News What is next?

  • Thread starter megashawn
  • Start date

megashawn

Science Advisor
435
0
It seems the war with Iraq will be over in a month or two, and I'm curious what the next step in bush's war on terrorism is? Remember, we are at war with terrorism, not just Iraq.

I do not want this to turn into another thread where as Greg put it, throwing countrys around as potential targets like a game of risk. It seems like we should have certain goals in eliminating these terrorist organizations.

I'm also curious as to what will happen if after the war in Iraq no WMDs are found? While I agree there are plenty of other reasons, this was bush's biggest arguing point for going to war.

And I do not know about everyone else, but does these talks of several Arab nations wanting to form a new union worry anyone? It seems they hope to work together to protect themselves from the US.

So does anyone know of any other evil regimes or terrorists groups we will be seeking out after we are finished with iraq?
 
It's these kinds of things that I have been worried about, and I think that we'll continue to see a more foreboding geopolitical "climate", both through the public actions of governments and religious groups, and through the increased mobilization of terrorists.

Most people talk about damage done to Iraqis as a reason to oppose war...and it's a good reason, but my number 1 reason for being anti-war is summed up in the above paragraph.
 

kat

12
0
You have a much more positive outlook then I do..I'm seriously doubting this war will be over in a month or two.

I think our PR is basicly shot at this point..whether we find WMD's or not..it's not going to make a huge difference on how much of the world views us unless it's an absolutely MONUMENTAL find. I suspect at some point we may also find massgraves of tortured, assassinated people this may allow us some "forgiveness". I think more will depend on how the Iraqi people react towards us after Saddam and the dirty dozen are removed from power. Noone will know the truth of how they feel until they feel secure enough to say without fear of retribution.

I think the Arab Union has been around for awhile now..they've been ineffective for the most part..just a lot of talk talk..no action. I wish they would act in a manner that was productive and conducive to peace, even for israel and palestine..I highly doubt it.

I hope to God we will not be seeking anyone after this, we can't afford it, the world can't afford it and I'm quite sick of this question. No offense.
 

Zero

I think, once we've divided Iraq between American companies and turned its peoples into virtual slave labor, Bush will go back to his ranch and chill out.Oh wait, does he ever leave his ranch?
 

amp

Yeah Zero, when

he vacations at Camp David.
 

kat

12
0
Originally posted by Zero
I think, once we've divided Iraq between American companies and turned its peoples into virtual slave labor, Bush will go back to his ranch and chill out.Oh wait, does he ever leave his ranch?
Oh yes, just like we did with Japan, Germany...and...uh huh..evil evil.
 

Zero

Originally posted by kat
Oh yes, just like we did with Japan, Germany...and...uh huh..evil evil.
Yeah, ok, the world political scene hasn'r changed in 50 years...sure, whatever.
 

Lifegazer

Originally posted by kat
I think our PR is basicly shot at this point..whether we find WMD's or not..it's not going to make a huge difference on how much of the world views us unless it's an absolutely MONUMENTAL find.
Don't worry. One way or another, I'm sure they'll find what they want us to see.
 

LURCH

Science Advisor
2,546
118
Originally posted by megashawn

I'm also curious as to what will happen if after the war in Iraq no WMDs are found?
Also, what are all the protesters chanting "no blood for oil!" going to do if, once we enter Iraq, we find there is no oil there?
 

amp

Lurch,

What was that black liquid spouting from the ground that Saddam set on fire?
 

megashawn

Science Advisor
435
0
I hope to God we will not be seeking anyone after this, we can't afford it, the world can't afford it and I'm quite sick of this question. No offense.
None taking. However, you must understand its a valid question, and one that people should be thinking about now before bush just starts dropping bombs.

I mean, it seems to me Bush has set a new standard for starting wars:

Step 1: Accuse country of harboring illegal weapons or some other contrband.
Step 2: Ignore the UN and continue with threats of war if they don't turn over there weapons
Step 3: When they start turning over there weapons, hurry up and go to war with them so you can accuse them of war crimes and such.

I agree that Saddam needs to be out of power. He needed to be removed 10 years ago.

My question is, what will stop Bush, or any future president from doing the above to any country that displeases him/us?


Also, what are all the protesters chanting "no blood for oil!" going to do if, once we enter Iraq, we find there is no oil there?
Well, quite simply because I think the majority of protesters are merely riding the bandwagon. I'd say half of them don't even realize what there chanting, or what the sign there holding says/means.

Uhm, being as it is a known fact that Iraq is one of the richest oil reserves in the world, what makes you think we would not find any oil? As amp asked, if there is no oil, what then is fueling the fires? Thats really a silly question isn't it?
 

Alias

Hello!!! Is anyone home? It's called sarcasm. Look it up.
 

kat

12
0
Originally posted by megashawn
None taking. However, you must understand its a valid question, and one that people should be thinking about now before bush just starts dropping bombs.

I mean, it seems to me Bush has set a new standard for starting wars:

Step 1: Accuse country of harboring illegal weapons or some other contrband.
Step 2: Ignore the UN and continue with threats of war if they don't turn over there weapons
Step 3: When they start turning over there weapons, hurry up and go to war with them so you can accuse them of war crimes and such.

I agree that Saddam needs to be out of power. He needed to be removed 10 years ago.

My question is, what will stop Bush, or any future president from doing the above to any country that displeases him/us?

Well...actually..it's what you should have been asking way back in October during the congressional hearings.
 

Related Threads for: What is next?

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
9
Replies
211
Views
12K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Top