and why?
Assuming money, time and resources are readily available for disposal.
2006-12-12 18:47:59 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Travel ➔ Travel (General) ➔ Other - Destinations
The answers so far are too easy. I suppose I wouldn't go to someplace completely unsafe. But given the unlimited time, money and resources provided within your question, I don't think I would completely rule out places like that on aid missions in the not to distant future. And, those places are in the news a lot so we know enough that you could end up wanting to visit say Baghdad.
Where wouldn't I go. Places that I am indifferent about in areas I am unlikely to go. Like Bangladesh. Not likely I'll make it to India, I might, but then Bangladesh just wouldn't make the cut as a secondary country to visit.
Then Uruguay. Brazil, Ecuador, and Argentina would be interesting, so not likely I would make it to Uruguay.
2006-12-12 19:18:46 · answer #1 · answered by JuanB 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Iraq... way to much going on there. Maybe in a decade or two but definetly not right now!
2006-12-12 18:50:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Afghanistan. Only if i were in the army and had no choice. But that's why they do it so i don't have to . I can't stand starving towel-heads.
2006-12-12 18:53:22 · answer #3 · answered by wjb 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
USA, BEEN WATCHING PROGRAMMES FOR THE PAST 40 YEARS ALL SET IN THE USA, THINK I WOULD SOONER EAT SAND, DRINK BATTERY ACID AND STICK PINS IN MY EYES
2006-12-12 23:13:06 · answer #4 · answered by trudidog7 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