Ex Cia Director: US faces World War IV

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Former CIA director James Woolsey said Wednesday that the United States is engaged in World War IV, and that it could continue for years.

In the address to a group of college students, Woolsey described the Cold War as the third world war and said "This fourth world war, I think, will last considerably longer than either World Wars I or II did for us. Hopefully not the full four-plus decades of the Cold War."

Woolsey has been named in news reports as possible candidate for a key position in the reconstruction of a post-war Iraq.

He said the new war is actually against three enemies: the religious rulers of Iran, the "fascists" of Iraq and Syria, and Islamic extremists like al Qaeda.

Woolsey told the audience of about 300, most of whom are students at the University of California at Los Angeles, that all three enemies have waged war against the United States for several years but the United States has just "finally noticed."

"As we move toward a new Middle East," Woolsey said, "over the years and, I think, over the decades to come ... we will make a lot of people very nervous."

It will be America's backing of democratic movements throughout the Middle East that will bring about this sense of unease, he said.

"Our response should be, 'good!'" Woolsey said.

Singling out Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and the leaders of Saudi Arabia, he said, "We want you nervous. We want you to realize now, for the fourth time in a hundred years, this country and its allies are on the march and that we are on the side of those whom you -- the Mubaraks, the Saudi Royal family -- most fear: We're on the side of your own people."

Woolsey, who served as CIA director under President Bill Clinton, was taking part in a "teach-in" at UCLA, a series of such forums at universities across the nation.

A group calling itself "Americans for Victory Over Terrorism" sponsors the teach-ins, and the Bruin Republicans, UCLA's campus Republicans organization, co-sponsored Wednesday night's event.

The group was founded by former Education Secretary William Bennett, who took part in Wednesday's event along with Paul Bremer, a U.S. ambassador during the Reagan administration and the former chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism.



www.cnn.com...

I guess they consider the Cold war WW III

But the whole world wasn't involed in the cold war. I'm sure it affected the whole world, but we never really fought in an all-out war. Korea and Vietnam are their own wars in my mind, and the whole world wasn't involved.

I think it may be a precursor to WW3. If you have been reading my posts lately, you'll know what I mean.

I think we're IN World War III right now, it's just different then the last 2, kinda piecemeal

WWIII started with 9/11...then it was Afghanistan, now it is Iraq. We've still got Syria, and Iran to go, as well as the problem child-led North Korea. There's certainly a lot of cleaning to do...let's just try and not blow ourselves up while doing it, hmm?

I agree with Gazrok that WWIII started during 9/11. Soon the Mid. East will be against us minus Isrieal. The world will be torn apart. I realy don't see how WWIII was the Cold War since it was only Russia and the USA and there was no major fighting.

WWIII started with 9/11...then it was Afghanistan, now it is Iraq. We've still got Syria, and Iran to go, as well as the problem child-led North Korea. There's certainly a lot of cleaning to do...let's just try and not blow ourselves up while doing it, hmm?

Looks like you want to take the world on!

I would worry if China and Russia got involved, because the US would get a though opponent to match!

Originally posted by zaxatron

WWIII started with 9/11...then it was Afghanistan, now it is Iraq. We've still got Syria, and Iran to go, as well as the problem child-led North Korea. There's certainly a lot of cleaning to do...let's just try and not blow ourselves up while doing it, hmm?

Looks like you want to take the world on!

I would worry if China and Russia got involved, because the US would get a though opponent to match!

We would lose a ground war against China only because the whole popularion fights to the death. If we were to wage war with China it would be an air war and a war of technology. I can see it now, we have 1 billion Chinesse running down a plain to charge at US troops and helicopters and planes mow them down.

With Russia, I doubt they would use nukes at first. We would invade in full force and destroy them to the ground.

so while yous are invadaing with 'full force' who is protecting your own borders from invasion?? And why is there so much talk about America's will for world domination, the more US tighten their grip on the middle east the more countrys will slip through its alliance. America would not win a war aginast china and russia, espeacially trying to invade russia, thats the stupidest thing ive heard all week.

who's protecting our own borders? The United States Navy, Coast Guard, partnered with 2 major oceans dividing us from ANY major threat, invading America at this time is not possible, though i do not speculate right now about the future

I have a question. Why is it that the so magnificent U.S. always 'liberates' the Middle Eastern countries? Why isn't it some S. American country that actually needs it, or N. Korea? Bush has been very undecisive with his reasons in this war to "liberate" Iraq.

Einstein said that World War III would be fought with weapons never seen before.
World War IV will be fought with Sticks and Stones!
Let's hope this War isn't an escalation to a World War.

This is all my speculation: I believe that Iraq war will spark WWIII. I believe that Isreal will be involved with US against the Middle East-perhaps Iraq will send off some WMD at Isreal at last stand, igniting WWIII. Russia is currently ready to send troops to take on Isreal. They are already fighting and China wants to take them and Us on as well. We already know that Bush broke an agreement he had signed with the Russians, and China is waiting out the Iraq war for "something" to happen.
If you haven't check out this site yet, it's pretty interesting. It is a religious site, just to let you know.
www.cuttingedge.org...
or their main page:
www.cuttingedge.org...

By the way I forgot to say who Russia is currently fighting with. I didn't mean to say with Isreal like it sounds. I'll find out who they are fighting with, I had forgot.

I'm going to hear that lecture tomorrow at my school. It should be interesting to see what happens, and hear the lecture.

Originally posted by Lakini
so while yous are invadaing with 'full force' who is protecting your own borders from invasion?? And why is there so much talk about America's will for world domination, the more US tighten their grip on the middle east the more countrys will slip through its alliance. America would not win a war aginast china and russia, espeacially trying to invade russia, thats the stupidest thing ive heard all week.

One word. NUKES and we're not afraid to use them

The actual war is a silent one, they are directing our attention everywhere but the real target like a good magician should. The real target is the central Asian Stan�s.

Terrorists have merely replaced Communists in the vocabulary of justifiable expenditure. Our countries largest incomes come from our arms industries. To put it in its simplest terms we need a bogie man. How long do you think any nation would put up with massive arms expenditure if there were no wars to be fought and peace was rife across the Earth?

well there goes the neighbourhood

someone has too stop. but neither sides are willing too

joehayner,
According to Richard Nixon, in his book: "No More Vietnams", he proclaimed and dubbed Vietnam and the fight to stop the spread of Communism in the world, mainly the Third World nations, as WWIII.


regards
seekerof

Originally posted by TheCatalyst
I have a question. Why is it that the so magnificent U.S. always 'liberates' the Middle Eastern countries? Why isn't it some S. American country that actually needs it, or N. Korea? Bush has been very undecisive with his reasons in this war to "liberate" Iraq.

Because we need to capture the worlds natural recources in order to fight more major battles. Its kind of hard for other countries to wage war if their tanks are sitting there with no oil/gas. Hell even CNN reported the worlds oil reserves will be tapped by 2010.