attack on Iran **WILL START** within next 6 months

[Azure]

Why would it matter if they only stay there for 6-8 months, they swap out.
We've had CBGs there for probably longer than you've been alive. No big deal.

Duuuuuuuh!!

 

[CptColumbo]

CC, I am sure you meant to say "this is a skeptic site" in your blistering riposte to pagan.

Way to let the side down, CC.

DR

Sorry, I went with spelling in the real world. I'll leave it in place to emphasize my shame.

 

[Zep]

Sorry, I went with spelling in the real world. I'll leave it in place to emphasis emphasise my shame.

Oh. Dear.

 

[CptColumbo]

Oh. Dear.

According to my Webster's it's "emphasize." So I will change that. Unless you're English and have some crazy way of spelling it like "centre." Ya freaks.

Remember, "If it wasn't for [the US] you'd all be speaking German!"

 

[Darth Rotor]

According to my Webster's it's "emphasize." So I will change that. Unless you're English and have some crazy way of spelling it like "centre." Ya freaks.

Remember, "If it wasn't for [the US] you'd all be speaking German!"

A variation on that is:

"If it weren't for us, you'd all be speaking Russian."

DR

 

[Brainache]

According to my Webster's it's "emphasize." So I will change that. Unless you're English and have some crazy way of spelling it like "centre." Ya freaks.

Remember, "If it wasn't for [the US] you'd all be speaking German!"

Come on guys, Zep is an Aussie so please get it right: "If it wasn't for [the US] you'd all be speaking Japanese".

 

[rikzilla]

oahuoahu - please make certain you start your threads in the correct subforum. This is a political topic, not a conspiracy theory.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

I object!

We have a conspiracy theory sub forum....and Alex Jonesieists are CTer nutballs, hence their threads belong there. Why are you insisting on polluting P&CE with this crap? Don't we have enough of our own problems here? Sheesh! I come here to escape the constant barrage of truthy stupidity in the CT subforum.

-z

 

[Garrette]

Come on guys, Zep is an Aussie so please get it right: "If it wasn't for [the US] you'd all be speaking Japanese".

I prefer: If it weren't for George Washington, we'd all be speaking English!

 

[Tricky]

I bet in the neartime future, A US warship will accidentally shoot down an Iranian passanger plane. And this will start WW 7

Um.... Didn't that already happen? Are we in WW VII now?

 

[Beerina]

Here we have a classic symptom of "conspiratosis." Conspiracy guys honest-to-God think they can predict the future. This is because they see through the facade of things. They never notice that their predictions are always wrong.

Oh they notice alright -- they adapt their theories and continue, rather than abandon their theories.

 

[Beerina]

oahuoahu - please make certain you start your threads in the correct subforum. This is a political topic, not a conspiracy theory.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

Bart: Hey, it's the femail man.

Lisa: Femail person.

 

[Kerberos]

I prefer: If it weren't for George Washington, we'd all be speaking English!

Personally I blame the French for that.

 

[Kerberos]

I bet in the neartime future, A US warship will accidentally shoot down an Iranian passanger plane. And this will start WW 7

OK, I just got to ask, I've heard people with loose understandings of what the term World War means calling all sorts of minor squabbles WW3, but WW7? That takes the prize. Which 4 conflicts have you managed to promote to world war 3 to 6? The Cold war? The Korean War? The invasion of Granada? Or perhaps a particuarly large football Brawl? Do tell.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The U.S. carrier fleets near the middle east cannot last for more than 6-8 months. They've already been there for a while.

Expect an attack on IRAN within the next 6 months.

Possibly with Isreal starting it, but we may both go at the same time.

Will there be a terror attack carried out to precede attacks on Iran? Most likely but Isreal may just hit without an attack.






These are just my educated guesses, based on the navy battle and carrier fleets in the region and the PR's being released saying Iran is helping Iraq terrorists and insurgencies.

Oh how exciting! Will they get commemorative t-shirts? Will they have to pay taxes?

You voted for Michael Badnarik in 2006, didn't you?

 

[Tailgater]

Oh how exciting! Will they get commemorative t-shirts? Will they have to pay taxes?

Yes, but they might have to say "labor income taxes" so some people don't get confused.

 

[Darth Rotor]

OK, I just got to ask, I've heard people with loose understandings of what the term World War means calling all sorts of minor squabbles WW3, but WW7? That takes the prize. Which 4 conflicts have you managed to promote to world war 3 to 6? The Cold war? The Korean War? The invasion of Granada? Or perhaps a particuarly large football Brawl? Do tell.

You can without too much error assert that WW III = the Cold War, with the same political framework as "The Hundred Years War" is seen as one war, and "The Thirty Years War" was seen as one war. With that perspective, all three wars were fought fought out in a mix of alliances and interests, with the sides generallly based on two political nuclei.

That would mean WW III started with the Berlin Blockade, and ended in 1989 when the Wall came down.

Where WW IV enters the picture is another matter. James Woolsley's assertion that "the War on Terror is World War IV" doesn't wash with me.

DR

 

[firecoins]

Um.... Didn't that already happen? Are we in WW VII now?

Next Iran will overthrown the US embassie and hold American hostages for several years. Things in the Middle East tend to repeat themselves. Things in the Middle East tend to repeat themselves.

 

[Kerberos]

You can without too much error assert that WW III = the Cold War, with the same political framework as "The Hundred Years War" is seen as one war, and "The Thirty Years War" was seen as one war. With that perspective, all three wars were fought fought out in a mix of alliances and interests, with the sides generallly based on two political nuclei.

That would mean WW III started with the Berlin Blockade, and ended in 1989 when the Wall came down.

Where WW IV enters the picture is another matter. James Woolsley's assertion that "the War on Terror is World War IV" doesn't wash with me.

DR

It's not the notion that The cold war was one conflict that I object to, it's simply that it can be called a world war. It simply doesn't bear any similarity to the 2 actual world wars. Not only was the intensity of the conflict much lower, the two major enemies were never actually at war. The cold war fails to be a world war simply by virtue of not being a war. If one must absolutely designate more wars "world wars" I really think that the Napoleonic wars are the best candidate.

 

[steverino]

Maybe Darth can back me up on this, but I hear that U.S. carrier fleets are closing in on Afghanistan, and will soon be pulling into port at Kabul.

 

[Garrette]

It's not the notion that The cold war was one conflict that I object to, it's simply that it can be called a world war. It simply doesn't bear any similarity to the 2 actual world wars. Not only was the intensity of the conflict much lower, the two major enemies were never actually at war. The cold war fails to be a world war simply by virtue of not being a war. If one must absolutely designate more wars "world wars" I really think that the Napoleonic wars are the best candidate.

I think a case can be made for the Cold War being a World War in that there were proxy wars (and wars mistakenly seen as proxy wars) and in that the seemingly unavoidable conflagration drove major foreign policy decisions for several camps.

As to the Napoleonic wars, I've made the same point to several people, though I would push the start of the World War back to at least the American Revolution and possibly to the French and Indian War (you might know it as the 7 Years War).