Bush debate President Tom - Iran

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on U.S. President George W. Bush to participate in a "direct television debate with us," so Iran can voice its point of view on how to end problems in the world.

"But the condition is that there can be no censorship, especially for the American nation," he said Tuesday.

The White House called the offer to debate Bush a "diversion" from international concerns over Iran's nuclear program, Reuters reported.

During a news conference in Tehran, Ahmadinejad also blamed "special concessions" granted to the United States and Britain as "the root cause of all the problems in the world."

"At the Security Council, where they have to protect security, they enjoy the veto right. If anybody confronts them, there is no place to take complaints to."

His comments came two days before a deadline set by a U.N. Security Council resolution for the Islamic republic to suspend uranium enrichment or face possible sanctions.

Although he did not directly address the U.N. deadline, Ahmadinejad said '"nobody can prevent" Iran from its right to a "peaceful, nuclear program."

"I think the time has passed to speak of the Security Council and the tools they can use to force a country to do certain things," he said.

Ahmadinejad said he would reject any suspension of enrichment, even if requested by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan during an upcoming visit to Iran. (Full story)

Iran has until Thursday to agree to halt the enrichment program, which Tehran maintains is part of a civilian nuclear program to generate power.

Asked about Ahmadinejad's comments, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton said Washington and its European allies are moving forward with sanctions against Iran.

"We have made it clear unless we get an unequivocal acceptance of that condition in the Security Council resolution, that sanctions would follow," Bolton said.

"That condition by the way is not something the United States has imposed. That condition is what the European-3 have been operating under since the outset of their negotiations."

Western nations accuse Iran of seeking to master technology to produce nuclear weapons.

The U.N. Security Council resolution, approved on July 31, would pave the way for the Tehran regime -- if it complies -- to receive financial incentives.

The United States has also held out the possibility of resuming direct contacts with Iran, more than 25 years after the two countries broke off diplomatic relations.

Last week, Tehran offered to resume negotiations about its nuclear program but did not agree to halt uranium enrichment before any talks take place. (Full story)

If the Iranians do not accept the U.N.'s incentives offer by Thursday, the Security Council will discuss a resolution proposing economic sanctions on Iran.

While such a move is backed by three of the council's permanent members -- the United States, Britain and France -- the two others, Russia and China, have been cool to the idea and could use their veto to block a sanctions resolution.

Meanwhile, a senior Iranian official on Tuesday invited Western companies to bid for tenders to build nuclear plants, The Associated Press reported from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

"We have had ... another 21 thousand megawatts of nuclear power plants approved by the parliament that will be built in the next 20 years," Seyed Ala'addin Barojerdi, chairman of Iran's Parliament National Security and Foreign Affairs Commission, was quoted as saying.

"(The) international tenders for building of two of these nuclear power plants have been so far presented and we would be willing to see the Western companies participate in these projects," he said.

Western nations have been closely watching developments in Iran's nuclear program for signs of compliance. In recent days, Tehran has made public displays of new technologies and facilities.

On Sunday, state television reported that Iran test fired a long-range, radar-evading missile from a submarine in the Gulf as part of war games that began earlier this month. (Full story)

Some analysts interpreted the test and war games as thinly veiled threats that Iran could disrupt vital oil shipping lanes if pushed by an escalation in the nuclear dispute, according to Reuters.

A day earlier, Ahmadinejad officially opened a heavy-water production plant that he said would serve medical, agricultural and scientific needs. (Full story)

Video broadcast on Iranian television showed the president touring the plant in the central Iran city of Arak along with Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization.

Heavy water is used in preparing uranium for nuclear weapons, but it is also useful for medical purposes, such as nuclear magnetic resonance imaging, according to Reuters.

"No one can deprive a nation of its rights based on its capabilities," the agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying in his speech to inaugurate the project.
................................................
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
What is Bush afraid of ?

This would be the most watched debate in the history of the world. Why not lay it out there and match wits with this guy .

Dialog is better than bombs.

Bring him to the UN and lets get it on.

Oh I forgot , the Iranian President can only travel to countries that support Terrorism. That might
be a stumbling block there.
 

hammer1

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 17, 2002
7,791
127
63
Wisconsin and Dorado Puerto Rico
Amen to That!!!!!!!!!!!

Amen to That!!!!!!!!!!!

But Since when does this Administration do any thing
Intelligent

Da Dumya........."Ah Se no Reason why Fish and People Can Not Co Exist Peacefully."

