Who is next?

Wich country will be attacked next?

  • Iran

  • Syria

  • North Korea

  • Not sure, but Bush will attack another country.

  • No one. The American people will not allow another war.

  • No one: Bush is not planning to "liberate" any other nations.


Results are only viewable after voting.

David Gould

Pearl Harbor sucked. WinAce didn't.
May 28, 2002
16,931
514
53
Canberra, Australia
Visit site
✟29,118.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
AU-Labor
3rd April 2003 at 05:24 PM l33tace said this in Post #22




 :(

So no response to the rest of it?

Don't you think it was foolish to announce who you were going to attack and give them over a year to prepare? Don't you think it was foolish to make an already paranoid regime which you knew was close go getting nuclear weapons even more paranoid?


Or do you think that is a good strategy for dealing with North Korea?

It seems that some of you people worship Bush as if he is a god and refuse to actually think about the implications of some of the things he says.

What about the Axis of Evil speech was a good thing in terms of foreign policy, whether military or peaceful?
 
Upvote 0

Blindfaith

God's Tornado
Feb 9, 2002
5,775
89
57
Home of the Slug
✟7,755.00
Faith
Non-Denom
It wasn't official, it was a suggestion.  Yes, you edited it.  I edited my comment to 'Never mind'.

I think that some of us don't want to waste our time responding to the same old tired rhetoric that you're talking about.  Why the rolling of the eyes?  Because of said rhetoric that just isn't believable anymore except for a certain few. 
 
Upvote 0

Doctrine1st

Official nitwit
Oct 11, 2002
10,007
445
Seattle
Visit site
✟12,523.00
Faith
Politics
US-Others
As far as war, persnally I think no one is next unless there are *very* direct links unlike Irag and more like Afghanistan. I think some of the Saddam issue has a little to do with unfinished business. We can only wait and see, because if this exclusively has to do with terrorism then there are major players out there who are "coveted" by groups in Saudia Araiba, Asia, and of course Palestine.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cenimo

Jesus Had A 12 Man A-Team
Mar 17, 2002
2,000
78
To your right
Visit site
✟10,182.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
didymus / all

175 Thousand Russians to Be Called up for Military Service in Spring 2003
Gog-Magog here we come!

This is all of a sudden spiraling with supersonic speed!




http://english.pravda.ru/politics/2003/04/01/45366.html

175 Thousand Russians to Be Called up for Military Service in Spring 2003

Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree yesterday 'on the call-up
of Russian citizens for military service in April-June 2003 and the release
from military service of those who have completed their service.' As the
president's press office announced, the call-up will begin today. A total of
175,050 people will be summoned for military service this spring but,
according to the presidential decree, only men between the ages of 18 and 27 will be called up. Those servicemen who have completed their term of service will be released from duty according to the law on military service. This decree comes into force from the day of publication.


__________________
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,133
5,624
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟276,960.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
175 Thousand Russians to Be Called up for Military Service in Spring 2003
How many already serving are going to be released, though? This sentence in the article caught my eye:
Those servicemen who have completed their term of service will be released from duty according to the law on military service.
If they release 175,000 and replace them with 175,000 more, rather than preparing for Gog-Magog, maybe all they're doing is breaking even. :)
 
Upvote 0

cenimo

Jesus Had A 12 Man A-Team
Mar 17, 2002
2,000
78
To your right
Visit site
✟10,182.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wolseley

Can't be sure what they're doing. Up until the end of the USSR days, well...our Army, if everyone was activated, Reserves, NG, etc...comes out to something about the equivalent of 17 2/3 Divisions. The USSR had 18 Airborne divisions, i.e., they had more paratroopers than we have soldiers!

We can't tell from the story if 175,000 will have completed their service.
Just thought the timing on the story was a bit ironic.
 
Upvote 0

datan

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2002
5,865
100
Visit site
✟6,836.00
Faith
Protestant
I don't think the US is planning to invade anyone pretty much soon, just in terms of a possible timetable. The "axis of evil" speech was just a lot of rhetoric.

Invading Iraq took fully 1 year to plan (from when we started hearing about it last year to when Bush actually went in).

Let's assume that after Iraq is fully occupied that the US ties up 3 Army divisions there just maintaining order [there are lots of people there who will hate the US regardless of what happens to Saddam, so we can expect more gureilla style attacks à la N Ireland]. According to the outgoing army Chief of Staff Gen Shinseki, the US needs at least a hundred thousand troops to maintain order. That ties up a good part of the army for at the very least 3-6 months (hey Bosnia was only supposed to be one year, but the National Guard is still there...). That comfortably puts us into the end of this year. Next year, the Bush administration will be focusing on the end of the year elections, and won't be worrying about a future war. Thereafter, depending on whether Iraq turns out to be a mess, Bush may or may not get re-elected. Also, you need to think about troop morale. Most of the troops over in Iraq just want to get the job done and get home, not shipped off to S Korea.

N Korea--okay let's even suppose he plans to invade N Korea. The only way in is through S Korea.

Do you think N Korea is just gonna sit by and let the US build up forces in S Korea? Once the US even hints about building up forces, moving in heavy army divisions, N Korea will have no choice but to launch an all-out attack on Seoul, which it would probably destroy with artillery. Then, you have to worry about China getting into the fight since the Korean armistance would be effectively over.
 
Upvote 0
2nd April 2003 at 10:40 PM blindfaith said this in Post #26

It wasn't official, it was a suggestion.  Yes, you edited it.  I edited my comment to 'Never mind'.

I think that some of us don't want to waste our time responding to the same old tired rhetoric that you're talking about.  Why the rolling of the eyes?  Because of said rhetoric that just isn't believable anymore except for a certain few. 

 

*Taps nose*
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums