World War 3 imminent

by **Namloot** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:44 pm

Supposed to read "Lebanon, Jordan and all it's other neighbors if it wants to, Including Syria."

Duh.

by Conscious* » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:32 pm

First off, if this got global, it would end quick, Russia and China would not fight the US or anyone else, and they would not supply Iran or any country fighting the US with weapons directly. Only two things could happen as a results of Russia fighting the US, Russia loses, or the world is over. So worrying that any significant power will be fighting the US/UK/GER is kind of foolish.

Second thing, Israel wouldn't use nukes, if Israel started losing considerably which it wouldn't, the US and anyone else would certainly intervene.

This will end within two weeks, the UN will tell Israel to slow down the attacks and get the Lebanese government to create a buffer zone in southern Lebanon. I'm not exactly sure on the capabilities of the Lebanese army vs Hezbollah, but with UN intervention Hezbollah will be wounded very badly.

by Conscious* » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:36 pm

Namloot, Syria and Iran aren't smart enough I'm afraid. Mr. Ahmadinejad (sp?) has said the holocaust never existed and claimed he will bring death to Israel, if the right situation occurred...the UN too slow to act, and Israel going ape shit on the Syrians for suppling them with long range missles (not the Russian Katyushas..the ones that strike Haifa)..Iran would attack Israel.

by Conscious* » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:41 pm

Monstrous- About what will wipe out human kind....

I think the most likely situation right now would that terrorists or Iran/N.Korea got hold of a nuke and used it on Israel or someone else unexpectedly. Then Pakistan, India and Israel would start shooting their missles. The only problem with that is, it would be sort of hard to find how that spell the end for the UK/US/GER/RUS/CHINA countries who wouldn't be involved.

by **Hash** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:02 pm

Can you really say that North America would be unaffected by a nuclear war should it happen? One thing i've learned in studying history is that it repeats itself over and over again. This situation is no different, everyone will be involved.

by **cavalierlwt** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:40 pm

I really disagree about this chain reaction thing. At a certain point it just stops, too many countries simply don't have a good reason to join in, and have too much to lose by joining in. Eygpt will not jump in. Iran is highly unlikely to fight, unless Israel hits them first, and even so, Iran wouldn't risk going into a full scale war that they simply can't win. Jordan isn't going to jump in, they're pretty moderate. Turkey? No real reason to get involved. Saudis won't. Their population would like to, and many Saudis will join the 'jihad' but Saudi Arabia won't declare war on Israel. Syria would hit back if Israel hits them (and it is a possibility) but Syria is nothing, no real threat to Israel.
Russia and China are no where near having a reason to send troops, not even one in a million would they intervene with combat troops. All that will happen is there will be a constant smackfest between Israel, Lebanon, Palestinians, and maybe Syria. Lot's of young men from countries throughout the ME will travel to fight in this little smackfest, but that won't be a problem for Israel. The Israelis simply have military superiority over the Middle East. No one else has the tanks, jets, and choppers to deal with it.
The biggest threat to us is the disruption of the oil.
The Pakistanis and Indians will sit it out because they have no real reason to get involved, plus they both have the gun pointed at each others head. The Pakistani population will send a lot of 'jihadists' to the battle though, not that it will have much impact.
After a while, there will be a shaky ceasefire. This is far from the worst I've seen in my lifetime.

by **Major SONAR** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:42 pm

First off, if this got global, it would end quick, Russia and China would not fight the US or anyone else, and they would not supply Iran or any country fighting the US with weapons directly. Only two things could happen as a results of Russia fighting the US, Russia loses, or the world is over. So worrying that any significant power will be fighting the US/UK/GER is kind of foolish.

Second thing, Israel wouldn't use nukes, if Israel started losing considerably which it wouldn't, the US and anyone else would certainly intervene.

This will end within two weeks, the UN will tell Israel to slow down the attacks and get the Lebanese government to create a buffer zone in southern Lebanon. I'm not exactly sure on the capabilities of the Lebanese army vs Hezbollah, but with UN intervention Hezbollah will be wounded very badly.

Wow Concious, I don't know where to start... Certainly Russia and China wouldn't openly fight the US, but NOT supplying weapons to Iran?? Come on, they do it now, why would they stop? In particular, Russia with their economy crippled; would be willing to sell their souls if they thought they could make a profit... Hell I'd be suprised it they wouldn't sell a nuke or two!

I'd almost hesitate to call Russia a superpower anymore. More or less, Russia is a fractured nation of individual states ruled loosely by a central govenrment. Yes they have a big army and nukes, but I don't think they have the will/desire/money to fight America. They fought in Afganistan for 10 years and finally retreated. How long did it take us to clean up Al Quida (sp.) 6 - 8 MONTHS? Makes you wonder doesn't it?

