Go back to 2000 and ask any liberal if we're going to find WMD's, guess what they'd say?
Hah, I think if you went back to 2000 and said to some random liberal 'Will we find WMD's in Iraq? Or is bush just there for the oil?"
They'd say "What the hell are you talking about? Oil? Iraq? You're a lunatic buddy, Bush is an idiot, and I wouldn't be surprised if he pulls
something like that.. what's a WMD? I haven't heard that term used in popular media.. Weapon of Mass Destruction? I guess it would be.. But why are
we looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction? I really, really think you need to sit down."
-- See, in 2000, there was no one getting all "OMG BUSH IS THAR 4 OIL" - Because he _wasn't_ anywhere. He just got elected in November, and he was
'out' pretty much straight until September 11th happened. After that it took until 2003 for "Attack Iraq" to be part of the official deal. WMD's
didn't enter mass media until then either.
Funny, how it would actually have been quite strange in 2000 to say what he did - aside from the civil war if Bush was re-elected in a second steal.
Considering it's pretty widely accepted that the first time _was_ a steal, that they fudged it a bit to get him in, if he had done it again, then
there probably WOULD have been a civil war. But instead, Kerry gave up.
When you look at it, the guy said that we're just there for Saddam's oil and there really are no WMD's, and that massive civil liberties would be
Well, that happened. Considering he said it long before September 11th, when people started thinking this, it's a pretty good guess at worst.
If he was smart enough to guess that, then perhaps he's smart enough to guess about some upcoming civil problems in the United States, and a
developing major world conflict. From the present outlook, civil problems in the US wouldn't be that difficult. The major political/religious cracks
in the country are obvious - and they basically run along the same lines. With the EU growing in power and consolidation, India's massive growth,
China's openness, Russia's returns towards a stranglehold democracy, and America's "World-Police" ethic, alongside massively unstable goings-on
in the Middle-East and Eastern/Southern Asia, a world conflict isn't difficult either.
Regardless of his being a liar or a traveller through time, he seems to have guessed what we'd be thinking and what the world would look like from
Do you have to hate that? Do you have to hate that some people don't?
(Post Script: Also, I find it funny how you simply ignored my first post. Whenever I point out reasonable problems in someone's plot, they just act
like it didn't happen, and go on about all the positive things they've seen.
That's right buddy. You're successful. Your idea was deemed unfit for real discussion in ATS, and you've conjured up a band of people stupid enough
to follow you or tolerant enough to take your side and not just laugh at you. You won't even recognise your problems, let alone fix them.
Congratulations, you still fail.)