He Would Make a Bigger Arse of Himself Than He Did During The Presidential Debates.
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
Debate how to solve the world problems. What a great idea! Why haven't humans thought of that before?

Perhaps Survivor 14: "World Leaders" would be good. That could settle things once and for all. France would so get voted off first.
But I would get annoyed with the Samoan president walking around in a loin-cloth all the time.

Seriously though, why bother debating a nutjob whose country subjigates women beyond belief, executes gay teenagers in public squares, and outlaws alcohol for the love of god! Just the tip of the nutty iceburg

Even Bush couldn't mess up that debate.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Seriously though, why bother debating a nutjob whose country subjigates women beyond belief, executes gay teenagers in public squares, and outlaws alcohol for the love of god! Just the tip of the nutty iceburg

Even Bush couldn't mess up that debate.
............................................

Seems like a can't lose situation. You get a moderator that is tough and not allow them not to answer questions like President Tom did on the 60 minutes interview.

I would be hanging on every word so to speak.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Even Bush couldn't mess up that debate.

You can't possibly be serious. Bush could - and would - mess up any debate. In watching the Iranian leader on 60 minutes against Mike Wallace, and in watching any interaction with Bush with, um, anyone in a public forum...it would end up an embarrassment for the United States, somehow.

Cheney? Sure. Heck, Rumsfeld? O.K. Powell? Absolutely. Rice? Maybe.

Bush? God, Allah, or Tom Cruise, help us...:rolleyes:
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Bush's mind set runs mainly in one direction. So This type of debate would be wrong thing for him to go near. Stay the course wold not work repeated over and over.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
You can't possibly be serious. Bush could - and would - mess up any debate. In watching the Iranian leader on 60 minutes against Mike Wallace, and in watching any interaction with Bush with, um, anyone in a public forum...it would end up an embarrassment for the United States, somehow.

Cheney? Sure. Heck, Rumsfeld? O.K. Powell? Absolutely. Rice? Maybe.

Bush? God, Allah, or Tom Cruise, help us...:rolleyes:

it's ironic that this guy wants to debate bush but doesn't allow real honest debate in his own country.

and btw...didn't bush do better than al gore in their debates ?
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
With AL maybe a draw. With Kerry not as good. Bush admits he is not a good debater. In any case this suggestion with Iran leader is as stupid as it comes no mater who our prez is. However we do have countries now trying to form a group to Challenge our policies. Granted all with not much clout. But just enough to keep getting in the way of progress.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Obviously it's a bluff - and Bush will not call it. The offer makes Iran look good in the eyes of people and countries on the fence. It's a lot like that letter he sent to Bush.

Bush is a horrible debater and speaker. He would not be able to respond well to the big issues Ahmadinejad would purse - things like Israli favoritism, nuclear energy, and Iraq. ...NOT TO SAY Bush or US is necessarily taking the wrong stances on these - BUT Bush will look utterly foolish attempting to explain anything. ....He's a moron, there's just no way around that.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
mahmoud_ahmadinejad_hostages1b.jpg


Mr Ahmadinejad was born in Garmsar, near Tehran, in 1956, the son of a blacksmith, and holds a PhD in traffic and transport from Tehran's University of Science and Technology, where he was a lecturer.

There has been confusion about his role in the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Several of the 52 Americans who were held hostage in the US embassy in the months after the revolution say they are certain Mr Ahmadinejad was among those who captured them.

New leader in his own words

He insists he was not there, and several known hostage-takers - now his strong political opponents - deny he was with them.

His website says he joined the Revolutionary Guards voluntarily after the revolution, and he is also reported to have served in covert operations during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

When he became mayor of Tehran, the former revolutionary guard curtailed many of the reforms put in place by the moderates who had run the city before him.

Iran's outgoing reformist president, Mohammad Khatami, barred Mr Ahmadinejad from attending cabinet meetings, a privilege normally accorded to mayors of the capital.

Mr Ahmadinejad reportedly spent no money on his presidential campaign - but he was backed by powerful conservatives who used their network of mosques to mobilise support for him.

He also had the support of a group of younger, second-generation revolutionaries known as the Abadgaran, or Developers, who are strong in the Iranian parliament, the Majlis.

His presidential campaign focused on poverty, social justice and the distribution of wealth inside Iran.

During his campaign, he also repeatedly defended his country's nuclear programme, which has worried the US and European Union.

Once in power, he made a defiant speech at the UN on the nuclear issue and refused to back down on Tehran's decision to resume uranium conversion.

