RSVP to Iran

Ever wish you could whisper in the president's ear? Give him advice on issues plaguing the nation? Well, here's your chance to tell the world what you would do if you were president of the United States. Twice weekly, we'll ask our readers a question about an issue facing the nation and post your responses here.

Today's question:

If you were president, would you respond to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter? And if so, what would you say?

Click on the story in the box on the right to read excerpts from the letter, then e-mail us at Check back during the day to read more responses from FOX Fans and to see if yours was posted.

Here's what FOX Fans are saying:

"I do not believe he should answer the letter for TWO reasons: one is China, and two is Russia. This country has already forgotten what we went through during the Cold War. These countries could just look at the character that is making all of the trouble and tell him to straighten out or else. They do not need to have any fear that it would cost them anything as far as their investments are concerned. Iran is not about to try and bully these two countries. They will do exactly as Russia and China tell them to do. This world is heading for some real problems if the inhabitants don't wake up pretty soon. Most of the countries in the world have a pretty good life and it will only take a person like the one in Iran to really end it all. Hopefully Russia and China will realize that it is about time to join the rest of the world instead of letting the dictators continue to take it over." — Pat (Binghamton, NY)

"The U.S.A. is happy to discuss how fast you terminate your development program for nuclear technology. Additionally, I would announce that to him and the world that we (U.S.A.) are funding an ethanol production project on the scale of the Manhattan Project and converting our transportation to burn 100% ethanol. We will also be placing severe restrictions on oil usage within the U.S. so the oil companies can't derail the ethanol project. We will drive the price of oil so low that it will be an insignificant commodity, and your country of Iran will return to the dark ages where you want it to be." — Paul

"Publish the 'letter' it in its entirety so the world will know what we are confronted with. It in no way deals with the threat that civilization faces if Iran gets nuclear bomb capability. For the U.S. to be the ones to try to negotiate with them directly would only lead to failure and then we would be blamed for the failure. The U.S. effort should be to organize countries of a like mind on the Iranian problem (outside of the U.N. where Russia and China will block any real effective proposals) and proceed with sanctions, etc., to try to force Iran away from their current course." — Gordon

"I would not advise the president of the U.S.A. to respond to a letter written by a tyrant. It would lack class and integrety because the Iranian leader did not offer any type of solution to the issue. It is clearly a smokescreen to further hide their true position. Their government is based off theocracy and everyone should know that Iran and other 'axis of evil' nations' goal is to totally dominate the entire world with their beliefs." — Mike

"I would respond with a big, 'WHATEVER!'" — Scott (Dallas, TX)

"I don't believe as a country we have accomplished anything by having no diplomatic relations with Cuba, so it would be better to open the channels of communication with Iran." — Doug

"I would not give this idiot the time of day. He may soon find out that this nation will not put up with his b.s. and we will not stand by and allow them to have weapons of mass destruction. This man has already let it be known that he is a menace to the world and he needs a lesson in understanding what the world will not tolerate." — Moody (Florence, SC)

"The Iranian president is a moron and a lunatic. He talks out of both sides of his mouth, so to speak. He uses religion to further his cause even though there does not seem to be anything religious about him. This is not really surprising, since most if not all the leaders in that region do the same thing. It is a shame the common masses over there cannot seem to pick up on this. The correspondence of this idiot does not warrant nor deserve a response from anyone, especially the president of the United States. Mr. President should never even mention that the letter was written." — Stan

"What's the harm in responding? The president of Iran is trying to get a negative response from G.W.B. President Bush could give answers to Mahmoud to think about. Better yet, invite him to the White House to talk in person. This way, George could go point-counterpoint with him and settle their differences before the whole world. It would be the ultimate show of diplomacy. We peacefully regard this President of Iran with intelligent discourse and see how he responds." — Dan

"It does not warrant a response. Our relations with Iran will continue to fester for years to come, with some give and some take. Israel is well-prepared to take care of itself and doesn't need our saber-rattling to ensure their safety. If Iran reaches the brink, let Ahmadinejad pick his teeth with cruise missles." — A.F.

