• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Saddam challenges Bush to a live tv and radio debate

glen

Lifer
rolleye.gif
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/21/iraq/main541427.shtml

Saddam Challenges Bush To Debate
Feb. 24, 2003


In an exclusive interview with CBS News Anchor Dan Rather, Saddam Hussein has challenged President George W. Bush to a live, international television and radio debate about the looming war.

Saddam envisions it as being along the lines of U.S. presidential campaign debates. The Iraqi president also flatly denies that his al-Samoud missiles are in violation of United Nations' mandates and indicates he does not intend to destroy them or pledge to destroy them as demanded by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix. Blix had set a deadline for at least a promise by this weekend.

Responding to Saddam's proposal, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer tells CBS News Correspondent Mark Knoller that it's "not a serious statement."

Fleischer said, "This is not about a debate. This is about disarmament and complying with the worlds instructions that Iraq disarm."

As for Saddam's denial of possession weapons of mass destruction, Fleischer said Saddam "is not facing reality on the issue of the al-Samoud missiles, why would his other statements have creditability?"

Fleischer said it would be more helpful to the world if Saddam engaged in disarmament and not debates.

Meanwhile, the U.S. and Britain readied a measure that could lead to military action while war opponents introduced a call for more inspections.

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock will introduce the resolution on behalf of London and Washington at a council meeting Monday afternoon, the diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"The best way to protect America is to find the killers before they kill us," President Bush told a meeting of U.S. governors at the White House.

The U.S. British resolution is expected to be accompanied by a deadline for a vote, which a spokesman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair said is expected by mid-March.

The resolution will state that Iraq remains in "material breach" of U.N. resolutions ordering its disarmament and refer to "serious consequences," the diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

It does not call for "all necessary means" to be used against Iraq.

The United States and Britain believe a declaration that Iraq is in "further material breach" would be enough to pave the way for military action against Saddam.

French President Jacques Chirac, meanwhile, announced that France, Germany and Russia have submitted a proposal Monday in the United Nations for step-by-step disarmament of Iraq, part of a European drive to counter U.S. pressure for military action.

"The aim is to establish a timetable for Iraq's disarmament, program by program, relating to weapons of mass destruction," Chirac told reporters before talks with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.

The U.S. is hoping to win the nine council votes necessary to pass a resolution ? and thus put the pressure on war skeptics like France, China and Russia, to either use their vetoes or acquiesce to military action.

The idea is that none of the three, who have criticized the U.S. for pushing a war without an international consensus, will want to be seen blocking a resolution with consensus support.

In Beijing, Secretary of State Colin Powell urged Chinese support for the resolution authorizing force against Saddam, but the Chinese stood by their position that U.N. inspections should continue.

France reiterated its long-held position that a new resolution on Iraq was "neither useful nor necessary" and that weapons inspections should continue and be reinforced.

Russia issued a strongly worded statement opposing a war over Iraq. The Foreign Ministry said, "Russia intends to use its full arsenal of diplomatic means in order to resolve the current critical situation around Iraq through political methods."

The United States has said it may go ahead with an attack even if it doesn't win Security Council approval.

The Security Council vote could depend heavily on the next report by chief inspector Hans Blix, and especially upon Iraq's reaction to Blix's call for the destruction of all Al-Samoud 2 missiles, which experts say violate range limits.

Iraq, which contends the missiles are still in a testing stage, has not refused to destroy them but has asked Blix to reconsider, claiming the missiles don't exceed the 93-mile limit once loaded with warheads and guidance systems.

But Blix said Iraq had increased the diameter of the Al Samoud in violation of a 1994 order from the previous U.N. inspectors, and that computer simulations showed the missile exceeded the limit. A larger diameter means the missile has the potential to travel farther.

U.N. inspectors now estimate Iraq has between 100 and 120 of the missiles, according to diplomatic sources.

Blix is also expressing skepticism over Iraq's claims to have destroyed the stocks of anthrax and VX nerve agent. Blix told a magazine he found it "a bit odd" that Baghdad, with "one of the best-organized regimes in the Arab world," had no records of the substances' destruction.

But Iraqi Lt. Gen. Hossam Mohamed Amin repeated claims that Iraq is "clean" of weapons of mass destruction, and said Iraq is cooperating with the inspectors in an attempt to prove it.

He said a U.N. team will come to Iraq on March 2 to check the soil for proof of weapons' destruction.

Amin also cited as an example of Iraq's cooperation its agreement to let American U-2 spy planes fly over its territory to support the work of the inspectors. He said Iraq was working on plans for flights by French Mirage fighters and German drones.

Separately, the United States on Monday overcame a hurdle in military preparations with Turkey's Cabinet agreeing to the deployment of tens of thousands of U.S. troops, allowing for a possible northern front against Iraq.
Turkey's parliament was expected to vote Tuesday on whether to allow the troops. A deadlock on the issue was broken when Washington offered Turkey $5 billion in aid and $10 billion in loans to cushion its economy in a war.


©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. opps!
 
saddam gets dumber everyday. The US should agree just so they could finally have tabs on Saddam. They haven't known where he has been for years I think. Then when the war starts they can bomb the presidential palace 😛
 
Why does anyone think that they'd have to be in the same room? Never seen a news reporter broadcasting from the location of the event they're covering?
 
That would be sweet - live TV coverage of Saddam at the podium about to start the debate, then BOOOOOOOOM!
he blows up, sort of like that video of the whale on the internet
 
So how would Saddam refer to Bush?

Great Satan?
Mr. Satan?
The Evil One?
Mr. Poopy Pants?
 
It woulid be better to have a fist fight except if bush starts to lose they throw mike tyson in there to eat saddamn.
 
Originally posted by: Mani
I'd kinda like to see that actually.

I'd rather it be between Saddam and Powell.

I like Bush and all, but I'd be nervous about putting him on a live debate. His speech skills just aren't... there.
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It woulid be better to have a fist fight except if bush starts to lose they throw mike tyson in there to eat saddamn.

That is a good one.... but a debate would be done first, so they both get overexcited and beat each other with hate......
 
Originally posted by: dahunan

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator" George Bush

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0012/18/nd.01.html

Not that you're taking that quote out of context or anything...

Full Text:

CHRIS BLACK, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Frank, President- elect George W. Bush came to Capitol Hill today for the first time since the election intending to listen to congressional leaders, the bipartisan congressional leadership. But he also made it clear to them, in more than two and a half hours of meetings, that he intends to stand by his tax cut proposal and other planks in his campaign agenda.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
 
There's not a chance in hell his advisers would allow him to make a fool of himself in front of the world. And there's nothing to debate. We are taking over Iraq for religious reasons, a New American Century, the visionary dream of lunatics idiological fanatics. It's not about truth, it's about pretending to have reasons to attack. We will be the new Axe of Evil. Your job is to stay the hell out of the way. The people are fools who have no idea what's best for them.
 
I'd love to see that!

Bush will need a translator though. I don't think anyone with an IQ of 80 and above can understand what he says. 😉



Or maybe I'm misunderestimating him?
 
Originally posted by: BunLengthHotDog
Bush is too dumb to debate anyone.

Lets see you get up in front of an entire nation...scratch that, THE WORLD...and not screw up once in awhile.

Saddam would be in the situation and probably handle it better, and he'd be the more hated one of the two, so would have more pressure to deal with.

There was a comment that the satatement wasn't serious, maybe it was and Saddam just wants to show Mr Poopy Pants up in front of the world.
 
Back
Top