Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

US bombing leading to WW3 except this WW is gonna be different

  • 13-09-2001 06:06PM
    #1
    Slydice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭


    Just looking at the news, will this US bombing tragedy, turn into a world war where, its everyone against Terrorists?

    Like, would afganistan have the wrath of the world upon it, if they harbour those responsible for killing so much US citizens?

    If such a stance is taken, would that mean other terrorist groups such as FARC in columbia, ( deemed by russia ) Chechnian Terrorists even Irish terror organisations, who have failed to go on cease fires?

    Would several countries be obligued to help????


«1

Comments

  • #2
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    i dont see this as starting a world war.

    i cant even see America bombing anyone, anytime soon.
    i can see the US going to get bin laden or even the Taliban handing him over, and he will be executed in america.


  • #3
    Slydice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭Slydice


    No way will he get executed, life in prison i'd say


  • #4
    buzz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 341 ✭✭buzz


    hmm....
    I agree with chernobyl, I dont see this as a ww. But I say this now, as Nickson said in the 60`s, "war is profit", and he is right! the amount of money made from arms etc, is enough to cover losses in a country like usa over the next few months.
    I dont wanna see it happen, but if it does, we`re all fuc*ed.

    On Tuesday, at 4pm gmt, Bush said that he would "get them folks" which worried the **** out of me, cus within 1 hour of saying it, Germany and Isreal condemed the attack!! And that is why I posted the thread!
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31105

    Think of all the people who work in American companies inside of Ireland???
    All the same, if the stocks fell, there will be trouble, unless there is a reduce in currency in every country in the world, and a Major reduce in inflation!
    but I dont see it happening....:(


  • #5
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    id be more worried about americas relations with pakistan at the moment.
    after all, pakistan does have the bomb .
    and pakistan does have relations with afghanistan and the taliban


  • #6
    SHADOW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 768 ✭✭✭SHADOW


    Originally posted by chernobyl
    i cant even see America bombing anyone, anytime soon.
    i can see the US going to get bin laden or even the Taliban handing him over, and he will be executed in america.

    I have to dissagree. I dont neccessarily see it as starting a world war but there is no way the Americans are going to mess around.
    They will give the Taliban some time (hours or days, not weeks) to hand over Bin Laden or else they may demand both rights to use their airspace and freedom of movement inside their borders to capture him themselves.

    If Afganistan dont co-operate they will go to war with them. This isnt going to be something that will venture too far down the peacefull relations path.

    It seems clear to me when you Bush is saying things like:
    "America's resolve has been tested today and that is a test we will pass"
    and
    "We are not only going to hunt down and punish the people responsible for this we are also going to get those responsible for harbouring these people"

    From watching alot of the news that is being broadcast, particularly the american news, it seems to me that most Americans are thirsty for blood, and understandably so.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Dustaz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Dustaz


    Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
    id be more worried about americas relations with pakistan at the moment.
    after all, pakistan does have the bomb .
    and pakistan does have relations with afghanistan and the taliban

    Pakistan lack any long range capability, they are too busy concentrating on trying to land a bomb directly on deli.
    The asian arms race would be funny if it wasnt so dangerous. Pakistans main missle is named after a folk hero who killed a lot of indians, Indias main one is named likewise. Theres no doubt what these weapons are for.


  • #8
    Bard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,311 ✭✭✭✭Bard


    Originally posted by buzz
    the amount of money made from arms etc, is enough to cover losses in a country like usa over the next few months.

    not the human losses... not the loss of life.


  • #9
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    Originally posted by Dustaz


    Pakistan lack any long range capability, they are too busy concentrating on trying to land a bomb directly on deli.
    The asian arms race would be funny if it wasnt so dangerous. Pakistans main missle is named after a folk hero who killed a lot of indians, Indias main one is named likewise. Theres no doubt what these weapons are for.

    agreed, but as we have seen, you dont need long range capabilities. we know india and pakistan dont exactly get along, but if push comes to shove, if pakistan doesnt fall in line with america, then i will assume they go against. then i will become worried.


  • #10
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
    pakistan does have the bomb .
    and pakistan does have relations with afghanistan and the taliban


    I dont think any nation will use "the bomb", cus thats the last thing they will ever do.
    seriously though, if they do, then ireland is probably the best country to be in.
    i dont see it going that far though.


  • #11
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    no neither do i.
    but.......

    itd not as if pakistan is exactly a 'safe' country though.
    and if thats the case, im outta london like a hot snot down an ice cream!


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    i think that pakistan realise that the entire world is with the US [although i dont think china said they will give support], but the US have Europe, Russia, Australia, and themselves, who would say we support the taliban on this?
    the taliban are even scared.


  • #13
    R. Daneel Olivaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 186 ✭✭R. Daneel Olivaw


    Originally posted by chernobyl



    I dont think any nation will use "the bomb", cus thats the last thing they will ever do.
    seriously though, if they do, then ireland is probably the best country to be in.
    i dont see it going that far though.

    Isn't Ireland almost directly over a flight path from the middle eastern areas towards the US? I remember reading about the V2 rockets on London during WW2 and people quoted like: if you hear the rocket , your OK. It's if you hear it spluttering, it's about to hit near you because it's almost out of fuel".

    Now, granted, they aren't short of fuel ;), but I don't fancy bombs being traded back and forth over the sky. Also, would the gulf stream be inclined to bring a lot of the **** all the way back up here?

    Plus, after the US, the UK would be a big target. That's getting a little close.

    "I'm a loving guy. And I am also someone, however, who's got a job to do and
    I intend to do it. And this is a terrible moment," Bush said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34322,00.html [foxnews.com]

    A little ominous regarding talk of nuclear weapons?

    At least if they use Source-Programmable Rocket Launchers, Dan Ackroyd will save the day (along with Chevy Chase, but I never trusted him in that movie).


  • #14
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw


    Isn't Ireland almost directly over a flight path from the middle eastern areas towards the US? I remember reading about the V2 rockets on London during WW2 and people quoted like: if you hear the rocket , your OK. It's if you hear it spluttering, it's about to hit near you because it's almost out of fuel".


    do you thin this battle will happen close to ireland?

    if there is a war, the US will start it.
    the us will be lauching it from close to afganistan by sea and air and the replies from the afgans will be far away from the irish.
    anyways no missle would reach ireland from the middle east.
    not even those *scuds* which travel up in space before their "accurate" decent.
    we are safe, but if it does go nuclear, then we are screwed.

    by
    ""
    i mean, that they land within 10miles on the intending target...sat navigation is amazing..:((


  • #15
    buzz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 341 ✭✭buzz


    I dunno......
    During the gulf war, americans did land here, and refuel!
    But we are a nutral country, and we definatly dont have the resources to go into a war!


  • #16
    Vokes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,836 ✭✭✭Vokes


    i dont think we are as "neutral" as we like to think here in ireland. if the US and some arab country start trading missles ireland may not be all that safe what with us being really great friends with the US and having many branches of at least half their multinationals here. i think if WW3 were to come about(lets hope not of course!), ireland would have to choose sides!!!


  • #17
    Lemming
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,178 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    Originally posted by chernobyl
    who would say we support the taliban on this?
    the taliban are even scared.

    You can see it everywhere. Every arab country/terrorist/dodgy organisation is running for cover denying responsibility left right and centre, cause they all know that what was carried out over-stepped the mark by quite some distance, and has awoken something in the American psyche best left asleep.

    They all know that the response when it does come, is gonna be exceptionally unpleasant for the poor(insert 'dumb' possibly) b*stard on the recieving end.


  • #18
    [-Morpheus-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 357 ✭✭[-Morpheus-]


    This won't be anything big but that bush is a crazy war type guy and i say he would love a war right now..


  • #19
    Pugsley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,136 ✭✭✭Pugsley


    Originally posted by [-Morpheus-]
    This won't be anything big but that bush is a crazy war type guy and i say he would love a war right now..

    He wouldnt lobve a war but Id say he thinks its the easy way out,politics just aint his thiny,he seems to prefare heavy artillary and dead dirty arabs


  • #20
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Originally posted by Chernobyl

    I dont think any nation will use "the bomb", cus thats the last thing they will ever do.


    Emmmm....I'm afraid that's exactly what Bin Laden would love to do. The way those fúckheads sacrificed themselves on Tuesday would have been their version of martyrdom, in fact their religion encourages this shíte. 'tis a little messed up (just a tad) but if the US launched anything on Afghanistan, they wouldn't think twice before throwing a nuke america's way. Of course America would respond in kind, but those freaks would praise whoever that they were about to meet their God. These people are not afraid to die(and kill) for their cause, and that's the most dangerous enemy you can possibly have. Did you see them dancing on the streets? They have been brainwashed with this crap since they were in school(where they get military training), so there are possibly millions of these suicidal fighters. I'm thinking fighting them is not the way............:(


  • #21
    bubbles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,839 ✭✭✭bubbles


    Maybe it is the Western World which is brainwashed Seamus?


