to debate him so they can laugh at Bush once more. It's not really about exposing Ahmadinejad for the man that he likely is.

LOL, yeah, I really need this debate to know that Bush economic policy, environmental policy and foreign policy are laughable.

oh, wait, I don't.
 
tomahawk53 said:
But still WHY would Bush want to debate a maniac?

There's no logic to it.

again though, with the foregone conclusion that he IS a maniac.
 
War Lord said:
War is sometimes a necessary tool to remove bigger threats, which Bush removed and I commend him for it.

Unfortunately, the lack of will to remove Ahmadinejad is going to bite us all on the ass.

Whereas if he DID remove Ahmadinejad it would be a Triumph Of The Will.
 
This would be really funny if this happened. Stupid vs. Crazy, who will win? :)
 
Mr Sparkle said:

He has no reason to debate the guy. Plain and simple. I know that for most here it's the fact that it's Bush and he doesn't want to do something so what ever he wants to do is wrong in there eyes but seriously tell me...why he should. And 'to prove to the world that he's a maniac' should never be on the presidents list as reasons to debate someone.
 
celldog said:
ARE ALL OF YOU ******ED??????????? :mad:

Debate?????????? For what?????? Why?????????? We know all we need to know about this maniac....this new Hitler! If he had nukes he'd rid the world of Israel. Then he'd use them on us!!

Why should Bush or any President waste time with this guy?? good greif!! You people side with our enemies more than with your own country!!


that post is highly unintelligent and close minded. most of the world considers our president to be the maniac. if we are so certain bush is so wonderful and he is not than why not let the debate take place? wouldn't that give Bush a chance to prove it to the world?

this guy claims that he disagrees iwth Bush on how to go about international affairs. He says he believes in cooperation rather than force. Obviously he's a liar, and he can be proven to be a liar if somebody debated him. Unfortnately our president is the same exact way as him. The only thing stopping him from nuking people is the fact that he would be charged with high crimes against humanity.

and who are we to call this guy the new hitler? It's incredibly ******ed to say "if he had nukes he'd rid the world of Israel" How many Israeli's do you think sit around having coffee and talk about ridding the world of Iran? you think the door doesn't swing both ways?

He knows that if he nuked Israel, then Israel, and Pakistan would both nuke Iran right back. MOst likely if he gets them, he wont use them. He doesn't want to kill everybody in Israel he wants to rule them. You can't boss people around if they are dead. the more people you rule, the more powerful you are.

that is what he wants. he isn't going to nuke Israel or the United States unless somebody nukes him first, and that's why he wants them as a deterrant to nuking his country. Unforntatnely I have heard many republicans at this very board in the last week saying we should nuke Iran.
You people side with our enemies more than with your own country!!


and for you rinformation Bush is the enemy. He is more dangerous to America than anybody else at the moment. Bush is the agressor, opressor, the filthy rich, the corrupt, the cruel, the dictator, the brutal, and he has committed crimes against his own people just as equally horrible as saddam has. How many people live in agony for years because people like Bush wont let them use medical marijuana? that is the equivlaent of torture in every meaning of the word. yet we do it. It doesn't matter if you use a pen or a rubber stamp or mustard gas to commit bad acts, they are still bad acts.


Every Republican in America has sided with the enemy more than their own country as far as I'm concerned.
 
maxwell's demon said:
Whereas if he DID remove Ahmadinejad it would be a Triumph Of The Will.

I suppose we could wait to remove him after it is impossible to remove him without great cost to all those involved.
 
tomahawk53 said:
He has no reason to debate the guy. Plain and simple. I know that for most here it's the fact that it's Bush and he doesn't want to do something so what ever he wants to do is wrong in there eyes but seriously tell me...why he should. And 'to prove to the world that he's a maniac' should never be on the presidents list as reasons to debate someone.
again with the foregone conclusion that he IS a maniac.
(and that all this would only be to show it to everyone else)
 
Mr Sparkle said:
:confused: I still don't get it, why WOULDN'T he? because it's a waste of his valuable time? I still want to know why people keep saying things like "this dude is a maniac" wouldn't the debate prove your point in the eyes of the world?

