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

2007-11-03 05:02:34 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

How many answers can we get 1...2...3...4...50....600...7000...80000...900000......?????

2007-11-03 05:07:33 · update #1

25 answers

If we Americans are really ambitious, we could make it WWIII. But we have to believe in ourselves, and elect a Republican President.

2007-11-10 23:51:04 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. Bad Day 7 · 1 1

The Cuban Missile crisis could've sparked WW3, the Yom Kippur had the makings of a WW3 spark, the accidental near-launch of nuclear missiles in the last 20 years brought us to a hair's breath to destruction.....

t could be 28 minutes from now or 280 years from now. When the superpowers square off against each other in two camps, then come back and we'll talk apacolpse.

Until then, just think regional conflicts, wars between rump states, proxy wars and brinksmanship. If you recall the Yom Kippur War in 1973, a coalition of Arab States (Egypt, Syria and Jordan) were soundly defeated by the Israelis. That was a worse situation than the current conflict and it didn't raise a blip on the world war radar (not that it didn't have the potential to spark a global war).

The next World War will involve a nuclear exchange, how could it not. In the first 30 minutes, nearly a billion people will have been vaporised, mostly in the US, Russia, Europe, China and Japan. Another 1.5 billion will die shortly thereafter from radiation poisoning. The northern hemisphere will be plunged into prolonged agony and barbarity.

Eventually the nuclear winter will spread to the southern hemisphere and all plant life will die. You ask is the war in Iraq be WW3, you are asking when will we commit global suicide. My answer is it won't happen soon because the larger superpowers are more rational than the rump states in the middle east.

Our biggest risk is an accidental launch of nukes by one of the nuclear powers.

2007-11-03 05:55:50 · answer #2 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 1 0

sure, i've got self assurance this is in common terms beginning up, this merely an opinion yet we could desire to constantly no longer have been there interior the 1st place as we are in a position to tell that the casualties mount up. Now the president is watching Iran next this could carry an entire new scale to this war, as for if nukes the place added into the aggregate it does no longer be days it may be minutes. simply by fact the the different international places interior the international that dislike us sufficient to launch on us in minutes no longer days.

2016-10-03 06:14:51 · answer #3 · answered by mehan 4 · 0 0

It could already be the start. If things with Iran get worse and the Iranians cut off oil routes to the west, you can bet some serious **** is going to hit the fan. But don't expect Dick Cheney to mention any of that when he hits the Sunday talk shows. He'd have us all believe taking care of Iran is as easy dropping a couple of bombs.

2007-11-03 05:43:26 · answer #4 · answered by MIKE l 2 · 0 0

The war in Iraq is merely part of a war between Israel and the Islamic world over Palestine.

The USA and other mugs like the UK have been roped into it by trickery . This trickery was done by the Israeli government and over 35 high ranking supporters of Israel who actually work in the White House.

For those really interested and not in clinical denial of this there is evidence to cover a soccer field to prove it

2007-11-03 05:49:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

If you follow the beliefs of Winston Churchill (for those of you who don't even know who he was, just read this anyways). you will see that this quote applies to G.W.Bush!!!!!!

Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
Sir Winston Churchill
British Politician 1874-1965

2007-11-03 06:06:30 · answer #6 · answered by Sgt Big Red 7 · 0 0

If left to be run by imbeciles like Bush or lunatics like Cheney, sure. Enough bad decisions could be made and enough mindless aggression displayed to piss off the entire world and spread the Iraqi civil war to the entire region...and beyond.

Hopefully, someone with a brain and a talent for geopolitical maneuvering will be elected in 2008 and we won't have to suffer any more at the hands of America's worst president ever.

There is no reason whatsoever for further conflict in the Middle East. The whole Iran thing is bogus bullsh--t concocted by people who are hell-bent on "succeeding in office".

Iran and Islam-ism (as opposed to Islam) is dangerous and must be handled with confidence and a solid policy.

But using the US Army like it was a toy a rich kid got for Christmas? George Bush be damned!

2007-11-03 05:07:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

No... it is the precursor. We have military presence in Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Cambodia.... just to name a few. Now they think they will be able to "close the noose" , but that will backfire... did everyone forget that Iran bragged about firing up 3,000 Nuclear Reactors. How much weapons grade plutonium do you think they could produce at that rate? And do you remember the Carter Administrations failed attempt at gaining control there? Do you honestly think Iran has forgotten that? As soon as we raise a hand to Iran, they will not back down, believe that!

2007-11-03 05:15:57 · answer #8 · answered by Shinji 5 · 1 1

No. The insurgents in Iraq lack the military coordination and firepower to be able to launch the kind of global attack that would be needed to spark WW III. However, the war in Iraq could lead to WW III if a country with nuclear capabilities decided to try to kick the U.S. out of Iraq through military force.

2007-11-03 05:06:59 · answer #9 · answered by ACM 4 · 2 2

I dont think so but the war to be in Iran could quite possibly create WWIII

2007-11-03 07:31:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

nope
not even close
compare the deaths of world war 1 and 2 they don't even compare
plus there are only 3 countries involved
its more of a war on terror

2007-11-03 05:06:01 · answer #11 · answered by ikegirl 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers