2006-09-19 07:47:39 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No question about it.
One of the biggest problems facing the world today is the threat of a nuclear holocaust.
The most powerful nuclear weapons in the world are in the hands of the President of the United States.
It is therefore of absolute prime importance for the security of our survival that this person is of absolutely sound mind.
It has been stated by the author of 'Bush in the Couch' that George Bush is not of sound mind.
He has built in his own mind an imaginery world, and now he actually believes what he says. Even though time and again it has been proven that his beliefs are very far from reality.
The people outside America can do very little about this situation, apart from waging war. A couple of people, like Ahmadinejad and Chavez have had the courage to speak up in front of the world, and that is the best we could have hoped for.
It is up to the American people to find some backbone, and demonstrate that they are not just weak-willed-lilly-livered cowards. They must rise up in unison and demand that the danger in the White House be removed immediately.
Until they do this, the world is in the utmost danger.
So many are afraid to accept that there is anything wrong, and continue to live in denial, hiding behind there own imaginery screens and avoiding examining the facts.
The war on Iran is already in advanced stages of readiness. There are 5 battleships in the Straits of Hormuz right NOW, waiting for the order to nuke Iran.
The world is on GREAT danger from someone who is not completely sane!!!
2006-09-26 18:40:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Based on his speech at the UN, I do not think so. I believe he rather have the people of Iran overtake the government with the help of the US, or go the diplomatic route with the European Union to impose sanctions. The problem is that although the UN has passed a resolution (signed by all countries including Russia and China) with a drop dead date of August 31st for Iran to stop uranium enrichment, the UN is not going to uphold this resolution violation and impose any sanctions as they did with Iraq's many resolution violations. I only hope that our intelligence advising the President is better on Iran's ability to produce nuclear weapons than it was on Iraq's possession of WMD's. If we do go to war with Iran, I fear that the new PM in Britain will not go along and I know the European Union will wither like always. That leaves the US and Israel to go it alone. Anyone can see that so little world support for a war of this magnitude would further alienate the US from the world as being an evil empire. And all we really want is our freedom and peace.
2006-09-20 10:36:49 · answer #2 · answered by sneeky2878 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, of course not. To do so is a no win situation but Iran is pushing as hard as it possibly can to have us attack them.
The options here are very wierd. Iran is on the verge of a revolution, one that will set them back for decades if they win or completely eliminate their current religious structure should they fail to win.
The easiest way to avoid the revolution is to have a war, but to attack someone would not sit well with the revolutionaries or the world opinion, and make no mistake they are concerned deeply about both.
So by continuing to work on developing a nuclear device is to some degree a side show. They do want nukes but they want the US to attack them soon.
We are between a rock and a hard spot and our only good short term hope is to get Russia and China to go along with us. If we accomplish that Irans current government is going to fall, so you can see how they will be pushing the money buttons of Russia and China.
Kind of a screwed up situation isn't it? Why on earth would you think bush wants yet another war, that is absurd.
Have you succumbed to paranoia?
2006-09-26 16:31:22 · answer #3 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Bush thrives on war. He is a lot like his father. I'm sure he believes that war is good for the economy...he said it himself that the war will not be over as long as he is president....what kind of statement is that? What if something happened and all the terrorists quit being terrorists (not that that will ever happen...) would Bush still stay at war? What is the reason for going into Iraq in the first place--they found nothing. He wanted to settle a beef with Saddam at any cost....and I guess he got to do that didn't he?
I'm sure since he feels Iran is associated with it that he will go in and invade them next...but I think maybe he should consider settling the whole Afghanistan and Iraq thing first.
2006-09-19 14:56:21 · answer #4 · answered by vdubbchick 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No. Bush doesn't want to go to war with Iran now. We are spread too thin as it is.
Our policy in dealing with Iran has been consistant for the past 20 years, and that is focus on Iraq. Everything we have done in Iraq has been focused on putting pressure on Iran. With a free and democratic Iraq we will do more damage to Iran than going to war with them. Even though we would smoke them if we wanted to.
In response to Neddie, its Aminjadjahhd (sp) that refuses to meet with us. That guy is a snake.
2006-09-19 14:53:26 · answer #5 · answered by Luke D 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am certain the President has enough with one war. Observe the behavior of the Leadership of Iran.
2006-09-24 10:52:02 · answer #6 · answered by pooterilgatto 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can't second guess what is occupying Bush's sorry excuse for a mind, so I don't even try. However, I do believe that he and his evangelical buddies along with Anne Coulter hope to bring about Armageddon, because they figure on getting all Raptured up. Wouldn't they be surprised if they woke up in a 72 bedroom house with 72 virgins and a bunch of dark haired, angry mustachioed men glaring at them? LOL!
2006-09-19 14:59:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Please read the US Constitution, only Congress can declare war. As to whether Bush wants war, of course he doesn't. Yet, thank goodness he is not afraid to extend the defense of the US outside our borders. Few seem to understand this concept.
2006-09-19 15:07:38 · answer #8 · answered by jh 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
does it make any difference to anyone that Ahmed Ammdinnyjad, um, Imadinnerjacket, whatever, that he said Israel had to be, and this is a quote, 'wiped off the map'? Facts people. The guy said it. over and over again. Doesn't that make a difference? Anyone who thinks that doenst make a huge difference is crazy, stupid, or both. Honestly.
2006-09-19 14:55:23 · answer #9 · answered by Charles D 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps if you weren't so single-minded and a "Bush hater"......you might ask yourself: "Do we really want to wait and see what happens after Iran gets it's hands on nuclear weapons??????
Maybe after a few million people get nuked you will have changed your mind.....but somehow I doubt it!!!!
FYI: whoever our next president is, Republican or Democrat....they're still gonna have to deal with Iran and the nuke problem!
2006-09-19 14:53:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