Is George going to lead us into WW-3 ?

Question

More and more nations are getting closer to or have nuclear weapons - a few months ago in Maclean's magazine top US security people were laying odds on the terrorists getting a nuclear bomb inside the US and detonating it. The figures were anywhere from 24 % to 50 % over the next five years .

Has that figure increased now ? It will take the US a couple of years to build a fence between them and Mexico how many nukes could be snuck in in the mean time? What about a Naval launch just off the coast - Surely N Korea has one boat capable of carrying such a weapon -
ran and Veezuala might team up with N Korea in a common goal of not being invaded by the US - Now there could easily be 3 nations after the US with nukes do the odds go up again now?
I find this all very unfortunate as I do believe that Bush is likely going to be the last President of the United States I live just far enough from the US to not suffer a direct hit but just close enough to die the more painful radiation way

Answer 1

seems that way doesnt it?? everytime he appears on tv he has that cat that just ate the canary look on his face. it is as if he knows the eventual outcome of his presidential policies. basically all any of us can do is to prepare for the end time and wait. if we are hit by a nuclear holocaust then i pray that my loved ones die quickly and are not left here for what will surely be a living hell of suffering and knashing of teeth. if they are not killed in the initial nuclear blast then i am prepared to prevent their suffering and then take my own life afterwards. remember that their will be 7 years of tribulation. many will not be able to survive and will die horrendous deaths. i hope we are all wrong about the demise of mankind, but alot of signs point to something happening before george bush is out of office. call me crazy if you will but he just might turn out to be the great deciever. FOR A RIGHTGEOUS MAN SHALL DECEIVE THE NATIONS!!!!! isnt that why christians voted for ole george because they precieved him more rightgeous than gore or kerry??? how clever of that horned deciever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 2

Terrorists do use heavy handed tactics but the destruction of a nuclear weapon would be much greater than they need to get the attention of the people who they oppose.

They are not too stupid though and they would realise that this action would be condemned by even their allies and the repercussions would mean that they cant achieve their long term goals.

The US is not necessarily the greatest critic of North Korea but NK would definitely consider the US the greatest threat. A ship would be useless as the amount of satellites focussed on NK right now would allow them to know exactly wht is aboard this ship. And Japan is a much closer enemy to them in any case. And also Japan is not friendly with China (NKoreas biggest supporter) while US is on friendly terms with China.

Bush has spent a lot of money on defence during his terms as president and with this we also know the technology has increased. It is important to remember then that any attack by missle would be futile as it can be shot down even before it is armed.

Iran and Venezuala have very different political agendas and would definitely not team up with north korea. Despite their dislike for US they would not try to destroy the country else Bush's politics were 100% correct.

If you feel like you are in danger for fear of being attacked then President Bush is wise to pursue action to forceably remove the reason you feel unsafe. Whether he should be responsible or not is not for us to decide. A military presence in these countries could start war but also could prevent the worse outcome. It is too early to tell at this stage and it will be years before anything of this nature will be thougtht imminent and Bush will definitely not be the president.

Also be careful of some statistics and who releases them. Obviously those who disagree with Bush's politics will have different estimates to those who sympathise.

Answer 3

No, we will not enter a WW III, because too many nations have a hand in preventing it. Hopefully, with the upcoming elections in the US, the Congress will be in the hands of the Democrats and a withdrawal strategy will be put in place. I think this will help ease the tensions in Iraq.
N.Korea may have a nuclear weapon but Russia and China will not sit back and allow them to become a threat. The same with Iran. Besides, both N.Korea and Iran are just using the nuclear issue to get the US to give them more money - I don't think they are a real threat.

Answer 4

As Elle already said..... we are already in the middle of World War III.

And for the record, the US will act on NK long before they can mount their crude devices on missiles. This wasn't started by Bush, and it certainly won't be finished by him. It is because of the pacifists that we are in for the long haul. This will be a protracted war as all the left want desperately to have peace talks and peace accords, and our enemies use that time while negotiating to continue arming. Hitler did it and so will the new Hitlers.

Answer 5

No one!
When their own children born and raised after independence were all at loss and still primitve living human kind running on batteries for their own survival on " Planet of Apes" is already at high risk and high stakes greater than the nuclear weapons is being overlook on planet earth.
So who wants to kick the butts of their own children being overlook on planet earth.

Answer 6

"I've reminded the prime minister—the American people, Mr. Prime Minister, over the past months that it was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship."—Washington, D.C., June 29, 2006

I hope not!

Answer 7

So, are you able to furnish america of a with the answer a minimum of? Do you have any protection stress management journey? Are you any of the severe protection stress accepted rank? Are you a protection stress strategist? Do you have any attitude on restorting america of a economic device besides because of the fact the attitude on struggling with the terrorists & keeping america of a's well being? final yet no longer least, DO you have ANY ideal answer which could deliver A PROSPERITY & PEACE TO us of a in any respect? Please, are not getting offended by my questions, i'm basically thoughts-storming with you because of the fact from my attitude, i haven't any OF THE thoughts to those QUESTIONS that i'm ASKING TO MYSELF. hence, i'm quite be HUMBLE & OBSERVANT because i'm able to't resolve ANY of those nationwide secure practices & distant places coverage subject concerns THAN working MY MOUTH COMPLAINING relating to the solid us of a. i'm A FORMER us of a AIR-stress LIEUTENANT, those solders are like area of my families & I help them each and every of how and now i'm in basic terms a typical joe working 6-days/week, looking after my relatives.....i'm no longer a newborn-kisser or any severe member of protection stress workers; for this reason, i'm able to in basic terms help usa & desire for the main suitable of this us of a. bear in mind, inner branch WILL in basic terms bring about TRAGEDY.

Answer 8

World War III is much more likely to follow the realization that U.S is running out of OIL.

Answer 9

Nope, the terrorists beat him to the punch. We're already engaged in WWIII.

Answer 10

George leading us into war? only if he takes crap from Iran or N.Korea.While we ( the US) shoudnt go looking for problems around the world,we cant take crap from douchebag countries that think they are sooo badass cuz they got or are making nukes.I do live in the US,Im not that worried about it.