EVE Search - WWIII

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

WWIII

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 10:49:00 - [1] If WWIII breaks out soon, what will be the composition of the two sides? USA UK Israel Australia India South Korea Japan Germany Poland Spain Italy Iraq (possible) Afghanistan (possible) Lebanon (possible) Saudi Arabia Jordan Brazil Mexico Kuwait -vs.- Russia China France North Korea Iran Syria Egypt Pakistan Iraq (possible) Afghanistan (possible) Lebanon (possible) Cuba Venezuela That's just off the top of my head, I know I forgot some... What do you think the sides will be? My Current Project
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 10:58:00 - [2] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 12/09/2007 10:58:20 Will it really matter? With the weapons currently available, it will all be global chaos, death and destruction. Not to mention we will see all kinds of bio-engineered deceases, viruses, chemical warfare, microwave weapons, space weapons and so on. We're looking at the build-up right now. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 10:59:00 - [3] Originally by: Jim McGregor Will it really matter? With the weapons currently available, it will all be global chaos, death and destruction. Not to mention we will see all kinds of bio-engineered deceases, viruses, chemical warfare, microwave weapons and so on. We're looking at the build-up right now. No it won't really matter, but there will still be sides, and I'm wondering what they will be... My Current Project
Invader Skooge Minmatar Dopehead Industries FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:02:00 - [4] The sides will be Dead...whatever happens
Decidis Caldari ASGARD SECURITY SHIPPING PRODUCTION SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:04:00 - [5] I read on www.foxnews.com the other day (lol fox news) apparently the Bush Administration is looking at the costs and benefits of bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran actually has a military, much stronger and more potent that what Iraq's military was back in 2002. In any case, if we bomb Iran, I'm pretty sure the response from Iran won't be pretty, hopefully they won't try and attack Israel. Because then a whole nasty chain of events could very well follow.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:04:00 - [6] I predict that this thread will be locked ohhhhhhhh so fast Your second list doesn't make much sense. Why would Cuba (a communist country), Russia (a capitalist country), and all the Islamic Fundamentalist countries want to be on the same side of anything? They hate each other as much as they hate the people on the other list... All the objections that Islamic Fundamentalists level at Western countries such as the US apply tenfold to Communist countries- they're even more "godless" and "sinful". And why exactly post-Soviet Russia would want to get involved in Communism or Religious Fundamentalism I don't know... ------ Originally by: CCP Prism X There's no such thing as playing too much EvE! You all obviously need more accounts!
Sirial Soulfly	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:05:00 - [7] List would be slightly shorter if you would say Europe instead of all its members.
Caid Lemant	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:07:00 - [8] As much as you'd think, France will likely never fight against America and the same vice versa. China is quite unlikely also considering how much money transfers to them from the States. -------- There is not enough love and goodness in the world for us to be permitted to give any of it away to imaginary things. Friedrich Nietzsche
Xoria Krint The Movement	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:10:00 - [9] I sense much fact in this list young padawan.. - My Movies
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:13:00 - [10] There are prophecies about World War 3 from the guy who warned about that the World Trade Center would be attacked by terrorists back in 1987. He was right. And he has been right about hundreds of events like Global Warming and so on, long before it was a known problem. I bet you wont be interested though, since he knew these things from alien contacts, and there are no aliens right? But anyway, some people do have a open mind about these things, so ill post it here still... ò 215th Contact, February 28, 1987: Known as the Henoch (or Enoch) Prophecies, this contact contained a forewarning of the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) by terrorism, the series of worldwide wars that the US would subsequently launch, and military actions involving Russia, China, France, Germany, Spain, England, Scandinavia and many Third World and other countries. Corroborated: September 11, 2001, the WTC was destroyed; the United States has already attacked Afghanistan and Iraq as of the time of this writing. Prophecy for World War 3 --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:20:00 - [11] I think when the crap hits the fan, you would see sides... And all of the EU would not fight alongside the USA IMO... If we were to bomb Iran, Russia would all but want to bomb the hell out of us... They would not be on the same side because they love one another, but it would be "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" scenario... My Current Project
Locus Bey Gallente Qalandar	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:39:00 - [12] My real life occupation is a Xenopsychologist, specialising in pledian psychosis. I'm not talking the channelers, but the actual aliens themselves. As we all know they derived a great kick out of fecking with the new agers of the 70's, revealing bogus mayan calenders and end of the world predictions. Now I am sad to report they are at it again, this time with predictions of the world war III. Knowing many of us are suckers for this kind of apocoylptic mumbo jumbo, they are at it again predicting not only another world war, but the illuminati backed global new order. They are really ****ing themselves laughing over this one, so don't be fooled WW3, not in my lifetime
Znaei Caldari Thundercats RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:40:00 - [13] Tbh, I think the top list will be alot shorter. Also, I don't know what weapons will be used in the WWIII but I'm guessing we will be using sticks and rocks in WWIV. Not so hard! Air gets in between.
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:46:00 - [14] Originally by: Znaei Tbh, I think the top list will be alot shorter. Also, I don't know what weapons will be used in the WWIII but I'm guessing we will be using sticks and rocks in WWIV. I don't know... I'm not sure how long it will take for the first nuke to be launched... Maybe the war will rage for a few years before that happens, or for only a few hours. If it's the former, the lists will start out small and grow. I guess I'm looking at the lists based on nukes not being used right away... My Current Project
mamolian M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:46:00 - [15] Seriously.. wtf is this topic about.. Beginning to wonder if you people are ***** ******.. -------------------------------
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:50:00 - [16] ****** topic... x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:58:00 - [17] Originally by: Znaei Also, I don't know what weapons will be used in the WWIII but I'm guessing we will be using sticks and rocks in WWIV. Nicking Einstein quotes without attributing them is so not cool. ------ Originally by: CCP Prism X There's no such thing as playing too much EvE! You all obviously need more accounts!
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 11:59:00 - [18] I think someone should make a WWIII computer simulation program, adding known tech of all countries of the world, and using political data to run the simulation over and over again, showing death tolls & whatnot... Post the results in the news every morning... Maybe that will be better for humanity than to ignore this possibility and call it ********... My Current Project
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:01:00 - [19] Originally by: DarkMatter I think someone should make a WWIII computer simulation program, adding known tech of all countries of the world, and using political data to run the simulation over and over again, showing death tolls & whatnot... Post the results in the news every morning... Maybe that will be better for humanity than to ignore this possibility and call it *******... Tiny* bit off topic, but Defcon is a brilliant game ------ Originally by: CCP Prism X There's no such thing as playing too much EvE! You all obviously need more accounts!
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:04:00 - [20] japan wont join you. Iraq and afghanistan wont join you. France wont fight you. china wont fight you (for now) oh, and IBTL. oh, and apparantly my country will be neutral :-) ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer." Originally by: Royaldo complete win by Cornucopian!
Darwinia Minmatar	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:06:00 - [21] I wouldn't be too worried about WWIII. Wars today are fought mostly for economical reasons (either to secure resources or to 'expend' them). Destroying earth is not... economical. Lots of small wars... yes. A world wide war... not likely. ------------------------ I don't believe in sigs.
Teh Hoodedclaw	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:06:00 - [22] Originally by: DarkMatter If WWIII breaks out soon, what will be the composition of the two sides? Germany ( could very well stay nuetral pretty much as they are in afganistan at the moment where they seem to rarely leave their bases ) Iraq (possible) Afghanistan (possible) Lebanon (possible) Saudi Arabia ( these 4 countries could find their goverments kicked out by the radical religous groups starting an upriseing, they would then likely side with iran) another country to add alongside iran would be pakistan, the radical's in that country would likely start an upriseing there to, most likely helped by the pakistani inteligence agency which still seem's to be filled with the same taliban supporters that helped them get a foothold in afganistan.
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:28:00 - [23] to the op : france would never side against another european country if this kind of conflict arise, never ever ! gotta be partly braindead to think that...seriously ! x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Feng Schui Minmatar The Ninja Coalition	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:31:00 - [24] Originally by: Darwinia I wouldn't be too worried about WWIII. Wars today are fought mostly for economical reasons (either to secure resources or to 'expend' them). Destroying earth is not... economical. Lots of small wars... yes. A world wide war... not likely. you're forgetting religion. Group A sets off a dirty nuke in Some City. That country retaliates, nuking the countries that helped. The automated MAD systems activate, end of world. Or... Suicide Bomber A thinks its a good thing to release SomeUberDeadlyVirusWith100%FatalityRateInOneDay... end of world Or hell, we could just get hit by a comet too The Beginning <-- crap quality, need to redo, sorry :(
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:32:00 - [25] Originally by: Darwinia I wouldn't be too worried about WWIII. Wars today are fought mostly for economical reasons (either to secure resources or to 'expend' them). Destroying earth is not... economical. Lots of small wars... yes. A world wide war... not likely. I tend to agree, but there is a very good chance, someone is going to launch a nuke. That takes it beyond economical, and into crazed desperate humans fighting for survival and defending their way of life. The gloves come off in a hurry... My Current Project
Arvald Caldari House of Tempers	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:45:00 - [26] Edited by: Arvald on 12/09/2007 12:51:57 Microsoft dell ford Honda V apple Chevy Mitsubishi sony microsoft will rule the world one day ya cant stop the rokh and no i have not nor will i ever contribute anything constructive to your thread
Vajak	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:46:00 - [27] ******** topic but what I find most disheartening is that you actually think France would want to side against other EU countries and US. I mean sure I always see France jokes being made but I didn¦t realize there are actually people who seriously feel that French people hate US. Guess Fox has done its job well with you PS. no I am not from France
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:48:00 - [28] Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 12:48:43 Originally by: Vajak ****** topic but what I find most disheartening is that you actually think France would want to side against other EU countries and US. I mean sure I always see France jokes being made but I didn¦t realize there are actually people who seriously feel that French people hate US. Guess Fox has done its job well with you PS. no I am not from France Oh yeah, and Canada would be on our side, but Quebec would be a listening post for France... LOL! Quote:** ya cant stop the rokh I just love that... My Current Project
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:57:00 - [29] american ignorance ftw, huh.. x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:03:00 - [30] Edited by: Raoul Endymion on 12/09/2007 13:04:00 im danish, and have nothing to do with france.. just hilarious (and a bit scary) that you actually think that they would be against you, and any other european country for that matter.. again i say, american ignorance gotta love it sometimes.. x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:04:00 - [31] Originally by: Raoul Endymion american ignorance gotta love it sometimes.. Its actually not so funny when you think about it, since they have the largest army on earth and a insane president. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:07:00 - [32] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Raoul Endymion american ignorance gotta love it sometimes.. Its actually not so funny when you think about it, since they have the largest army on earth and a insane president. We don't have the largest army... My Current Project
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:07:00 - [33] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Raoul Endymion american ignorance gotta love it sometimes.. Its actually not so funny when you think about it, since they have the largest army on earth and a insane president. He's not insane Jim, just very smart. Not so good at public speaking though. Anyone who is prezzy of the US is a smart man, or his dad was. SNAP. apart from that US have already declared they will invade my country if we ever have an american on trial in the world court in the Hague. I guess they dont believe in anything like that. Or the UN, or Kyoto for that matter WWIII ey? ATM Us and Europe would pwn everyone. give it twenty years with china in full swing and a about 500million soldiers to throw away.... then, not so much. China is developing REALLY fast. ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer." Originally by: Royaldo complete win by Cornucopian!
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:10:00 - [34] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 12/09/2007 13:16:20 Originally by: Cornucopian He's not insane Jim, just very smart. Not so good at public speaking though. Anyone who is prezzy of the US is a smart man, or his dad was. SNAP. He is crazy. Certifiable, in fact. Paranoid Megalomaniac. ****** was one of the smartest men for his time too. Intelligence doesnt mean they are good leaders. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:12:00 - [35] Originally by: DarkMatter We don't have the largest army... You're right, I meant most technologically advanced and most dangerous. Numbers dont really mean much these days with the weapons of mass destruction that is available. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:17:00 - [36] Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 13:17:06 Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter We don't have the largest army... You're right, I meant most technologically advanced and most dangerous. Numbers dont really mean much these days with the weapons of mass destruction that is available. Hey, China has nukes too... And the largest army. And their economy is growing, and they will be THE superpower soon... It will be interesting to see what happens when they are the top dog... How many people who are not currently thinking about war will think about it then? My Current Project