It would if our president wasn't so incompetent. I really odn't want bush to debate him. Because half the world will watch it and come to the conclusion that Iran's presdent is correct and righteous. but maybe they would both look like idiots if were lucky.
 
tomahawk53 said:
He has no reason to debate the guy. Plain and simple. I know that for most here it's the fact that it's Bush and he doesn't want to do something so what ever he wants to do is wrong in there eyes but seriously tell me...why he should. And 'to prove to the world that he's a maniac' should never be on the presidents list as reasons to debate someone.

not as simple as to "show the world he's maniac" which seems like a line frankly, the point would be simple, if the US president has the logical position what's to be lost by having a dialogue? wouldn't it be easier to say that all avenues where exhausted?
and you know the "you just don't like bush" doesn't really apply, when somebody is two faced about foreign policy it's just that, it has nothing to do with Bush really. you can't say "you can't reason with these people" and then turn down a dialogue. it's nutty.
 
War Lord said:
War is sometimes a necessary tool to remove bigger threats, which Bush removed and I commend him for it.

Unfortunately, the lack of will to remove Ahmadinejad is going to bite us all on the ass.

by removing Saddam we created the bigger thread of Iran, because we shifted the balance of power in favor of Iran. I said it years ago the war in Iraq will only cause another war which will cause another war and another war. I bet you any money if we hadn't gone to war with Iraq, this nuclear problem with Iran wouldn't exist. Saddam wouldn't sit by and allow it.

The middle east needs to take care of the middle east, and America needs to deal with more advanced and intelligent countries. If you are atrekkie you could see how we should be compared to post-interstellar travel worlds, and the middle east is like pre-warp.
 
maxwell's demon said:
--I heard it was mistranslated. and beyond that- one quote isn't enough for me to damn a man no matter how crazy. After all, if i were a regular old good Irani citizen and i heard some "whack job" tell me my homeland was part of some looney "Axis of EVIL"....well, gee, would it be fair me to write off the guy who said it as a 'maniac'?:confused:

--I think safety measures could easily be put in palce to ensure it would be civil. And if one party did get uncivilized? well then its like everyone's been saying. They've just played they're cards in front of the world stage. Their loss is the other sides gain.

--If we had had lots of these debates in the past then maybe i'd see your first point better. But as has also been pointed out- when has a public debate on these kinds of matters ever taken place?
As for succumbing to peer pressure... if by that you mean we might appear "soft"...then yeah- that's definitely part of it.
But isn't "macho" behavior one of the main things we've accused Iran of having too much of?

--cool

---yay. i like being happy.:O


Here are a few of my favorite quotes (direct quotes) from the leader. You be the judge of if we are dealing with a guy in his right mind:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--The Iranian nation is a learned nation. It is a civilised nation. It is a history-making nation... You know and we know: you need us far more than we need you.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world, ... The World without Zionism. Anybody who recognises Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nations' fury [and] is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world.”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said:
--Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the Islamic countries due to their need.

My favorite of course is how he says that Holocaust never happened and was made up by the Jews.
 
maxwell's demon said:
again though, with the foregone conclusion that he IS a maniac.

Yeah it may be a conclusion seeing as how we haven't psychologically evaluated him but I think he's said enough to make it more probable than not.
 
tomahawk53 said:
He has no reason to debate the guy. Plain and simple. I know that for most here it's the fact that it's Bush and he doesn't want to do something so what ever he wants to do is wrong in there eyes but seriously tell me...why he should. And 'to prove to the world that he's a maniac' should never be on the presidents list as reasons to debate someone.

There is one reason your forgetting, this debate should occur because it would be really funny. :D
 
Mr Sparkle said:
not as simple as to "show the world he's maniac" which seems like a line frankly, the point would be simple, if the US president has the logical position what's to be lost by having a dialogue? wouldn't it be easier to say that all avenues where exhausted?
and you know the "you just don't like bush" doesn't really apply, when somebody is two faced about foreign policy it's just that, it has nothing to do with Bush really. you can't say "you can't reason with these people" and then turn down a dialogue. it's nutty.


It's not the US president’s logical position that I'm worried about.

Do you honestly think that he will listen to any logical point Bush would make? Especially since this guy thinks it's 'logical' to wipe Israel off the map.

I think his sense of logic is not working or something...
 
And yet kids think it's perfectly logical to believe that if you wear a towel around your neck when you jump off the roof of your house, that makes you Superman.

Thoughts and words are just that. Thoughts and words.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,262
Messages
22,074,426
Members
45,876
Latest member
kedenlewis
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"