The Iranian President has challenged Bush to a live debate...sm
Posted By: LVMT on 2006-08-29 In Reply to:
I would be interested in hearing that. One quote from the article:
The debate should be uncensored in order for the American people to be able to listen to what we say and they should not restrict the American people from hearing the truth.
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database Do you honestly think the Iranian president can be reasoned with?
I know you think Bush is as evil as he is (maybe you think Bush is worse) but do you honestly think the Iranian president is a reasonable person? I think nukes should be a last resort, but it should be in the contingency. I think you and the writer of the article are looking at this all wrong. Sometimes you have to saber rattle. When the neighborhood bully is issuing threats and does not appear open to negotiation you have to show him you can beat him up, and basically that's true. We could light up his little sandbox of a country inside of 30 minutes. He knows that, but he's just testing the waters to see how passive, poll-sensitive our country has become. He, like the rest of the fundamentalist Islam Jihadists, are testing what our resolve is.
Hey, but have a good shopping spree. I'd hate to have to count on a nuclear war to erase my debt...
I've actually listened to what the Iranian president says.?
You said for liberals only, so excuse my intrustion into your world, but have you honestly not listened to some of the speeches he makes in his own country which usually begin something like *Death to America* etc. etc.? He's sounding all diplomatic right now, because he knows that his soldiers got caught in Hezobollah's forces, and he knows he has everything to lose. I'm going to watch it not because I think he's the best thing since sliced bread like some of you do, but because it's going to be real interesting when on Monday morning the free press rolls out all the hate/kill America speeches he's made, but you all will just believe they are fabricated too.
The Iranian president is a whack job & needs to be snuffed out. FOR LIBERALS ONLY: 60 Minutes Interviews Iranian President Sunday.
I am looking forward to watching this interview because I am truly interested in hearing what this man has to say.
I can recall as a child growing up to the tune of We have to fight Vietnam because the Communists want to take over the world. During those times, the worst thing a person could be called in the USA was a Communist.
It seems to me these days the USA is the one that wants to take over the world. It has no respect for any government that cares about its poor people or even America's poor, for that matter. (For example, Chavez tried to provide cheap oil to the poor last winter while Bush didn't care if poor Americans froze to death.) Any country that removes the profit incentive from medicine or education for its citizens is a terrorist nation in Bush's eyes. We're quickly approaching the day when most of us will be poor as the middle class continues to disintegrate before our eyes.
I am suspect of everyone Bush labels as terrorist these days, and I want to hear both sides. Bush refuses to sit down diplomatically and listen to what Ahmadinejad has to say, so I'm grateful that Mike Wallace took the time to do so.
I wonder if Bush would still have won if voters knew the extent to which he blatantly lied during this debate. To find the TRUTH, all someone has to do is take just about EVERYTHING Bush said, REVERSE IT (with the possible exception of the comment: "I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place." I didn't understand it in 2000 and still don't know what it means. And why did he only focus on "our friends in the Middle East?") I know this isn’t new news, but I found it interesting to take a second look at this. Hindsight being 20/20, I'm amazed at how good Gore is suddenly starting to look!
From www.debates.org/pages/trans2000a.html
MODERATOR: New question. How would you go about as president deciding when it was in the national interest to use U.S. force, generally?
BUSH: Well, if it's in our vital national interest, and that means whether our territory is threatened or people could be harmed, whether or not the alliances are -- our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped. And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. So I would take my responsibility seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power. Morale in today's military is too low. We're having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well-equipped. I believe we're overextended in too many places. And therefore I want to rebuild the military power. It starts with a billion dollar pay raise for the men and women who wear the uniform. A billion dollars more than the president recently signed into law. It's to make sure our troops are well-housed and well-equipped. Bonus plans to keep some of our high-skilled folks in the services and a commander in chief that sets the mission to fight and win war and prevent war from happening in the first place.
MODERATOR: Vice President Gore, one minute.
GORE: I want to make it clear, our military is the strongest, best-trained, best-equipped, best-led fighting force in the world and in the history of the world. Nobody should have any doubt about that, least of all our adversaries or potential adversaries. If you entrust me with the presidency, I will do whatever is necessary in order to make sure our forces stay the strongest in the world. In fact, in my ten-year budget proposal I've set aside more than twice as much for this purpose as Governor Bush has in his proposal. Now, I think we should be reluctant to get involved in someplace in a foreign country. But if our national security is at stake, if we have allies, if we've tried every other course, if we're sure military action will succeed, and if the costs are proportionate to the benefits, we should get involved. Now, just because we don't want to get involved everywhere doesn't mean we should back off anywhere it comes up. I disagree with the proposal that maybe only when oil supplies are at stake that our national security is at risk. I think that there are situations like in Bosnia or Kosovo where there's a genocide, where our national security is at stake there.
BUSH: I agree our military is the strongest in the world today, that's not the question. The question is will it be the strongest in the years to come? Everywhere I go on the campaign trail I see moms and dads whose son or daughter may wear the uniform and they tell me about how discouraged their son or daughter may be. A recent poll was taken among 1,000 enlisted personnel, as well as officers, over half of whom will leave the service when their time of enlistment is up. The captains are leaving the service. There is a problem. And it's going to require a new commander in chief to rebuild the military power. I was honored to be flanked by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwartzkopf recently stood by me side and agreed with me. If we don't have a clear vision of the military, if we don't stop extending our troops all around the world and nation building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road, and I'm going to prevent that. I'm going to rebuild our military power. It's one of the major priorities of my administration.
Sams has challenged dems to name
nm
President Bush
Surely you don't mean that. I think in years to come we will be sorry we thought such thoughts. Time will tell, maybe long after he is president. Will we apologize for attacking him or will we try and justify why we thought the way we did. He is a good president. Like the rest of us, he is not perfect. He is faithful to his family, and that should speak volumes.
Bush as president, OMG
I hear ya, Lurker. When Bush first ran, I warned friends, this guy will ruin America, he is a dummy. Well, he got into office..I dont believe legally..I truly believe the vote was fixed. I have read the conclusion by the University of Chicago which did a recount and Gore would have gotten in..But,. however, we had the Supreme Court Five who decided all of our fates..Anyway, when Bush was running once again, I could not believe it..I warned my friends, family, anyone I could speak to..do not vote this guy in..He will destroy America and the world..Now, Im sitting here, three years to go with Bush and Im watching it come to reality..I fear what the next three years have to hold..God help us all.
You mean thanks for nothing President Bush!
The largest terrorist attack on US soil happened on George Bush's watch. He has done nothing positive during the past 8 years. He has created wars that have killed and maimed thousands and thousands of innocent people in countries in which we had no business being, and he is leaving the United States in financial shambles.
I may not agree with some of the things that have occurred over the past eight years, but it is a fact. He has kept us safe since 9/11, and has been ever vigilante on his watch, with his policies he has put in place for the safety of our country, here at home.
Thank you, Mr. President. God bless you and yours.
President Bush owes me no apology.
He has my profound gratitude for keeping us safe since 9/11. Nuff said.
No matter how you feel about President Bush, he at least
deserves respect. These crappy posts calling him all sorts of names, slurs, etc. is unbecoming of an American citizen. Is this just because you're democrats or just because you have no couth?
Bush is not running for president...nice try.
As far as JOhn McCain's birthday...is there some law or moral wrong to eating cake on your birthday? Where was Obama when katrina hit? What was he eating?
First, Ray Nagin refused to make evacuation mandatory until a full 24 hours after he was asked to do so. He is the first line of defense for his city. He dropped the ball. I don't see you ragging him here. Second, the President expected FEMA to do its job. Just like Barack Obama would have done.
However...this is a nonissue. George Bush is not running.
Again...John McCain's birthday, and yes, he was eating cake. I want to know where Obama was, and what he was eating.
