greensboro news
General | Local / Regional | Food | Entertainment | Technology | Religion | Politics | Sports | Travel | How To | Classifieds | Beth's Blog
Greensboro Weather
::

World War III

By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:51 am

Last night I heard the first media reference to the turmoil in the middle east being the beginning of World War III. I can't remember what show it was but they even had a check-list of countries who would support us, fight us, and even a category for those that just wouldn't care. The scary part was the only country these newsticians could put in our allie category was England, and they even debated that might fall through due to the large amount of Muslim belivers in England. Basically they concluded we are going to get a ass handed to us on a shiny silver platter if the crap hits the fan. Not exactly the news I was hoping for.
By Jovick
Religious Expert
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:18 am

We might very well lose. I don't expect Israel to lose though...
By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:00 pm

So do you think we'd use nukes before we'd go down?
By Jovick
Religious Expert
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:47 pm

Depends on the circumstances but to be really honest I don't know. If its a conventional war (major in nature) then I think we would certainly use nukes but I'm not sure there is such a thing as a conventional war anymore. I certainly hope we wouldn't use nukes "Because" we were going down and want to take them with us.
By Matt
The Voice of Reason and Dissension
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:56 pm

In recent history we've only seen small controlled bursts of the U.S. Military strength.

If was an all-out war/invasion, the world would be shocked what we're capable of, without a nuclear component.
_________________
Procrastinate now, don't wait until later.
By Jovick
Religious Expert
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:11 pm

Matt wrote:
In recent history we've only seen small controlled bursts of the U.S. Military strength.

If was an all-out war/invasion, the world would be shocked what we're capable of, without a nuclear component.



I agree.
By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:49 pm

Do you think we are superior to say China?


And...

Do you think our bombing of Hiroshima and the stigma thats come with that might cause our military to hesitate in a first strike nuclear situation?

More to the point who will launch the first nuke?
By Jovick
Religious Expert
Published: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:11 pm

We are stronger than China militarily. Its not even close. Really.

I don't agree that there is a "stigma" from Hiroshima. That bomb saved millions of lives.

I see us not having any hesitation to use a strategic nuke as a first strike as defensive manuever.
By Matt
The Voice of Reason and Dissension
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 7:23 am

beth wrote:
Do you think we are superior to say China?


And...

Do you think our bombing of Hiroshima and the stigma thats come with that might cause our military to hesitate in a first strike nuclear situation?

More to the point who will launch the first nuke?



China has lots of people, but they don't have near the technology, coordination, or training. We see what information and hardware can be exported, but military systems are a different animal all together.

It would have to get pretty bad to use a nuclear first-strike. I think a lot of what China and N. Korea are doing is testing exactly how far they can push things before we go on high alert and really get ready to spank someone.
By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:05 am

I guess we should just be glad Mexico doesn't have nuclear warheads sitting in Tijuana. We're actually quite luckily that were far enough away, we might at least have a shot to shoot down the nukes. Russia on the other hand, I imagine could hit the west coast of the US if had to fairly quick.
By Jovick
Religious Expert
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:22 am

beth wrote:
I guess we should just be glad Mexico doesn't have nuclear warheads sitting in Tijuana. We're actually quite luckily that were far enough away, we might at least have a shot to shoot down the nukes. Russia on the other hand, I imagine could hit the west coast of the US if had to fairly quick.


Having those missles in Cuba are just as just bad as having them in Tijuana. Thanks to Kennedy those were removed. That's not to say that there aren't some hidden there now.
By Matt
The Voice of Reason and Dissension
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:50 am

Is that a nuke in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:44 pm

Hitler say's he's happy to see you:

By beth
Executive Editor
Published: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:58 pm

CNN is officially calling it WWIII on the news right now. Actually they are debating if it's WWIII or WWIV since some people think the cold war was World War 3.
By Sanjuro
Lacky
Published: Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:44 am

Don't believe the hype. The only people calling it WW3 are those who can benifit from scare tactic news, or those who want it to be for religious reasons. The same ones who kept you scared with such classics as "biological attacks: Is your neighbor a terrorist?" and "dirty countertops: What you DONT know might KILL you"

Anyone who knows anything about world wars know its history that determines this, not pundits. Believe me, this is pretty freakin far from a world war right now.
_________________
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do" -Mark Twain
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1


Discussion & © 2005-2006





Advertise here

Sexy Shannon | Free Dish Network