World War III

[Cary]

I noticed several commentators in the news claiming that we are in WW III, including a high level Israeli official.

We're in the middle of a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq. It seems to me that Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with what's going on in Israel. Iran has clearly used Hezbollah, but Hezbollah is not Iran's puppet. Hezbollah, a Shiite organization that collaborates and has ties with Iran has also collaborated with Hamas, a Sunni organization. The only thing Hezbollah and Al Qaeda seem to have in common is their hatred of Israel, which permeates the entire Middle East any way you look at it.

You have North Korea causing some problems. China and Russia are doing some things that aren't necessarily in our interest.

I don't see WW III going on here. Am I missing something?

I know I didn't get into the Bush PNAC crap, and I have been contemplating that part of it. I know they really want to make WW III so they use it to do their thing. I'm really not seeing how this is WW III though.

[pinto]

1. Yeah, I think there's a large element of sensationalism in the meme.

The Arab/Israeli War of '67 was worse than this, the Iran/Iraq War was far, far worse and the ongoing devastation in the Horn of Africa makes this pale, if there's any legitimate comparison that can be made.

Between 24/7 Cable News and the breadth of the information/opinion available on the internet, I think it behooves folks to keep some perspective.

[Cary]

3. Perspective, yes. . .

unless you want WW III. I have no doubt that neocons do want WW III. I also have no doubt that this neocon influence is at play to some extent.

[kimmerspixelated]

2. Well, THEY want WWIII

War is Money,remember? PNAC is serious business for them. I believe it's not here yet, but unless we can overthrow the terrorist in the wh, they'll do everything to bring it on...sadly..( gasp!)

[Cary]

4. Which is why I bring it up.

Someone needs to counter the rhetoric.

[madmunchie]

30. We all (presently) need oil, China, US, Europe.....as long as that

need still exists, YES, this is the beginning of WWIII. Haven't you noticed the nations taking sides?

[pinto]

6. Actually, I disagree. We overlook the obvious. I think neocons

are "true believers". They are like the old line intelligentsia of the Bolshevik Revolution. Their belief in the ideology is paramount. The specifics are secondary. Listen to the Administration's growingly desperate rhetoric. Bush has said recently, more than once, that "this" - they always have a vague "this", or "there are those", "some people" - this is a war of competing ideologies. Democracy will sweep the region. Pick a region, any region. Why? because we believe!

Yep, I think he believes it, and that all the bright and shiny sycophants they have recruited into the Administration do as well. It's like a bunch of Reagan Republicans with an ideological twist that would make the Reaganites, who at least had a take on the real world, cringe.

I know there's a slew of corporate money agendas feeding at this trough, and they are criminal as we've come to see, but I think we discount the possibility that the ADministration is telling the truth - their truth, in a way.

[Cary]

12. True believers, absolutely.

Good post.

[melnjones]

5. I don't think it has to become WW III,

although it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Bush makes sure it does.

[Lastgasp]

7. "World War III" is Republican spin . . .

Get used to hearing it day after day until the election in November. It will be the Republican mantra. They want to frighten all voters to believe that the GOP is the war party -- better at bombing and killing.

[fordnut]

23. i agree with you 100%

[ray of light]

8. Someone told them to say that.

[David Zephyr]

9. Newt Gingrich gave the "WWIII" talking points to the GOP for November

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/davidpostman/archives/2006/07/gingrich_says_its_world_war_iii.html

[Spearman87]

10. WWIII was underway long before Israel/Lebanon

It began more or less unnoticed in the West, caught up as we were in the winding down of the Cold War, and later distracted by its still-glowing embers during the 1990s. But world war is nontheless underway, at least based on the traditional definition: a conflict that involves battles between opposing protagonists raging over broad and varied portions of the globe. Islamic radicals are on one side of the conflict, and have stated their goals from time to time with a solid degree of clarity (The latest statement of goals I heard came just today, and the Islamic leader included among those goals the irradication of Western culture and influence, and an Islamic state stretching from Iraq to Spain. So, at least from the Radical Islamist point of view, a global conflict has begun, and they have already inflicted attacks across the globe from Argentina to New York, Haifa, London, Munich, Arabia and Bombay, among others. Granted, Western nations have generally not recognized the conflict, and the one Western leader who has spoken of it most prominently has misnamed it and refused to dare identify the specific enemy, instead mentioning only the most common tactic he employs. But the other side is not going to be made to disappear simply by being largely ignored or misidentified—no moreso than war-weary nations of 70 years ago could make the fascism of their own day disappear by hoping and longing that it could be reasoned with or appeased. When historians look back on our own era 70 years hence, it will be much clearer with the view of hindsite that this decade is part of the opening salvos in the last great 20th century style war. Granted, this actual WWIII is one with a much lower average intensity of weaponry than was envisioned when we people first warned of a 3rd global holocaust back during the 2-superpower era (and lower in fact, even than that used by the WWII protagonists, where weapons power and efficiency was lower, but was used in vast quantities, backed by huge industrial output capabilities on both sides)