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:18:00 - [37] Originally by: DarkMatter Hey, China has nukes too... And the largest army. And their economy is growing, and they will be THE superpower soon... It will be interesting to see what happens when they are the top dog... Probably even more death and destruction. Thats just the way we are. Just the fact that they are currently gearing up in order to "assert their international role" shows very clearly how its about e-peens on a global scale. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:21:00 - [38] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:21:47 Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:21:02 I'm not overly bothered by China becoming the world's most powerful nation. How many countries have they invaded in the last century? I believe that the answer is no more than two (Tibet, and you could argue Korea too). Now compare that with the number of countries invaded by Russia, the UK or the US in that time. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:21:00 - [39] Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 13:21:41 Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:21:02 I'm not overly bothered by China becoming the world's most powerful nation. How many countries have they invaded in the last century? I believe that the answer is around one (Tibet). Now compare that with the number of countries invaded by Russia, the UK or the US in that time. They have never been on top (in "recent" history), I think that will change things... My Current Project
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:24:00 - [40] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:24:46 Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 13:21:41 Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:21:02 I'm not overly bothered by China becoming the world's most powerful nation. How many countries have they invaded in the last century? I believe that the answer is around one (Tibet). Now compare that with the number of countries invaded by Russia, the UK or the US in that time. They have never been on top (in "recent" history), I think that will change things... They're more likely to use their economic clout to get their own way, tbh. The US was using gunboat diplomacy long before it was a super power. The UK is still using it long after it's ceased to be powerful. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:26:00 - [41] Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 13:26:26 Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:24:46 Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 12/09/2007 13:21:41 Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/09/2007 13:21:02 I'm not overly bothered by China becoming the world's most powerful nation. How many countries have they invaded in the last century? I believe that the answer is around one (Tibet). Now compare that with the number of countries invaded by Russia, the UK or the US in that time. They have never been on top (in "recent" history), I think that will change things... They're more likely to use their economic clout to get their own way, tbh. The US was using gunboat diplomacy long before it was a super power. The UK is still using it long after it's ceased to be powerful. I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... My Current Project
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:29:00 - [42] Originally by: DarkMatter I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... Much, much sooner. The US is broke. Maybe thats why they are trying to get the World War 3 to start. Put everything back to zero again. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:33:00 - [43] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... Much, much sooner. The US is broke. Maybe thats why they are trying to get the World War 3 to start. Put everything back to zero again. I guess we'll find out, won't we? My Current Project
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:34:00 - [44] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... Much, much sooner. The US is broke. Maybe thats why they are trying to get the World War 3 to start. Put everything back to zero again. Jim not a very smart reply: wars dont make the US as a country richer, it only causes more Us Debt, since the government is forced to borrow more money off the fed to keep a worldwar machine running. Most countries have debt. ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer." Originally by: Royaldo complete win by Cornucopian!
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:34:00 - [45] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 12/09/2007 13:36:22 Originally by: DarkMatter Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... Much, much sooner. The US is broke. Maybe thats why they are trying to get the World War 3 to start. Put everything back to zero again. I guess we'll find out, won't we? Yes. Originally by: Cornucopian Jim not a very smart reply: wars dont make the US as a country richer, it only causes more Us Debt, since the government is forced to borrow more money off the fed to keep a worldwar machine running. Most countries have debt. Yes absolutely. Im not saying that the country earns money from war (the weapon industry does, however). I wasnt implying that it was a way to get richer. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:36:00 - [46] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: DarkMatter I guess we will find out in a couple decades if not sooner... Much, much sooner. The US is broke. Maybe thats why they are trying to get the World War 3 to start. Put everything back to zero again. I guess we'll find out, won't we? Yes. Exciting times we live in, right? Maybe not, but I still think it's better than loin cloths over our nads, wives with knockers down to their knees and stone tools... If we happen to leave that for future generations, maybe they will have better luck next time... My Current Project
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:52:00 - [47] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Raoul Endymion american ignorance gotta love it sometimes.. Its actually not so funny when you think about it, since they have the largest army on earth and a insane president. Yeah, China beats us currently. I read an article like 4 months back where China was cutting 5 MILLION troops to cut costs in certain area's and I'm sitting there thinking 'holy ****, 5 million?' As for the US I'd like to share a little concept that I've discussed with friends. Try to think of the US as a severely Bipolar child. Every time we receive a new president our actions and policies tend to change drastictly. And we're coming up on another election, Jebby can't re-sub, so expect a mood swing soon. As for Iran, I believe that's one place we shouldn't tread since they are a dog that bites back and their technology is almost comparable to ours (and in some cases better). Not to mention we already have them on their guard. ___________________________ Never Forget, Never Forgive
