English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What do you think the world would be like now?

2007-01-23 13:52:06 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

17 answers

i would probly not be were i am now................Ask yourself this if a guy was beating you to a pulp and you just sat there, then he attacked your family and others meanwhile you just watched, what do you think would happen,

Now imagine you fighting back underminig his confidence and other men looking at your strength and bravery and aiding to your asistence. and stopped him before he got to your family and friends. ......................doesn't that sound much better.

2007-01-23 14:21:24 · answer #1 · answered by *PEACE BEGINS WITH A SMILE* 4 · 0 0

on the comparable time because of the fact the article tried to placed lipstick on the pig..... it continues to be a pig. “In Kennedy's case, that's genuine that Britain assesses the cost-effectiveness of ideas and drugs in the past determining whether to prescribe them. And the NHS does deny some ideas and drugs in conserving with concerns on the comparable time with the severity of a affected man or woman's ailment, the cost of remedy, and the easy of existence afforded.” “In England, the $22,750 make particular represents now no longer what "six months of existence is properly properly worth," whether the cost at which the excellent determines a single drug isn't cost-powerful. Exceptions to the ceiling are authorized especially situations; and Britons preserve the alternative to pay for inner maximum care.” There are diverse costs attempting to gentle sell the thought that somebody different than the affected man or woman and wellbeing care provider makes judgements concerning the persons wellbeing care.

2016-11-26 22:17:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Very little would have happened.

Saddam Hussein was an enemy of Iran (they started the war between themselves and Iran). He had a firm control over his government and an excellent intelligence service. Iran would have gotten nowhere against him and wouldn't have tried.

Saddam Hussein was looking for weapons of mass destruction and probably had some chemical weapons. But, his WMD program was much further behind then we thought. Mainly it was a big bluff not just against the US, but against anyone in the Middle East who would pose a threat to him, as well as those in his own country who would pose a threat.

I don't think he would have used those weapons against the US; he was never stupid. I also doubt if he would have given those weapons to terrorists, he was too frightened. After Desert Storm Saddam started moving around a lot and never slept in the same place twice. He feared an assassination attempt like the bomb attack we used to kill his sons or the one we made against the former leader of Al Qaeda.

When President Regan was in power the leader of Libya tried to mess with the US Navy and the US responded with a bombing run on his palace and the tent where it was thought he was sleeping. We missed him, but we got pretty close and he hasn't been mean to the US since.

Saddam Hussein would have allowed terrorists into his country, but he wouldn't allow them to set up a base or training facilities. That is what the leader of Libya did.

Saddam wouldn't have fallen to a group like the Taliban since they rose to power to fill a power vacuum. He would not be a popular man with the US and the US Government would still find him a diplomatic target, but not a very important one.

I think that in another 10-20 years he would have come up with more chemical weapons and he would have picked up some biological weapons from the former Soviet Union. He would let people know that he had something, but he would keep them in reserve to face the nuclear threat of Iran. Ironically he may even have become a reluctant ally of the US. Or on of his sons might. Saddam was a dictator and he was grooming his sons to continue in his place (they were A students in the science of cruelty). His government has been very stable and he kept the Shiites under control (Saddam's Bath party was Sunni controlled), so unless the two brothers fought with each other their rule would have been a stable one. I predict that the Hussein family would remain in charge for at least one more generation. Of course after his sons took over there would be a minor problem of getting them married and pregnant, but even those two fools could do that.

More importantly world opinion would not be so strongly against the US and the Islamic world would not think that we are fighting against them and their religion. We would have strengthened our base in Kuwait, and used it to keep watch on Iraq. We would also have kept enforcing the no fly zone (it made a great theater for our pilots to get some combat flight training). Iraq would have slipped off the world stage to a minor role. With our attention focused on Iran, China and North Korea.

The rocket attacks against Israel from Hezbollah inside of Lebanon would have happened any way since that war is one that Iran is still fighting against the US and Israel. The North Korean nuclear test would have probably been delayed until they had a better bomb, but it would probably have still taken place, if not in 2006 then in the spring of 2007.

The Madrid bombing would probably not have taken place, but the London attacks would have, as well as the attempted attack from Canada and the Heathrow airplane bombings.

Britain would have stood by Tony Blair and he would not be forced out of office this year. The Republicans would probably still be in power. The economy took a hit from the fear inspired by the Hezbollah attacks, but it was still in good shape. With no war to drain out funds that money could have been used for social programs and programs that would support business. If the economy is doing well then the current administration would be able to take the credit. They would claim that it was a result of the policies enacted by Ronald Regan, and continued by George Bush.

Dick Cheney would still be the co-president, and our most powerful Vice President, but he would remain behind the scenes. George Bush would have been more of a do little President, preferring to let things run themselves, and the biggest scandal of his administration would have been the mishandling of Hurricane Katrina. Since that would have been the most important event then real reform in FEMA might have taken place, but then interest would have died out after the calm Hurricane Season of 2006.

More importantly George Bush would not have had to assume all the power that he did, nor would have ignored the will of the American people as much as he has. He would have gone down in history as a mild mannered president who rallied the nation after 9/11/2001, but not as the power grabbing monster that he is seen as now, and the US wouldn't be at the top of Santa's Naughty List.

But, I don’t like to live in the world of “maybe’ or “if only” we are stuck with the war and wishing it didn’t happen won’t do us any good.

2007-01-23 14:31:37 · answer #3 · answered by Dan S 7 · 0 0

saving thousands of lives, saving millions for the country, living in a real world not the one they wont us to believe in, and yes no job for the military companies in the United States

2007-01-23 15:14:51 · answer #4 · answered by nevermind_bana 2 · 0 0

If Saddam Hussein had allowed UN weapons inspectors into the country, he would still be president of Iraq and we'd be arguing over something else.

2007-01-23 13:55:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

about the same but with more alien movies and bush would not have gotten re-elected since the war is what the US wanted at the time.

2007-01-23 13:55:31 · answer #6 · answered by thatoneguy 4 · 0 0

We did NOT "enter" the war in Iraq. WE STARTED WAR WITH IRAQ, and don't forget it.

2007-01-23 13:54:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

We'd have a lot less people saying good bye over the caskets of their loves ones.

2007-01-23 13:56:25 · answer #8 · answered by Zen 4 · 1 0

Same as it was but there would be a lot of young men and women who have died there around to enjoy it.

2007-01-23 14:00:10 · answer #9 · answered by appalachian_panther 4 · 0 0

We would be focused on another dictator that slaughtered its own innocent people and also had abundant natural resources.

2007-01-23 14:15:53 · answer #10 · answered by Daisy 2 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers