Where Next For The President?

It is already clear, is it not? Syria and Iran. Looks like North Korea is busy lining itself up, too. However, I do not see any benefits accruing to Bush or the USA from that one.

Where next? To hell, hopefully. And he can take his daddy with him.

Plenty of oil in Iran. How about France and England? Many museums packed with art treasures ready and waiting to be loote ... er ... oops ... taken into protective custody.

John:

Good question, as I am one who sees this whole "War on terror" as an attempt to restart the "Cold War".

Iran and N. Korea are logical next targets IMHO, perhaps Syria, if he's feeling flush (likely) some of the former Soviet states (Bush has already shown he doesn't care about world opinions).

Of course, this also means that the "Anti-War" movement cannot simply disband just yet--we may still have a LOT of work to do!

And I intend to keep at it!

I hear from the Pentagon that Switzerland who, by pure coincidence, holds trillions of dollars in every currency on earth including diamonds, platinum and gold, is considered a serious potential danger to world peace.

It is alleged by Mr. Rumsfeld that they are secretly developing CCMDs (Cuckoo-Clocks of Mass Destruction) and are a hiding place for very rich suicide bombers. Thereby posing a serious threat to the future safety of the United States. :wink:

And those Swiss "francs"; they're "bbq"ed so probably contain charcoal, and that can be burned, and where there's fire there's smoke, and mirrors, and..... and...... and......

It's a tough job being President - all those nations to invade and loot ..... and so little time before the next election?

I do hope you are not suggesting, that after the next election, time will have run out!

I wouldn't mind if Bush invaded Zimbabwe, since their leader, Mugabe, is a genuine tyrant who has murdered and robbed many Britons and Americans. Too bad they have nothing worth stealing?

You couldn't be closer to the truth. The Cold war was a very simple situation. You had us(the good guys, freedom,..) and you had them(bad guys oppressing their civilians, no freedom,...)

But after the communist system collapsed it all became blurry. Who was our ally, who can we trust?

Now things are back to normal, this means simple. You got us, the free, and them, the terrorists. And all who is not with us is with them!!

Simple as hell!

That artificial simplicity led to the Bushist attempt for an American World Order, triggered by a 21st century Reichstag fire:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/NYB3-22/nycmarch032202-a.html

Re: Where Next For The President?


I would restate your list a bit, if you don't mind:

1. Control over the country must yield either great strategic, or great economic advantage to the US
2. There must be an evil dictator or someone who can be construed to be one to the American public (Iran and Venezuela falling in the latter category)
3. The dictator in question must indulge in anti-American or anti-Western rhetorics ("our" dictators don't count). Links to other dictatorships in some Axis of Evil doesn't need to exist, it can always be proven by guilt through association.
4. He must preferably be Muslim (so a link to the 9/11 terrorists can strenuously be upheld).
5. Any association with, funding of, or activity in or nearby his country of any guerrillas/terrorists is an added bonus, though not necessarily needed if the dictator is Muslim.
6. They must be developing (or have developed in the past) any kind of weapons that can be construed as seriously dangerous - but they must not actually already be proven to have the likes of nukes (because then you will know better than to invade, you're not crazy).



Well, N-Korea is out for the moment because they actually have been proven to possess WMD, so it's much too dangerous.

Syria fits all of the criteria. It's a miracle it's not already in the Axis of Evil.

Iran fits all of the criteria too. Well, it's not actually much of a dictatorship anymore, what with the reasonably free elections in which angry young Iranians have massively voted in a reformer as president, who consistently has dissident journalists freed from jail whenever the ayatollahs still try to clamp down - but the American public knows nothing about all that.

Lybia works, too, though it seems to be considered 'old hat' for now.

Sudan lacks both strategic/economic importance and "WMD", alas. Yemen lacks those kind of weapons, too, and can not be as easily construed as the kind of brutal dictatorship Saddam so obviously represents. Pakistan, should it no longer be able to maintain its strategic submission to US demands, would qualify, except its already got nukes, so thats tricky.

Venezuela's Chavez meets several of the criteria. Cuba, apart from not being Muslim, doesnt have "WMD", I think, and again Bush doesnt seem to eager to take on countries the US has already strenuously fought against in the past - it must have a certain "freshness".

EXCELLENT--you sure you're not reading my mind!

Of course--as I said in my post, should that be the case, then we'd better make sure that all of these groups and coalitions of citizens that have sprung up to oppose the war can stay together.

According to radio news today, the next move by President Bush is to re-build Iraq.

Question:

Why destroy Iraq in the first place?

New Haven:

Might be tough, especially if the UN remembers how the US invaded without approval and in defiance of the UN Charter and International Laws.

Of course, how are we gonna pay for this since Bush decided to pay back his contributors.

Once again--an opportunity for this anti-war movement to carry on past the end!

If they're willing to take it!

New Haven

Your remark reminded me of a cartoon strip on our refrigerator.

(Man and wife)

She: So let me see if I've got this right. In golf, the object is to hit the ball as few times as possible.

He: That's it!

She: So why hit it at all!

Final panel -- moon overhead -- the guy looking up at it saying to himself: "So why hit it at all???"

I don't think you guys are reading the "signs" effectively;

Bush's next move is to convert to Islam.

Then as a moslem, he is going to "set" an example by committing ritual suicide; he will pour gasoline (see he really was after the oil) all over himself, and set it alight!

Presto "burning Bush"!

Now consider the ramifications of that one!

Aren't you forgetting Mexico and Canada?

If Bush wins this - and so far I haven't heard a clear definition of a win - then the scenario calls for American domination of that whole area - spreading out to Asia, then to Europe. If all goes according to plan. If he doesn't crack up (with Rumsfeld) first.

nimh, You missed Zimbabwe. c.i.