President of Iran at Columbia University

[The13thMan]

[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]I personally hate it when I state what I think and people insist on continuing the debate when it's clear I have no intention of changing my stance. ^_~ I don't mind arguing and debating to a certain extent, but when that argument starts to go in circles a bit, I lose interest.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]The end result of a debate doesn't always have to be somebody changing their stance on a subject. To my experience it rarely occurs. Instead i find debating a great way to strengthen your own beliefs by having to defend it against an equal on the other side of the fence. I barely had an opinion on the matter before this thread. Now i have a strong one. So, i guess it worked for me.
[/FONT][/COLOR]


[QUOTE=SunfallE][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]
That's a bit of the circular deal I was talking about actually. [/QUOTE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I don't know if i agree if it's circular or not, but if it is then i'd say the only reason it is is because there is a misunderstanding somewhere. Either with me or you. And let me make this abundantly clear, i'm not suggesting it's with you. I really don't know. I wouldn't be surprised at all if i was mistaken somewhere.

I do hope most arguments can be fairly linear, but if it has to loop back for a moment for the sake of clarity then so be it. Especially in the case of a message board where the last bit of the argument was probably read a day ago.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=SunfallE][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]What you did was first, ask me if I was going by what others said and I explained that I went by what the actual people said. Your counter if you will, was nothing more than a warning to not simply state what others think after I just stated that I don't? That's not a continuation of the debate that's being insulting and ignoring my clarification that I do think on my own. It doesn't make the debate any clearer, it comes across as you not believing what I already told you, I don't need the speech of it's okay to agree with others if you have the same opinion, but not if you're just doing it to agree. Especially since I already told you I don't do that. I live in Utah, a state that's so Republican that it's painful and yet I did not vote for Bush. I prefer to do things based on forming my own opinion instead of following others. So instead of following up with that...
[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]That's not being insulting and ignoring your clarification at all. I think it's very important to get that point across for anybody and everybody. I accepted that your opinion was your own very happily. Seriously. I apologize if it was insulting, it wasn't my intention.


[/FONT][/COLOR]


[QUOTE=SunfallE][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]
Why not ask what it is about their speech that had me thinking they were idiots instead of pointlessly continuing the bit about thinking for yourself when I already said that I do. I'll give an example of why I think Bollinger is an idiot, he told the President of Iran that he exhibits all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator. And my thought is why not call him out on just what these signs are? After all he is democratically elected by the people no less. It was in my opinion a rude statment that did nothing to further the discussion at all. It made Bollinger look like an idiot.
[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Why not say why you thought they were idiotic right when you stated that thought? It really is pointless to ask me why i didn't do this or that when i can just as easily counter it with an equally just question. And i honestly didn't think to ask it. Perhaps i should have, and perhaps you should have. Whatever man. Or...woman? Yeah... i think so.

And actually, i find it kind of funny that you didn't say why you thought they were idiotic up front when you're complaining about Bollinger doing the same thing to the Iranian President. It's not quite the same situation, but they are strikingly similar. Wouldn't you agree?


[/FONT][/COLOR]


[QUOTE=SunfallE][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]
Is my opinion of them harsh? Not in my eyes. Both of these men are in a position of power, different forms of power but still, one of influence. If that means they can't be a bit more polite or more direct with their conduct and discussions then I find that idiotic and stupid. Honestly, it looked more like a stupid, I can be rude to you so there deal instead of someone truly questioning the president of Iran.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I don't think he was being rude for the sake of rudeness. I think he had a personal problem with him and was angry at him. And so that we don't go in circles again, i won't continue this train of thought any further.

I have a question though, what would you have said if you were in Bollinger's position? Would you have been really polite while on the inside wishing you could speak your mind and call him a moron? In all honesty, that's probably what i'd do. I don't think i have the guts to call the guy out the way Bollinger did.

Another question: You feel that Bollinger is an idiot and the only reasons that you've come up with so far (that i've heard) is what he said during the introduction of President Ahmadinejad. What other reasons do you have for feeling that he's an idiot?
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[color=crimson]You have to approach some things with protocol. A democratically elected head of state of a major regional power should be handled as such. His demagoguery would have come bubbling out of his mouth inevitably without lambasting him in an introduction.