Second thing, Israel wouldn't use nukes, if Israel started losing considerably which it wouldn't, the US and anyone else would certainly intervene.

I tend to agree with you there... then again they might use nukes if they were loosing badly. The US and the UK would probabaly come to Israels' aid if things ever turned really bad.

This will end within two weeks, the UN will tell Israel to slow down the attacks and get the Lebanese government to create a buffer zone in southern Lebanon

Two weeks, huh? You have more faith in humanity than I do, considering they have been fighting over there, over the same piece of dirt for several thousand years. You certainly have more faith than I do in the UN... what a collection of useless (and corrupt) terroristic countries. You know what the UN will do? Issue sanctions against the offending countries and if they doesn't work.. they will issue more sacntions.. AND if that doesn't work, then they will get really nasty and issue MORE SANCTIONS! Wow! I'm scared of the UN!

but with UN intervention Hezbollah will be wounded very badly.

I tend to disagree. I don't think the UN could impact Hezbollah one way or the other. The Lebonese army/government may have some impact, but I tend to think Lebanon is on the side of Hezbollah. I listened to the PM of Lebanon and he did not once apologize for the attacks on Israel. in fact he blamed the problem on Israel. Admittidaly it has been a few days since I've watched the news, so perhaps he has apologized now.

My comments are not intended to be personal. I merely have a difference of opinon about the situation over there.

by **Alofwar** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:47 pm

Cavalier, your wrong about Saudi Arabia, they support Israel, say the kidnapping of the Israely soldiers is "unacceptable". Egypt and Jordan both support Israel. Syria are obviously against, and Iran is not a member of the Arab league of nations and holds little political clout in the area.

Sonar, Al Queda ,ay have been driven out of Afghanistan then, but their back now stronger than ever, given our boys over their are tough times, 6 British soldiers have been killed in the last few weeks in Afghanistan with serious , almost constant battles with Taliban fighters. Now those casualties may be accpetable to the US army, but not to us, every soldiers life is highly valued, its just our equipment is shit, guns that melt, having to cannibalise Helicopters for spare parts for other Helis, and we have beg fellow EU nations to give us few.

by **cavalierlwt** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:54 pm

How am I wrong Alofwar? I said exactly that, Saudi, Eygpt, and Jordan wouldn't get into it. The population of Saudi Arabia has a strong Wahabi population, and some of them will migrate to the battle (personally) just like they do to Iraq. Same with Pakistan. But the Govts aren't going to get into it.

by **ShellShock** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 9:56 pm

The war isn't going to spiral out of control, the middle east has been through much worse. While this fighting is intense, and its bascially setting back all the progress Lebannon has made in the last few years (recovering from the civil war, emerging form Syrian control), it isn't as bad as it was in the early '80s when Israel flattened Beirut with artillery.

by Conscious* » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:37 pm

Let me clarify myself...
Sonar your right abotu the Russia not dealing arms..when I mean arms I mean tanks, vehicles, long range missles. I'm not talking about AKs and Stalin's little rockets from WWII. Russia wouldn't deal heavy weapons to Iran or Hezbollah...

When I said this will end in two weeks I didn't mean the Israel conflict, I meant Israel's string of attacks on Gaza and Lebanon. As long as a muslim and a jew are alive, the holy land will be disputed. Unless Jesus or Allah comes, then I think one side might have an advantage.

by **Ldsmith104** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:37 pm

somewhat o/t, but it fits the title of the tread

The chronology speaks for itself.
WW III Started in 1979

This is not very long, but very informative. You have to read the catalogue of
events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position
that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, sit back, reset the
snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you
missed it, World War III began in November 1979... That alarm has been ringing for
years!
US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola,
Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate
account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so
necessary.
AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!
That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When more than 3,000
Americans were killed -AD) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get
Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we
have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of
peaceful sleep since then.

It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and
political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the
American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil;
it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed
a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a
serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do
something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated
mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with
terrorism.
America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized since the end of
the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military
was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed
throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living
and working abroad. The attacks against US
In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the
US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went
off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.
Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden down with
over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps
headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead
and hit the Snooze Button once more.
Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven
into the US Embassy in Kuwait , and America continues her slumber.
The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the
US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.
Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a
restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.
Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main
gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is
buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked.
Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we
watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and
executed.
The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they
bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing,
Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in1988, killing 259.

Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to
bring these people to trial. These are acts of war.
The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America . In January 1993, two CIA
agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
The following month, February 1993 , a group of terrorists are arrested after a
rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of
the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are
injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is
depressed again.
Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.
A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from
the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers,
a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are
getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.
They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies
in Kenya and Tanzania.. These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224.
America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October
2000 , when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US
Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to
investigate the crime and went back to sleep.
And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this
was the first attack against US soil or in America How wrong they are. America has
been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and
roll over and go back to sleep.
In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high officials
in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read
the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew.
You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see
the pattern that has been developing since 1979.
I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we
as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to "Get out of Bed" and act
decisively now. America has been changed forever.. We have to be ready to pay the
price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford
to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to
sleep.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems all we have
done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we need to disseminate to
terrorists around the world.
This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year this is an
AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years
to come.

If you believe in this please forward it to as many people as you can especially
to the young people and all those who dozed off in history class and who seem so
quick to protest such a necessary military action. If you don't believe it, just
delete it -- and go back to sleep

by Conscious* » Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:55 pm

Too long lol.

by **Alofwar** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:39 pm

HUH????

Is that the generals speech, or your own words?

Some of those casualty figures must be exagerated. 241 Marines killed in 1 truck bomb? What were they doing to have that many, that close to the bomb? Its ridiculous, thats more than twice as many British casualties since the War in Iraq began. 1000 injured in a bomb in an underground car park? Now i know thats made up.

The fact of the matter is, the US does not know what it is to be under attack, the only time it has been was Pearl Harbour, and that was a 1 off raid. Britain has had to enjured bombing of 2 world wars, the fighting in the Napoleonics wars, many conflicts within Britain between England, Wales and Scotland, the 100 years war, the Normans, Vikings, Saxons. We have almost 2000 years of war and being under attack and threat under our belts, when the US is under threat of real attack for for than 5 years, you can let me know. An act of war is not terrorism by an organisations, which are not countries. America may have fought many wars, but rarely its land has been directly threatened.

And During the 80's didnt the US support terrorism? The NRA in Northern Island ring a bell? Who were supplied by the US? In order to help the NRA bomb Britain?

Of course the US wasnt the only victim of terrorism by Iran in the 80's. A group of British civilians were taken hostage in a football stadium. Immeadiately a plan was devised, operation credable sport. It invovled using a Hercules transport plane landing in the stadium carrying a team of SAS troops who would then rescuethe hostages and they would escape in the Hercules which would take off in the stadium. This plan would be made possible by a system already in development, JATO (Jet assisted take off) The Hercules already famous for its short take off and landing, would have booster rockets attached to the rear of its fuseilage which would fire at take off giving it the thrust to leave the ground and gain height quickly enoughto clear the stadium. The plan struggled with the landing, another set of theruster were developed to be placed on the front of the Hercules to fire just as it was about to touch down. But in the test landing, they misfired and the plane went nose down crashing, killing the crew. The problem was fixed and ready to be implimented, but the hostages were released without the need for military action. Sorry to go off on a tangent there but its an interesting story.

Now where can i continue, i know, George.W. He is scare mongering constantly, the September 11th boming were a god send (as he would put it) in terms of his political career. Well into the second year of his 1st term, he was looking like a lame duck president, then 9/11 happens, and suddenly he has a chance to become a great American hero. He declares a state of war, which is still in effect, which allows him away human right abuse, breaking laws, and even completey ignoring your precious constiution. Bush is the 42nd..... most unpopular president ever now though. George.W re-election, the moment the world went "OH F***, were doomed"

by **PraiseA||ah** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:44 pm

Of course the obvious answer and rebuttal to that long diatribe of nonsensical linking of largely unrelated events into one contiguous series is... They weren't all related.

To follow that guys thought to the ending he wants is like declaring war on Christianity. Hmm.. Ok.. There are basically two groups largely represented by Catholics and Protestants. Then there are sub groups. Which one do we declare war on for the Oklahoma bombings?

The problem with declaring war on a religion is that they don't generally fall within discrete borders of specific countries. Then there are degrees of belief and action within the particular sub group or groups responsible. Identifying that small minority and declaring war on them is not at all the same thing as declaring war on a country responsible for an attack as was the case with Japan in WWII.

Unless you're like the current administration and are willing to accept a scapegoat country in lieu of targetting the real problem. Of course, you run the very real risk of making MORE people mad at you and engender even MORE attacks, not to mention making MORE Americans available for those attacks to be committed upon.

At any rate we have put ourselves in this position. Backing the Mujahadeen and other extremists because they opposed Communism regardless of their morality. Because that's what it comes down to. Decency and respect shown to your fellow human beings - or lack thereof. There is so much of that going on lately.

World War 3 imminent

Who is online