Neither President Bush or the VP are attending the convention....
Laura Bush will be representing him. I think there will be some kind of satellite link thing from him. I am sure this was expected by most of us. It is in doubt whether John McCain will. He and Sarah Palin are going to Mississippi today at the request of Gov. Haley Barbour to look at their MEMA plans and procedures.
Throwing Shoes at President Bush
I just saw a story on Headline News Network about the shoe-throwing incident, and they said the people of Iraq are divided on how they feel about it, but nobody feels it was wrong, half of them think it was the right thing to do and half think it was an embarrassment but not necessarily the wrong thing to do.
so if they feel that way, let's bring our precious sons and daughters home, and never go back. Our finances are in crisis, we can't afford to be spending billions where we're not wanted. What's the point of being there and spending all this money we could be using in much better ways. Why keep risking the lives of our troops for people who don't appreciate it at all? I'm no political genius, far from it, but plain old common sense says this is just wrong!
President Bush's strength of character.....sm
was tested this weekend, when two shoes were hurled at his head in fast succession, while the owner of said shoes, (size 10, by the way, per our prez), had hoped they would hit him, not to mention embarass with the intended podiatric insult.
However, President Bush showed great strength of character in the aftermath of said attack, calling off the secret service, and making light of the matter.
Somebody has to pay for 9/11. Somebody has to pay for the USS Cole. The right people are locked up. Excuse me for not crying about their civil rights or worrying about how they are interrogated. National security is why President Bush locked those terrorists up, national security and justice.
And I do have a grip -- a firm grip on reality. I don't live in Obama-land.
Trying to rehab the terrorists who haven't killed yet and releasing them is better than just letting them all go and dropping charges against the ones who have murdered.
And obviously Bush made his point -- you can't rehab terrorists, you can't reason with them, you can't make peace with them.
I'm surprised Dubya didn't attend this since he recently told Larry King that Lay was such a *good guy.*
Friends remember Lay at memorial service
By KRISTEN HAYS, AP Business WriterWed Jul 12, 7:17 PM ET
Enron Corp. founder Kenneth Lay was a high-powered businessman, philanthropist and family man who didn't succumb to despair despite the scandal that destroyed his company and left him a vilified felon, friends and family members said at a memorial service Wednesday where mourners included former President George Bush.
Lay's 90-minute service drew some of the high-profile guests who were close to him before he was convicted in May of fraud and conspiracy for lying to investors and the public about the energy company's financial health. Enron collapsed in late 2001.
Neither the Bushes nor former Secretary of State James Baker III, Houston Astros owner Drayton McLane Jr. and noted heart surgeon Denton Cooley spoke. The Bushes sat directly behind Lay's wife, Linda.
Instead, Lay's family and friends sought to show a kinder view of him than had been seen publicly since the company's collapse. Some expressed bitterness over their — and Lay's — steadfast belief that he was wrongly convicted in one of the biggest corporate frauds in history.
I am angry because of the way he was treated in the last five years of his life, and I think I'll leave it there, leave it at that, said Lay's stepson, David Herrold, who attended much of the four-month trial.
I am glad he's not in a position anymore to be whipped by his enemy, Herrold said to the hundreds in attendance at Houston's First United Methodist Church, which Lay attended for 12 years.
His mother, Linda Lay, dabbed tears with a handkerchief.
Lay died of heart disease July 5 in Aspen, Colo., where he was vacationing with his wife. About 200 friends and family, including his co-defendant, former Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling, attended a small memorial service there on Sunday.
But Skilling decided not to attend Wednesday's service because of heavy media coverage, said his attorney, Daniel Petrocelli. His wife, former Enron corporate secretary Rebecca Carter, attended both services.
As guests entered the sanctuary, they passed a framed photo of a smiling Lay wearing a red Enron T-shirt, blue athletic shorts and gym shoes. Two large bouquets of sunflowers sat on either side of the pulpit, while two burning candles sat on each side of an open Bible in the center.
The Rev. Bill Lawson, prominent pastor of the African-American Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church in Houston, said the Lay he knew wasn't the target of late-night TV jokes or a pariah. Lawson called Lay a victim of a lynching and praised mourners for staying friends with him through the scandal.
The folks who don't like him have had their say. I'd like to have mine and I don't care what you think about it, he said, eliciting brief applause. Now his grandchildren won't ask, `Why is Papia in jail?' No more persecution. That is behind him, Lawson said.
Lawson evoked leaders who he said were vilified in life but vindicated by history, including the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Minutes before Wednesday's service began, shrieks pierced the sanctuary as Lay friend and former Houston Mayor Bob Lanier, 81, collapsed in an aisle. Carter and Lawson comforted Lanier's distraught wife, Elyse, before paramedics whisked him to a hospital, where was in stable condition with an irregular heartbeat.
Lay and Skilling were the faces of Enron throughout the company's meteoric rise from a stodgy pipeline company to a powerhouse energy trader.
Their reputations shattered alongside the company as their images switched from business visionaries to perpetrators of fraud that fueled a spectacular crash that evaporated $60 billion in market value and left thousands jobless.
A jury convicted Lay of six counts of fraud and conspiracy and Skilling of 19 of 28 counts of fraud, conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors. Lay also was convicted of bank fraud and lying to banks in a separate, non-jury trial related to his personal banking.
Lay died awaiting their Oct. 23 sentencing, and his lawyers are expected to ask a judge to erase his conviction because his death left his case unfinished. Skilling still faces sentencing on that date and could be ordered to serve decades in prison.
Beau Herrold, another Lay stepson who manages the family's finances, read from a letter he had begun writing to U.S. District Judge Sim Lake that he intended to deliver before Lay's sentencing.
In the letter, he described Lay as a devoted husband, father, grandfather and brother who always found a way to make time for family. Lay is survived by his wife, children, two sisters and 12 grandchildren.
___
Associated Press photographers David Phillip and Pat Sullivan, viedographer Rich Matthews and writer Chris Duncan contributed to this report.
NEW ORLEANS, Aug. 28 (UPI) -- As he headed for the Gulf Coast on Monday, U.S. President George Bush told an interviewer he expects the rebuilding of New Orleans to take a decade.
Bush planned to spend the anniversary of the U.S. Gulf Coast landfall of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans after a visit to Biloxi, Miss. It was his 13th visit to the devastated area.
We can rebuild buildings, the question is can we rebuild its soul, he told April Ryan of American Urban Radio Networks. We can. I believe, 10 years from now April, you and I will be thinking about our time here, and trying to remember what it was like 10 years ago
Bush came under fire last year for apparently ignoring Katrina immediately after New Orleans flooded and then flying over the city in Air Force One.
Later White House spokeswoman Dana Perrino said she wasn't aware of a specific time period but that the president has said all along that it would take more than a year to rebuild New Orleans.
In terms of like, 10 years, I don't know about exact time frame, but it's certainly going to take several years, Perrino said.
Nor is my husband. The friend is. He married a Korean. They chose conservatism. I may not have clarified that. Sorry about that.
I have to wonder where many get their news. I know politics every which-way, so won't even go there. I kick total butt at it.
Not interested in this.
From one Iranian spouse to another...
Left me get this straight. You are married to an Iranian, yet you paint Iranians with such a broad brushstroke that you suggest negotiations can only take place with radical Islamic extremists? Do you also include his family (your in-laws) in that monolith? Are you able to distinguish between the single ultra-conservative party, the 7 main parties of the conservative alliance, the other 11 main parties of the reformist coalition, the 3 repressed parties of the dissident coalition inside Iran and the roughly 70 separate parties living in the Iranian diaspora, which roughly break down as follows:
• 17 communist parties
• 8 socialist and social-democrat parties
• 24 ethnic-based parties
• 6 nationalist parties
• 9 liberal democrat parties
• 4 conservative parties
Let’s not overlook the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Iran and has the final word in all aspects of foreign and domestic policies.
When you say you and your husband are active in conservative politics, I assume you refer to US brand of conservatism…or is it the Iranian brand? There is a difference, you know…or do you? Do you speak Farsi? Are you confident that you know exactly where your husband stands when it comes to the politics inside his own country….you know, that discussion he has in Farsi with his buddies in social gatherings and over the telephone?
Are you at all familiar with the recent history of Iranian politics, i.e. the era of the US CIA-sponsored coup to overthrow Mosadegh in the early 1950s to restore the exiled shah to power and the disastrous consequences that have ensued, an act which ushered in the current era of ill-advised US interference in the region? If you have taken the time to explore any of THEIR issues, even on the most superficial of levels, then you know that the leaders in power do not necessarily reflect the will of their people and by no stretch of the imagination are Iranians all Islamic fundamentalists.
Let us at least extend the respect to our spouses that it just might be possible that Iranians should be in charge of their own political affairs and should not surrender their country as the next US colony in Middle East. It in on their behalf, the behalf of their/your families in Iran, and in our own interest as Americans that these negotiations should commence. It just might be worth a try to present US leadership that uses new approaches to diplomatic issues, starting with the intent to listen as much as the intent to talk, an attempt to establish common goals, mediate differences, engage in dialog void of orders and ultimatums and, at the very least, a commitment to avoid becoming party to nuclear holocaust that has the potential to decimate populations both at home and abroad.
BTW, beware of cowboy diplomatic initiaties. An American Interests Section (quasi precursor to an embassy) will be just that. Translation: An "intelligence" (if such a word can be uttered in the same context as Bush diplomacy) collecting dugout established to gather dirt to manipulate in the US media in an attempt to justify dialing conservative-style nuclear nonproliferation up a notch, just in time for an election. Ain't that handy? You can't talk to the Iranian leaders
They are the cleric and they are the ones who rule the country. They rule with an iron fist and by the power of Islam. The president of their country is only a puppet just like in the U.S.
We should NOT get involved unless asked, which probably will not happen. Sure, there are some in this country who thinks we should and it's both sides who have that opinion, not just the pubs. President A will be the winner, you can be sure of that, since they are only doing recounts on certain areas of the country (probably those that voted for President A.
As to Ann Coulter...the left has their share..Michael Moore, AL Franken...do you ever look at your own party?
That is the most INtolerant post I have seen here in a LONG time.
Liberals true colors always come out...regardless of how much they say they are the MOST tolerant, and want EVERYone to live and let live...everyone if you happen to be liberal.
If you want me to read something, then post it, so I can, but please don't suggest that I go on some kind of wild goose chase on some other unnamed *board* for a post by some unnamed *Iranian.* I simply don't have that kind of time.
If you don't think the Iranian president is nuts, then blame the media and the administration because that's he way he's been portrayed by both, and his actions sure suggest that he is. Please post his redeeming qualities as you see them.
I posted this because I thought it was humorous, yet dead on accurate in the way a lot of Americans feel.
Get the picture?
Debate, lets debate
Honey, I dont know if your problem is Alzheimer's or Parkinson's but I have debated all over this board..I have tried and tried again and again to debate with your cohorts..It starts out okay and then your conservative friends start attacking and it continues through the debate to where then there is no longer a debate. I ask for you to check the archives and you will see this..nothing but personal attacks against me, which then I attacked back..Debate..lets debate..I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE WITHOUT ATTACKS..Place an issue and lets debate..Who knows..my consciousness might be raised or yours might be..Lets do it,,
If customary deference to a sitting president by president elect
for the rest of us who understand such concepts as respect and traditional protocol, it would qualify as a darned good reason.
You do not know how to debate
you are the biggest hypocrite ever. I was debating with you, but just because you didn't like what I said you said I was attacking you.
