If President Bush, the smart, has nothing to hide, why won't he debate Iranian President Ahmadinejad?

Because he knows he'd lose. Not to mention he'd start using words like nuke-you-lar and calling himself the Decider and come up with comments that make no sense (for a full collection, go to www.DubyaSpeak.com). Bush would probably lose a debate to a well-informed high school debater.

He should not debate because it would further legitimize Ahmadinejad's positions. There is also no real benefit for the US in this debate. No matter what Bush does in the debate it would be portrayed in the Muslim world as a win for Ahmadinejad, and if does poorly the US press would tear Bush apart.

Besides how do you debate someone who will use religious dogma as fact, and whose starting position is the assumption that anyone that does not believe in Ahmadinejad's version of Islam has to convert or be killed.

One more thing, Ahmadinejad does not really rule his country, it is Iran is ruled by the Mullah's and allow Ahmadinejad to exist as a figurehead as long as he pushes their agenda.

Bush, in comparison to JFK, Reagan, Clinton and all the enduring Presidents, merely can no longer "think of on his ft" and Ahmadinejad knows that. are you able to think of a few tyrannical 0.33 international chief (or everybody else for that count) tricky Bubba to a debate? with the aid of the time massive undesirable Bubba became completed with him, Ahmadinejad could be volunteering Iran because of the fact the 51st state of the union.

That photo was photoshopped...sort of blows another gaping hole in your opinion doesn't it? Check over at Snopes for all the other faked garbage.

Now, to answer your "serious" question. The Iranian President is a known kidnapper (Carter administration hostage taker), an alleged murderer and all around radical Islamic. He is insane and as such, how does one have a cogent conversation with a man like that? Preposterous....try harder in your attempts.

A debate like this would only just show the world how much more incompetent Bush really is. Sorry cons, its the truth.

Why debate a Moronic Terrorist who claims the Holocaust never happened ? Why debate a Terrorist who has stated on numerous occasions his desire to wipe the only Democracy in the middle east off the face of the earth ?

Because it would be a frivolous waste of time to do it and there wouldnt be any benefit. Usually I preferr officials who dont want to waste their peoples time trying to show eachother up or holding expensive conferences denying the holocaust.

What would a debate prove. There is no reason for a debate. They are not running against each other.

He's never sober enough to speak clearly.

It is the policy of his Administration not to even talk to "wrongdoers". That would be rewarding them for their wrongdoing!

If negotiation doesn't work, how has the Neanderthal approach to foreign affairs been working for us?