Two front world war

Discussion in 'Community' started by jefhatfield, Feb 13, 2003.

  1. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #1
    is it possible that the united states might get involved in a two front world war against iraq in the middle east and north korea in asia?

    the last time the us was so involved in two serious warfronts was back in world war II

    but now, iraq and north korea, the supposed enemies from the "axis of evil" have a great deal more technnology and more devastating weapons (maybe) than germany, japan, and italy had in the second world war

    is there a way the us can avoid armed conflict with these nations?
     
  2. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #2
    We will not go to war with N. Korea so soon.

    Bush is scared of people with glasses. (don't ask why, he just is)

    The U.S can fight a war on 2 fronts but this is just a diversion from domestic issues.

    One war should be enough to stop paying attention to domestic issues. So far it is the only thing people talk about.

    That is a good thing for Bush. We need a war to last, not a quick kill. We can't let them get away with there crime, but Bush needs to make this war last...

    If learned anything about Ceasar you know what I'm talking about. If domestic issues fail then always go to war.
     
  3. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #3
    N. Korea is playing a power game, they're not interested in war. Besides, we wouldn't have the resources available to do both and do it right.

    D
     
  4. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #4
    domestic issues failed from 1989-1993 and george bush, the president then, brought us into the gulf war and had the biggest military victory for the us and still he lost his seat at the white house

    the senior bush' ratings were over 90 percent, unprecedented in popularity in the history of the usa, but when it came time for the voting, people did not forget they were hurting as were many sectors in the country

    certainly ronald reagan's economics of voodoo economics led to the downturn of the late 80s and early 90s, but george bush was blamed for it

    even though this soft economy may not be the doing of W, he will take the heat of it next year in november and it may just lose him the election like it did for his father

    reagan was a strong two term president and so was clinton, but if W wins a second term, there is no way i can see any unbiased person putting him in the same category of reagan or clinton politically
     

Share This Page