"I would suggest to the Iranian president that we have a face-to-face discussion. We will work out the time and place for a constructive interaction." — Elsa

"If I were president, I would give an interview with a line like this: 'Hey Mahmoud, we deeply regret that we did not kill you 25 years ago when you captured and tortured Americans. But we will do it right now to save our civilizations from barbarians like you and your kind." — Toby

"At this point it would be difficult, if not impossible, for any leader to engage in a diplomatic dialogue with a country that is preparing itself to take part in the 'Modern Crusades.' In preparation, we need to gather our allies, as well as marshall our forces and treat the situation in the Middle East as it should have been from the very beginning, as World War III. Unlike Vietnam and Korea, we need to take the gloves off and play for keeps." — Charles (Southfield, MI)

"Tell Barbara to keep her introspection to herself. The president's job is to protect us and the world from countries like Iran. Diplomacy is not an option. If we wait and talk, we will suffer. Look at it like this: if someone threatens to shoot a cop with a gun, should the cop wait to see if the gun is loaded? Or should we send the sheriff to see if the bullets are real?" — Peter (Thomasville, GA)

"The president should seize this opportunity to send a reasonable and carefully-worded open letter back to the Iranian people (rather than the Iranian president) stating the reasons why the U.S. is pursuing this course of action against the Iranian nuclear program. Within this letter, I would say that any nation that violates the charter of the U.N. by advocating and pursuing the destruction of another nation (Israel), combined with years of trying to hide the development of nuclear technology, cannot be trusted by free nations if there is even the possibility of nuclear weapons development. I would further say that the present Iranian regime, by defying the reasonable demands of the U.N and feeding the fears of the free nations, is leading their nation towards an inevitable conflict they cannot possibly win." — Edward

"I would say, 'I am the right man, in the right place, at the right time to say to you that you are the wrong leader in a very bad place at a time that is not of our choosing. I (We) the people of the United States will not tolerate any attempt to blackmail the world. The clock is ticking and not in your favor.' " — Don (Waynesville, MO)

“There is no way to have a dialogue with people so filled with hate for America and the freedom we stand for. Therefore, I would not respond except to say, ‘Your time is up.’ America cannot afford to wait until Iran decides to use their nuclear weapons. It will be too late.” — Linda (Texas)

“No, I would not give Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a response. Ahmadinejad has no credibility at all. Therefore, there is nothing that he can say that will hold any water. He is a lowlife that has too much power, and he must be stopped. The best way to deal with the situation in Iran will be to infiltrate the other groups within that country that would love to oust him in order to save their own country.” — Mike (Long Island, NY)

“President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made clear Iran's position concerning their nuclear development and their intentions toward Israel. The letter is nothing more than a ploy to distract and buy more time. If I were president, I would not dignify it with an answer. I would however, make sure the media got the right spin on it because in the event of an American intervention in Iran, the record needs to be set straight. President Ahmadinejad's letter was a ploy to buy more time to further his nuclear program — not an attempt to employ diplomatic means toward a solution!” — Steve

“I do not think this letter is worthy of a response. I would pursue alternative fuels with the same vigor and vision we tapped during the space race. I would move more troops into the Afghanistan/Pakistan border to hunt down bin Laden and kill him. I would stay the course in Iraq; to abandon them now would be an unpardonable sin. I would pressure Syria, Iran, Hamas and Islamic Jihad at every opportunity from economic embargoes to increasing support of Israel and for friendly governments in the area. I would punish any government who supported or helped Iran, including Russia and China, and I would subvert authority in Iran and increase levels of espionage to monitor nuclear advances.” — Scott (Arkansas)

“No, I would not respond. His letter was a self-serving instrument intended only for media attention and offers nothing constructive whatsoever. Why dignify it with a reply?” — Phil (Rensselaer, NY)

“I agree with Fred — I would not respond to the Iranian president's letter. He's learned from the North Koreans that you only offer an olive branch when you are up against the wall. It is usually backed up with lies and broken promises. If our president were to respond, I would offer the following: Democracy is not dead. It will never be dead as long as free men and women roam the earth. Millions in Eastern Europe and Central America now live in free democracies that would not exist if not for the leadership of the U.S. Iraq will have a democracy also, although it will be a long and tough road. Our own government is over 200 years old and we are still learning, so why should we enforce artificial and politically-motivated timetables on the struggling government of Iraq? The Iranian president states, 'Western-style democracy has not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity and that concept has failed.' Isn't it strange that only the democracies have stable governments and economies while third-world authoritative governments are racked by violence, intolerance and hatred?” — Stephen

