• Almost publicly ruined himself? By who’s calculation? His approval rating was always very good. :(


  • Always very good? I remember certain months in Winter where Bush’s ratings weren’t always very good.


  • @Deviant:Scripter:

    I think a side-advantage of the war with Iraq is that it will give us better bargaining leverage with North Korea. We’ll point to Iraq and say to Kim Il Jong, “you still wanna keep those weapons…?”

    @Deviant:Scripter:

    His approval rating was always very good.

    :roll: :o
    i wonder which news agency you use, D:S…. his approval ratings before 9/11 were pretty much desastrous.
    The way to go against N.K. seems to be “multilateral talks”, without the threat of military action. (well, N.K. actually has carrier systems and most probably WMDs, so attacking there could be actually dangerous and create more than 10 handfuls of casualties).
    I mean, while Hussein tried to avoid the war as much as possible, Kim was more or less begging for it (in their diplomatic behavior etc)… but the US decided to go for Iraq…


  • @F_alk:

    @Deviant:Scripter:

    I think a side-advantage of the war with Iraq is that it will give us better bargaining leverage with North Korea. We’ll point to Iraq and say to Kim Il Jong, “you still wanna keep those weapons…?”

    @Deviant:Scripter:

    His approval rating was always very good.

    :roll: :o
    i wonder which news agency you use, D:S…. his approval ratings before 9/11 were pretty much desastrous.
    The way to go against N.K. seems to be “multilateral talks”, without the threat of military action. (well, N.K. actually has carrier systems and most probably WMDs, so attacking there could be actually dangerous and create more than 10 handfuls of casualties).
    I mean, while Hussein tried to avoid the war as much as possible, Kim was more or less begging for it (in their diplomatic behavior etc)… but the US decided to go for Iraq…

    no oil or Arabs in N. Korea . . . .


  • North Korea has nerve gas and the ability to deliver it to Soeul. Estimates range in the neighbourhood of 37% of the 12 million citizens could be dead in 24 hours.

    NK can fire about one half to one million rounds per hour into sourth korea…… The US can’t make the choice to go to war alone on this one.

    BB


  • I don’t think we can make that choice either, at least not without NK making a bold move first. However, I’m certainly not going to rule it out. When dealing with people like that, the threat of force always has to be present, otherwise all your strong language goes right out the window if you’re not willing to back it up eventually.


  • A agree 100%, as Theodore said, talk softly but carry a big stick. NK’s ‘mission statement’ is in effect ‘forced re-unification under NK rule’. If the other guys religion is to crush and rule you then you are a fool to do anything to help him towards this goal.

    IF NK makes a bold move the plan is regime change also a bold and correct move in response. However, with 10, 000 long range artillery pieces all in range of hitting Soeul it would be a blood bath for everyone. Some plans call for 750, 000 troops to invade the North.

    BB


  • well i listen to FoxNews but i have a habbit of Twisting facts once there in my head :roll:


  • Cystic is right. There’s no oil or arabs in NK, therefore no reason for us to rush in there. And Kim Il Jong isn’t a complete moron. He knows that if he opens fire on SK that his days are numbered. It seems lately we’ve been having to clean up our old messes. We gave Saddam shitloads of $$$, equiptment, and training to fight the Iranians in the 80’s. So he gassed them and used the equiptment and cash to further his own crooked cause. And now we’ve got to deal with NK who didn’t have nuclear power until we gave it to them. Our US policymakers need to get their collective heads out of their asses. :evil:


  • There’s no oil or arabs in NK

    LOL! After all, it IS the arabs that we want a piece of… :wink:

    I’m sorry, it’s just the way you said it that made it seem funny. :P


  • He knows that if he opens fire on SK that his days are numbered.

    His days are already numbered. His regime is failing. He knows he’ll be ousted if a miracle doesn’t happen.


  • I think Syria is next. They’re major problem is that they’re usrrounded on three sides by enemies. In the east, the Americans in Iraq. In the north, Turkey would be eager to fight and in the west, Israel is prepared.


  • Just spotted this one and thought it was in regards to who would reach 1000 next! :lol: :roll: :lol:

    EmuGod,
    I don’t think the US is going to allow Turkey in any upcoming Middle East military actions. I seem to recall Turkey was uncooperative in Operation Iraqi Fredom. It’s might have been over a week earlier. In addition, the coalition might have captured 200(a low estimate) Al Qeada terrorists who escaped across the Iraq-Iran border…


  • I think Bush will either go for Syria or the Palestinians…

  • '19 Moderator

    I think Bush is done with war for this term. Barring anything unforseen. War is only poular to a point.

    Besides Syria unlike Iraq freely admits to having WMD and WILL use them in defence. I also do not belive the arab world would stand for an invasion of Syria. I think going to war with Syria would war throughout the middle east. Call it another Arab/Israeli war only add in US forces.


  • @dezrtfish:

    Call it another Arab/Israeli war only add in US forces.

    and i dont think isreal would be able to win with conventional weaponry this time


  • Rumsfeld is preparing Iran as the next “victim”….
    But, much more interesting is how both Tenet and Rumsfeld will see the report about the efficiency of the secret services in their light only…


  • Like the prime poster (dubya also gatorade) sez, “same as the old war.”

    What is our new mode of war these days? Superclass first-world US force takes on third-world (Iraq) or even fourth-world (Afghanistan) force.
    Good job mashing the Taliban, but the followup is crumbly.
    Masterful work trashing the Saddam’s Baaths, but winning the peace looks a bit prickly.
    Where to next that fits the pattern? Find a place that’s already pitifully screwed up… apply our might… declare victory and an end to hostilities… apply bandaids… scan abroad with haste for the next glorious adventure.

    This is no way to run an empire. It is also a cruel way to ruin the morale of our armed forces. Anyone see “Gladiator” – what did the most gifted, loyal and charismatic warrior in the empire really want? To go home to his family and his farm. Who betrayed him? The political rulers, far from the battlefield… which makes me wish McCain would run again for President. None of these military geniuses – Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz – ever served a day in a combat zone. It seems W didn’t even bother to serve out his draft-evading National Guard duty.

    So who’s next?

    They seem to be attempting a Chile-style (1973) coup d’etat in Iran… stay tuned. But it would be extremely unlikely that we will send in masses of troops. Also doubtful is Syria or, I think, anywhere else in the Middle East. Bush (that is, Karl Rove, his chief campaign advisor) has already shifted gears. Last year he shifted from fighting terrorism to decapitating an Arab state. More recently he has shifted from making war to earning a peace trophy. Please note that his most consistent activity over the past three weeks is collecting huge trunks of dough at pre-election lunches, speeches and dinners. It started as soon as he parked his Roger Ramjet stage prop on that aircraft carrier.

    I agree with several posters who note that we are too close to the active electoral campaigning for a shooting war – unless used with skillful timing in late summer 2004 as a distraction from the damn hit-and-run sniping against our troops that we seem destined to endure in Iraq for a long while to come.

    Things in Iran could move through several sharp-turn phases over the next 12 months. At such a juncture when the government there has changed hands, is on shaky ground, but remains defiant on making and owning nuclear power and/or weapons, perhaps then we could see US-led military intervention there (summer 2004).

    In the meantime, however, the White House is focused, as it must be, on plans to destroy the prospects of several would-be world leaders, by the name of Kerry, Lieberman, et al. Phase One of this “war” will be concluded by spring 2004.

    Hey – it’s term limits in spades, baby. The 22nd amendment to the Constitution, I believe. If Bush could be elected over and over again, then maybe he wouldn’t be in such a hurry to shift gears. Maybe our campaign to root out the baddest guys across the Islamic crescent from Morocco to Pakistan would be more methodical, allowing for beneficial alliances, timely consolidation, logical progression, clear and unifying principles, and new benign structures of stability and prevention. Maybe. But it ain’t.


  • @Z:

    This is no way to run an empire.

    W ain’t playin’ Civilization!

    But considering what he’s done ya got to give it time.
    Compare it to Clinton’s Somalia pullout, Haiti mess, Serbia/Kosovo slaughter, or bombing an aspirin factory(smaller scale.)


  • I agree, give Bush some time. His exploits may yet equal Clinton’s.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

31

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts