washingtonpost.com — "I am ready to hold talks with Bush on important global issues at the assembly," he said. "Let us hold talks about Iraq and other issues. Then public opinion will judge ... We will offer our global solutions." The White House rejected Ahmadinejad's last year call for a presidential debate, calling it a "diversion."
Sep 16, 2007 View in Crawl 4
brokenbrickSep 17, 2007
Sure why not, and if anyone complains the warplanes are standing by. Oh wait, the military machine is already red lining; you can only push a piece of machinery so hard
oceanrainSep 18, 2007
Bush would lose on account that he could not even pronounce the Iranian leader's name!
xraminxSep 18, 2007
That would be the most hilarious debate ever! Two morons debating things they have no idea about.
leadoffmanSep 18, 2007
if it was ok then, it's ok now.Yes I think before I post, and I think you're a moron
ascheinbergSep 20, 2007
Typical. So the goal is to win by pandering to a base of "fans," rather than to serve your country and/or actually take a stand. And they wonder why our country is ready to crumble.
ciaran036Oct 2, 2007
It's not a laughing matter.
ciaran036Oct 2, 2007
why digg down? The fact is, America was once a very racist country, so it can't possibly criticise anyone else.