Why do the FOX News personalities keep saying World War 3 regarding the Israel-Lebanon conflict?

Question

Anyone with any sense knows that the conflict will NEVER escalate that far, so why are they saying it. Couldn't be because fear=ratings, could it?

Because that wouldn't be Fox News. That would be Fox propoganda. And they would never do that, would they?

Answer 1

I know it's not easy, but try to ignore the propaganda people.

Dubya's policies are not new :-

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Hermann Göring 1946 Nuremberg Trials(Nazi)

Ask yourselves what Newt Gingrich is trying to achieve.

Answer 2

Because as the liberals claim, Fox is the puppet propaganda machine for the neo-con administration. They might have some insider information. Maybe this is the beginning of ww3, it's not a real stretch to imagine this thing getting out of control.
Fox booted Newt today and brought in the former secretary fo the army Togo West today, just to balance their reporting a little bit and shut up the liberals who say that neo cons control the world.

Answer 3

Many countries have thousands of terrorists that have infiltrated into their countries. Terrorist attacks are now an international threat that countries are banding together to counter. It is generally accepted that a few Middle Eastern countries are supporting most of these terrorist activities. So instead of open conventional wars as World Wars have been in the past, we might be entering an age where a large population of fundamentalist fanatics can be brought together in a cult like fashion by communicating over modern telephone and internet communications. So is it possible to have an army whose members are disseminated around the world and who fight a dastardly, cowardly war in which they hide amongst innocent civilians and principally target innocent civilians as in the World Trade Center attack in New York City, or the train bombings in London and Bombay? I think so, and in the future I think our only long term solution to this new type of terrorist army is to internationally agree to some sort of fail safe DNA type personal identity badge that all persons must have surgically implanted on their body. Then people will be constantly scanned no matter where they go and given access to public transportation and facilities only if they they clear the scanner criteria as when you have a security clearance.

Answer 4

Newt Gingrich made the argument that with North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel all in focus this is a World War.

The problem with the theory is that they're not all connected together. At least not yet.

So, until N. Korea picks a side decides to nuke either Iran or the US, we can't call it a World War anymore than UN "peacekeeping" efforts can. (They use armies from around the world, right????)

Answer 5

the republicans control fox news. this is a story that cannot be traced back to bush as the jews did it for their own reasons. so he is not to blame.
yet it causes fear and trepidation and makes the public think that this is a bad time to try to change the power in washington. so they are tryin to get a political advantage for the republicans in the upcoming elections to counter some of the stuff that has been hurting their image.
if they keep the public fearful and focused on thie event, they may make them forget all the other negative stuff that has happened for their party lately.
this is the problem when a political party controls a tv news show. the news should be objective, not biased and used for political reasons to manipulate the voters

Answer 6

The Irael/Lebanon 'conflict' can't possibly be WW3. The USA has already pre-empted that with the Iraq war. WW3 is all about oil.

The thing between Israel and thier neigbors has been going on since Moses told them this was 'the Promised Land'...

Answer 7

I wish I knew. We have to pay extra to get Fox so we're stuck with the liberal propagandizing CNN. So we find out what's going on but we have to take the commentary with a grain of salt because all right thinking people know that liberals don't tend to tell the truth. I bet if CNN were saying WW III, you'd by it in a heartbeat.

Answer 8

The Fox Nazi News uses scare tactics to keep you on your a$$ all day for their ratings.I doubt we will go there if Bush gets outta office but I'd say the only thing good on Fox is Mad TV.

Answer 9

There are many people who view the Entire War on terror as being WW3. THere are others who view it as WW4 (These people see the Cold War as WW3.) Also, Newt Gingrich has recently made comments describing the War on Terror as WW3. He is now on a tour promoting the paperback release of his new book Winning the Future.

Answer 10

Foolish, immature sensationalism. Then radio announcers hear them and reciprocate. So silly. Would they resort to propoganda? Can't you tell by the characters they employ that the answer is a blazing "yes?"