The simple reason I believe the "War on Terrorism" does not equal "WW3" is that we are not really fighting any nations officially. Not anymore. Not yet. Even if we did start fighting Iran and/or North Korea, it wouldn't be the same because we wouldn't be fighting a group of nations working together. I also believe that this is an unwinnable war because of the abstract nature of our enemy.
Newt is another shining example of a Republican with no moral/ethical standards at all. They're going to try to scare people into voting for them and they'll distort, lie, scam and rig their way into office if they can get away with it(like they have been). Don't buy the lies. Republicans are the reason why were are in the mess we are now. They had the last 6 years and this is what they have to show for it? Time for a change thanks.
@mirunit: Let's examine some the states involved in your comment.Indeed WW2 stopped the continued killing of millions of Jews. It also led to the establishment of a Jewish state, which in turn has led to countless deaths and major instability in the Middle East due to Arab - Israeli tensions. War didn't create the US. The desire for freedom from British rule and the political actions of individuals in the US led to the creation of the republic. The war defended the newly created state, but it didn't create it. France only needed saving the second time because following the WW1 France, along with the other allies, but mainly France, pushed for such crushing reparations from Germany that its economy collapsed which ultimately led to disallusionment among the population and the rise of Hitler. Both sides in the Korean conflict pushed for war and both sides were equally to blame for starting the war and for what happened later. South Koreans still lack a lot of the basic freedoms most Americans would consider important for a "Free State" to have. War liberated China. Hmm. It also led to the expulsion of the democratic forces from China and the creation of the Communist Chinese state which has, in turn, become one of the worst violators of Human Rights in recent history. War should only be used when diplomatic channels have failed and even then it should only be used to bring the other side to the negotiating table in a weaker state so that they must accept terms which would lead to the betterment of all the people involved. War itself is never a solution - unless you intend to totally wipe your enemy from the face of the planet. War under any other circumstances, including the cause of self-defense, waged without an ultimate diplomatic solution in mind, is a totally useless endeavor.
As with the "War on Terror" this isn't analysts speculating on the state of the current war. This is analysts *declaring* world war 3.Bush stated it was a war on terror originally and the public percieved it to be "we are retaliating in the war on terror". This is a fallacy. The delcaration of a "War on terror" was exactly that - a declaration of war.The wars that rage on are an extension of this hostile declaration and the factions fighting it are largely united by the semantic entanglement provided by the bush rhetoric. Old lines were redrawn and old enemies reunited all in the name of tracking down and killing less than 50 murderous a$$holes.Don't pander to these media war mongers.
It doesn't matter what number war we are in.But we ARE IN A WAR. Wake up America. Islamic fascists have declared war against us. That want a new caliphate to control the world. They say it every day. Open your ears. They want to subjugate Christians and Jews. It is not some hidden conspiracy. They say it out loudly every day. Open your ears. Listen to what they say. Look at what they do. It is not hidden.
nukethewhalesJul 16, 2006
The simple reason I believe the "War on Terrorism" does not equal "WW3" is that we are not really fighting any nations officially. Not anymore. Not yet. Even if we did start fighting Iran and/or North Korea, it wouldn't be the same because we wouldn't be fighting a group of nations working together. I also believe that this is an unwinnable war because of the abstract nature of our enemy.
atomic1fireJul 16, 2006
biblicaly isreal will be attacked from the north way i figure it lebanon is a likely northern attacker
hawkeye17Jul 17, 2006
Newt is another shining example of a Republican with no moral/ethical standards at all. They're going to try to scare people into voting for them and they'll distort, lie, scam and rig their way into office if they can get away with it(like they have been). Don't buy the lies. Republicans are the reason why were are in the mess we are now. They had the last 6 years and this is what they have to show for it? Time for a change thanks.
tiduJul 17, 2006
I believe that once China awakens/is angered by us, WWIII will begin.It'll be West vs. East... and an end to one of those ways of life.
madtinkererJul 17, 2006
@mirunit: Let's examine some the states involved in your comment.Indeed WW2 stopped the continued killing of millions of Jews. It also led to the establishment of a Jewish state, which in turn has led to countless deaths and major instability in the Middle East due to Arab - Israeli tensions. War didn't create the US. The desire for freedom from British rule and the political actions of individuals in the US led to the creation of the republic. The war defended the newly created state, but it didn't create it. France only needed saving the second time because following the WW1 France, along with the other allies, but mainly France, pushed for such crushing reparations from Germany that its economy collapsed which ultimately led to disallusionment among the population and the rise of Hitler. Both sides in the Korean conflict pushed for war and both sides were equally to blame for starting the war and for what happened later. South Koreans still lack a lot of the basic freedoms most Americans would consider important for a "Free State" to have. War liberated China. Hmm. It also led to the expulsion of the democratic forces from China and the creation of the Communist Chinese state which has, in turn, become one of the worst violators of Human Rights in recent history. War should only be used when diplomatic channels have failed and even then it should only be used to bring the other side to the negotiating table in a weaker state so that they must accept terms which would lead to the betterment of all the people involved. War itself is never a solution - unless you intend to totally wipe your enemy from the face of the planet. War under any other circumstances, including the cause of self-defense, waged without an ultimate diplomatic solution in mind, is a totally useless endeavor.
raid517Jul 17, 2006
@Cyrusman... are there really people as dumb as you in the world?
bitcloudJul 17, 2006
As with the "War on Terror" this isn't analysts speculating on the state of the current war. This is analysts *declaring* world war 3.Bush stated it was a war on terror originally and the public percieved it to be "we are retaliating in the war on terror". This is a fallacy. The delcaration of a "War on terror" was exactly that - a declaration of war.The wars that rage on are an extension of this hostile declaration and the factions fighting it are largely united by the semantic entanglement provided by the bush rhetoric. Old lines were redrawn and old enemies reunited all in the name of tracking down and killing less than 50 murderous a$$holes.Don't pander to these media war mongers.
BayAreaTechProsJul 17, 2006
why is israel even there? its like settling the finnish into western russia
amarna1370Dec 17, 2006
It doesn't matter what number war we are in.But we ARE IN A WAR. Wake up America. Islamic fascists have declared war against us. That want a new caliphate to control the world. They say it every day. Open your ears. They want to subjugate Christians and Jews. It is not some hidden conspiracy. They say it out loudly every day. Open your ears. Listen to what they say. Look at what they do. It is not hidden.