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 13:54:00 - [48] Originally by: Micheal Dietrich As for Iran, I believe that's one place we shouldn't tread since they are a dog that bites back and their technology is almost comparable to ours (and in some cases better). Not to mention we already have them on their guard. Is this really true? I dont know much about their technology, but the US will most likely have air supremacy as always, and bomb the living hell out of their installations. Sure, you may not be able to actually take over the country, but you should be able to just wipe their army with ease. No? --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Teh Hoodedclaw	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:02:00 - [49] Edited by: Teh Hoodedclaw on 12/09/2007 14:02:57 Originally by: Jim McGregor Is this really true? I dont know much about their technology, China has access to a some us technology because Israel sold it to them link they have also then sold some of this technology on to Iran, during the recent war in the Lebanon some of the isreali ship's were hit by missiles, the report's from some sources at the time indicated that the ships anti missile system's had been jammed using iranian technolgy that they had gotten from china-->Isreal--> the US
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:03:00 - [50] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Micheal Dietrich As for Iran, I believe that's one place we shouldn't tread since they are a dog that bites back and their technology is almost comparable to ours (and in some cases better). Not to mention we already have them on their guard. Is this really true? I dont know much about their technology, but the US will most likely have air supremacy as always, and bomb the living hell out of their installations. Sure, you may not be able to actually take over the country, but you should be able to just wipe their army with ease. No? Iran is so anti-air it's not even funny. They almost do have the MDS that we've been trying to build. Our jets would do better than theirs in air battles however (they use F-16's, F-18's, and Migs) although their air force is quite impressive. I don't know the exact name of the tank that they use but basically what they did was took parts of other tanks that they liked the best and made this one. No one wants to admit it but it's better than the M-1. ___________________________ Never Forget, Never Forgive
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:03:00 - [51] Originally by: Micheal Dietrich As for Iran, I believe that's one place we shouldn't tread since they are a dog that bites back and their technology is almost comparable to ours (and in some cases better). Not to mention we already have them on their guard. maybe when it comes to consumer electronics, but when it comes to military grade high-tech, satelites and funky military systems, i doubt they can be matched with the US. x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Grez Minmatar Sybrite Inc.	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:06:00 - [52] As long as someone's attacking Britain by sea, we're ok ---
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:08:00 - [53] Originally by: Teh Hoodedclaw Edited by: Teh Hoodedclaw on 12/09/2007 14:02:57 Originally by: Jim McGregor Is this really true? I dont know much about their technology, China has access to a some us technology because Israel sold it to them link they have also then sold some of this technology on to Iran, during the recent war in the Lebanon some of the isreali ship's were hit by missiles, the report's from some sources at the time indicated that the ships anti missile system's had been jammed using iranian technolgy that they had gotten from china-->Isreal--> the US Let's not forget that Iran borders Iraq, where 160,000 fatigued, generally war-weary US troops are patrolling the streets and coming under daily attacks by militants. If Iran launched an attack on US forces through Iraq, I believe we'd have a very hard time stopping them. In addition, Iraq would fall into greater chaos since the troops are no longer capable of assisting the police and training the new Iraqi army. Even assuming that Iran couldn't defeat US troops outside of Iraq, a war with Iran would destroy any lingering hope of turning Iraq into a stable democracy. They have the incentive as well since the power vacuum created by the absence of US power in the country could be easily filled by pro-Iranian leaders. The United States cannot afford a war with Iran, politically or militarily. And given the extended and multiple tours of duty the troops currently in Iraq have been serving, we may not even be capable of it.
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:08:00 - [54] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Micheal Dietrich As for Iran, I believe that's one place we shouldn't tread since they are a dog that bites back and their technology is almost comparable to ours (and in some cases better). Not to mention we already have them on their guard. Is this really true? I dont know much about their technology, but the US will most likely have air supremacy as always, and bomb the living hell out of their installations. Sure, you may not be able to actually take over the country, but you should be able to just wipe their army with ease. No? Yes, we could attain air superiority. But that really doesn't win you a war... If our objective is to just blow up their nuclear facilities, we'd just give Israel more money and let them go do it... My Current Project
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:17:00 - [55] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Thanos Draicon In addition, Iraq would fall into greater chaos since the troops are no longer capable of assisting the police and training the new Iraqi army. So you really believe that the US went into Iraq to turn the country into a democracy? Why arent they doing that to countries that dont have oil then? Because we are there for both, a "friend" in the region to combat Iran, Syria & others, and also to quench our energy thirst by having a "friend" we can trade stuff to for oil. The priorities: Have Iraq as a base of operations for any war against Iran. This includes the use of the Iraqi army for that war. Quench our energy needs utilizing this oil rich region. Give the Iraqi's a better life. We are there for all those reasons, though ppl may not like the order of priority. But that's the world we live in... Iraq was the easiest nation to invade to create this "friendly" Islamic Democracy the Middle East, and it's right on Irans doorstep to boot. Unfortunately, the administration greatly underestimated insurgency & sectarian strife, and the plan will be ruined when Hillary Clinton takes office and brings the war to an end. We will not have an Iraqi democracy, and we will not have a friend in the region... My Current Project
