Well, it's almost time to prepare for another world war. I want some debate about whether it will, or will not happen, and if it will, when. I personally think, with the war were in, and Obama, most likely going to pull our troops, we are totally vulnerable to many countries that want to attack America. I know some may not agree, but I think with all the chaos that's breaking around the world, were in for some type of fight... so what I am asking is, what do you think?. Please no getting offended, with any arguments that aren't what you agree with. And if any racist comments get out here, I'll ask for this thread to be locked or removed.
My ass. Those facts come from the Media, take it from someone who knows people that LIVE THERE. >.> No offence :P
But people could have done most of those things before, it was Saddam that messed the country up in the first place causing the religious parties to want control of the government, we had that job done for ever ago.
Iraq's people welcomed Americans and danced, and others fought. There have been countless reports of people picking up guns and shooting. Do you know how many people have died in Baghdad? WAY more than what they're supposed to be, the terrorist force was small yet so many innocents have died. Now that we have a huge force there of course there's a zero of suicide bombing/killing. But we cant sit there forever, and the bloody idiots that live there wont' leave their guns in the closet when we gtfo.
Free elections? They're all Rigged, All of the Democratic Middle east = Rigged elections.
Most people could have walked safeley in the streets before, except for places where there was a Kurdish population -- Over there you STILL can't walk safeley.
People couldn't walk safeley down the streets during the middle of this so called 'war' because everyone had to pick sides and it didn't turn out so well.
I'm not sure how many provinces there are, but "Under Control" is a bit of a lie, buddi. I doubt even the awesome American Army can take control of that many villages.
But Idk. They never tell us anything >_.> Lmao
Anyway, I woulda made this post a bit better, but I have to go to Best Baii. Later world.
So we went in there to save an effed up country, and the people actually welcomed us an danced in the streets.
Which totally explains the reason they burn our flag in protests and throw shoes at Bush. I say once again, if the only reason we went there is to "save" a country then why aren't we invading ever country that has citizens who are in a far worse state of existence?
We are not hunting down "bad ppl", that's what we were doing when we started.
No we invaded Iraq to find those weapons of mass destruction. We invaded Afghanistan to hunt down the people who attacked us. Remember Afghanistan?
Anyway, a word war three would be possible in theory. Would it actually happen? Depends on China, I would guess.
And when I say some people welcomed and danced, not all, of course. Most of the Iraqi deaths are NOT terrorists -- They are Iraqi's themselves, defending their homes because some Superpower-leading President started a war that he didn't kno much about.
We invaded Iraq to find WMD's and we later learned that bush had no real PROOF of WMD's in Iraq besides the fact that Iraq was buying uranium according to the CIA. The CIA thought it was enriching it and making WMD's. In the end Iraq didn't have nukes, but it was just reasearch and Iraq still has a few 'biological/chemical WMD's' just like the ones Saddam Hussein had used on the kurds years back. (Because HE was an idiot)
We invaded Afghanistan to get back, but not only that, but to clear out the Taliban that were considered heroes after saving Afghanistan from the U.S.S.R and now rule the country like tirants that dirty the name of Islam.
Also, It depends on Russia, really.
Think -- Russia gets pissed at someone, China has all the man-power they need to get Asia to STFU, and they're allied. China's also allied with Pakistan. Thats nuclear power in your face. Not only that, but Man-Power.
So I have a feeling it might just happen in Asia.. Europe's had too many WW's to have another one I think. xD
But on a Nuclear Note -- You have Ground Soldiers in America, but if China nukes America America can Nuke with 10x back.
According to most sites Russia has the most Nukes, but if China+Russia went to an all out Nuclear-warfare bomb of awesomeness in the end you would get three devestated countries. You can't just keep bombing back and forth, both of them will realize they're demise. So its a confusing subect (Nuclear warfare)
PS: This might just happen though, if lets say perhaps the US hits Moscow, Russia or vise versa with Russia/China getting pissed and Nuking D.C./New York, New York.
But you never kno..>.> I just dont' want to be under the Bombs shadow.. Or anywhere near it if it happens.
Doesn't Russia have a lot of internal problems at the moment? I was under the assumption that they were having trouble keeping their people fed. Does Russia really have the manpower, resources, and cold hard cash to be a serious contender in a war?
China seems like it's on the brink of becoming the world power IMHO. It seems to me that they could just break out and start making demands on the world. Is there any country alone at the moment who could realistically war with China one on one, I wonder. I don't know, maybe I'm giving them to much credit.
