Ex Cia Director: US faces World War IV

We have one of two choices to go about doing things in this war.....

1. We can leave the middle east entirely and let the extremists rule the area and eventually attack Israel and perform holocaustic type atrocities against Israel and their own people.

2. Fight against this kind of extremism with the hopes that democracy will persuade enough people that the way they have been living for centuries is a farce.

To me this is as much of a war against all that is wrong with the world vs what is right. Basic human rights vs the extreme views of radicals. Someone needs to stop this kind of oppression and if the US doesnt do it, I hate to say it, no other country will UNTIL they are affected personally by it. The world is to passive and that evolves into more extremism IMO. America is guilty of being passive as well when situations like the ones in Rwanda occured. We simply cannot turn our back on people that are so desperate for basic human services as that will only lead to more jealousy and more terrorists who will try to eventually take us down anyways.

Excuses for the US to stick its nose where it doesn't belong. But the US isn't the world's policeman. One of these days, it's going to stick its neck out too far, and it'll regret it. Consistent bad foreign policy hasn't taught it a thing, I see.

DE

Originally posted by Gazrok
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?

9-11 will go down in history as the beginning of it all. I honestly feel evil entered the world that day. Its no coincedence that the image of the devil was seen in the smoke of the falling building. Its time we stop talking and start taking action. 3000+ of own citizens died.........they fired the first shot long ago. We our currently at war, and its not against terrorists!

It's all economic. The question was asked will we war for economic superiority and the answer was yes. 9-11, I can't call. There is so much information and misinformation out there that one could bury themselves in it for the next fifty years and still not have a clue.

Truthfully, I want to believe Bush when he says he thinks he can democratize the middle eas with war, and improve their life so that they aren't blowing themselves up. But, there is this cloud looming and it makes me suspicious. I know in a few short years we will in direct competion with China. And even though it hasn't been announced they are vying for superpower status. A communist nation that has secured veto status in the UN. So maybe, this is more about keeping democracy on top and preventing to the spread of communism into Asia pacific and the middle east. We are still fight that war. Russia is heading straight to Authoritarian regime. And the dollar is weaker than it's ever been.

There are so many reasons to keep these wars going that I can't help but to think that our government is a dying giant trying to break her fall.

(War is murder.) most definately.

""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."

ROFL! We're on the side of your people! Unless they don't like the US, then they're our enemies.

What a total load of horse manure.

And who are these "allies"? Britain, which practically has to declare a state of emergency when Bush visits because of massive protests? The Coalition of the Willing? (Go Pulau! Go Marshall Islands!)

Sounds to me like Woolsey is speaking out of his ass.


j

Woolsey is a lying, corrupt, greedy piece of excrement. I wouldn't put stock in anything he says. Unless you're his business partner.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Woolsey is a lying, corrupt, greedy piece of excrement. I wouldn't put stock in anything he says. Unless you're his business partner.

Agreed EastCoastKid. I was appalled this afternoon. For the most part, the audience was Jewish, and at the end he got a standing ovation. I didnt stand, nor applaud. I was, however, quite surprised that a question I submitted was asked. Though, not at all surprised when no real answer was given. Just the usual garbage.

Originally posted by parrhesia

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Woolsey is a lying, corrupt, greedy piece of excrement. I wouldn't put stock in anything he says. Unless you're his business partner.

Agreed EastCoastKid. I was appalled this afternoon. For the most part, the audience was Jewish, and at the end he got a standing ovation.

I didnt stand, nor applaud. I was, however, quite surprised that a question I submitted was asked. Though, not at all surprised when no real answer was given. Just the usual garbage.

Everytime I've heard the man speak, it's all subterfuge. So, anything he says with regards to Al Qaida and the middle east is suspect to me. One must filter his words through the prism of his business self-interest. And you know, as inside as he is, he probably knows the exact location of Osama Bin Laden.

No wars are fought over ideology. Ideology may be used as a way of selling the idea to the public, though. Also, nobody wins a war, it's just a matter of who loses the least amount of lives (and money, probably).

Terrorism is always a matter of perspective, which makes it part of wartime rhetorics. I'm sure there are a lot of arabs feeling that the US is the terrorist because of the relentless support of Israel (among other things).

Moreover, I have my doubts, but I think the US gov. is smart enough to realise that using force will only increase the risk of middle eastern attacks on US targets all over the world.

So, there must be another reason for this war. Someone mentioned the Asian Stan's, which is very plausible. Natural resources are often the reason behind wars. And if campaign contributors and gov. officials can get rich in the process, of course they go through with it.

Furthermore, I cannot understand how someone can advocate the use of military force. If this actually leads to a world war, the consequences will be devastating.

Originally posted by yergen

Terrorism is always a matter of perspective, which makes it part of wartime rhetorics. I'm sure there are a lot of arabs feeling that the US is the terrorist because of the relentless support of Israel (among other things).

Terrorism is in the eye of the beholder. You know what they say, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Moreover, I have my doubts, but I think the US gov. is smart enough to realise that using force will only increase the risk of middle eastern attacks on US targets all over the world.

With the Neo Cons, I'm inclined to believe this is exactly what they want. Perpetual warfare.

er nope, I don`t think we are in WWIII at all. All the Bush camp did was to reinvent an enemy like it had during the cold war. Fighting the 'Soviet Threat' was very useful in its time, it mean the DOD could have great funds and bascially do what they wanted.

To advance the agenda they needed to invent a new threat to the world, and well its pretty useful to have control them too. So why not turn people like OBL and Saddam into the all new "Boogie Men"... noticed how they disappear? Don`t you worry, when they re-appear they will be in countries which the US had on the list anyway ( well US and Irsael of course ).

I would say that we are currently in the cold war II.

One thing I really want to know is... why don`t terrorists ever attack govenments? surely its them they have the big beef with, so why attack innocent people? They are pretty much giving public opinion into the hands of those who they don`t like.. ?

Well, thats my opinion anyway.

We're not in a war. That's fiction. "The War on Terrorism" is a manufactured, external threat. To be correct, we are running concurrent occupations of two countries that for the most part had nothing to do with the attacks of 9-11.

exactly EastCoastKid, see my post above. Everything you saw from the morning of 9/11 has been part of the agenda, some call it the NWO, whatever.. its certainly nothing to do with terrorist "hating our (US) freedoms"

Originally posted by eRnie
exactly EastCoastKid, see my post above. Everything you saw from the morning of 9/11 has been part of the agenda, some call it the NWO, whatever.. its certainly nothing to do with terrorist "hating our (US) freedoms"

Ah, come on man! You know them AyRabs hate us because we got McDonald's french fries and gameboy!

only freedoms I can see living in the west is we can chosse exactly which "country of little brown people*" we can bomb next..


* shamelessly stolen from Bill Hicks

can you prove any of this?

no, can you prove otherwise? exactly.. pretty pointless argument. Just look at history, or read some of it.

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
can you prove any of this?

The United States government has never shown the American people or the world community a shred of evidence supporting their contention that Al Qaida was behind the 9-11 attacks. Unless, of course, you consider, "Trust me, I'm your president" as evidence. That would never hold up in a court of law. Only in the neo con parallel universe of non-justice and slavery does that work. Or make the slightest bit of sense.

Your last post reminded me of this cartoon ECK.



Kind of thing where you don't know wither to laugh or cry..