[Javaman]

11. Have you ever seen the movie, "tribulation 99? check it out. nt

[Cary]

14. You sound like Norman Podhoretz.

How do you equate having ambitions and some military or quasi military activity with a World War? 62,536,700 died in WW II, and those are just military deaths. The destruction and costs were likewise far more devastating than anything we have or probably will encounter.

Podhoretz says that the Cold War was WW III, and that this current situation is WW IV. I'm not convinced of either.

As a side note, what we do know now is that the Soviet threat was grossly overstated. Unseemly characters used it to spread fear in order to advance their own agenda. Containment worked brilliantly, patiently (except for costly adventures in Vietnam, Korea, and some smaller venues) allowing the Soviet Union to collapse, as anticipated by the architects of the containment policy, under its own internal inconsistencies.

What are the lessons here?

[Spearman87]

18. A conflict with the power/potential to reshape the world

I posit that that is just as meaningful a way to define a 'world war' as is having an eye-popping casualty total. But if we do go by casualties, what would the threshold be for defining an official world war? 20 million…..more, less? This conflict is only in its early stages IMO. Radical Islam as a movement is gaining momentum, not losing it. It will take decades for the radical mindsets now being bred to be reshaped and outgrown. Terrorists will one day use WMD, not once but multiple times, I’m convinced. The casualty toll in this conflict may yet get magnitudes higher than the toll to date.

At any rate, I appreciate your take....interesting.

[madmunchie]

29. How do you think that the money masters - Federal Reserve plays

into this? Don't you consider them part of all of this?

[Spearman87]

31. I would say that the international arms trade

is the biggest way that money factors into all this.....the age-old profit motive serving to fuel the global proliferation of more and more weapons.

You would have to give me some pointers on the Federal Reserve; the truth is I don’t know much about its role.

[madmunchie]

32. Here is some info for you.

Googling "The Money Masters" will bring you to a fascinating video. Be prepared, it is 2+ hours long. You can take it in shorter doses however. The thing is, is that it is fascinating as well as extremely educational. After viewing this, you will never view international politics the same way, you will never view our Government the same way.

It is well worth the time to view, please do.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4991544789166784731


The rest of this is also eye opening.

AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM

The scariest damn film you'll see this year. It will leave you staggering out of the theatre, slack-jawed and trembling. Makes 'Fahrenheit 9/11' look like 'Bambi.' After watching this movie, your comfy, secure notions about America -- and about what it means to be an American -- will be forever shattered. Producer/director Aaron Russo and the folks at Cinema Libre Studio deserve to be heralded as heroes of a post-modern New American Revolution. This is shocking stuff. You'll be angry, you'll be disgusted, but you may actually break out in a cold sweat and feel a sickness deep in your gut; I would advise movie theatre managers to hand out vomit bags. You may end up needing one."


http://www.freedomtofascism.com/trailer/... ....

Primary Objectives

Stop the polarization of America
Stop the domination of the Democratic and Republican parties over our political system
Shut down the Federal Reserve system
Return America's gold to Fort Knox and have it audited
Have Congress and the IRS, in a public forum, reveal the law that requires Americans to pay a direct, unapportioned tax on their labor.
Make computerized voting illegal in all 50 states
Keep the internet free and out of the control of large institutions
Rescind the law called the Real ID Act so Americans never have to carry a National ID Card
Make it illegal to implant RFID chips in human beings
Educate juries to the fact that they have the right to determine the law as well as the facts of a case
Educate juries to the fact that they are not obligated to follow the instructions of a judge
Stop Globalization because it is the path to a one world government
Protect our borders
Restore the environment
Put an end to the Patriot Act
Sign up millions of Americans so we can accomplish our objectives

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/index.ht...


If interested you can read these:

http://www.canadianliberty.bc.ca/related... ...
http://www.federalreserve.gov/FOMC /
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm
http://www.worldnewsstand.net/today/arti... ...

[Cary]

34. The liklihood of some nutcase using WMD is high.

This is a function of technology, more than "Radical Islam". Extraordinary weapons are more and more available to ordinary people and this trend will only continue, with or without Radical Islam.

Of course a few tons of fertilizer and some diesel fuel makes a perfectly good WMD. We know how well that works. In fact it worked better than Aum Shinrikyo's more technical approach in an extremely crowded Tokyo subway.

The real enemy here is the idea that you can somehow promote your cause this way. And how is this a military matter anyway? I think it's more of a law enforcement, crime prevention issue.

BTW, the 62 million figure was, in fact, total WW II casualties.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

13. Their has always been wars in the world

Look at history & I would stick my neck out say you will never see a single day where one nation was not at conflict with another. For it to be a world war it has got to involve most of the world. People all over the world would suffer. Economies would be totally depressed. Weapons would be produced at an alarming rate. Their would be a great amount of killings. The German machine that brought us 2 world is not found in any of the radical Islamic groups. They do not have the ability to manufacture the scale of war Germany did. They would however like us to believe they have put us in WWIII. This they achieve by terror attacks which makes a nation tighten up on its freedoms. Some of us in the USA have played into the belief that the radical Islamists really are a great threat so some of us have the feeling that loosing some freedoms will not be that bad. Yes they are a threat, but they do not have what it takes to put us in a world war.

[Cary]

15. Germany was the most powerful military power in the world.

You are absolutely correct.

[Spearman87]

16. No vast industrial machine is needed in the age of WMD

In the not too distant future radicals will probably have access to WMD weapons, giving them the ability to inflict the kind of slaughter that cost Germany huge industrial output.

Also, to get closer to their goal a broad Islamic state, they don't have achieve victories only via the battlefield. They can slowly increase their influence in societies from within. But I'm in rush.....I'll reflect on what you said a little further

[bdamomma]

17. I think this is nothing but the media spinning again

if only they would have a ceasefire, however, this is what exactly our regime wants, they want to expand their war, I wish that PNAC agenda would just blow up in their faces.

Just for your information this is the information about the PNAC, I would not dismiss this as hooey.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

[Strelnikov_]

19. It Is Just Another Manifestation Of The 'Fear' Card

And to turn the tables, if this is WWIII, why are we not:

- Initiating a draft to greatly increase the manpower available to the military.

- Initiating rationing of resources, especially energy, food and mineral resources.

- Initiating a strategic review and reconfiguration of our trading relationships. To give just one example, if war with China is inevitable, as the Reich wants us to 'think about', why are we still making wholesale transfers of our manufacturing capability.


And are not the leaders who are not initiating the above three steps committing high treason?


Oh that's right, it's a 'different' kind of war.


Well, if it is 'different', then it really isn't a World War, is it.

[AntiFascist]

25. This has been a neocon ploy for several years now...

They would like us to engage in a series of "World Wars" in order to establish unquestioned American dominance around the world. Bombing the hell out of nations is a lot easier than what they are trying to do in Iraq, so making it sound like a major conflict is important.

[Theyareallthesame]

20. I don't believe that we are there yet. However, I doubt few people

(in 1914) believed that the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand would set WWI into motion.

[TrogL]

21. It's the new fundie code for Armageddon -> Rapture

[LUHiWY]

22. The real war?

The real WWIII is the profit war?

Based on "free trade" and cheap labor?

Underlying the whole 9/11...terrorist thing is the exploitation for profits of natural resources and people. In the mideast...oil?

It's about multinationals and big business crossing country boundaries....trashing environments and exploiting people...the "war on terror" is a way of further victimizing the victims...and keeping the focus off the real war?

[fordnut]

24. i think the only war

is in Bush's head wanting people to believe it so he won't be
impeached and scare people so he can make money

[Cary]

28. I think it's utterly irresponsible to call it WIII.

I don't it's so much that Republicans want a great war, as much as they want to erase the "defeat" in Vietnam and to assume the role of superhegemon.

What would have been different if we had "won" in Vietnam?

As for right now, we are a superhegemon. That's exactly why we're getting what we're getting.

We couldn't "win" in Vietnam. We can't "win" a counter-insurgency, or asymetrical warfare, or a guerilla war, or whatever you want to call it.

[Cobalt-60]

26. Republican Wannabees

The Republican Party has long resented the glorious victories brought in under FDR.
They want something to call a World War to boost their status.
Kicking around third world countries is profitable, but it doesn't look good in the history books.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

27. Wow, I never thought of that!

A grand military victory to hang their hats on. Of course, given that a military conflict of that magnitude in this era would likely entail mulitple nuclear strikes, there wouldn't be many people left to admire them. But rational consideration of future consequences just isn't their strong suit.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.