Is the "War against Terror" really the WW-III, as claimed by Bush?

Answer 1

bush is an idiot, what does he know anyway.

Answer 2

No the war against terrorism is not WW III. It is not even the precipate for it. China and the US are the real story and the current events are sure to leave an opening for China to become openly aggressive. Once that genie is out of the bottle only WW III will put it back in. Many other nations are playing political intrigues in the middle of this chaos and the US Gov is using the war on terrorism like it did the war on drugs and war on crime to strip rights from Americans and create an Orwellian world.

Answer 3

i have not heard bush call it such but others have and it appears that they may be right. terrorism is world wide and has bases, supporters, and targets just about everywhere. IMHO this leads to the conclusion that we are in a world war. it may last a long time but it will end except for local terrorists. what we are really fighting is the wide spread interconnected groups supported by a few countries and certain religious factions. once this linkage is uprooted and destroyed the amount of terrorism will fall off to very low levels. it will never go away since it is a weapon of people that often feel they have no other. its going to be a war with few major victories and mostly small actions that will not make the news. what we will hear about is the few successful actions by the terrorists since they always seem to make headlines. slowly the groups will be put out of action by attrition, age, loss of support, fatigue, and death. if countries like iran and syria can be stopped from supporting it and other groups like radical islam can also be changed the rest will be fairly easy. there are almost examples of armed groups being successful without outside help and terrorism is no different.

Answer 4

No because a War on Terror is a war without an end. Now considering what's been happening in Lebanon and Israel, that's looking more like World War III to me

Answer 5

When did Bush declare that we are in WW III? He never said that so get your facts straight...

Other pundits (like Newt Gingrich) made the statement.

Liberty Over Liberalism!

Answer 6

No, Revenge of the Sith isn't a political statement. notwithstanding the priority that permits Emperor Palpatine to create his Galactic Empire is frightenly corresponding to genuine international activities. Palpatine creates a warfare by using taking section in both area and receives his valid rulership noted by using further and extra better powers. Conspiracy therorists have a field day with the comparisons.

Answer 7

Gawd, where are you getting all this false info from? W's said no such thing, Newt Gingrich first used this term. Yes, it is, I heard the statement and why it was used and yes, IMO, the terrorist have started a world war. Here in the US, in Canada, in India, in Japan, In England, in Indonesia, draw a line from each place thats been attacked and you'll see a world war

Answer 8

No, you're way off. That's like saying Baseball is really Softball III.

Answer 9

That's up to Islam. Tell the world you have given up your goal of converting, killing, or enslaving the West, and we'll go back to our daily lives. Back it up by actively ending all terrorist activities rather than hiding them behind your skirts, and we'll applaud you!

Should have listened to Saudi Arabia when you had the chance.

Answer 10

Not Bush, it's Newt. But yes.

Answer 11

Bush never said that. It was Newt AND Sean Hannity.

...and we all know Sean Hannity is Jesus Christ.