Should Bush debate Ahmadinejad?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's a publicity stunt, but it could backfire on Ahmadinejad.

I think the most that we can hope to get from Iran on the nuclear issue by using only diplomacy is that they do their Uranium enriching in another country (such as Russia and/or China) with IAEA monitoring of their entire fuel cycle, including used reactor fuel leaving Iran immediately for reprocessing.  It's not perfect, but I think if we try for more than that we'll have to have yet another unilateral war to get it.

Now if Bush were to spring this proposal on Ahmadinejad in the debate, then he has to agree that this satisfies the supposed reasons why Iran wants to "peacefully" enrich Uranium in the first place or give up the charade that he has only peaceful uses in mind.

However, even if Bush had the inclination to make such an offer, I doubt his administration's ability to pull it off.  Skillful diplomacy has not been a hallmark of the Bush presidency to date.  Indeed, some would say that there is no need to qualify the previous sentence with the word "skillful".

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What's your solution to the Iraqi situation? Cut and run?

Why should we allow the Iraqis to fight to the last American?  We should only hold their hands so much.  We can't keep the Iraqi Civil War from going full scale on our own forever.  The Iraquis have to be willing as well, but so far they've been more willing to let this continue than to face the real problems themselves.

That said, I think we are still at the point that the managed chaos that is in Iraq today is better than the unmanaged chaos that would result were we to leave now, but at some point either it will be clear that the Iraqis will never do enough to avoid a Civil War, in which case we should leave and let them enjoy their War, or it will be clear that they are doing enough to avoid a Civil War, in which case we should leave because our job there is done.