Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

[lancecashion]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Here we go again with the Vietnam interjection... We pulled out and over 5 million died afterwards in a ripple effect that spilled into Cambodia. Vietnam was a part of the Cold War. It was not a mistake to be there, just a mistake to let politicians run a war... and that is what is happening now in Iraq. Generals runs wars/Politicians run for office. I know many a frustrated Marine who gets shot at and can't shoot back b/c if they do return fire in an urban area, they have to fill out paperwork for the next 3 days. So, basically we are sending them out as armed targets.

Its a war folks, people are going to die and its ugly... Until we take the glooves off and start fighting this like a war, its just going to get worse.

Kamal. Thanks for the lesson in battle tactics and history. The SEALS are the few who DO know who the enemy.

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

re: vietnam, you dorks brought up all the political nonsense, i was just saying that the similarity is: walking down the street, our miliarty doesn't exactly know who the enemy is, and who the enemy isn't, which is similar to vietnam. sheesh

[KinKyJ]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Hokey, everybody be like Fonzie for a sec. WWIII is not going to break out tomorrow because of these attacks. Back in the 70's and the 80's Israel already launched military campaigns against Lebanon and they were on a much larger scale than now. We didn't have a global war on our hands back then either.

However, it's a sign on the wall imo. A sign that after the crumbling of communism a new global enemy is rising, arming itself and acquiring technology. The problem now is that this new enemy isn't bound to states nor wears uniforms. Muslim extremism is much more dangerous in other words than communism ever could be.

Why? Because they don't play by the rules normal states play by. During the Cold War there was the relative safety provided by the fear of MAD and backdoor diplomacy. Nowadays you can't possibly predict where the threat will come from (could be a country like Iran launching a strike or a terrorist cell kidnapping people). Apart from that, I don't see representatives of the Taliban, Al Quaida, Hamas, Hezbollah or whatever flag they fly sitting in the UN or any other pan national body. In other words, diplomacy won't provide an answer here.

Wait, rewind... Diplomacy WILL provide an answer here. Not by negotiating with the enemy, but by negotiating amongst allies in order to get an international front together in which all member states speak the same language and have the same agenda. The lack of unity and organisation within the "Free World" is a weakness muslim fundamentalist exploit to the max right now.

I'm not a political analyst, but the only way we can wipe out the fundamentalist threat imo, is by international cooperation of intelligence services and the political courage AND integrity to crush fundamentalism once and for all (I added integrity because the destruction of the threat should be the only goal at this moment, not oil, territory, ...).

@ sean: interesting that you point out the responsability of the Lebanese and Palestinian people bear for the actions of the people they've elected. Let's talk about the responsability on the heads of those who elected and re-elected the Bush administration... No, I'm not bashing the US, but you can't deny that thanks to the lack of long term vision, Bush and his friends facilitated the shit we're in indirectly. A few examples:

- The transatlantic relationships (NATO) never have been as stressed as they are under his administration.
- In its efforts to stay the only super power in the world, the Bush administration is (partly) responsible for the lack of unity within the EU, making it impossible for the Union to take rapid and determined action.
- Bush violated international law by invading Iraq as well as basic human rights by torturing and abusing prisoners. This scared the shit out of the ME, triggering a defensive reaction (like you see in Iran) as well as further radicalisation.
- Bush abused and weakened the military capacity of the US to "settle a personal vendetta" with Sadam. Capacity that could've been used to fight the real threat now
- The Israeli - Palestinian conflict only got worse due to the administration's lack of long term vision concerining the matter.

I'm not attacking what you said (it's a valid point indeed), nor do I want to bitch about how bad Bush is. My point is that in order to get us out of this mess, the world needs a team with long term vision in the Oval Office and not a pile of hidden agendas.

Sidenote: I'm not looking forward to a third WW, but maybe this is what the world needs in order to wake up. Face it, the way we've been and still are managing our (natural) resources only leads to a situation which will be far worse than a global war. With the depletion of fossil fuel reserves in sight, energy has already become a weapon. You don't have to be a NK rocket scientist to put two and two together to figure out what will happen if we run out of oil... And if you think I've been watching too many Mad Max movies, well just think of the reason why Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Was it:
a. because they were bored
b. because someone spiked their sake with xtc
c. because they were running out of oil due to their supply being cut off.

