GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   President Bush warned today that Iran would be raising the risk of a ?World War III? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=777469)

Azoy? 10-17-2007 10:35 PM

President Bush warned today that Iran would be raising the risk of a ?World War III?
 
OK. It's official. Bush lost it. The guy is talking about WW3. Does this guy love war or what ? I wonder if he would be so into wards if his kids were in the military or sent oversees in the military.
Why can't he try to at least make an effort to negotiate. Even when the US was in the cold war with the USSR, former US Presidents spoke with them trying to work with them the arms race.



The story below can be found here.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — President Bush warned today that Iran would be raising the risk of a “World War III” if it came to possess nuclear weapons.
And he said he believed that Russia still wanted to stop Iran from developing such weapons.

Those comments, made during a far-ranging 45-minute news conference, came as reporters sought the president’s reaction to a warning on Tuesday by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia against any military strikes on Iran to halt the nuclear work that it has continued in defiance of much of the world. Iran contends that its nuclear program is purely peaceful.

WWC 10-17-2007 10:39 PM

http://www.lindqvist.com/kitSiPub/bi...1011113746.jpg

halfpint 10-17-2007 10:43 PM

Yep heard the same over here on the BBC :helpme Bush has really lost the plot

cheapgallerydesign 10-17-2007 10:43 PM

As much as I hate Dubya, he has a point. Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes. This is not just the US policy. This is UN policy. The majority of the planet agrees.

It does disturb me that he would speak of the possibility of a global instability brought on by Iran creating nukes by using the term "World War 3". I don't know, we all know it's a possible scenario but it seems that someone in his position should pick and choose his words a little more carefully. He has never been known for his suave diplomatic characteristics though :1orglaugh

minusonebit 10-18-2007 12:13 AM

I need to call my attorney in the morning and get a legal opinion on whether or not its permissible to render lifeless a political, uhm, "leader" who is undertaking a series of actions that have a good likelihood of killing me and everyone else here when someone pushes the big red button and launches a nuke. Self defense could apply here, am I right or am I right?

eroswebmaster 10-18-2007 12:21 AM

I started stocking up with tuna fish sandwiches over 5 years ago.

flashfire 10-18-2007 12:23 AM

thanks for the end of the world you retards that voted for this waste of skin

who 10-18-2007 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapgallerydesign (Post 13252767)
As much as I hate Dubya, he has a point. Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes. This is not just the US policy. This is UN policy. The majority of the planet agrees.

What makes you say that Iran is a 'rogue' country? Fox news? Tell me one trait of Iran which makes it a rogue country, which is a trait that USA doesn't also possess.

thonglife 10-18-2007 04:41 AM

Quote:

Tell me one trait of Iran which makes it a rogue country, which is a trait that USA doesn't also possess.
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2001/nea/8251.htm

Here's a whole bunch of traits.

DWB 10-18-2007 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thonglife (Post 13253459)


Does anyone list the atrocities the USA has committed? It's gonna be a lot longer that Iran's I can assure you.

cykoe6 10-18-2007 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapgallerydesign (Post 13252767)
As much as I hate Dubya, he has a point. Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes. This is not just the US policy. This is UN policy. The majority of the planet agrees.

Thanks for injecting a small amount of reason into an otherwise typically idiotic political thread on GFY. :)

VicD 10-18-2007 06:09 AM

peace does not excist, it's preparation time for the next war...

Joe BrainCash 10-18-2007 06:14 AM

when does bush leave again?

After Shock Media 10-18-2007 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapgallerydesign (Post 13252767)
As much as I hate Dubya, he has a point. Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes. This is not just the US policy. This is UN policy. The majority of the planet agrees.

Cough India Cough Pakistan Cough Israel Cough.

SilentKnight 10-18-2007 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minusonebit (Post 13253019)
I need to call my attorney in the morning and get a legal opinion on whether or not its permissible to render lifeless a political, uhm, "leader" who is undertaking a series of actions that have a good likelihood of killing me and everyone else here when someone pushes the big red button and launches a nuke. Self defense could apply here, am I right or am I right?

As they say - the best defense is a strong offense.

Although highly unlikely you'd find much support in the legal community, from a logical, self-preservation standpoint it makes very good sense.

Insane times we live in.

gaymale 10-18-2007 07:29 AM

You know if Nancy Pelosi had balls (which we know she doesn't) she would have started impeachement procdures the same day she was sworn in. Isn't it enough that we invaded a foreign country without a declaration of war, under false pretenses, murdered almost 4,000 of our own people by sending more and more fo them there, murder our allies children, husbands, wifes, daughter and sons, murdered innocent Iraquis (yes there are inoocent ones) and try to put the blame for all this on someone else? Now he has started getting 8 combat troops ready for war, under the same false pretense it's just to get them combat ready. Combat ready for what? Iran? Russia? England? Hell with Bush you never know. Maybe he should send all his croonies who have been found out to be crooks (Gonzales, etc.) into combat and his two drunk daughters to work in a hospis to show the American people true patriotism, and while you're at it, include Cheney's daughter and Cheney, he seems to have a good aim while hunting, his friend can attest to that. You know Hitler came to power in the same manner, convincing his people that he was just protecting his people.

buzzy 10-18-2007 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thonglife (Post 13253459)

Hmm ever heard of sharia law? You know, the one that saudi arabia uses, the same country that the usa has its dick in.

