Bush declares World War 3

[Defiant One]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060505/pl_afp/usattacksbushwwiii_060505220719

Discuss this idiot at will.:rolleyes:


edit - this rolleyes icon is fucking GAY!!!

[Poncho]

Umm... did anybody NOT think this was WW3? I knew the day that the Twin Towers went down we were approaching WW3. So for Bush to say it... doesn't really matter to me. We've got a ongoing war on 2 fronts, and may very well have a 3rd soon as well as MANY nations involved.... hmm, seems like a World War to me.

[DeadLamb]

I don't see how a war against an "idea" is even close to being the same as a world war vs a force that had already over ran a bunch of countries.

Al-Qaida vs Germany of WWII in the scale of world bad guy is not even close. Threat wise or body count or political power or or or or..

It's not Apples and Oranges, it's like a truck full of apples to a drop of orange juice. Germany killed more an any given Monday during WWII then Al-Qaida has in 5+ years.

The best thing bush could to do help is ratings and just how people think about him is STFU more and not wing it of the cuff style about anything.. Some are good at doing that but clearly he is not and it makes our leader look like a dumb ass to others every time he does crap like this.

I don't like the guy but I still want the president of my country to look/sound etc like the most powerful world leader he is and stuff like this does not help that happen.

[xwred1]

Calling it WW3 is pretty stupid and sensationalist imho. Doesn't seem anywhere close to tapping the resources of involved countries the way it did in WW2. Plus it looks like 95% of the chestbeating and warring is done by just the United States.


Bush said: "I believe that. I believe that it was the first counter-attack to World War III.

That line just strikes me as incredibly cheesy.

[Gremlin]

Aye I agree too. Calling it WW3 is way overkill. If he meant WW3 he should have gone straight for Osama and not else where but hey he knows what he is doing right. :rolleyes:

And poncho you are referring to attacking a 3rd nation? If you are meaning Iran, that surely will start WW3. We attack Iran, Iran attacks Israel, Israel retaliates and nice daisy chain. So yeah way to go. Let's start some more wars shall we :rolleyes:.

It is nothing being liberal or conservative, it is common sense that it would be a big mistake of attacking Iran.

[Swagger]

Let's start some more wars shall we. It is nothing being liberal or conservative, it is common sense.


I agree.....Get rid of the "Bad Guys".......first political sense you've ever made congrats Grem :P

[Gremlin]

I was being sarcastic. I am talking about common sense of attacking Iran. None of you guys think of the consequences what happens afterwards.

So you guys think of attacking Iran?? Well with what troops? Troops in Afghanistan and Iraq ( which should not have happened but hey I guess good ole Dubya is doing what he wishes )

[xwred1]

Don't feed the trolls.

[Gremlin]

I am not feeding the trolls :P

[Poncho]

Aye I agree too. Calling it WW3 is way overkill.


Make no mistake... this is WW3, whether or not it is officially called that. Comparing the tactics and style of combat to WW1 and WW2 is stupid. I doubt we'll ever see trench warfare again. :rolleyes: We are fighting an enemy across the globe, on just about every continent. Just because there is no clear cut nation or leadership does not make it any less of a war.


And poncho you are referring to attacking a 3rd nation? If you are meaning Iran, that surely will start WW3. We attack Iran, Iran attacks Israel, Israel retaliates and nice daisy chain. So yeah way to go. Let's start some more wars shall we. It is nothing being liberal or conservative, it is common sense.

Yea I'm talking about Iran. It would be nice if they would directly attack Israel, maybe then they would do something about, despite us not letting them. What's common sense is the reality that this is NOT a war against a nation but rather a war against a religion. A religion that wants us dead. And don't give me that BS about it only being the "extremist" that feel that way. I'll consider EVERY Muslim a threat until the day I see the "peaceful" ones condemning suicide bombers publicly.


Oh... and as for troops. Iran will mostly be an air war I bet, with the only ground warfare being "low intensity" SpecOPs type actions. And you know whats also great? We have A LOT more area to enter Iran from now that we are in Iraq. Shocking... maybe there was a method to all of this.

[Gremlin]

Yes US is the only who sees it as WW3. :rolleyes:

If good ole Bush sees it as WW3, why not go after Osama, directly instead of Iraq??? Well that is the point of WW2 comparison.

Again, do not think of the consequences of what happens after attacking Iran. It is easier said than done. Go for Air attacks, you think that is going to win the war??

[Poncho]

Again, do not think of the consequences of what happens after attacking Iran. It is easier said than done. Go for Air attacks, you think that is going to win the war??


