Saddam Challenges Bush to Debate


Deuce

Well-Known Member
?I AM READY to conduct a direct dialogue ? a debate ? with your president,? Saddam told CBS News during a three-hour interview Monday in Baghdad, excerpts of which are now being released. ?I will say what I want and he will say what he wants.
?This will be an opportunity for him, if he?s committed to war, this will be an opportunity to convince the world.?
CBS News anchor Dan Rather, who conducted the interview, said he asked Saddam if his offer was a joke.
?This is something proposed in earnest,? Saddam said in response. ?Out of my respect for the people of the United States and my respect for the people of Iraq and the people of the world, I call for this because war is not a joke.
?As leaders, why don?t we use this opportunity??
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer rejected the debate offer, saying it was ?not a serious statement.?
?There is no debating his need to disarm,? Fleischer added.

MISSILES IMPASSE
Saddam also flatly denied that any of his most advanced al-Samoud missiles are in violation of U.N. mandates.
?Iraq is allowed to prepare proper missiles and we are committed to that,? Saddam was quoted as saying. ?We do not have missiles that go beyond the proscribed range.?
Rather said Saddam strongly indicated Iraq will resist efforts to begin the destruction of the missiles as demanded by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix.
Saddam faces a test of whether he will destroy dozens of the missiles by March 1 as ordered by Blix. Destruction of the missiles, which have a range that exceeds U.N. limits, would be a blow to Iraq as it prepares for a possible invasion by U.S. forces.
Fleisher noted that Saddam ?won?t even acknowledge that the missiles exceed the limit. This is one further and troubling piece of evidence that he has weapons that he has both failed to acknowledge or destroy. This underscores the very nature of the threat and the problem in the first place.?

INTERVIEW IMPRESSIONS
Rather, who went through two hours of security before sitting down with Saddam, said he found Iraq?s leader to be outwardly calm but expecting that war will come.
?He knows that the time for the invasion is very near. He takes seriously what President Bush has been saying,? Rather said.
Saddam believes that if it comes to war, Iraq will have to ?absorb a tremendous first and maybe second punch from the United States and its allies? but his country will be able to withstand that punch and emerge undefeated, Rather said, adding that Saddam did not accept that he lost the 1991 Gulf war.
Saddam made clear he did not plan to flee into exile before any invasion, Rather said.
CBS said it intended to broadcast portions of the Saddam interview Tuesday but that Iraqi television, which recorded the three-hour interview, insisted on translating it and making copies and still had not delivered the tapes.
The network said portions of the interview would air Tuesday and Wednesday nights.
Saddam, who often appears on Iraqi television but rarely makes public appearances, gave his first Western TV interview in more than a decade earlier this month, speaking with a retired British lawmaker and peace activist, Tony Benn.
 

I heard this on NPR last night, and have yet to see anything about it from major media.

And why is Powell so non-chalant about N. Korea's firing a missile on the same day as S. Korea inaugerates their leader?

These Muthas have NUKES, and the missiles to use them. Bush wants to completely disarm Iraq, who MIGHT have WMD.

What if we go in there and there is NOTHING? What kind of arseholes would we look like?

Increase the inspections and help the people of Iraq, not their government.
 
Originally posted by sophandros

What if we go in there and there is NOTHING?

sophandros,

That's our least worry. We're looking for oil, not weapons, and we're sure to find plenty of that.


Robber,

LOL. Lately, its been hard to tell which one is the lunatic, and which one is the idiot.
 
Battle-2.gif

:argue:
:argue2:



gossip.gif
 
The funny thing is, for years, our government, the CIA, FBI, and anybody else who wanted to get in on the manhunt, couldn't find Saddam.

How does Dan Rather find him? Then talk to him for 3 hours.

LMAO @ Robber.

NICE
 
What a joke.

Let me see,,,,,,,,, Hitler challenges Churchill/Roolsevelt to a debate,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, :xeye: :retard: ,,,,,, folks,,, mass media has gotten TOTALLY out of hand if this happens. :lmao:
 
And why is Powell so non-chalant about N. Korea's firing a missile on the same day as S. Korea inaugerates their leader?


He did not do any favors with the South Koreans by saying that we should not rule out the option of attacking N.korea.


Someone did not brief him or tell him that to the South Koreans, he meant that we will attack the North. Most of the South Koreans are starting to believe that the U.S will attack N.korea.


Why would we?
 
Re: What a joke.

Originally posted by Bartram
Let me see,,,,,,,,, Hitler challenges Churchill/Roolsevelt to a debate,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, :xeye: :retard: ,,,,,, folks,,, mass media has gotten TOTALLY out of hand if this happens. :lmao:
YOu are comparing bush to Churchill or Roosevelt?

