Is there great significance is this phrase?
What's the "second war" to be?
2006-08-31 04:23:31 · 17 answers · asked by murphy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The war in Afghanistan was the first and Iraq the second -- it would seem.
2006-09-01 05:56:45 · update #1
WE SHOULD BE ALARMED AT ANYTHING BUSH SAYS.
2006-08-31 04:29:21 · answer #1 · answered by Monty L 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. We should expect more warfare in the next 200 years as we have broken ground in history waging war in the middle east.As a matter of fact we are the most probable of all nations to engage in warfare due to democracy and status. We have allies in which we protect therefore Bush correctly interprets our countries future in this statement.However alarm will occur as this reality transposes into the states, by foreign attack on our soil or waging war elsewhere.Lives will be lost.The second war will probably be with N. Korea, contention remains over nuclear programs.
2006-08-31 04:38:36 · answer #2 · answered by triple sec 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a little late to be alarmed about Bush and his plans for more war. His family is dependent on the sale of munitions. He's just drumming up business. Nothing new about that. What scares me is when he says he's not going to do somethng, because you can then be assured that that is exactly what he will do next.
2006-08-31 04:37:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
enable Me answer your question with yet another question. How ought to you sense if someone got here for your city killed your cousin blew up your position and took over your authorities. Then compelled your approaches on the survivors and policed their streets to make sensible thinks the position runing how the outsiders wanted them to be ran. you wouldnt like very a lot whould you? He changed into incorrect and Obama is in basic terms persevering with trees blunders in simple terms on a more beneficial scale.. Its feels like Bush set the extent for Obama to go back in and end off the pastime.. Sadam Had not something to do with 9/11 there the position no guns of mass destruction in Iraq . They didnt use that on 9/11 so what changed into the rationalization to search for theese wmd's for besides.
2016-11-23 16:05:38 · answer #4 · answered by egbe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Bush is just excited that he got to be the first to start another war in the 21st century.
2006-08-31 04:27:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Name any century in history that has had no wars, or only 1 war. Humans kill each other, it's in our nature. Bush recognizes this fact, do you?
2006-08-31 04:35:58 · answer #6 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm 100 years in a century...You'll be dead by then...but I'm SURE there will be other wars.
But if you must know the second war will be against stupidity
2006-08-31 04:38:14 · answer #7 · answered by smitty031 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes it is first war in this cetury but after that USA will never fight or enter any war ,did you Know USA lose alot of men and money here in Iraq and it will not be able to attack any country for ever
2006-08-31 06:49:22 · answer #8 · answered by abu 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why? It is the first war of the 21st century You Big Dope!!
2006-08-31 04:36:57 · answer #9 · answered by ace 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no there has been wars going on for a long time in different countries,
2006-08-31 04:30:00 · answer #10 · answered by paki 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he is being realistic that in the next 100 yrs there will most likely be more wars. I don't think anything else must be said on that.
2006-08-31 04:27:24 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