In the scheme of things, beyond being a young adult, there exits in the corporate, political and broader world unwritten and written rules of how to engage other parties. It's not all "brutal honesty rocks man". That mantra does not always work in complicated situations.[/color]

[James]

[color=#606060]I agree with DK - you do have to approach some things with protocol, no matter what your opinions of the leader.

This says far more about the United States and the fact that it is willing to be respectful and decent in the face of an enemy, rather than saying anything about Iran. If the host is respectful it makes Iran's rhetoric look even more misguided.[/color]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"][quote name='The13thMan;792495][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I don't think he was being rude for the sake of rudeness. I think he had a personal problem with him and was angry at him. And so that we don't go in circles again, i won't continue this train of thought any further.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]Personal problems have no place in a discussion like that. If that really is the case, he should not have even been involved if he could not leave them behind.[quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I have a question though, what would you have said if you were in Bollinger's position? Would you have been really polite while on the inside wishing you could speak your mind and call him a moron? In all honesty, that's probably what i'd do. I don't think i have the guts to call the guy out the way Bollinger did. [/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]Yes I would, and for the same reasons that DK and James mentioned in their posts right before this one. My personal feelings are not the issue and should not be when dealing with the President of another country. If one can't leave that behind when engaging in a debate or discussion, they need steer clear of said discussions.

As for what would I have said? I could have asked him this:

"with respect to the U.S., shortly after your election in October 2005, you called for a global jihad aimed at destroying the U.S. saying 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?' You went on to say, 'You should know that this slogan can certainly be achieved."

I would ask for him to explain that statement. I could also ask him why he did this: "Ahmadinejad has also revived an old slogan of the Khomeinist movement that had fallen into disuse in the '90s: 'Death to America!' Every meeting he addresses in Iran starts and ends with this cry - chanted by professional demonstrators working for the regime."

Or how about asking him about this: Ask Ahmaninejad about his role in the Iranian hostage taking of American consular officials during the Carter administration.

All of those are topics that would have called to question or demanded some form of answer instead of the other trite things that were merely an insult and made us look stupid. [quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Another question: You feel that Bollinger is an idiot and the only reasons that you've come up with so far (that i've heard) is what he said during the introduction of President Ahmadinejad. What other reasons do you have for feeling that he's an idiot?[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]Because Bollinger supports increasing the University of Columbia into the Manhattanville neighborhood, including using eminent domain to help with seizing the needed property there. If you want to know more, look it up. That along with his behavior in regards to the President of Iran is why I think he's an idiot. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]Personal problems have no place in a discussion like that. If that really is the case, he should not have even been involved if he could not leave them behind.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I thought about this for a good moment before coming to a decision. And... as usual, i come to a mixed conclusion. But i did realize one thing, i believe truth should always prevail. I think it is the most important thing of all here.

As i said before, ******* politeness if it weakens truth.
[/FONT][/COLOR]


[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]
Yes I would, and for the same reasons that DK and James mentioned in their posts right before this one. My personal feelings are not the issue and should not be when dealing with the President of another country. If one can't leave that behind when engaging in a debate or discussion, they need steer clear of said discussions. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Ok, but why? Why do we need to leave emotion out of political discussions? Is it because we are afraid of some sort of conflict? War? Then shouldn't it be those things that should be controlled and not the speech?

Unfortunately i realize that these are my own personal feelings on the matter and have little bearing on what actually should(n't) happen. People get offended at rudeness. People can get so angry to the point that if they're in a point of power they can lift their fists (be it literal or metaphorical) and strike. I see this as one of the true problem behind war, conflict, and politics. We as a race possess so much raw emotion that we often times cannot control ourselves and we resort to our brutish nature. It's too bad we have not evolved in maturity past that. We have so much pride in our thinking and rational minds and yet we still allow ourselves to be controlled by the very instincts that we look down upon.

There needs to be change.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]
Because Bollinger supports increasing the University of Columbia into the Manhattanville neighborhood, including using eminent domain to help with seizing the needed property there. If you want to know more, look it up. That along with his behavior in regards to the President of Iran is why I think he's an idiot. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I still think you judge harshly. But i'm one of those guys that really needs to get all the information before making a judgment. I know how biased information can be. It would take me a long time before i could form an opinion on Bollinger or even Ahmadinejad.


[/FONT][/COLOR]