Sorry, I've been out of town...give me a few minutes to catch-up.
Well....I've skimmed the content...too bad...some good minds were kind enough to drop by...I was really interested in how this topic would play out.
I was thinking about Bush's (or whomever) PREEMPTIVE STRIKE concept. Now, other countries use the ideal in their rationale for attacking other nations. If I remember correctly, North Korea, Iran and possibly others claim they must build up their defenses in order to protect themselves from the US.
It is possible that the administration will seriously consider using a nuclear bomb, or some such device. In which case, all of the so-called bad guys would feel they have a right to use the bomb.
IN CASE YOU CONSIDER RESPONDING, MAY I SUGGEST THE REST OF US SKIP OVER THE POSTINGS THAT APPEAR OFF TASK AND ADDRESS THE GENERAL THEME OF THE DISCUSSION.
And what you don't know or won't admit, Mr. Cool, is that the Sudanese massacres are due in large part to Bushie's complete indifference to what is happening in Africa.
Mr. cool011,
Appreciate your posting...it is true that millions of people have died in Africa during the past decade...that is an assumption, so if someone has quote from a reliable source, it would be appreciated....so, in that sense, it would appear the world might look the other way; however, it would be, so to speak, an opening of the NO-NO DOOR (nuclear explosives).
I know there has to be a prepared response to a nuclear explosion...probably at the national and international level. I would be appreciative if someone could post it (them). Then there is the posturing that would take place once such a thing happened...perhaps even some group finally using such a weapon because the DOOR HAS BEEN OPENED.
The next Nuclear strike will be Israel( with Bushie's backing) hitting the Iranian Energy sites. That will be the signal for an all out Nuclear exchange which the Middle East will lose because of the overwhelming force of the Israeli/US military. But what will happen after that?