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    R. Daneel Olivaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 186 ✭✭R. Daneel Olivaw


    Originally posted by Lemming


    You can see it everywhere. Every arab country/terrorist/dodgy organisation is running for cover denying responsibility left right and centre, cause they all know that what was carried out over-stepped the mark by quite some distance, and has awoken something in the American psyche best left asleep.

    They all know that the response when it does come, is gonna be exceptionally unpleasant for the poor(insert 'dumb' possibly) b*stard on the recieving end.

    Wasn't it after Pearl Harbor that the Japanese leader said "We felt we had awoken a sleeping beast, with terrible resolve".


  • #23
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    Originally posted by seamus



    Emmmm....I'm afraid that's exactly what Bin Laden would love to do. ................. but if the US launched anything on Afghanistan, they wouldn't think twice before throwing a nuke america's way.


    Firstly bin laden does not have nukes and neither do the Afgans.

    but lets just entertain the idea if they did.

    this war is going to happen[actually will not happen] close to the afgans, they only thing hostile that bin laden can hit are american ships and planes, not american soil.


  • #24
    Hannibal_12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 378 ✭✭Hannibal_12


    Pakistan's nuclear arsenal not only pales in comparison with the US in sheer volume but also in technological terms (i.e payload in megatons).
    If a middle eastern country did hit the US and killed say 7 million either by missile (unlikely) or suitcase nukes and Mr Bin Laden was again behind it and sponsored by said country then the American response would be nothing short of total devastation on the target.
    Not forgetting of course that while not fully operational the missile defence system is at least functional and god knows what else the states have in terms of weaponry.
    Their defence budget alone could swallow all mid east countries.


  • #25
    Lemming
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,178 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw


    Wasn't it after Pearl Harbor that the Japanese leader said "We felt we had awoken a sleeping beast, with terrible resolve".

    yes it was! I think it was actually the admiral in charge of the actual attack itself. Not sure though


  • #26
    Lemming
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,178 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    Originally posted by Hannibal_12
    Pakistan's nuclear arsenal not only pales in comparison with the US in sheer volume but also in technological terms (i.e payload in megatons).
    If a middle eastern country did hit the US and killed say 7 million either by missile (unlikely) or suitcase nukes and Mr Bin Laden was again behind it and sponsored by said country then the American response would be nothing short of total devastation on the target.

    I have to laugh .... a nuke is still a nuke no matter the technological sophistication or yield. What are you gonna say, "Oh, its only a small nuke we sent in. Nothing to worry about" ?!!

    F*cks to that!!!


  • #27
    xm15e3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 165 ✭✭xm15e3


    Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. He was a brilliant leader and a tribute to the Japanese. We assasinated him on April 18, 1943 with Lockheed P-38s.


  • #28
    Bard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,311 ✭✭✭✭Bard


    Originally posted by chernobyl

    the only thing hostile that bin laden can hit are american ships and planes, not american soil.

    ... unless of course he IS proven responsible for last weeks atrocity, in which case he'd already have succeeded in carrying out a major attack on American soil.


  • #29
    chernobyl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭chernobyl


    i was ofcourse talking about a hypothetical war between the US and bin laden.
    which i hope will not happen.
    war sux...to say it stupidly.


  • #30
    xm15e3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 165 ✭✭xm15e3


    :eek:
    Originally posted by SHADOW

    From watching alot of the news that is being broadcast, particularly the american news, it seems to me that most Americans are thirsty for blood, and understandably so.

    That is the truth. I think I've got a pretty good idea on the public sentiment here. I have never seen the American people like this in my life. This attack has struck a grim chord with us. I think we all knew this was going happen, and in fact, we were waiting for it. The general attitude here has changed from complacent apathy to a morbid "Lock and Load Motherf@#$7ers!". Bush has, with out a doubt, the greatest public support for the use of nuclear weapons in our history.

    This may not start WWIII, but it could easily turn into a war against Islam. As devastating as that would be, I'm not sure if it was ever avoidable.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Nagilum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 71 ✭✭Nagilum


    I believe we would never use nukes on Iraq or Afghanistan, even if they supported terrorists that used a nuke on us. Its terrible strategy. The ground is useless for 50 years because of the radiation.

    Besides, why would we nuke when we have this?

    Fuel Air Explosive: Considered one of the most powerful, non-nuclear explosives of the 20th century, equal to a low grade nuclear weapon in it's larger forms. This explosive bursts, forming a massive explosive gas cloud, that is detonating by a small phosphorus charge - becoming a massive fireball. Overpressure from the detonation flattens everything for miles around the blast.

    A few of those can do just as much as a nuke without all the negative side effects of radiation.


Advertisement
Advertisement