Krissam Caldari Advanced Crystal Methods The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:17:00 - [56] throw denmark with the us, Fogh does whatever he can to get in bed with Bush
Teh Hoodedclaw	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:17:00 - [57] Originally by: Thanos Draicon Let's not forget that Iran borders Iraq, where 160,000 fatigued, generally war-weary US troops are patrolling the streets and coming under daily attacks by militants. If Iran launched an attack on US forces through Iraq, I believe we'd have a very hard time stopping them. In addition, Iraq would fall into greater chaos since the troops are no longer capable of assisting the police and training the new Iraqi army. Even assuming that Iran couldn't defeat US troops outside of Iraq, a war with Iran would destroy any lingering hope of turning Iraq into a stable democracy. They have the incentive as well since the power vacuum created by the absence of US power in the country could be easily filled by pro-Iranian leaders. The United States cannot afford a war with Iran, politically or militarily. And given the extended and multiple tours of duty the troops currently in Iraq have been serving, we may not even be capable of it. As soona as a war with Iran started the pro Iranian goverment that is currently in power in iraq would turn on the us/uk troops in iraq and so would most of the tribal leader's leaving us with no choice to rapidly withdraw as quickly as possible whilsh trying to keep casulties to a minimum. On top of this you would very likely see Syria push into Iraq from the west and the religous police in Saudi Arabia starting unrest in that country that would see the Saudi royal family pushed from power and the country being more radicalised than it currently is, in the slightly longer term it would flare into a total middle eastern war that would no doubt involve Israel and then due to the world's need for oil this could at least possibly esculate even further.
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:18:00 - [58] Whoever wins, we lose ;)
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:18:00 - [59] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Thanos Draicon In addition, Iraq would fall into greater chaos since the troops are no longer capable of assisting the police and training the new Iraqi army. So you really believe that the US went into Iraq to turn the country into a democracy? Why arent they doing that to countries that dont have oil then? lol, you mean africa? all they have is mangos and starvation, not worth it mate :-) ----------------------------------------------- "post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer." Originally by: Royaldo complete win by Cornucopian!
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:21:00 - [60] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 12/09/2007 14:22:37 Originally by: DarkMatter Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Thanos Draicon In addition, Iraq would fall into greater chaos since the troops are no longer capable of assisting the police and training the new Iraqi army. So you really believe that the US went into Iraq to turn the country into a democracy? Why arent they doing that to countries that dont have oil then? Because we are there for both, a "friend" in the region to combat Iran, Syria & others, and also to quench our energy thirst by having a "friend" we can trade stuff to for oil. The priorities: Have Iraq as a base of operations for any war against Iran. This includes the use of the Iraqi army for that war. Quench our energy needs utilizing this oil rich region. Give the Iraqi's a better life. We are there for all those reasons, though ppl may not like the order of priority. But that's the world we live in... Iraq was the easiest nation to invade to create this "friendly" Islamic Democracy the Middle East, and it's right on Irans doorstep to boot. Unfortunately, the administration greatly underestimated insurgency & sectarian strife, and the plan will be ruined when Hillary Clinton takes office and brings the war to an end. We will not have an Iraqi democracy, and we will not have a friend in the region... Yeah, that just about sums up my opinions about it as well. But I dont believe that you will ever successfully create a peaceful democracy out of Iraq. Like you said, its not the top priority either. If the oil runs out, you're out of there. So I think bringing the troops home is the right move. More time will not make a difference in my opinion. But since the number one reason is to have a base there, Bush will never do that. Not Hillary either. You need Ron Paul. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Raoul Endymion Gallente x13	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:24:00 - [61] Originally by: DarkMatter Unfortunately, the administration greatly underestimated insurgency & sectarian strife, and the plan will be ruined when Hillary Clinton takes office and brings the war to an end. ...and they lived happily ever after...the end would be the best thing if that happen, which i sincerly hope it will. x13 Website ~ x13 Killboard ~ x13 Recruitment
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:25:00 - [62] Originally by: DarkMatter Have Iraq as a base of operations for any war against Iran. This includes the use of the Iraqi army for that war. Quench our energy needs utilizing this oil rich region. Give the Iraqi's a better life. We are there for all those reasons, though ppl may not like the order of priority. But that's the world we live in... Iraq was the easiest nation to invade to create this "friendly" Islamic Democracy the Middle East, and it's right on Irans doorstep to boot. This makes sense to me, considering the current administration. Quote: Unfortunately, the administration greatly underestimated insurgency & sectarian strife, and the plan will be ruined when Hillary Clinton takes office and brings the war to an end. We will not have an Iraqi democracy, and we will not have a friend in the region... I think it was much more than just underestimation. From the onset the war planners (mainly the upper escellon of the Executive Branch) didn't seem to have much interest in planning for the post-war Iraq. From the questionable intelligence recieved from exiled leaders, to the order for US troops not to interfere with looting, to the disbanding of the Iraqi army, we've made huge mistakes in dealing with the post-war situation because the plan for a post-war Iraq was only drawn up two months before the invasion (compared to two years for post-WW2 Germany). Withdrawing troops in the near future will ruin whatever chances we have, however. If we stay it'll have to be for another decade, and I'm not sure how capable the troops are regarding that task.
