Who should we attack next?

ALIAS KILLA · 08-04-2004, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRETTISRAD
Norht Korea

or the chinese

We prolly wouldn't invade China. We are the country where they get mostly all there economy from, without us they would die as a country.

North Korea would be the best country to attack next, they are just the same as Iraq and Afghanistan. They could have nuclear capabilities and they probably do right now.

joe73 · 08-04-2004, 11:01 AM

syria is next

elTwitcho · 08-04-2004, 11:47 AM

Someone explain to me how it is that while Iraq is continuing to be one big cluster **** the states will never get out of, there are idiots who want to go and attack yet another country. I mean, it's not like you even half finished the job in Iraq, what's the logic for wanting to charge headlong into another stupid situation?

IchBinKaseBrot · 08-04-2004, 11:52 AM

You're canadian twitch, you wouldn't understand...

RedfordRenegade · 08-04-2004, 12:25 PM

Here's one vote for a Global World War.

Unfortunately, some members of this country (yes even the world) have descended the ladder of evolution to the point where war is considered to be the prima dicta of policy. Some throw the term around as if it was the "in" thing to do these days. Many have become desensitized to the horrors of war which only through the inititiation of a world war, on multiple global fronts, these atrocities could actually be felt by all.
I feel that only through the sacrifice of the total world population will people have an idea of how powerful war can be. When people are faced with shortages, food rationing, enormous loss of lives, hopelessness, ie. complete change of lifesytle, only then will they understand that war is not glorious. War is not the only solution. War should not be made out of choice, but necessity as an extreme last resort.

Our generation does not remember war as many others do. We lack the insight to see the eventual outcomes of war.
We have a president who was busy protecting the sky above Texas when the Vietnam war was being fought.
He had his hands full bankrupting two seperate buisnesses when Desert Storm was being fought.
A president who does not know the unjustness that war offers, yet is willing to send troops to a war out of choice rather than out of necessity?

We all need a reality check, speaking of all of America, and perhaps some of the world.
Every so often the tree of liberty must be replenished with the blood of tyrants and freedom fighters.
The only question that remains is whose blood, yours or mine?

DreadLock Doc · 08-04-2004, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by elTwitcho
Someone explain to me how it is that while Iraq is continuing to be one big cluster **** the states will never get out of, there are idiots who want to go and attack yet another country. I mean, it's not like you even half finished the job in Iraq, what's the logic for wanting to charge headlong into another stupid situation?

If we invade another coutry, all the insurgents and terrorists leave Iraq and go to the next target country, thus solving all of Iraq's problems.

Duh, stoopid.

AutoMaggot · 08-04-2004, 01:07 PM

So, why is North Korea a threat again?

oreo · 08-04-2004, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by /-\dam
hell who knows we still have troops in germany. i think we will be in iraq for a very long time. if we did invade another country id say it would be north korea. although personally id take out the french.

cause we have bases on germany der, where do you think thos bombers cam from, do you think they flew all the way from america?

AxPandorasxBox (Banned) · 08-04-2004, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hiaseas
North Korea would be worse then Vietnam, I hope we dont invade anybody. But If Bush wins, my money is on Iran.

No way. I don't even think Bush is stupid enough to declare war on Iran, let alone North Korea. Syria is a possibility, but I'm still not sure. I don't want to be sure...

AxPandorasxBox (Banned) · 08-04-2004, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by IchBinKaseBrot
You're canadian twitch, you wouldn't understand...

Yeah Twitch. You don't have that American ignorance that's pounded into you during your upbringing as a young citizen growing up here.

IchBinKaseBrot · 08-04-2004, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RedfordRenegade
Here's one vote for a Global World War.

Isn't "Global World War" kind of redundant? I mean, how much more global can the world be or how much more worldly can the globe be?

ALIAS KILLA · 08-04-2004, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AutoMaggot
So, why is North Korea a threat again?

There nuclear Capabilities.

DreadLock Doc · 08-04-2004, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AutoMaggot
So, why is North Korea a threat again?

North Korea will do what it wants, when it wants, and how it wants! How is that not a threat? Who do they think they are? Americans? Ha! I laugh at them like an arrogant Frenchman laughs at a fat american!

/-\dam · 08-04-2004, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oreo
cause we have bases on germany der, where do you think thos bombers cam from, do you think they flew all the way from america?

dude wtf bombers fly farther than that all the time.

however i think most of this has to do with the election. if bush gets re elected we probably will invade another country or two. if kerry wins i dont think we would invade anybody at all.

wudude · 08-04-2004, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ALIAS KILLA
We prolly wouldn't invade China. We are the country where they get mostly all there economy from, without us they would die as a country.

North Korea would be the best country to attack next, they are just the same as Iraq and Afghanistan. They could have nuclear capabilities and they probably do right now.

If US were to invade China anyways the US would die not China because the US has most of there goods made there and China doesnt need the US anyways.

/-\dam · 08-04-2004, 06:22 PM

i dont think our products from there would matter. if we had a war with china it would boost the economy like mad. WWII for example. wasnt with china but it pulled us out of the depression.

oreo · 08-04-2004, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by /-\dam
dude wtf bombers fly farther than that all the time.

however i think most of this has to do with the election. if bush gets re elected we probably will invade another country or two. if kerry wins i dont think we would invade anybody at all.

no ****, but its logical to have bombers thousands of miles closer instead of haveing to fly half way around the world just drop some bombs off... it dosnt make sense witch is why we haves bases in urope so we can deploy faster

AutoMaggot · 08-05-2004, 05:55 AM

Quote:

North Korea will do what it wants, when it wants, and how it wants!

No it wont.

DreadLock Doc · 08-05-2004, 09:15 AM

Yes, they will. I've personally talked to Jong-il about this after eating a big meal somewhere in Guangzhou.

neubs · 08-05-2004, 01:09 PM

Canada.
>_>
<_<
O_O
Seriously though, we should let someone else attack first for a change. That way someone else will look bad.

llSmithll · 08-05-2004, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DirtyDrake That is totally absurd, If I felt that Bush sacrificed 900 American lives for some quick cash I would have been the first calling for his head. "He did it for the money" is the same old typical democratic party line slander that has been used for decades to discredit republicans.

yeah just forget about haliburton, they were there out of sencerity.

Quote:

Originally posted by oreo
cause we have bases on germany der, where do you think thos bombers cam from, do you think they flew all the way from america?

the bombers are stationed in Whiteman AFB in Mid Missouri jeinoius. they make 24 hour missions all the time. infact, i was buzzed by one on my way home from visiting my now deceased grandparents, at an altitude of around 700 feet. would you seriously let a multi million dollar aircraft land in an airport in a different country????