Bush going overboard?

Well folks, it looks as if we may be facing another World War. I think Bush needs to cut down on his political actions against other countries until we finish the Taliban and al-Qaeda. He is making things personal and letting his personal emotions dictate the American fait. He's pissing off EU which have been a close brother to us. Now he wants to pick a fight with Saddam Hussein. It will be a very bloody war if we go to Iraq. Plus, we've pissed off China again because they are on our nuke target list. I don't know how the rest of America feels but I feel kind of scared. I guaranty that Canada will be flooded with Americans if nukes start flying.

Should we be worried America?

I also got wind that there is a small militant mother group in Colorado that is looking to go to war with Canada. Has anybody else heard of this "Blame Canada" movement?

90% of Canada's population lives within 200 miles of the US border, so it's not like Canadians wouldn't be affected.

yep. if nukes start flying against the US, we will be the first to know (and to go).
(Norad anyone?) :(

[quote]Originally posted by MacGyver:
<strong>90% of Canada's population lives within 200 miles of the US border, so it's not like Canadians wouldn't be affected.</strong><hr></blockquote>

We build a Windrivers fallout shelter.

I think we need to clean up the mess that has been out there for too long. Will that lead to a World War, sure it could. I don't think anyone is capable of doing that, except China, India, Russia and the US. North Korea has Nukes, but I don't think they can even reach American soil (except perhaps Hawaii), so whom would they target?

Terrorism is an infection supported by smaller, less endowed countries. They have the money to attack the free world; they just don't have any real means other than terrorists.

I say flush them out, and cut their heads off. Terrorist supporters will be less and less over the next few years. Maybe then we can get on a plane without fear.

Ive said it before, and I'll say it again. Put simply, Bush is a friggin retard. I would trust him to pump my gas, let alone run my country.

my 0.2c

maybe he is the anti christ :eek:

[quote]Originally posted by EvilCabbage:
<strong>Ive said it before, and I'll say it again. Put simply, Bush is a friggin retard. I would trust him to pump my gas, let alone run my country.

my 0.2c</strong><hr></blockquote>

He isn’t a retard. He is thinking more about his political statue then what he is actually doing for our contry. I think.

...your from Australia, how the hell would you know anything, you don't live in the most wealthy, most powerful, most free country in the world? I guarantee you would be singing a different song if you lived in the USA. No beef intended, it's just that you can’t justify making comments like that.

I completely agree with Ya_know...

But Bush also needs to realize what a war will do.

Sure, we've been in them, but none have really happened on this continent for about 150 years.
The EU knows first hand what a war will do, most of Europe was decimated not once, but twice over the past 100 years, and each war is a lot worse than the last.

Bush needs to work with the EU, NATO, even the Warsaw Pact countries to figure out this issue, and deal with it as a team. We all learned that back in the 40s that teamwork is the only way to resolve an international issue without making it ten times worse.

As for the point of the only countries that can fight in a all-out nuclear attack, Its not just those handful of countries. Isreal has nukes, so deas the UK, Spain, Argentina, Germany, France, Italy, Pakistan, , a lot of the former USSR countries (Georgia, Ukraine, ect...),and there is a very good chance that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lybia, and a few others do have nukes (whats to say that Cuba still doesn't have them after the missl crisis?)..

Sure, North Korea may not have the reach, but whats to stop a sub from going right up to San Fransisco and blowing it to hell? How about Tokyo? China? South Korea? Australia (very strong ties with the US right now...)? The Phillipines?

Same with Iraq. Isreal, Turkey, parts of the EU, Egypt

Sure, not much would hit the US directly with a nuke to Tokyo, Athens, or Melbourne, but look at the long term effects, global tensions skyrocket, world economy crumbles (esp with a hit to Tokyo or in the EU). Its gone beyond killing now.

Even Bin Laden said, Sept 11 wasn't just about killing and destroying, he showed how fragile the world economy is. That one day, even though we were in a recession, pushed it back even further. Sept 10th, there was a good outlook of it being over and on a way to a very strong recovery Dec/Jan. After Setp 11th, over 50,000 people had no place to work instantly. Then, airliners laid off tens of thousands. Guess what? People who don't work don't pay as much taxes.Less taxes = less revinue for the government. Less revinue = less spending on what is needed in a time like this, military and science. All that was done without any weapons of mass destruction, just about 2 1/2 dozen men (I use that term loosly) with airline tickets, some crude weapons and training.

Well said Opiate. I dont see Americans talking **** about Tony Blair or Geoff Galop or whoever, because the fact is, we don't know that much about them, or the political system in their respective countries. Unless you know what EXACTLY someones intents are, you cannot, CANNOT, judge them as a person.

Bush is NOT a 'friggn retard'.

The threats of a nuclear attack, as long as no terrorists or extremist groups come into power with one, is very small.

The WHOLE reason we want to attack Iraq is to PREVENT A nuclear war. Saddam will have a functional ICBM NUKE capable of blowing up israel, or a US Target from anywhere from 5 to 18 months. Saddam is a madman, and he has proven his irrational behavior before, and will do it again. The day he gets a nuke, something will happen from his part. Say good bye to Israel.

We need to take him out FAST take him out HARD and take him out NOW. If not, the fate of the world is in his hands. Bush knows this. The UN knows this. And Most of your countries governments know this. And when it comes down to it, they will be here to help us out, regardless of what they say now.

[quote]Originally posted by Draggar:
<strong>I completely agree with Ya_know...

But Bush also needs to realize what a war will do.

Sure, we've been in them, but none have really happened on this continent for about 150 years.
The EU knows first hand what a war will do, most of Europe was decimated not once, but twice over the past 100 years, and each war is a lot worse than the last.

Bush needs to work with the EU, NATO, even the Warsaw Pact countries to figure out this issue, and deal with it as a team. We all learned that back in the 40s that teamwork is the only way to resolve an international issue without making it ten times worse.

As for the point of the only countries that can fight in a all-out nuclear attack, Its not just those handful of countries. Isreal has nukes, so deas the UK, Spain, Argentina, Germany, France, Italy, Pakistan, , a lot of the former USSR countries (Georgia, Ukraine, ect...),and there is a very good chance that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lybia, and a few others do have nukes (whats to say that Cuba still doesn't have them after the missl crisis?)..

Sure, North Korea may not have the reach, but whats to stop a sub from going right up to San Fransisco and blowing it to hell? How about Tokyo? China? South Korea? Australia (very strong ties with the US right now...)? The Phillipines?

Same with Iraq. Isreal, Turkey, parts of the EU, Egypt

Sure, not much would hit the US directly with a nuke to Tokyo, Athens, or Melbourne, but look at the long term effects, global tensions skyrocket, world economy crumbles (esp with a hit to Tokyo or in the EU). Its gone beyond killing now.

Even Bin Laden said, Sept 11 wasn't just about killing and destroying, he showed how fragile the world economy is. That one day, even though we were in a recession, pushed it back even further. Sept 10th, there was a good outlook of it being over and on a way to a very strong recovery Dec/Jan. After Setp 11th, over 50,000 people had no place to work instantly. Then, airliners laid off tens of thousands. Guess what? People who don't work don't pay as much taxes.Less taxes = less revinue for the government. Less revinue = less spending on what is needed in a time like this, military and science. All that was done without any weapons of mass destruction, just about 2 1/2 dozen men (I use that term loosly) with airline tickets, some crude weapons and training.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Just to set the record straight. The Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Alan Greenspan has said that we are no longer in a recession. This was about 1 week ago. YEAH!

Hopfully the un-employment gap will shrink and we can continue as hard working Americans. I think the Brits airline market got hit almost as hard as the US did, given' the size comparison.

OK, let me clarify then.

I have not seen one single intelligent public statement, from Bush, that didnt make him look like a puppet. A weak figurehead, will all the backbone of a squid.

Perhaps the media is just painting a bad picture of him for us.

You also have to remember that facing Iraq wont necessarily be a 'bloody war'. more than 10 years ago we went in there, with minimal casualties. The technology now is SO much better its not funny. It would almost be a repeat of afghanistan. Constant air barrages, until all their defenses are down, then more. Then FINALLY, tank, infantry, and anti-tank units will engage. Casualties will be at a minimum.