:sick:
 
Damn, I guess the black Republicans don't have an opinion on this. :confused:


Must be waiting on another opportunity to generalize the Democratic Party and bash it.
 
I had this question posed to me by one of my co-workers... with all this high tech spy stuff we have here. Why can't the US just send in some spys and assassinate Sadaam?
 
Originally posted by mighty hornet
Damn, I guess the black Republicans don't have an opinion on this. :confused:


Must be waiting on another opportunity to generalize the Democratic Party and bash it.

We need to focus most of our attention on N.Korea and Bin Laden otherwise we stand we will leave a potentially dangerous situation unchecked.Make no mistake we can take them out and so could S.Korea because they have a better trained military.We have the capacity to stop their nukes but we have more casualties in a war because they are tougher than anything Iraq could come up with.Saddam poses a very real threat and has for the last 6 or 7 years due to his ties to known terrorists and his failure to comply with UN regulations.Why wait until we are at the brink of war to follow the regulations?The man has murdered thousands of his own people but I don't recall any worldwide protests over that.Now as far as N.Korea is concerned they want our attention because their economy is on the verge of collapse so they want the UN to trade aid for nuclear disarmement(sp).
 

Originally posted by BISON-2K1


We need to focus most of our attention on N.Korea and Bin Laden otherwise we stand we will leave a potentially dangerous situation unchecked.Make no mistake we can take them out and so could S.Korea because they have a better trained military.


The problem with attacking North Korea, is that they have vowed that if we attack them, they will immediately attack South Korea, and possibly even Japan.

There is no doubt that the U.S. would prevail against them in the end, but the amount of casualties sustained by South Korea and Japan could be devastating.

It is estimated that South Korea could have upwards of 500,000 civilian casualties within the first few hours of a nuclear attack by North Korea, before any type of response could be made by the U.S., if North Korea decided to make a pre-emptive strike.

Even if the U.S. strikes first, North Korea would likely still have enough fire power left after absorbing the initial blow, to kill tens of thousands of South Koreans. When it comes to nuclear weapons, it only takes ONE. Remember Hiroshima?

Consequently, South Korea is the last country that wants a war between the U.S. and North Korea.
 
You know, I wonder why I even bother sometimes....

But here goes...

Sadaam has not since day one of his surrender after invading Kuwait adhered to agreed to sanctions. Remember he surrendered...he agreed to the terms and has not abided by them. Based on the region, the Muslim govt's surrounding them and the level of support that they give to current and future terrorist plans it is in our best interest to facilitate his demise. For you Oil argument advocates....what kind of car do you drive?? Do you carpool?? Ride a horse??? If not, then start walking then we won't be dependent on foreign oil. Oh yeah, we can't drill here in the U.S. because so many liberals worry about the habitat of the silverbacked ground squirrel. We create our own problems in regards to fuel needs......again, unless you are walking or riding a bike or horse stop making that argument.

North Korea for the 100th time does not have a Nuclear weapon...they are trying to "develop" one. If a woman wants to develop pregnacy she has to have sex first....we are in the process of trying to keep the spoon out of the pudding in regards to N. Korea. South Korea would have to decide whether or not N. Korea is kicked to sleep....Saudi Arabia is giving us Carte Blanche to do so...why, because they are "threatned" by him. Last but not least Koreans are Koreans....citizens of both countries ultimately want a unified Korea....It's just the idiots to the North that still wish to hang on to their outdated Communist ideals. Korea is the last place in the world where Capitalism and Communism face off against each other......you even see Pepsi, Coke and Pizza Hut in China, so what does that tell you.

Again, I don't even know why I bothered....
You will still continue to call Bush a war monger, when Clinton sent troops into Somalia....We "STILL" have troops in Kosovo that he sent during his admin...We bombed Yugoslavia, Bosnia and Iraq 14 times during his administration.

I guess a Democratic led war is more compassionate...

John F. Kennedy please send help...
.
.
.
.
..

.
..

Ooops my bad, he was a Democrat too...
:(
 
See?? You negros should listen to makahoe.

I used to think that war business was about cheap gas, and then I realized that gas is higher now than it has ever been. This whole thing is about Saddam trying to kill Bushs daddy, and the US trying to police the whole damn world.

This weapons of mass destruction (WMD) bit is a joke. nobody gives a damn about the israilies or the Pakistanis or the Indians having WMD. Nobody gave a damn about saddam having them as long as he was killing Kurds and Iranians with them. When he grabbed at Kuwait, well we had to kick him in the ass. We killed 100,000 iraqis in the process, but the mission was accomplished.