“Without question, I would respond, and I would respond with a letter to be read during a session of the U.N. when the world is listening. I would outline our needs/requirements, explain our concerns, and then use the occasion as a huge P.R. blitz to refocus the world on what the U.S. truly stands for. I would explain what we have given to the world for the past 60 years in terms of assistance and outreach initiatives. I would use the forum to challenge the Iranians on specific issues and require that they speak to those issues. I would give them 30 days to respond with solutions, not just more proclamations and subterfuge. This is a golden opportunity to place the diplomatic ball back in the hands of the Iranians by challenging them to make their beliefs and agendas known. I would not miss this chance for anything.” — J. B. (Hopewell Junction, NY)

“I would not answer the letter. I would move every available military resource we have to his borders and point every muzzle in his direction. ‘Your move, Mahmoud.’ The games are now over. If you're indeed such a ‘powerful nation,’ let's see what you’ve got. If fighting takes place, it won't last long. One way or the other, the nuclear threat will be dismantled. It is not a danger we can live with. As far as ‘U.N. diplomacy’ goes, what major problems have these meaningless international whining sessions ever solved? None. The U.N., today, is useless, powerless, and meaningless. We don't need them and we should no longer pay attention to their self-serving ‘peace, love, and equal rights’ rhetoric. It's all for show anyway. They have no interest in truly working with us on anything. Recent history speaks volumes to this fact. Each member nation only has eyes on furthering its own views (and making its own money). Why bother with them? It is obvious they are willing to ignore, or even work against their so-called ‘friends’ needs in order to further their economic positions, regardless of consequence. The U.S. needs to do what the U.S. needs to do to protect ourselves and our allies.” — Mike

“Yes, I would respond to the letter. I would ask President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad why he needs nuclear power for energy when his country has enough oil to satisfy its need for energy for tens, if not hundreds, of years.” — Bill (Hemet, CA)

“I would not answer the president of Iran's correspondence. This is no president, but a dictator, who is putting his own people at risk by playing these games. He is clearly unstable and should not be toyed with. The entire United Nations should put as many sanctions against him as humanly possible short of hurting the Iranian people.” — Karen

"I do not think that I would respond if I were president. Ahmadinejad does not seem to be very qualified to make the kinds of statements/observations he has made about the U.S. vs. the world. He's using the current nuclear crisis simply to gain a public platform to continue his extremely radical and dangerous views. This is a country that has vowed to destroy Israel, and has inferred destruction of the U.S. They are our enemy and the letter does nothing to cause us to open a dialogue." — Fred

"The same advice Quadafi gave to Saddam just before the first Gulf War: 'Dig deep holes,' for we are coming." — D.D.

"My guess is that he is going to play cat-and-mouse with us just like Saddam did for 10 years. This will buy him the time he needs to get online with his nuke program. After this happens, we need to go back to the Cold War strategy of mutually assured destruction. In other words we say: 'If anyone shoots off a nuke at Israel, the U.S., or any other NATO nation, we will turn your country to glass, starting with Mecca.' I think that would get his attention." — Mike (Bradenton, FL)

"I take the letter for just what it is — a letter. Iran is actually getting pretty good about first strikes, meaning they know how to play the media. With that being said, I don't feel the president owes them anything. Now, if the U.S. wants to play politics, then respond." — Alfred

"Mr. Ahmadinejad: In the past century, the United States of America has been called upon several times to save the world's civilization from despots like you and the ideologies of hate that they preached. Hundreds of thousands of our citizens have lost their lives in crushing the spread of evil, perverted idealogues like you. In each case, democratic, free countries have emerged and prospered. Unfortunately, the world will again look upon the United States, as the most prolific, devastating, destructive and intimidating war machine ever assembled on this earth, to ensure unstable persons like you never develop nuclear capabilities. The United States is prepared to protect the world again. If you fail to heed the warning associated with this letter, your existence as you know it, will be forever changed. The fate of Iran and its people are in your hands." — Dan (Brookville, OH)

"My response if I were president would be: First, you say you want to destroy Israel, now you want peace. I already defeated one flip-flopper — you're next! " — Anthony (Tampa, FL)

"Dear Mr. Ahmadinejad: If you are truly interested in the peaceful production of nuclear electricity, United States nuclear inspectors will monitor all your nuclear sites, and if you comply with their demands, your country will have peace. If this demand is refused, American warships will impose a naval blockade. If you try to 'wipe Israel off the map' with a nuclear weapon, remember that we have thousands of them, as well as thousands of troops both east and west of your country. If you truly want peace, now is your chance to choose it. " — Steven (West Hartford, CT)

