We have already seen the start of WWIII

The French are all over Africa. They have many bases in different countries in Africa. Qudaffi wanted to create a African Union that he could be leader of to bring Africa into the super power status. The Allies are backing France to get rid of him and any nation he was buddies with. Somalia, Darfur,Yemen just to name a couple who will be next because they were trying to create a Africa Union super power. Im not saying they could ever do it. But Qudaffi did sign contracts with France for nuclear power not to long ago.

There is another super power wannabe out there. Chavez. And as this war started Obama went to South America to his neighboring countries and was playing sales man for fighter jets. Yes Obama was there promoting our economy to Brazil USDOD approved figter jets.

U.S. Won't Intervene in Syria as Assad Differs From Qaddafi, Clinton Says

Clinton said the elements that led to intervention in Libya -- international condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security Council resolution -- are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a reformer.”

Originally posted by RizeorDie
U.S. Won't Intervene in Syria as Assad Differs From Qaddafi, Clinton Says

Clinton said the elements that led to intervention in Libya -- international condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security Council resolution -- are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a reformer.”

Please tell me you don't believe this tripe.

reply to post by JBA2848


Would you buy a used fighter plane from this man eh.

reply to post by RizeorDie


While I would love to think that our illustrious Sec. of State would do naught but tell us the truth, I have to call shennanigans on this. The source you posted did not have all of the interview posted, not that the Reuters source will have all of it either.. but it does supply some more information that can be added to your source to get a more complete picture of what was said.

Reuters Article

Asked if one should expect a U.S. involvement in Syria along the lines of the air strikes on Libya by the United States and other nations, Clinton flatly told CBS News' "Face the Nation" program "no."

"Each of these situations is unique," she added.

"We deplore the violence in Syria, we call as we have on all of these governments ... to be responding to their people's needs, not to engage in violence, permit peaceful protests and begin a process of economic and political reform," she said.

Hmmm.... well I'm thinking we've heard this before very recently.... the whole 'let's permit peaceful protests.. blah...blah.... blah". It's just the same thing we've heard in all of these protests thus far. I'm not buying it, not falling for it this time. You know the old adage "First time shame on you, second time...shame on me"

Analysts and a U.S. lawmaker said if the situation in Syria deteriorated, the United States may face calls for military action in a fourth Muslim country beyond Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Clinton said there was not the same level of violence in Syria and the government's crackdown on protests had not yet garnered global condemnation or calls from the Arab League and others for a no-fly zone as there was with Libya

Meaning that if the level of violence increases in Syria and we start to hear any kind of 'global condemnation or calls from the Arab League" etc.... there could be a response equal to what we are now seeing in Lybia. At least that's my take on it. Sounds more like more of the same double speak we are getting used to being spoon fed by this current administration.

I believe we have seen the end of World War III and IV (Invasion of Iraq and the infamous "lines battles" black Friday at Wal Marts nationwide.

Next up is World War IV and will most likely be started by the Peruvian government in an attempt to overthrow president J. Beiber in 2042

reply to post by lonegurkha


todaysdefense.com...

One of the U.S. companies with a potentially huge interest in those discussions is Boeing Co., which has been trying to convince Brazil to buy 36 of its F/A-18 Super Hornets – made mostly in St. Louis – for Brazil’s long-delayed F-X2 fighter aircraft program.

Such a deal seemed impossible as late as September 2009, when Brazil’s former president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, announced his preference for the Rafale fighter made by France’s Dassault aerospace firm. The next-generation F-X2 aircraft would replace Brazil’s aging fleet of French Mirage fighters, U.S.-made F-5 Tigers and Italian-made jets.

But Rousseff re-opened the bidding for the F-X2 program after she was elected last fall as Brazil’s first female president. And she reportedly told U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner recently that she regards the F/A-18 Super Hornet as the best fighter aircraft among the three finalists, which include France’s Rafale and an aircraft manufactured by Sweden’s Saab.

But there is a major catch to the potential deal, which media reports have said could amount to $6 billion. Brazil wants the U.S. government to authorize transfers of some proprietary technology that would eventually help Brazil develop its defense industry. According to some reports, the Brazilians also want to sell some of their own military transport aircraft to the U.S. military.

I don't think there talking about used air craft.

reply to post by JBA2848


Just joking dude.

Originally posted by lonegurkha
What do these idiots not get.

They're not idiots. They're actually very smart.

How can they take over the world without sending their military into these countries? They're playing the "let's help these people" card very well.

WWIII started years ago, when GWB said to all countries "you're either with us or against us". What else does that mean?

But I guess some people are still waiting for some form of formal declaration.