Now after Sept 11, bush sees his big chance to get back at saddam for one-upping his dad. He has tried to link Iraq to terrorism. No link whatsoever has been established. Why the hell arent we preparing to attack Iran or Saudi Arabia? He has tried to say that Saddam will give WMD to Bin Laden. This is the most laughable statement. Bin Laden does not like any muslim govt that is not strictly following islam. Since Iraqi women can walk around with their eyes uncovered, and dont get beaten for sass mouth, Binladen thinks Saddam is an infidel.

So we are going over there to "liberate" the Iraqi people. LMAO! Did anyone ask the people over there if the wanted liberation? maybe thats nether here nor there.

Makaho is trying to tell you about how big of a threat IRAQ is to us. I mean if saddam could get a missle over to Cuba, He could maybe hit Miami with it.

i dont know why he bothered either.
 
First of all it's Makaho not makahoe...

And I bothered because I can.

If you have lived in both Saudi Arabia and Korea post here---->
If you have ever laced up a pair of combat boots and actually seen the very weapons that we are trying to ban in action post here---->
If you actually know WTF you are talking about instead of regurtating Media spin post here --->

Otherwise don't comment on what I bother to comment on. Oh yeah, one of Clinton's first actions as President was to order a Tomahawk and Carrier based strike becasue he got wind of Sadaams's attempt to assassinate Bush Sr. Imagine that ?? Oh yeah, that was just one of over 14 times Clinton put a foot to dat azz.

Do you people even know what you are talking about sometimes. While I was in the Gulf War my unit had 40,000 Iraqi soldiers surrender to us without firing a shot on one occasion. If a countries soldiers don't have a will to serve their govt., imagine the apathy it's civilians have. And you can't ask them how they feel, because if they appear on camera and talk bad about the Govt. they are killed.
And you are dayumm right we can determine who and what countries own WMD. Sadaam ucking surrendered after the Gulf War, as per agreed to stipulations he can't have the isht.

You are in a profession that perpetuates this theory.
If Ray Ray sells Crack and gets caught he is a felon and cannot own a gun period. You mofos are letting your hate for Bush cloud your judgement. Clinton did the very same thing with N. Korea and Iraq.....My unit deployed once to Saudi after the Gulf War as a result of Sadaam clowning with inspectors. My unit deplyed twice to Korea because Kim Il Sung wouldn't allow inspectors into reactors.

And I bothered because I fu***ing can...
 
Sadaam has not since day one of his surrender after invading Kuwait adhered to agreed to sanctions.


Sanctions?

Ok serious question.

Isreal has violated 32 UN sanctions and also has nuclear weapons. Why have we not invaded them?

True of False Isreal threated to destory Iraq's oil reserves if the US threaten any sanctions agaist them.

Everything that we are claiming Sadaam has done to his people Isreal has done too Palastine. Why at no time has the US decieded to step in and disarm Isreal?

This whole picture is not right.
 
Israel did not invade Kuwait...get it's azz kicked...then sign agreements and promise to abide by said agreements then not follow them. We have never went to war with Israel so you are comparing apples and oranges. That's like you breaking up with your husband for something he did to his high school girlfriend....It has nothing to do with Israel.

BTW, Sadaam launched 40 Scuds into Israel and they did not retaliate, why because they did not want to make it a Jew/Muslim issue. Again, how many of you have actually lived in that part of the world? I have, no matter what Muslims will always hate Jews. I also don't know too many Jews that strap bombs to themselves and kill innocent people, so I can't get with the Palestinian references....they fall in the Terrorist category as far as I'm concerned.

And again, what does what Iraq is doing have to do with Israel....nada.
 
Waiting for the part where any of that stuff affects us...
Waiting for the part that justifies $100 Billion of our tax dollars to fix the problem.

When did Iraq ever attack the United States? Prior to 1991 had Kuwait signed a mutual defense treaty with the United States?

If you were in the Military, you should know better than the rest of us that this thing isnt worth American lives. We dont have a dog in this fight, and never did.
 
Makaho Sanford?

You know, I wonder why I even bother sometimes....

Mak, you remind me of Fred Sanford that time he kept tellin' Lamont, "I don't have nothing else to say. I'm gonna be quiet. I ain't gonna say another world.",,, only to keep on weighing in!

:lmao:

Admit it breh,,, you just can't resist weighing in on dem-rep smack! :bump:
 
I don't think the 'insiders' in Washington would ever allow a debate to happen between GDubya and Saddam. Personally, I don't think Bush can 'think on the fly' fast enough to match wits with Saddam. And unless the questions and answers are scripted, then Saddam wins the debate anyway you look at it. I say 'Smart move by Saddam' by demanding a debate. But even he knows it'll never happen.

That would be like Al Gore debating Al Sharpton. Even if Al Gore had the 'upper' hand issue-wise, Al Sharpton would 'grand-stand' him to death, winning over the crowd.......


:dude:
 
Back
Top