No... but we can keep their nuclear program in check that way. I don't think that we should try to take out the government, but you cannot think that them having nukes is a good thing do you? Especially when they have said that they will use them to destroy Israel. Or are we not suppose to protect our allies? That's not even talking about the possibility of them producing nukes for terrorists. Oh... but they are the "peaceful" Muslims right? LOL

[xwred1]

I'll consider EVERY Muslim a threat until the day I see the "peaceful" ones condemning suicide bombers publicly.

That was on TV a long time ago.


Especially when they have said that they will use them to destroy Israel.

We better use nukes to destroy terror first. Once, and for all.

[Poncho]

That was on TV a long time ago.


LMAO... yea, give me a link where a LARGE group of muslims say that suicide bombing is a bad thing. I'm not talking about the guy born and raised in the US FYI.

[Poncho]

We better use nukes to destroy terror first. Once, and for all.

You mean what by this exactly?

[twentydead]

Hmmm. Doesn't there have to be an official declaration of war prior to calling something a war? I believe the United States declared war on Japan for World War II. Or is there some special Presidential Power? This is a terrorism conflict, not a war, not a World War III.

[xwred1]

LMAO... yea, give me a link where a LARGE group of muslims say that suicide bombing is a bad thing. I'm not talking about the guy born and raised in the US FYI.

Why? You're going to condemn a whole religion? I think you christians are barbarians.


You mean what by this exactly?

I mean we better wipe them out with a preemptive first strike.

[Poncho]

Hmmm. Doesn't there have to be an official declaration of war prior to calling something a war? I believe the United States declared war on Japan for World War II. Or is there some special Presidential Power? This is a terrorism conflict, not a war, not a World War III.


Blah Blah Blah... yea, Vietnam wasn't a "war" either. :rolleyes: My point is that this IS WW3, whether or not anyone will admit it. We'll be fighting this "conflict" on every continent for the next 10 years probably. But yea... it's not WW3.

[xwred1]

Oh I'm sure we'll be fighting it wherever its convenient. Seems more like an acid trip with a room full of reptiles in Vegas or a crusade than it is a WW3.

[Poncho]

Why? You're going to condemn a whole religion? I think you christians are barbarians.


A) I'm not christian, I'm agnostic. and B) Yes, I will condemn an entire religion until the day they give me a reason not to. One way to do that is for all the "peaceful" ones to start standing up for what they believe in and telling the so called extremists that they are wrong. Yea, I'm not holding my breath for that day. Sorry.. I don't buy into this PC bullshit of the few making everyone else look bad.

I mean we better wipe them out with a preemptive first strike.

I agree completely. I would much rather see the middle east as a glass parking lot with it's only inhabitants the oil workers wearing radiation suits with US flags on them. But that's just me.

[twentydead]

Blah Blah Blah... yea, Vietnam wasn't a "war" either. :rolleyes: My point is that this IS WW3, whether or not anyone will admit it. We'll be fighting this "conflict" on every continent for the next 10 years probably. But yea... it's not WW3.


I like your Vietnam comment. It proves that this is not a war. Show me a declaration of war and I'll join the sheep along side you.

[Poncho]

I like your Vietnam comment. It proves that this is not a war. Show me a declaration of war and I'll join the sheep along side you.


<--- my point.......................you --->

Yea, ask any person who has been in ANY type of fighting if there is a difference.

[xwred1]

Sorry.. I don't buy into this PC bullshit of the few making everyone else look bad.

You think its some crazy conspiracy with billions of people wanting to kill Americans, they just don't do it for some dramatic reason?

[Poncho]

You think its some crazy conspiracy with billions of people wanting to kill Americans, they just don't do it for some dramatic reason?


No... I think that most want us dead, while only a few are willing to actually pull the trigger so to speak. But the bottom line is that if there is only a small percentage of "killer Muslims" and a HUGE percentage of "peaceful Muslims" then it would be real easy for the "peaceful" ones to get rid of the "killers" Why don't they do that? Oh.. that's right cause they ALL want us dead. Sorry... but inaction isn't an excuse.

[twentydead]

<--- my point.......................you --->

Yea, ask any person who has been in ANY type of fighting if there is a difference.

any person? someone who has served in the military? Or some random drunk at the local bar?

[twentydead]

No... I think that most want us dead, while only a few are willing to actually pull the trigger so to speak. But the bottom line is that if there is only a small percentage of "killer Muslims" and a HUGE percentage of "peaceful Muslims" then it would be real easy for the "peaceful" ones to get rid of the "killers" Why don't they do that? Oh.. that's right cause they ALL want us dead. Sorry... but inaction isn't an excuse.

Did you survey most of them or did Fox news tell you?

[Poncho]

any person? someone who has served in the military? Or some random drunk at the local bar?


Ok... now I'm growing tired of you. You know EXACTLY what I am saying.

[Poncho]

Did you survey most of them or did Fox news tell you?


My point is I don't see them condemning suicide bombers, only praising them. When the Twin Towers fell I didn't see crying in the streets of the middle east, I only saw cheering. Are there "peaceful" Muslims? I'm sure there are. But until they speak up, they don't factor into my protection.

[xwred1]

My understanding is there was some footage of people doing vigils in Iran, holding lighters in the air or something, morning for the innocents killed at the WTC.

I only say this because I saw a pic a while ago in a news story where they mentioned it offhand. There were so many different things on the news at the time, not like I'm going to remember that one thing. I can try and find some documentation of it if you want.

Overall I think it is unreasonable of you to expect this group of people to do a purge like that. Everyone agrees child molesters are bad too, but nobody hunts them down or condemns the Catholic Church. At least, not everyone -- I didn't go on TV condemning the Catholic Church.


Yea, ask any person who has been in ANY type of fighting if there is a difference.

You can be justified in saying there is heightened police-like activity in alot of places in the world now -- but actual armed conflict involving military types is only in a few places. Most of this "war" is soft stuff like intelligence, defusing possible attacks, freezing assets of organizations, stuff like that.

I mean shoot, look at the figures -- the number of US military people that have died in all combat situations since 9/11 is probably a drop in the bucket compared to the same stretch of time engaged in WW1 or WW2. It'd be interesting to see figures on money spent (adjusted for inflation, of course), but I bet alot more was spent during the same period of time than it has been for this conflict. I'm mentioning these things because counting battles, counting casualties, and counting resources committed seems like a good way to measure the size of a war.

[twentydead]

My point is I don't see them condemning suicide bombers, only praising them. When the Twin Towers fell I didn't see crying in the streets of the middle east, I only saw cheering. Are there "peaceful" Muslims? I'm sure there are. But until they speak up, they don't factor into my protection.


You see what your news shows you. Your news shows what your government leaks out and whatever scraps they are fed.

Did you cry when the the Subways in england were bombed? If not, you are as bad as suicide bombers.

[Poncho]

You see what your news shows you. Your news shows what your government leaks out and whatever scraps they are fed.



You keep using "your", are you from this country? If not, where are you from? I only ask cause this is a fairly localized group of people on this forum, most of us know each other in real life. Just curious.

Did you cry when the the Subways in england were bombed? If not, you are as bad as suicide bombers.

Well first off the death toll was a bit different between the 2 and while I didn't "cry" I did morn their loss. I thought it was tragic and felt a great deal of pity for their country and loss.

[Poncho]

My understanding is there was some footage of people doing vigils in Iran, holding lighters in the air or something, morning for the innocents killed at the WTC.


Yea, I doubt that happened. Had it it would be used in every counter argument to the point that I am making. I've never seen anything like that. Think about it though.... we as a country are doing something that many here don't agree with and those people are standing up for that belief PUBLICALLY. The same cannot be said for Muslims.

Overall I think it is unreasonable of you to expect this group of people to do a purge like that. Everyone agrees child molesters are bad too, but nobody hunts them down or condemns the Catholic Church. At least, not everyone -- I didn't go on TV condemning the Catholic Church.
.

While you are comparing apples to oranges, yes people do condemn the catholic church. There has been a great deal of scorn for the way that the church handled that situation. And beyond that there are citizens that hunt down molesters... often assisting the police. Just saw a story on 60 minutes or 20/20 (can't remember which) about this.

As for WW3... let's just drop that. It's highly opinion as to the definition of what the war on terror is. There really is no clear cut answer to that.... truth is we are both probably right. :D

[xwred1]

Yea, I doubt that happened. Had it it would be used in every counter argument to the point that I am making. I've never seen anything like that.

You mean you think you would have seen it on television as a counterargument for when counting heads call for the extermination of all Muslims? My recollection watching TV is that most of the time they are very careful to mention this is a war on TERROR, not ISLAM. We are targeting individuals, not nations. I'm just saying, I think its too much to expect huge protests in the streets for foreign countries to speak out against these shadow organizations.


