WW III: Isn't it irresponsible for the President to use this term?

Question

Is the fear machine in overdrive now or are we really on the path to WW III?

Thisisgettinggold: And you think that it is OK for our President to be seen around the world as a wackjob like Ahmadinejad?

I don't think it is about semantics. Those of you who are defending the President seem to think that WW III has already started. Is that the case?

Sharia- I agree with you 100%. The question at this point is, can we avoid it or is it inevitable? Is it a "cold war" or an actual war? Maybe that is the fundemental undertone where so many differ on the answers.

Migsoon-awesome video.

To those who did not see it, he said it yesterday on national television.http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-17-bush-wednesday_N.htm?csp=34

Jai- LOL Thumbs down for that? Come on it was funny.

RajinCajin-I agree that it was too early (hopefully it will always be) but I think it was irresponsible because words have consequences. Especially from the President of the US. I don't think that should be taken lightly. I think the goal is to avoid WW III.

Answer 1

its irresponsible and immature ,but it was used intentionally to pave or to gain acceptance on decisions

Answer 2

World War III has already started. Oh it's not the massive troop ships and invasions of I and II, but it is a world war nonetheless. Look at every single place on the planet where there has been strife and battle, the Muslim Extremist are there. They declared this current war; Beirut, Africa, Indonesia, Lockerbee, Yemen, Bosnia, Spain, England, New York.... It is a world war. To call it anything else would be naive. To give nuclear weapons to the Iranian wacko would sign a death sentence for the Middle East. It will be easy to prove from the isotopes what country gave them the power, whether it be Putin or North Korea or China. If a nuclear war in the Middle East cuts off 3/4 of the world's oil supply don't you think other nuclear powers are going to want to retaliate? I'm not just talking about the US. Other less stable countries like Pakistan and India and the Russian satellites and North Korea are all capable of pushing the switch. Bush used the term WW III deliberately to point out the seriousness of this action to our allies as well as our enemies. So no, it wasn't irresponsible.

Answer 3

Norman Podhoretz, one of the clearest and most powerful thinkers of our time has said that the cold war was actually WWIII and we are currently in WWIV. He wrote the book World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism (I know, some of you disagree with that word).

I do acknowledge that this site is biased but, there is an excellent write up here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1911282/posts

With that being said, I don’t think it is irresponsible, just inaccurate (as seems to be typical). Regardless, you know how I feel about all of this. I am not scared in any way shape or form, I just see all of the pieces falling into place.

While watching The War on PBS (for the second go around this time) I picked up on something one of the civilians back home said. They all knew something was in the air. Atrocities being committed worldwide, threats from Hitler which no one was taking seriously (just like Ahmadinejad’s threats).

Something else that cannot be ignored is that the Muslims, the Grand Mufti in particular actually worked with Hitler in his attempt at the eradication of the Jews. That connection carries through in the Arab world to this day… Israel is what most of this is about. Nazism, pigs and monkeys (what the Quran refers to Jews as) and hate.

Jew Hatred and Jihad - The Nazi Roots... by Matthais Kuntzel-
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Jew-Hatred%20and%20Jihad.pdf

Answer 4

Politics, what an odd thing!, It's unbelievable! Just think of the last agreement of Russian government with Ahmadineyad while not long ago they was bombing Muslims in Chechnya. US government sending weapons to Afghanistan to fight the Russians, after the Russian forces left Afghanistan, UN forces occupied the country.
US sending weapons to Iraq fighting Iran, after that they occupied Iraq.
We all have nuclear weapons pointing our heads like the Damocles sword.

Answer 5

Someone tell thisisget.... that if you are going to quote someone get the quote straight. Ahmiamadeus said " [Iran] does not have homosexuals like the United States..."

Anyhoo, this is just more rhetoric from the Republican sound machine. I'm betting Giuliani will be the first to say
World War III in one of his speeches. Any takers?

Answer 6

It would have been more responsible to call the Cold War, WWIII, but it was an economic war, not a physical one. A war against Islamic 3rd world countries is not WWIII>

Answer 7

yes its very scary

Iran has no capability to strike at the US

they're longest range missles can barely reach southern europe

its not our responsibility to send our people off to die for another Israeli directed war

bush said it very clearly during a press conference yesterday, it was on all the networks and the BBC

watch something other than FOX

Answer 8

Perhaps it's because we are in world war three. It's the war between western civilization and the religion of Islam for the control of planet Earth. Sooner or later the naysayers will realize this.

Answer 9

As a conservative, i don't believe it is irresponsible to use the term but i do believe he use it way to early. i don't believe there has been enough posturing by the Russian government yet. i believe it is absolutely necessary to keep WMDs from Iran not only because they are a state sponsor of terrorism, threatened mass murder, are a religious government, but because they are a member of the NPT!


"Peace is not the absence of violence but the presence of Justice!"


"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences."
-Winston Churchill

Answer 10

Well he certainly can't cry WMD's WMD's again now can he?

Well looks like a new version of that same old scare tactic

if there is a world war 3 it will certainly be because of his ineptness.

Answer 11

yes,no reason to induce panic. Maybe he likes this site.

http://www.againstbombing.com/ArmageddonUpdates.htm

http://www.threeworldwars.com/

added. In regards to your last add,there are some that believe WW3 has happened or is happening. WW4 is even being discussed. Check out this link, it is a more serious,credible site than the other two. There are many different links there too.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/world_war_4.htm