China seems like it's on the brink of becoming the world power IMHO. It seems to me that they could just break out and start making demands on the world. Is there any country alone at the moment who could realistically war with China one on one, I wonder.
Yes indeed. In a total war both Russia and the USA are far superior to the Chinese, who although economically have certain leverage over the US militarily they are at a huge disadvantage. As this war would be intercontinental it would be all about missiles and jets. China has 500 jets whereas the US and Russia have 2000 and 1500 respectively. In addition China only has 60-70 nukes whereas Russia and the US have eough to blow the world 5 times over. In a war like this China's man power means nothing.
Russia's had internal problems forever. They'll soon be eating away at Serbia's resources soon if they can fix up their screwy government. But Russia has Nukes, they can get an Army whenever they want, and they can borrow money. And considering they're a nuclear force and they still have wealthy influence over their previous 'republics' they still have a meaning at war.
China is like... They've got the 'Asian countries' under their influence anyway, and they could easily take Japan down (Even though the US would intervene in sake of their economy)
And China doesn't have enough money to do that, and making demands isn't good, it brings opponents together. If China gets the Arabic Nations (They're rich with oil) and Pakistan (Nuclear) somehow to ally with India (People) You've got a problem for China, so it isn't all that easy to run around making demands. China could easily take out the smaller countries below them, but that would just cause wars. They aren't like America with the power to have millitary influence everywhere, be extremeley rich with high living standards. And The US would Pwn China. China has a marching force, and the US Navy+Airforce is much better.
In a sense... China can't become a world power -- maybe an Asian power with dramatic ease -- But china as economically and population-wise boostish as it is can't become THE world power.
The world is in the west.the infastructure, new stuff, blah blah really is. America (in a sense) 'owns' a whole hempisphere, and by russia is the famous European Union. So again, Maybe.
China does seem beast atm -- But its just a scary negative to anyone opposing it, not a world power.
take it from someone who knows people that LIVE THERE. >.>
I sat next to a general on a plane, and i talked with another one of an AFB in Texas. I got the facts from them >.>
Free elections? They're all Rigged, All of the Democratic Middle east = Rigged elections.
Proof? Other then assumption based on situation...
Over there you STILL can't walk safeley.
Actually, you can. I have talked with soldiers before, as well as the two generals mentioned above.
I'm not sure how many provinces there are, but "Under Control" is a bit of a lie, buddi. I doubt even the awesome American Army can take control of that many villages.[quote]
Srlsy? Are you like an effing anarchist or anti-American person?
What i was saying is that we are NOT controlling that many provinces any more, we handed them over to Iraq's security force. That's a good thing, it means it is safe enough there that they do not need us there >.>
BTW dude, are country is a fucking super power. It's army masssive and powerful >.>
And Meh, I don't belive the Generals/Leaders. I mean, they aren't usually out there, they don't live there, and they're always telling people what they want to hear. Bush's main general lied a few years back. Explain that o.o
You can't really prove an election being rigged in a country like that, but if you really looked into it here and there you'd see that most of the people (besides the president) are either hated/crooks that somehow got elected. But I guess you can't really argue over that.
Sorry, when I said you can STILL walk safeley I said you can't, you could have before the war* I got carried away. >.>
And No, I'm against Anarchisism and America... It has its ups and its downz. xD
And when I mean all of America can't control all of Iraq.. I mean, they with the low # of soldiers they have there can't keep up with what they're doing, mainly because they don't know WHAT they're doing. Its not like all the terrorists (if there ARE that many, presuming half of them aren't just Iraqi's against the war) are running around wearing red shirts, buddi. When you don't know your enemey, you can't keep a place under control.
Also, 2 Things) 1) Trusting Iraq's security force is like putting a bomb on your head. Or we wouldn't be returning to previous 'Safe' provinces.
2) We aren't sure where we're needed.
3) Most people think the Terrorists are in Afganistan anyway (Apparently, 20-30K soldiers will be jumping in soon, pushing the numbers from 50k-75k [CNN])
And our objective isn't to blow Iraq to bits, if that was it America would have done the job in less than a year maybe.
The objective is to do in very vague terms "Find out Uranium holders and kill terrorists". I mean... Most of the soldiers have done horrible things, the soldiers themselves are undersupplied, the soldiers coming back are underpaid, Iraqi's that aren't terrorist related are fighting American soldiers.
ITS CRAZIIII.
And most Iraqi's are not FOR the war, except the places where there's been a mass american military +. (Most places on the souther area's of Iraq.. Where we're coming in from)
____________________________
Anyway, Idk even how to do the Quote thing. Was that here after I came back? or am I just stupid and not-knowing-ish? XD