He continued his defiance despite the reporting of Iran's nuclear programme to the UN Security Council and the possible threat of sanctions.


He said no power could take away Iran's right to nuclear fuel technology.

Mr Ahmadinejad has maintained a hard line with the US, with whom diplomatic ties were broken in 1979.

At home, he banned Western and "indecent" music from state-run TV and radio stations in December 2005.

However, BBC analyst Sadeq Saba says there have been moves inside Iran to rein in the president.

Powerful figures such as former President Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani believe Mr Ahmadinejad's confrontational approach has backfired.

They say the US struggled to report Iran to the Security Council for a long time, but with Mr Ahmadinejad's help Washington got what it wanted in a few months.

Mr Ahmadinejad has now made some small-scale concessions to moderates. He said he would not be confrontational in enforcing a campaign in Tehran to insist women obeyed Iran's strict Islamic dress codes.

He has also allowed women into major sporting events for the first time since 1979.

Mr Ahmadinejad maintains a populist streak, calling his personal website Mardomyar, or the People's Friend.

He also has a reputation for living a simple life and campaigned against corruption
.....................................................
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
judging by some comments,it looks like the dems have a new frontrunner for 2008......

"Ahmadinajad/Lamont In 2008".....lol

his talking points would be identical to the dem presidential candidate..... the dem speech writers would probably be volunteering to write his speech and prep him for the debate....the moderator would likely give him the questions ahead of time......all the major newspapers and msm(along with many posters here) would be rooting for ahmadinnerjacket to make bush look bad.

this is the state of our nation.....


btw...not being partisan...but,my money`s on bush since he's already debated comparables like gore and kerry........rimshot....:142smilie
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Maybe if Bush was wired.....no he still lost that debate too. Maybe Gw could do it. No one would know what he is talking about anyway. Even better he could lull them to sleep with his "Neocons I have loved and sometimes hated" Stand-up routine while we send the Marines in to Steal the oil.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
judging by some comments,it looks like the dems have a new frontrunner for 2008......

"Ahmadinajad/Lamont In 2008".....lol

his talking points would be identical to the dem presidential candidate..... the dem speech writers would probably be volunteering to write his speech and prep him for the debate....the moderator would likely give him the questions ahead of time......all the major newspapers and msm(along with many posters here) would be rooting for ahmadinnerjacket to make bush look bad.

this is the state of our nation.....


btw...not being partisan...but,my money`s on bush since he's already debated comparables like gore and kerry........rimshot....:142smilie

Your just too ridiculous sometimes.

OK - pretend you are Bush. How will you answer Ahmadinejad when he asks you why his country should be banned from pursuing nuclear energy - when his neighbor Pakistan and Israel are currently able?

How will you (Bush) answer this question?

I'm not defending Iran or their freak leader. ...I guess you could say I'm handicapping the debate. Bush lost handily all 3 debates with Kerry. It didn't make a difference as people already had their minds made up.

As for the Dems and the media and Iran being on the same side - please just drop that crap. It's really annoying and you are much smarter than that.
 

danmurphy jr

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 14, 2004
2,966
5
0
I would pay TV on Comedy Central. Bush pronouncing Ahmadinajad would go down in history!
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
OK - pretend you are Bush. How will you answer Ahmadinejad when he asks you why his country should be banned from pursuing nuclear energy - when his neighbor Pakistan and Israel are currently able?

How will you (Bush) answer this question?
........................................................

Its simple. Because you will not recognize Israel and talk of destroying other countries. You support terrorism and probably have Bin Laden living in your house. Your clerics are radical nuts and cannot be trusted with firecrackers much less a nuke.

Just tell it like it is George.

If John F Kennedy were alive and President, he would debate President Tom. I am sure of it.

"But I knew JFK and George is no JFK."
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
........................................................

Its simple. Because you will not recognize Israel and talk of destroying other countries. You support terrorism and probably have Bin Laden living in your house. Your clerics are radical nuts and cannot be trusted with firecrackers much less a nuke.

Just tell it like it is George.

If John F Kennedy were alive and President, he would debate President Tom. I am sure of it.

"But I knew JFK and George is no JFK."
I haven't heard of Bin Laden being in Iran, but we all know he's spent a lot of time in Pakistan.

I just can't see Dubya stringing enough sentences together when thinking on his feet.

I agree - I could see some of our other presidents do it. Reagan in his prime would have been nice.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top