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:26:00 - [63] Quote: Yeah, that just about sums up my opinions about it as well. But I dont believe that you will ever successfully create a peaceful democracy out of Iraq. Like you said, its not the top priority either. If the oil runs out, you're out of there. Actually no. I believe the long term benefits of having Iraq on our side is way more important than the current energy problems... I'm one who also believe that the people deserve democracy, or a good shot at it too... Having Iraq as a strong stable democracy will hurt Iran's & Syria's positions, that should be the main focus IMO... I don't want to see troop withdrawal until Iraq has a real chance to make it... My Current Project
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:29:00 - [64] Originally by: DarkMatter I believe the long term benefits of having Iraq on our side is way more important than the current energy problems... I'm one who also believe that the people deserve democracy, or a good shot at it too... Having Iraq as a strong stable democracy will hurt Iran's & Syria's positions, that should be the main focus IMO... I don't want to see troop withdrawal until Iraq has a real chance to make it... But the democracy thing is just something they use to get people like yourself, who want good for the Iraqi people, to support them. They dont care about that... its the oil they are after. You shouldnt support leaders like that... --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Jernau Gurgeh Gallente	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:29:00 - [65] Originally by: DarkMatter Quote: Yeah, that just about sums up my opinions about it as well. But I dont believe that you will ever successfully create a peaceful democracy out of Iraq. Like you said, its not the top priority either. If the oil runs out, you're out of there. Actually no. I believe the long term benefits of having Iraq on our side is way more important than the current energy problems... I'm one who also believe that the people deserve democracy, or a good shot at it too... Having Iraq as a strong stable democracy will hurt Iran's & Syria's positions, that should be the main focus IMO... I don't want to see troop withdrawal until Iraq has a real chance to make it... The thing about democracy is that you can't force it upon people. There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not.
Phrixus Zephyr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:30:00 - [66] ....France? Are you on drugs? Originally by: consider telos ..then we had a fight and he was so dead and then I like became champion of eve and then ccp gave me a medal and a t-shirt and asked me to go out with him on a date to mcD'
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:31:00 - [67] Originally by: Jim McGregor But the democracy thing is just something they use to get people like yourself, who want good for the Iraqi people, to support them. They dont care about that... its the oil they are after. You shouldnt support leaders like that... Be that as it may, if part of the end result that the people of Iraq can live without having to deal with an extremely opressive government and civil war, then it's a reasonable goal too. You can support the result even if you don't support the motive.
Teh Hoodedclaw	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:32:00 - [68] Originally by: DarkMatter I don't want to see troop withdrawal until Iraq has a real chance to make it... Problem is that could take decades or longer, the iraqi police/military and goverment's are riddled with pro iranian sympathisers who are just waiting for the us/uk troops to leave, and if you try to remove them from power they could just end up useing that as an excuse to turn thing's into an even more bloody cival war than there already is?
