Iranian President Ahmadinejad announced today he wants to...?

Question

sit down and debate with President Bush about solving problems the world is facing, should Bush agree to talk with him?

Answer 1

Honestly, I doubt that Bush would be willing to debate a five year old, much less an intelligent man like the Iranian President. Debate, after all, is an intellectual endeavor, and Bush doesn’t have the acumen for such an enterprise.

Just look at how uncomfortable and irritated he was against an excellent orator like John Kerry, during the 2004 Presidential debates. That in and of itself should tell you how much he despises debating.

He completely trivializes intellectual pursuits. He is the President who had the gall to admit that he doesn’t read about current events, but would rather have his staff members keep him abreast of what is going on, and undoubtedly, though he never explicitly confessed to it, probably has his opinions fed to him as well. Bush openly stated that he doesn’t reflect much on why he does something. A mark of an intellectual is one who keeps up with the world and the ideas around him, and is also introspective and critical of himself.

With his marginal view of other areas of intellectual exercise, why would anyone think that he would want to engage in the mentally laborious task of debating, especially with a man as articulate as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? No I am sure he will address this challenge as he as addressed all others in his presidency – by bombing the challenger and taking extended vacations.

Answer 2

I think Bush should have a open talk w/ President Ahmadinejad. If Ahmadinejad is as crazy as a lot of people think, this would allow him to display his crazed mind to the whole world. I'm a proud U.S.er, but I think it's bs how we try to bully everybody we don't like, and demonize them. Long Live Hezbollah. Hezbollah has the courage and moral clarity to stand up against the Zionist invaders. Don't just side w/ Israel, because they have an effective grip on US news media. Additionally, when listening to an "expert" talk about the middle-east, look at their name and features........often time they are JEWS!

Answer 3

Bush should be open to trying to solve the Iranian problem with diplomacy.

Two things I'm afraid of: Bush is a lousy diplomat, and Ahmadinejad is a looney.

Answer 4

I think we should send Condi, and have her take some bacon as a gift. Iran is a theocracy. Nothing Ahmadinejad (hard to say that name isn't it?) says or does will have any impact unless Immams or Mulahs or Iyatollahs (SP?) approve. I think there are two possibilities: They get nuke power and Ahmadinejad will convince the Komeni's that they have the power and should use it or, the muslim clerics will simply will him away.
Both scenarios would be bad for the world. Iran testing it's nuke on Israel will only prove Israel's nukes are stronger and probably more accurate. Ahmadinejad on the street with spoils of his last job......Hope he wasn't to angry about the bacon?

Answer 5

There is an old Peter Sellars movie called "The Mouse that Roared" about a tiny, impoverished country that declares war on the United States.

Their rationale is that they are so small and weak, that the U.S. will not take them seriously. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will be so impressed with their courage for taking on the big, powerful Americans that they will rush to their aid.

Although it was a 1959 comedy, the movie serves as a blueprint for the next half-century of global politics. During the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviets would not hesitate to throw money and arms at any third-world nation that openly opposed the other. Now, as the sole Superpower, ambitious nations like Iran, N.Korea and Venezuela polish their images by sniping at the U.S.

Like "The Mouse that Roared," they figure it is a no-lose situation. If the U.S. negotiates with them directly, they gain immediate legitimacy. If the U.S. does not, they are just another victim of American arrogance. All you have to do is read this board to know that this political game is very effective.

The fact is, the U.S. has a global responsibility not to negotiate directly with "rouge" nations. We could be like France or Spain and ensure a great deal of security for our own people by cutting deals with nations like Iran and North Korea, but by doing so we would subvert the global diplomatic structure that so many already accuse us of ignoring.

Look at Iraq as an example. The U.S. is routinely condemned for supporting UN sanctions aimed at reforming the Hussein regime. Meanwhile, other nations cut side deals with Saddam, helping him maintain the military infrastructure that kept him in power while his people suffered.

The U.S. can not legitimize regimes that threaten our allies and promote global disorder. These nations must prove that they are willing to negotiate in an international forum before we can recoginze them individually. To do otherwise would be the height of American arrogance

Answer 6

I think he should - I'm a hard nose right wing fanatic (self described) and more a Bush supporter then detractor though he is certainly not conservative enough. I think Bush should agree to his debate terms; and then require the topic of discussion to be;

1) Why did you create Hezzbolah and encourage them to attack innocement civilians in Israel,

2) Why do you say you support democracy but then send aid to the Iraqi insurgency who only wants to return the country to Saddam like tyranny?

3) Why do you say you want nuclear power when the one reactor you just cristined is the kind needed to produce weapons; and Russia offered you full nuclear power but you turned it down?

Answer 7

Ahmadinejad desires to place a wreath to "pay tribute to the sufferers" - In his psychotic eyes he might evaluate the sufferers the terrorists themselves. He might use this as a propaganda gadget for his fundamentalist Islamic followers to assert - "i grew to become into there, the place the Jihad persevered and paid tribute to our Martyrs" interior the eyes of the religious followers and illiterate human beings (one interior the comparable?) of the international, this might carry his fee up much extra and inspire much extra feeble minded persons to connect in on the insurgency.

Answer 8

This is all part of the Iranian waiting game. NO, ignore the plick until he starts acting like a reasonable leader. He is a state supporter of terror who wants a nuclear weapon. Until the\ose two issues are resolved, we have nothing else to say to the nutball.

Answer 9

i dont think bush will agree,he is a coward and only wants to invade iran and take control of its oil reserves so why would he want to solve the problem

Answer 10

Absolutely Not. I don't think Our President should sit down with a terrorist and talk unless there is a sharpshooter with that red beam on his forehead fixin to take him out!
He just wants to make himself look Legit and believe me the media who are mostly liberals would love it!