http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2297371.stm
10-03-2002
Iraqi vice president Ramadan suggested that Saddam Hussein and George W Bush shoulod fight a duel to settle their differences.
"The American president should specify a group, and we will specify a group and choose neutral ground with Kofi Annan as referee and use one weapon with a president agianst a president, a vice-president agianst a vice -president, and a minister agianst a minister in a duel."
Mr Bush's spokesman at the time Ari Fleischer rejected the idea saying, "there can be no serious response to an irresponsible statement like that".
Once again, W has the opportunity to fight for the honor of his country (just like in Vietnam) but I guess he'd rather let others do it for him.
Who electeted this wussy any way? I prefer a president with a spine.
2007-05-25 06:45:01 · 23 answers · asked by SKYDOG 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He did accept.
Saddam Lost.
Any Questions?
2007-06-01 07:57:46 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As much as I do not like Pres. Bush. The spectacle of a mass murdering tyrant wanting to go mono-e-mono with the President of the USA or anyone else for that matter just shows what a FREAK he was. It was not a fight about Bush vs Saddam. It was about a republic fighting a dictatorship. Do I think our President is a wussy ..hell yeah I do ..but if our President was some world champion Ultimate Fighter I would not want him in some idiotic barroom brawl to settle the matters of STATE!
2007-06-01 17:30:48 · answer #2 · answered by Libertarian56 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Bush has have been willing to commit the time and effort to his training it would have been a lot cleaner way to have settled their differences. And to whoever said it would not solve anything .. it would have solved lots had Saddam perished it would have eliminated Saddam without cause the massive loss of innocent life that has occurred as a result of the invasion. Had Bush lost it still might have prevented the massive loss of innocent life that has occurred since the invasion. Possibly a question with more merit, was why did Bush not accept Saddam's challenge for a televised debate via satellite?
2007-05-25 07:33:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I did not vote for the man either time, and think he is a horrible president, but are you seriously asking why he did not accept the challenge of a duel?
They are illegal, and the United States is not living in the 18th century.
As much as I don't like the man, I cannot fault him for not jumping at the bait. Saddam was insane, and cruel, and his swift execution showed more mercy than he deserved.
GW doesn't deserve to die, he just deserves to get tossed out of office, and maybe have some criminal charges brought against him.
2007-05-31 06:25:33 · answer #4 · answered by Penny K 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Well...I do not know where you have been lately? But can you explain to me how George W. Bush is going to have a Duel with a Dead Man...with a noose around his neck??? Besides...like or hate GWB,he is a rugged outdoorsy type-and my bets would go with GW anyday...in any outside challenge or competition!
2007-06-01 20:09:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it would be completely point less for two heads of state to duel, it solves nothing and the only reason this was proposed by Iraq is because they know the American military would fux their shiz up!
although i would pay to see that. even on pay-per-view
btw, saddam didnt make the challenge, his VP suggested it. there is a difference.
2007-05-25 06:52:02 · answer #6 · answered by Kevy 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Iraq challenges Bush to duel
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/762124/posts?page=48
US President George W. Bush should fight a duel with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein instead of going to war and making all of Iraq suffer, Saddam's vice president said in an interview Thursday.
"Bush wants to attack the whole Iraq, the Army and the infrastructure," Taha Yassin Ramadan said.
He suggested instead that Bush faces Saddam in formal duel with their vice presidents as their seconds and the weapon of their choice.
"In this way we are saving the American and the Iraqi people," he said. Ramadan also told Associated Press Television News that Iraq was neither concerned with nor surprised by US lawmakers' support of a congressional resolution that would authorise Bush to use force against Iraq.
"We pay no attention to this issue," he said, adding that approving such a resolution "makes no difference" to Iraq. The congressional resolution would support the president's efforts to seek Iraqi compliance through the United Nations and requires the President to report to Congress, within 48 hours of commencing an attack, that further diplomatic means would not protect US security interests and that military action against Iraq would not detract from the war on terrorism.
The agreement on the resolution specifies that authorization applies only to relevant UN resolutions regarding Iraq and not to establishing regional security.
Note:
BU$H AWOL/DESERTION
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/ bl85.htm?once=true&
George W. Bush Military Records
http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp
George W. Bush - AWOL from Supporting our Troops
http://www.awolbush.com/
Military Service Records of President George W. Bush
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/election2004/docs.html
George W. Bush military service controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy
DESERTER: THE STORY OF GEORGE W. BUSH AFTER HE QUIT THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD
http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
Military Career of our Commander in Chief – Edit “Illegal Resident Thief”
http://www.hereinreality.com/commander.html
THE AWOL PROJECT - An Examination of the Bush Military Files
http://www.glcq.com/
The George W. Bush Military Record
http://www.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=426
AWOL from the Truth
How George W. Bush Lied to Tim Russert
About His Missing Military Records
http://democrats.com/display.cfm?id=327
2007-06-01 16:00:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Gwb is not willing to make any personal sacrifices for this country. He sees even his presidency as a money making venture. If it doesn't put some coin in his pocket it isn't going to happen. -k-
2007-06-01 19:16:16 · answer #8 · answered by kbama 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was a suggestion not a formal challenge. After all FDR also let others fight for him, matter of fact if you look every president has. Your statement is idiocy.
2007-05-31 17:14:10 · answer #9 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was going to be done in at sometime he was already a dead man it was just a question of when and how
2007-05-25 06:53:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well where is Saddam now? and where was he found
hiding in a hole in the ground
NONAME: you said that draft-dodging chickenhawk and hid
behind his fathers apron strings rather than go fight in Vietnam.
It might interest you to know that GWB joined the Reserves,
Bill Clinton is the chickenhawk and REFUSED to report
when he was drafted, he was convicted of a FELONY.
Did you serve in the Military or are you a chickehawk?
did your father serve or is he a chickenhawk
2007-05-25 07:08:34 · answer #11 · answered by justgetitright 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