"Why should we respond if he doesn't respond to the U.N.? This letter should be forwarded to the U.N. for them to handle. I'm not saying I support the U.N. either, but if a country enters into the nuclear arena, they should at least comply with rules set forth for the betterment of the entire world, not just Iran. This Iranian president is obviously a wack-job. Have we forgotten what he did to the U.S. Embassy in Tehran? How he held U.S. hostages against their will? How he terrorized the area then, and now? What's to say this won't be the beginnings of WWIII?" — Jeffrey

"I would certainly try to establish a civilized dialogue with the president of Iran. While his views on Israel are untenable, he raises interesting and important points that President Bush would never consider answering, given his utter lack of introspection. As citizens, we should have asked the same questions — and demanded answers. But Bush won't really speak to us, either." — Barbara

"Dear Mahmoud: Up until yesterday, all you've talked about is destroying Israel. I believe you said, 'wiping Israel off the face of the Earth' or something. Now you're using the word 'peace.' How are you going to prove to me and the world that you've changed your ideas? And I'll tell you up front, I'm not too optimistic." Lt. Col. C.F. (Norfolk, VA)

"No, I would not respond to Iran. The president of Iran is a fanatical, uncivilized zealot. Anyone that makes a comment about Israel like he did does not deserve any serious thought. If the U.N. is doing what it should be doing, Iran should be expelled from that organization until this person is president of Iran." Nick

"I would send him a gift basket of nuclear warheads with my regrets." Ed (Mobile, AL)

"I would tell him that his word, no matter how diplomatic, has no credibility. If his previous actions are any indication of his integrity and truth, it means nothing. There are no guarantees that the words of the letter will not be changed at a more convenient time to suit his desires." Steve

"It is quite clear that you continue to feel the need that you must stand up to America in the eyes of your people. You are a little man in a big pond. The people of the United States will not be intimidated by your illogical rhetoric. This country and its people have been able to overcome situations which were much more vital and important. I will not allow your rants to have any importance in my decision-making. Thanks for the letter but when you are willing to face the vital importance of nuclear proliferation; write me again." Dora

"I do not believe the president of the United States should lower him or herself to respond directly to the leaders of Iran." Bob

"My reply as president would be with silence." Michael (Lebanon, ME)

"I would invite Mr. Ahmadinejad over for a personal tour of the United States, a road trip if you will. I would introduce him to all the beautiful splendors of our FREE country. We'd go to Las Vegas and enjoy all that city has to offer. We'd go to the Playboy mansion. I'd give him access to things he could only dream of. Then, I'd invite him to start working for the CIA and discuss the new road for Iran and the United States." Brent (High Point, NC)

"I wouldn't even dignify Iran with a response." Michael (Columbus, OH)

"The Ahmadinejad letter does not justify a response. It only would give him status as a real leader. Of course, Ahmadinejad is NOT a leader but just a mouthpiece for the real Iranian leaders, the fundamentalists. The recent backpedal on allowing women to attend soccer matches is abundant proof that Ahmadinejad is merely a puppet of the ayatollahs and has no power but is tightly controlled. As they say, Ahmadinejad has had his 15 minutes of fame. That is over now." Jim

"Mr. Ahmadinejad: You remind me of the previous president, George Bush, who was basically a mouthpiece for the real leaders of a religious and fanatically conservative political regime. If you truly cared about Iran's future and your people, you would do whatever was necessary to stop your nuclear ambitions. It is clear that you have your sights on the destruction of Israel, but you must know that will never happen. You will be utterly destroyed and the blood of your country will be on your conscience. If you are a reasonable man, you know all this already. If not, Iran will be facing many dark days ahead." Kip (Boston, MA)

"You have three months to dismantle, destroy, and abandon your nuclear program. If not, we will do it for you." Clinton

"I would give President Ahmadinejad the following ultimatum: Cease at once all efforts to develop nuclear weapons and allow U.S. (not U.N.) inspectors into Iran to ensure compliance with the ultimatum. Failure to comply will result in the utter and complete destruction of Iran's ability to wage war of any kind." Darin (Rio Rancho, NM)

"Diplomacy is not an option with a country like Iran. We are giving them too much time. Israel needs to make a strike with our backing." Peter