Think about it though.... we as a country are doing something that many here don't agree with and those people are standing up for that belief PUBLICALLY. The same cannot be said for Muslims.

United States is a big country with overt policies. Its not a shadow organization. Its doing things these people see every day, not engaging in cloak and dagger operations on small scales. I didn't see any americans out in the street trying to disassociate themselves from Timothy McVeigh. Did they do it for John Wilkes Booth or Lee Harvey Oswald? What about the BTK killer? Maybe I should distrust athletes until they are out in the streets denouncing those guys at Duke? Come on. Besides, its a weirder thing to be out in the streets protesting individuals than it is to be protesting groups (like protesting against a countries war policies, for example)


While you are comparing apples to oranges, yes people do condemn the catholic church. There has been a great deal of scorn for the way that the church handled that situation.

No, I think its a valid comparison because both of them are situations of large groups of people being tainted by the actions of a few. Personally, because of my boyish good looks, I am very distrustful of Catholics because I haven't seen a satisfactory rejection of child molestation by Catholics.


As for WW3... let's just drop that. It's highly opinion as to the definition of what the war on terror is. There really is no clear cut answer to that.... truth is we are both probably right.

No, I think you can make a pretty good argument that there are a group of conditions to be met in order to classify something as a World War. I'm not a historian, so I'm probably not qualified, but I don't think it is something you can look up in your gut -- we're going to have to consult those elitist books the factinistas continue to churn out :p

[Gremlin]

I guess some moron who tink they are Muslims are the baddoes that mean all Muslims are bad? Yes real Muslims stick to their religion like crazy. So I guess one Christian is bad so are all Christians bad?

Again US can call what they want because they want to. This is not World War III. The only thing I agree with Bush is to send illegal immigrants home. Rest he sux at what he has done so far with all the bullshit crap. World War III is with countries and terrorists are everywhere so have fundeclaring it which he does not know what he is talking about.

[Swagger]

So I guess one Christian is bad so are all Christians bad?


If truckloads of Christians were lining up to light themselves up like human m80's and killing bus loads of innocent people every week or so in the name of their religion and never seeing a Christian Leader speaking out about it....or other known Christians publicly condemning it...........I know I would pretty much condom all Christians as killers, maniacs and fucking loonies. But thats me.....and I like judging others and labeling people :P

[xwred1]

So is the benchmark a suicide act + no public figures denouncing it?

Or is just violence w/o suicide + no public figures also going to fall in this box?

[Swagger]

So is the benchmark a suicide act + no public figures denouncing it?

Or is just violence w/o suicide + no public figures also going to fall in this box?


I think my point was made pretty clear.....re-read if you must.

[xwred1]

So its only suicide attacks that really offend you. Cause people kill each other over religion all the time... just usually not with suicide attacks.

[Swagger]

So its only suicide attacks that really offend you. Cause people kill each other over religion all the time... just usually not with suicide attacks.

Nope....What i was saying was in response to Gremlins statement about hating a group because of the acts of an individual.

Its more about the massive amount of killing that goes on in the name of the Muslim religion and good "Muslims" not bothering to lift a hand or open their mouths to try to stop it or show that they are 100% against it.

[FreedomFGHTR]

World War III? Not yet but we are getting very close... In fact I doubt that we would attack Iran first, with all the rhetoric about attacking them, most likely they will roll into Baghdad during the sandstorm season which would render the US air superiorty wortheless while they pound the hell out of the green zone and take out key military leadership infastructure in the middle east. Then of course we would sandwhich Iran attacking them from both the west (Iraq) and the east (Afghanistan), and at which point several nations of the world would need to choose their sides wisely. Pakistan would side with the rest of the muslims and send their troops to attack our rear in Afghanistan. All the other middle eastern nations would problably bum rush Israel with all of our middle eastern forces occupied. Then we''d have to commit even more forces to save Israels ass, at which point China could then take Taiwan back, and from there go on a Pacific rampage. Most likely European nations wouldn't do a damn thing,.. Next thing you know you have North Korea breaking the 50+ year cease fire and crossing back into the South to continue its war against us (officially the Korean War has never ended) and then China will support thier fellow commies while we are streched even further to the limit then the next thing ya know after we are weakend to all hell the Ruskies will come into the middle east and viola Armageddon baby!!! Eventually the Chinese will come into California with help from the Mexicans, while the Canadians laugh their asses off... Finally we will launch nukes as a defensive action yet it will just ensure that the cockroaches will party like its 99... We all lose...