Again, you're are a sad individual....hateful sad individual.
As far as I see it, there is no debate.
This country has gone to the dogs. We are now just another *invading* country, with no morals, no Constitution, nothing of which to be proud. We have a lying, warring regime taking us down with them, taking our freedoms, spitting on the Constitution, tearing the very fabric of this country, and you see nothing evil about that? That, my fellow American, is what I cannot comprehend. Furthermore, Iraq was not our enemy. The Bush Family MADE him our enemy so that our very DEMOCRACY would be eroded to the point that we won't even recognize by the time he is out of office. And you don't see any EVIL in that? WAKE UP, Smell the coffee, or even the stench that wreaks from this regime.
Debate
One of the biggest problems that we have today is our inability to have intellegent discussions. The previous commenters irrational, over-wrought statements, frought with conspiracy theory, does an excellent job of proving that point. There is plenty of grist for calling those in power to task for their actions and decisions without foaming at the mouth. Oh, how I long for the days of the old boy's club of the congress before the eighties when people of conscience could disagree on substance, still be fast friends and treat their political opposites with respect and decorum. I'm contuinally amazed how the most vocal and extreme ascribe nefarious motives to others. This seems to be, almost exclusively, an affliction of the left. Without this intellectual pollution, we might be able to actually find common ground. Debate me...
First it was that **we couldn't debate,** now it is ** persecution.** When did I say I was persecuted. I merely said the Crusades have been seen in a negative light for as long as I can remember and suddenly they are being seen in a good light. That's all, kaput, the end. Martyr...don't think so.
I don't know how you can live with such disdain for all liberals and all Arab peoples and have any peace or joy in your life. That is a full-time job, being angry.
debate
Hillary all the way -
No need to debate this...because I see it as the same and you do not....
I listened to AL Franken on Air America quite a few times...that was mild, and it was not a joke. He meant it when he said it. I find that offensive. You do not, probably because Ann Coulter did not say it talking about Democrats. Face it, if Ann Coulter had made the same comment Al Franken did, substituting Democrat names and Democrat for Republican, you would not say Ann Coulter was obviously joking and ignore it. That is what I am talking about...you can see exactly what Ann COulter did wrong, but blow off Al Franken as obviously joking. I just don't get that kind of rationalization, sorry. No offense meant...just don't understand it, and it seems so prevalent on the left side of the house. I mean, I can say Ann Coulter was wrong and that both statements by both people were offensive and wrong. You can agree that what Franken said was tasteless and classless, yet he gets a buy as *obviously joking." I just don't get why you can't just say both were wrong and leave it at that...Coulter has to be worse and Franken gets a buy.
Debate
Once again, this is a subject I feel very strongly about. I applaud anyone who broadens their education by learning a foreign language or learning anything new for that matter.
That being said, I believe that anyone who wishes to immigrate to THIS country should wish to embrace our language, our customs and our way of life, not the other way around. I am speaking here of the illegal INVADERS. I imagine that those who become citizens through legal channels, most likely learn English. I am sick to death of hearing babbling everywhere I go, to the grocery store, to restaurants, everywhere. My ancestors immigrated LEGALLY from Ireland and Germany. The other side of the ancestors were herded up and driven to a reservation like so many cattle. I live next door to the Cherokee Nation and not once have I heard them speaking in their native tongue outside of their Powwows, although they strive to keep the language alive. They don't require a press 1 for Cherokee on every telephone message system.
If this language issue isn't enough, it infuriates me that the Mexicans can come here to OUR country and march in their demonstrations while waving their MEXICAN flag.
Unfortunately, the reason we have to learn THEIR language to commuicate is most likely the majority who enter our country illegally are ignorant in even the most basic education and thus not likely to be able to learn a foreign language i.e. English.
You are correct, if we aren't willing to stand up for the heritage of our country; we may as well learn the language as one day we will most likely be part of Mexico and Spanish will be the official language.
marks the location of current message within thread