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

That might be the first intelligent thing i've read from kinky that i can agree with on some levels.

Bravo sir.

[KinKyJ]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

That might be the first intelligent thing i've read from kinky that i can agree with on some levels.

Bravo sir.

Coming from you that's quite a compliment Jenks

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

You have no idea how difficult it was for me to even type that half ass compliment.

The Isreal v. Lebenon is indeed nothing new, and this pales in comparison to earlier decades. But you hit the nail on the head that this is the sign on the wall, the elephant in the middle of the room.

I don't condone the way Bush went about war, but in his feeble little brain, i think he's been right all along:

NOW is the time to take a stand, to take action to them, not wait for the elephant to knock over everything in the room and move throughout the house.

[KinKyJ]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

I wuv you too

[lancecashion]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Hokey, everybody be like Fonzie for a sec. WWIII is not going to break out tomorrow because of these attacks. Back in the 70's and the 80's Israel already launched military campaigns against Lebanon and they were on a much larger scale than now. We didn't have a global war on our hands back then either.

However, it's a sign on the wall imo. A sign that after the crumbling of communism a new global enemy is rising, arming itself and acquiring technology. The problem now is that this new enemy isn't bound to states nor wears uniforms. Muslim extremism is much more dangerous in other words than communism ever could be.

Why? Because they don't play by the rules normal states play by. During the Cold War there was the relative safety provided by the fear of MAD and backdoor diplomacy. Nowadays you can't possibly predict where the threat will come from (could be a country like Iran launching a strike or a terrorist cell kidnapping people). Apart from that, I don't see representatives of the Taliban, Al Quaida, Hamas, Hezbollah or whatever flag they fly sitting in the UN or any other pan national body. In other words, diplomacy won't provide an answer here.

Wait, rewind... Diplomacy WILL provide an answer here. Not by negotiating with the enemy, but by negotiating amongst allies in order to get an international front together in which all member states speak the same language and have the same agenda. The lack of unity and organisation within the "Free World" is a weakness muslim fundamentalist exploit to the max right now.

I'm not a political analyst, but the only way we can wipe out the fundamentalist threat imo, is by international cooperation of intelligence services and the political courage AND integrity to crush fundamentalism once and for all (I added integrity because the destruction of the threat should be the only goal at this moment, not oil, territory, ...).

@ sean: interesting that you point out the responsability of the Lebanese and Palestinian people bear for the actions of the people they've elected. Let's talk about the responsability on the heads of those who elected and re-elected the Bush administration... No, I'm not bashing the US, but you can't deny that thanks to the lack of long term vision, Bush and his friends facilitated the shit we're in indirectly. A few examples:

- The transatlantic relationships (NATO) never have been as stressed as they are under his administration.
- In its efforts to stay the only super power in the world, the Bush administration is (partly) responsible for the lack of unity within the EU, making it impossible for the Union to take rapid and determined action.
- Bush violated international law by invading Iraq as well as basic human rights by torturing and abusing prisoners. This scared the shit out of the ME, triggering a defensive reaction (like you see in Iran) as well as further radicalisation.
- Bush abused and weakened the military capacity of the US to "settle a personal vendetta" with Sadam. Capacity that could've been used to fight the real threat now
- The Israeli - Palestinian conflict only got worse due to the administration's lack of long term vision concerining the matter.

I'm not attacking what you said (it's a valid point indeed), nor do I want to bitch about how bad Bush is. My point is that in order to get us out of this mess, the world needs a team with long term vision in the Oval Office and not a pile of hidden agendas.

Sidenote: I'm not looking forward to a third WW, but maybe this is what the world needs in order to wake up. Face it, the way we've been and still are managing our (natural) resources only leads to a situation which will be far worse than a global war. With the depletion of fossil fuel reserves in sight, energy has already become a weapon. You don't have to be a NK rocket scientist to put two and two together to figure out what will happen if we run out of oil... And if you think I've been watching too many Mad Max movies, well just think of the reason why Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Was it:
a. because they were bored
b. because someone spiked their sake with xtc
c. because they were running out of oil due to their supply being cut off.

They have been fighting for 1000s of years, I could hardly say Bush has much to do with what is going on.... You did exaxtly what you said you didn't do, which was bitch about Bush. BTW, we did not violate international law by invading Iraq. There was no official treaty, only a cease fire since Gulf War 1. The Iraqi military fired on coalition planes in the no fly zone almost every day since the cease fire.

Maybe you can tell me how many UN Resolutions have to be passed before action is taken??? BTW, the UN is more worried about me owning a shotgun than the shit that is going on in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. Follow the money and the UN will be there fleecing in some manner (Oil for Food, etc.)

Hey Bush needs to grow a pair... Damn, just when you need Ronald Regan.

>My point is that in order to get us out of this mess, the world needs a team with long term vision in the Oval Office and not a pile of hidden agendas.<

What governement in this world in not run by people with hidden agendas? Political science professors must be smoking way too much dope these days.... wait, they always have smoked way to much dope.

Beat it nerds

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

<<<<<
greatest
president
ever

[Kamal]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Kamal. Thanks for the lesson in battle tactics and history. The SEALS are the few who DO know who the enemy.

I'd never have guessed

[KinKyJ]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

They have been fighting for 1000s of years, I could hardly say Bush has much to do with what is going on.... You did exaxtly what you said you didn't do, which was bitch about Bush.

Not to suck Clinton's dick, but things did look a tad better at the "end" of his term... Apart from that, this thread isn't about Bush at all

BTW, we did not violate international law by invading Iraq. There was no official treaty, only a cease fire since Gulf War 1. The Iraqi military fired on coalition planes in the no fly zone almost every day since the cease fire.

Oh, so now it was because they fired their toy guns at your jets... Ignorant me thought it was because of WMD. Wake up lance, your administration has fed you, me and the rest of the world false info non stop. Btw, don't give me that cease fire crap, that's just lame.

Maybe you can tell me how many UN Resolutions have to be passed before action is taken??? BTW, the UN is more worried about me owning a shotgun than the shit that is going on in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. Follow the money and the UN will be there fleecing in some manner (Oil for Food, etc.)

Read my post again. What part of "diplomacy won't provide an answer here" is it that you don't understand?

I agree with you that the UN has become ineffective, but I see that as an incentive to reform the organisation instead of ignoring/rediculising it. What's the alternative? Unilateral action? Yeah, we all see where that has led to

And as for the money... Well yeah, probably you've never heard of UNESCO or UNICEF before. Should we cut them off too because of what went wrong in the OFF programme?

Hey Bush needs to grow a pair... Damn, just when you need Ronald Regan.

Care to elaborate on that? Don't get that remark at all..

>My point is that in order to get us out of this mess, the world needs a team with long term vision in the Oval Office and not a pile of hidden agendas.

<

What governement in this world in not run by people with hidden agendas? Political science professors must be smoking way too much dope these days.... wait, they always have smoked way to much dope.

Beat it nerds

Beat it populist

[sono]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Kamal

When you cross the border, blow up a military vehicle on soverign undisputed Israeli territory, kill our soldiers, abduct two more, then you have opened the floodgates.

Simple no?

when you invade countries, kill innocent people, break every international law possible, destroy people's houses, occupy land that doesn't belong to you then you have opened the mother of all floodgates.

what a hypocrite, you should be the last person to talk about aggression. Nobody does it better than Israel. What's a jewish country doing in the middle of 30 Arab countries. Go back to Germany or russia, it's where the majority of jews living in israel now came from.

It's nice having America on your side. Oh and by the way, do any of you americans know where billions of your tax money goes? Yes, you guessed it, NOT loans BUT donations to israel. Israel has no economy and relied on the US throughout its history to bankroll its existence in the middle east.

simple no?

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

^And now they're paying us back for it by sticking it to Hamas and eventually Iran.

[sono]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

^And now they're paying us back for it by sticking it to Hamas and eventually Iran.

yes and watch your soldiers fall one by one in iraq and afghanistan.

Your country might be sending you to iraq soon since they're running out of reservists.

[Jenks]

Re: Are we on the brink of WWIII ?

Your country might be sending you to iraq soon since they're running out of reservists.

not a chance commie, i'm 31 and missing a kidney. WOO HOO!!!!