Many, many years ago there was a commercial about war, wish I knew the group that made it. But it was about 2 nations leaders meeting on top of a hill and proceeding to beat the tar out of each other. The winner of the fight would be the victor in the war. That's all I remember.

So I wonder if this new kind of war was enacted, who would win the Political Death Match: George W. or Saddam?

And also in general, if the World's leaders had to lead the charge to war and be on the front lines, would they declare war?

Mark

[ 09-20-2002, 06:22 AM: Message edited by: skywalker ]

heh, they would probably both lose, cause they are politicians in the end, brought up in gold craddles and in a life of comfort and privileges. theyd probably start whining and run away first chance they have. if i had to bet i would put my money on a tie. saddam would shoot himself in the foot and limp off crying and bush would go for the finish and choke on a pretzel. :D [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

I would have to put my money on George and heres why.

#1 Junkies arent good at much , but fighting is one of the things they ARE good at.

#2 Cocaine is a stimulant and with all the yeyo George is on he will be too tweeked up to feel any of Saddams punches.

#3 Having seen the way the Iraqi army surrendered at the first sighn of trouble durring the Gulf war, Saddam will prolly throw in the towel in the first 10 seconds.

#4 An election year is coming up and if George lost it would kill his re-election chances.

[ 09-20-2002, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: The Hunter of Jahanna ]

Mortal Kombat!

George The Bush VS Sadman Hustler

Round #1: Ding! Ding! FIGHT!

[ 09-20-2002, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Paladin2000 ]

Well, this kind of war isn't exactly new: for example a legend about the early ages of Rome is about a war with a neighbouring city, Albalonga. The war was fought by six men, three brothers from Rome and three from Alba, who dueled for overall victory. in the end the romans won, of course, although only one of the brothers survived.

Old Saddam would play nasty, you bet it. And also he seems the fittest of the two.

Yes, if they happened to be big and strong like a bull, since they could easily win wars without risking. This way we would have rulers which are there just because they are strong, and not for other and better reasons.
Just an example: Fidel Castro declaring war on the USA just after his golpe... an experienced fighter vs. a politician? Sounds bad for USA.

<font color="plum">And you don't think a good ole' boy from Texas knows a dirty trick or two himself?

Seriously, though, many people seem to forget that George Bush did serve in the military (Air Force). I also saw some blurbs on the news that he works out for 1 1/2 hours every day in the White House gym. He looks a lot more impressive without the 3-piece suit on.

Saddam is the one living off his people, not G.W.

BTW, the method of having generals face each other or each army choosing a champion is as old as the Bible - specifically David vs Goliath.

The Israelites and Philistines were locked in a bitter war with neither side gaining an advantage. That's when the Philistines offered Goliath as they're champion and challenged the Israelites to produce a champion of their own to face Goliath mano-y-mano - Winner Take All. The rest (as they say) is history.

Saddam is good at pontificating from the protection of his palace. He and his buddy Osama are both very good at sacrificing OTHERS for their cause while they stayed hidden in their holes. I'd put Bush up against either one of them any day of the week.</font>

[ 09-20-2002, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Cerek the Barbaric ]

<font color="plum">And you don't think a good ole' boy from Texas knows a dirty trick or two himself?

Seriously, though, many people seem to forget that George Bush did serve in the military (Air Force). I also saw some blurbs on the news that he works out for 1 1/2 hours every day in the White House gym. He looks a lot more impressive without the 3-piece suit on.

Saddam is the one living off his people, not G.W.
</font></font>[/QUOTE]Ya beat me to the punch Cerek. [img]smile.gif[/img] I saw a show on one of the discovery channels the other day(discovery health, I think), and it was talking about how much into physical fitness/working out Bush is. At one point it showed him jogging, then working out on free weights. He is BUFF! I hope I'm in that good of shape when I'm his age. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Anyhew...back on topic. I personally think that it might be an interesting idea if major international conflicts could be solved by having world leaders, or their chosen champion, duke it out. Boy...gives new meaning to the name WORLD Wrestling Federation. :D :D :D

Although I am not a native Texan, I find this statement to be patently offensive, not to mention inflammatory, as I am sure other of our Texas members here feel as well.

I suggest that you amend your statement, Hunter.

-Sazerac

ROFL Good fantasy dude. :D

Amended. I didnt mean to offend.