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:34:00 - [69] Originally by: Thanos Draicon Originally by: Jim McGregor But the democracy thing is just something they use to get people like yourself, who want good for the Iraqi people, to support them. They dont care about that... its the oil they are after. You shouldnt support leaders like that... Be that as it may, if part of the end result that the people of Iraq can live without having to deal with an extremely opressive government and civil war, then it's a reasonable goal too. You can support the result even if you don't support the motive. Still, the invasion was based on lies, in order to get oil. Now you are staying because of the democracy reasons, when thats not a priority and probably cant even be achieved. Its not like Bush talks about oil in the media, is it? He knows what buttons to push. He wants to look like someone who cares about the Iraqi. But he couldnt care less. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:37:00 - [70] Originally by: Teh Hoodedclaw Originally by: DarkMatter I don't want to see troop withdrawal until Iraq has a real chance to make it... Problem is that could take decades or longer, the iraqi police/military and goverment's are riddled with pro iranian sympathisers who are just waiting for the us/uk troops to leave, and if you try to remove them from power they could just end up useing that as an excuse to turn thing's into an even more bloody cival war than there already is? I think we would need to have troops there for 10-20 years or more. Similar in numbers to what we have kept in South Korea for the last 50+ years. I'm really pulling for the Iraqi government to make it... Also, the North & South had to reconcile here for the US to make it, I hope the Sunni & Shiite can too. But I fear that reconciliation concerning slavery is a bit easier than for the religions differences they have... That sucks... My Current Project
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:38:00 - [71] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Thanos Draicon Originally by: Jim McGregor But the democracy thing is just something they use to get people like yourself, who want good for the Iraqi people, to support them. They dont care about that... its the oil they are after. You shouldnt support leaders like that... Be that as it may, if part of the end result that the people of Iraq can live without having to deal with an extremely opressive government and civil war, then it's a reasonable goal too. You can support the result even if you don't support the motive. Still, the invasion was based on lies, in order to get oil. Now you are staying because of the democracy reasons, when thats not a priority and probably cant even be achieved. Its not like Bush talks about oil in the media, is it? He knows what buttons to push. He wants to look like someone who cares about the Iraqi. But he couldnt care less. True, but the fact is that as long as our presence in Iraq creates more positive opportunities for Iraqi people than our departure does, we need to be there. Perhaps we can just agree to disagree on this, I like this thread and don't want to get it locked.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:39:00 - [72] Originally by: Thanos Draicon True, but the fact is that as long as our presence in Iraq creates more positive opportunities for Iraqi people than our departure does, we need to be there. Perhaps we can just agree to disagree on this, I like this thread and don't want to get it locked. No no, I think its a good discussion too. Its fine to disagree, im just arguing my own point. :) --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)
Micheal Dietrich Cynical Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:40:00 - [73] Originally by: Thanos Draicon I like this thread and don't want to get it locked. Thanx alot for damning it to it's doom. ___________________________ Never Forget, Never Forgive
Jernau Gurgeh Gallente	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:47:00 - [74] Originally by: DarkMatter 9/11 is what enabled us to try and create this Democratic Middle Eastern country. And the real tragedy here is that Iraq not only nothing to do with 9/11, but also that the government there was actually anti-Al Qaeda at the time. There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:51:00 - [75] Originally by: DarkMatter 9/11 is what enabled us to try and create this Democratic Middle Eastern country. I never had a problem with that. I knew full well what politics were being employed to attain that goal. Was there that many people that were too stupid to see this??? Well, considering Bush didnt say "hey guys, lets go help the Iraqi" but instead said "these people are evil, evil, evil and we must go invade their country because they hate our way of life" might have gotten a few people confused. :) If you are going to invade countries that hate your way of life, you are going to have some work cut out for you. --- The Disclosure Project \| My UFO Thread (read it!)

Eshtir Forum Moderator	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:51:00 - [76] Right, no politics. No "future war" threads. Peace! forum rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website! It's full of stars.

Saya Hime	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:52:00 - [77] Let's take a look at the "spread democracy over middle-east" thingy. What country is supporting all the non-democratic regimes in this region? Oh wait, it's the United States of America.
Arvald Caldari House of Tempers	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:52:00 - [78] ok i honestly dont pay attention to the media very often (more twisted entertainment thatn an acurate representation imo) so what exactly caused us to invade iraq in teh first place? (btw only 16 so i guess the word most pepole would use in nieave ) ya cant stop the rokh and no i have not nor will i ever contribute anything constructive to your thread
DarkMatter Sintered Sanity	Posted - 2007.09.12 14:52:00 - [79] Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh Originally by: DarkMatter 9/11 is what enabled us to try and create this Democratic Middle Eastern country. And the real tragedy here is that Iraq not only nothing to do with 9/11, but also that the government there was actually anti-Al Qaeda at the time. The leader of that country and his refusal to obey the UN is also what enabled the war. If he would have complied a bit more after 9/11, this would not have been possible IMO... And Iraqi's would have no hope for a better future. Yes they have suffered greatly in recent times, but the hope of a better future IMO is what will push them to having a great country who can compete and win in the global market in the coming decades, as opposed to one with an oppressive dictator and the same old religious stife with terrorism speckeled in... My Current Project

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.