English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

IM worried about MUSLIM TERRORISM an Europe`s aliination towards the U.S,They thinkwere wrong for IraQ,So dont I how about you?

2006-08-22 06:15:52 · 29 answers · asked by ann m 1 in Politics & Government Military

29 answers

We are already IN WW3... Bush just won't use the word.

2006-08-22 06:22:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

George Bush's actions towards Sadam were/are largely impacted by George Bush Sr. Which has driven Bush on Establishing Democracy in Iraq. The Radical Islam-Muslims see this as an "Intrusion" to their religious beliefs, etc. And it may not even be this administration bringing us into WWIII but the Extremist Views of the Iranian President in his Quest to Eliminate Isreal off the map as well as the USA, which will spark an all out War against the West.

2006-08-22 13:59:22 · answer #2 · answered by Lunny2006 4 · 0 0

I don't think there is going to be a WW3 in the sense of the WWI or WWII. But I think we're close to, if not at the door of, a clash of civilizations visa-vie Huntington. With Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and our wonderful dealings with South America, we're making ourselves to be the grotesque monster on the block because we don't listen.

I'm not endorsing Clinton, but he fostered the impression that the US valued international input and acted with the rest of the world. Whether or not that was the actual case is not important. A lot of this had to do with his personal charisma but the act of building consensus pays off down the road. Bush, on the other hand is a cowboy. And while the white townspeople (the US) loved cowboy back in the old west, cowboys were hated by the Indians (the rest of the world) because they did whatever they pleased.

2006-08-22 13:32:45 · answer #3 · answered by Spaceman 6 · 0 0

If WW3 comes about it is because of the terrorists- not the Bush administration. Yes, there are countries that are alienated by the U.S. but there are far more who would rather fight along side the U.S. than fight against. I think Iraq was the right thing to do. Establishing a democratic style government in the mid east is the best way to show others that freedom is indeed possible. Right now they learn only what others who hate the U.S. have told them. We can lead by example and show the peoples of the world that freedom is not only possible but the best way to live... period!

2006-08-22 13:27:18 · answer #4 · answered by Coo coo achoo 6 · 0 0

This administration did not act alone. It was acting on intelligence information that the UN and individual nations had compiled about Iraq. Bush had UN permission to use force, after years of failed diplomacy with Iraq. He had the approval of Congress. Even the Clinton administration's official stance on Iraq was "regime change." Here are quotes from prominent Democrats:

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
___________________________

Regarding WW3, I am beginning to believe WW3 was the "Cold War" between the US and the Soviet Union. WW4 may have began during the Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979. Jihad or islamic holy war is their way and their duty. Remember what the Ayatollah said:

A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, is revealing. "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours."

2006-08-23 12:41:29 · answer #5 · answered by nobody 5 · 0 0

What you should be worried about is how long it will take the rest of the world to understand they are at war regardless of if they want to be. Islamo fascism is no different than the threat we faced from Germany and Hitler in WWII. If you take the time to read about things in the 5 years leading up to the United States involvement in the war, you would find the same sort of weak kneed appeasement of Hitler by Europe (until he took their country). You would find the politicians of the time spouting the same Pollyannaish mantra we now hear---things along the lines of "If we only took the time to better understand them" or "If we leave them alone, they will leave us alone".

The cruel reality is, that there are several hundred thousand people worldwide who want one thing and one thing only---the death and destruction of anyone whop does not convert to their form of Islam. They do not have any interest in "talking" and there is NOTHING to negotiate. You convert, or we kill you---that is it.

The question should be "How long will the world allow this group to build it's strength, how many more innocent people will be slaughtered and how long will we pretend this clash of civilizations doesn't exist and isn't happening?"

Let's hope it is before half of Europe is under their control this time and let's hope the citizens of the United States pull their heads out of the sand and stand in unity against a common enemy regardless of political party.

2006-08-22 13:30:30 · answer #6 · answered by Ceroulious 2 · 0 0

World War Three was the Cold War, which we won by spending our way to victory. The US and USSR fought battles using proxies to test new equipment. The Cold War began to end when The Berlin Wall came down
We're in World War Four. It started prior to Sep 11, 2001, I would guess in about 1992 when the former Yugoslavia started tearing itself apart. We've been fighting terrorists for years, its just that most people don't care until their well being is threatened, especially us in CANADA.

2006-08-22 15:53:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think that all muslim extremism does is close the gap between us and our European allies who might have been turned away by our activity in Iraq.

No matter what folks think of George W. Bush, they can all agree that they hate terrorism. The Muslim extremist are doing a good job of uniting those who they seek to hurt.

2006-08-22 13:23:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

By definition we are closer to WWIII everyday that goes by. This Admin is not alienating Europe they have been pulling away from us since the end of the cold war ( even before in some cases).

Given the terrorists though I can forsee a regional war.

2006-08-22 13:24:47 · answer #9 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 0 0

OK, I'm getting a headache trying to read your question through your public skool grammar, but I'll try to answer it:

Since when does self-defense equate to WW III? You're in WW III because the Muslim terrorists started it. It's up to us to finish it now. Yet again, America will save Europe from itself.

2006-08-22 14:08:57 · answer #10 · answered by rustyshackleford001 5 · 0 0

Muslim terrorism is a gnat on the map of the world. Hardly a world war. As long as the hotel resorts I frequent in Tahiti aren't attacked, I think it's safe to say that we're not even close to WWWIII.

2006-08-22 13:22:48 · answer #11 · answered by Tones 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers