2006-09-20 12:27:20 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
The war on terror is a slogan. You can't fight a war against a tactic. You can only fight a war against a defined enemy. And no, I don't think we are in World War III, at least not yet. When North Korea attacks South Korea, and China takes its side, and then when Iran or Syria start a war in the Middle East and the larger powers take different sides, then we will be in World War III.
2006-09-20 12:32:43 · answer #1 · answered by rollo_tomassi423 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The "war on terror" has become a benign political slogan. People are becomming more and more ambivilent to it. However, America's confrontations with radical islamic elements over the last couple of years are precursers to perhaps a greater global struggle. You can either look at the "war on terror" as a pre-World War III conflict i.e as the very thing that will push the world into a greater war or you can look at it as the very first battles of World War III i.e. the German Invasion of Poland in World War II. Things will only escalate from here. You can see the lines being drawn in the sand. Venezuela, Iran, Al Qaeda, North Korea they are all acting together supporting each other in some sort of Third World Axis. However, you must look beyond those regional powers to the Russians and Chinese. Do I think they would be drawn into a World War III? Hopefully not. Do I think that they want to see us knocked down a few pegs? Of course, they do not like our hegemony over the entire world. The Rhetoric is flying around, take a look at the United Nations the past two days with Bush, Ahmadina-whaterver, and Hugo Chavez. We are on the precipice and i'm not sure we can go back. My only hope is that Europe will not turn it's back on us.
2006-09-20 20:12:13 · answer #2 · answered by paradinet 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is foolish and inaccurate rhetoric for several reasons. First, "terror" is not an enemy but a method of doing violence. It has existed for centuries and will continue to for centuries more.
Second, the justified war America had after 9/11 was with Afghanistan, which was harboring the individuals responsible and refusing to turn them over. If Pakistan is in the same situation now, we would be justified in going to war with them, unless they take active steps to arrest and turn them over. Iraq was never associated with any of the individuals responsible for 9/11, though this lie has become firmly entrenched in the minds of ignorant people and partisan fanatics. None of these dirty, poor, overcrowded countries is anything like the foe we faced in an industrialized Germany or Japan.
The "war on terror" is as much an empty rhetorical device as the "war on poverty" or the "war on drugs" -- except that its consequences are much, much more costly in terms of dollars and of lives.
2006-09-21 13:42:02 · answer #3 · answered by BoredBookworm 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, but we are getting close. Just wait a few more years and then north/south korea will start fighting, then china and russia and of course the USA. Then ma'm i believe we will have a bloody good world war III. All i say is, this is the beginning of what is going to happen and hopefully we'll live to see it on textbooks in the future...
2006-09-20 19:41:55 · answer #4 · answered by bob888 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's World War III
2006-09-20 19:32:17 · answer #5 · answered by Sass B 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
then what was the WAR ON DRUGS? WAR ON CRIME? WAR ON POVERTY
These are not fighting wars, Bush started a war in Iraq, why? ask him
2006-09-20 21:55:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Being as how it is going on all around the globe, what would you prefer it be called?
2006-09-20 19:31:17 · answer #7 · answered by mrcricket1932 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
that's what bin laden and bush say, do you doubt them?
2006-09-21 03:03:09 · answer #8 · answered by acid tongue 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