Kippls Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 any country that he thinks has terrorists remeber he siad something a`boot a ten year plan against terroism probally Iran Liberia etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idea assassin Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 Just wondering which countries we flattened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albareth Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 Bush isn't going for any country IMO so long as he doesn't get reelected, and I'm personally hoping the intelligence of the "general" american population (fyi, not the idiots you see on tv) save us from that... Truly bad there's no good contestant though... But Bush won't be doing anything anytime soon, the economy id already a LOT worse than it was, demolished after Clintons good work. Invading countries just isn't an option. That doesn't say anything about trade embargoes and political coersions and propagand, which IMO won't stop while Bush and co (I'd go so far as to say any republicans... :P ) are in office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamastor Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 do remember that he was elected even tho he had less actual people vote for him... he won due to a technicality... and as for countries the us flatened? in recent memory we have afganistan and iraq... before that a whole lot more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eltiraaz Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 I saw in a recent issue of Time magazine that the US army was having trouble fighting the war against terrorism because their troops were too spread out. It included a map showing the current distribution of US Army troops. This included somewhere aound 30 - 40 000 in Europe. From what I last heard, Europe was fairly peaceful and not causing anyone any trouble. Why would the US have 2x my municipalities population located there? And even if a European country was a little shook, don't you think it would be up to the other European countries to deal with it? Last time I checked the world hadn't granted the title of "international police" to the states. :ph34r: Bush is up to something IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakkara Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 All of the above countries are in Bush's axis of evil. And the one lesson of the of the axis of evil is, if you dont want to be attacked by America YOU HAVE TO HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OR YOURE GOING TO GET BLOW TO HELL AND BACK EVERY TIME YOU TELL THE YANKS YOU HAVE LOADS OF OIL Exactly. The whole Iraq stuff really set a bad example for the rest of the world. Now everyone who feels threatened by US aggression DOES want to have WMD as a deterrant, and rightly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eltiraaz Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 Bush is up to something IMO. Bush or one of his superiors ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamastor Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 i dont know if anyone read the writings by sun tzu. he was a chinese general whos 'book' called "the art of war" not only still aplies today in many ways but it also aplies to things such as economy, and management. anyhow he writes that if a small force (iraqi army) is highly mobile and can attack anywhere it is asif it were invisible. this means that the defending force(us army) has to spread its resources all over the place to protect everything. this makes them weaker at any point and therefor the small force can actually beat a much larger one. he goes on about allot of stuf, i highly recomend it for a general knowledge read and is also quite good if you find yourself aking up in medival times and want to rule the world or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThetaOrionis01 Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 What the Iraqis doing is classic guerilla warfare - lots of hit & run attacks rather than an open confrontation. The question is - for how much longer will US & UK public opinion be willing to tolerate the loss of life? AFAIK more military personnel have been killed since the official end of the war than during actual hostilities. What would the consequences be both for the people of Iraq and for US foreign involvement if the coalition forces had to pull out because of unsustainable losses before an Iraqi government has had a chance to establish itself? Is Iraq another Vietnam in the making? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albareth Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 ...is also quite good if you find yourself aking up in medival times and want to rule the world or something... ! *evil laughter* MUHAHAHAHAHA! :lol: :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.