Also I don't know why everyone is presuming Iran is building nukes, when they clearly aren't.

ShellyCrash 10-18-2007 07:40 AM

:Oh crap:Oh crap:Oh crap

Why does he say shit like this. Can't they put a gag on him? Just a little more than 1 year left, if we can make it that long. :helpme

Azoy? 10-18-2007 08:00 AM

would be interesting to see what the end result will be once he leaves office.
i bet you will see a lot of cheers and tomatoes thrown at his take away car.
he's really a big fuck tard.

pornguy 10-18-2007 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapgallerydesign (Post 13252767)
As much as I hate Dubya, he has a point. Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes. This is not just the US policy. This is UN policy. The majority of the planet agrees.

It does disturb me that he would speak of the possibility of a global instability brought on by Iran creating nukes by using the term "World War 3". I don't know, we all know it's a possible scenario but it seems that someone in his position should pick and choose his words a little more carefully. He has never been known for his suave diplomatic characteristics though :1orglaugh

Sadly the UN does what ever the US says, so it is US policy.

sltr 10-18-2007 08:10 AM

iran would be raising the risk of ww3 if they build nuclear weapons.

ADL Colin 10-18-2007 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azoy? (Post 13252725)
Even when the US was in the cold war with the USSR, former US Presidents spoke with them trying to work with them the arms race.

You just reminded me of this amusing soundcheck by Reagan

"My fellow Americans, I've just signed legislation outlawing Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan

JFK 10-18-2007 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rock'n'porn (Post 13253674)
when does bush leave again?

unfortunately we are stuck with the War Monger idiot for a bit yet:disgust

[ScreaM] 10-18-2007 08:40 AM

He is a fucking moron.

Argoz 10-18-2007 08:42 AM

Thanks Bush.....

DaddyHalbucks 10-18-2007 08:52 AM

Do you idiots really think we should wait until an Israeli or American city is nuked before we confront Iran?

Bush hasn't "lost it."

You've lost it.

Barefootsies 10-18-2007 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azoy? (Post 13252725)
Does this guy love war or what ?

I am sure he has plenty of kickbacks from his corporate chums who are making billions off of the bullshit wars.

War is big business. With Bush and the Republicans in the white house. Business is good.

:disgust

sumphatpimp 10-18-2007 09:00 AM

you gonna get drafted.
then you gonna get rapped.

Andy Servers4Less 10-18-2007 09:04 AM

Yeah its not looking good. Better get a good, reliable host that can withstand WWIII :)

hardcoreblogger 10-18-2007 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapgallerydesign (Post 13252767)
Rogue & unstable countries such as Iran would be escalating a risk to the entire world if they were to possess nukes.

The US of A are a much more dangerous rogue country currently than Iran. Compare the atrocities and the damage done to the world in recent years...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 13254235)
Do you idiots really think we should wait until an Israeli or American city is nuked before we confront Iran?

LOL yeah sure, same like good ole Saddam bombed all your cities right? Same old lame excuse, supported by lots of lies from bush's cronies again.

Jon B 10-18-2007 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Shock Media (Post 13253720)
Cough India Cough Pakistan Cough Israel Cough.

Hmmm which one of these threatened to wipe Israel and the US off the map?
That would be Iran.
And I didn't vote for Bush I think he cheated to win the election...But it's too late now.

DjiXas 10-18-2007 09:13 AM

Go Bush!

http://ihatehate.files.wordpress.com...-as-hitler.jpg
http://ihatehate.files.wordpress.com...-as-hitler.jpg

BlackCrayon 10-18-2007 09:15 AM

Someone should invent something that would render all nuclear weapons useless while still being able to use nuclear technology for peaceful uses.

BlackCrayon 10-18-2007 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 13254235)
Do you idiots really think we should wait until an Israeli or American city is nuked before we confront Iran?

Bush hasn't "lost it."

You've lost it.

Think before you speak. If Iran nuked israel it would surely effect them as well. This is all just a big dick contest.

Barefootsies 10-18-2007 09:21 AM

Fear mongering... :disgust

Listen ladies, the name of this game is 'the most commited wins'. Since they are willing to trade their lives for what they believe in. They will win.

That's right.

Buckle your seatbelt Dorothy. They will win.

They are smaller. Faster. More agile. Do not require vast amounts of money. Only transportation and a target. The fact all these asshats think they can stop anything is insane. I honestly do not know which is worse. The fool, or those who follow them.

:2 cents:

minusonebit 10-18-2007 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies (Post 13254359)

I honestly do not know which is worse. The fool, or those who follow them.

:2 cents:

The followers are worse, by far. The fool would not get anything done if he did not have any followers.

leedsfan 10-18-2007 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilentKnight (Post 13253728)
As they say - the best defense is a strong offense.

Although highly unlikely you'd find much support in the legal community, from a logical, self-preservation standpoint it makes very good sense.

Insane times we live in.


So logically instigating WW3 is simply good offense?

Global nuclear war and self preservation-two themes that don't gel well for obvious reasons.

buzzy 10-18-2007 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 13254235)
Do you idiots really think we should wait until an Israeli or American city is nuked before we confront Iran?

Bush hasn't "lost it."

You've lost it.

Is it really possible to be this naive?

Tom_PM 10-18-2007 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks (Post 13254235)
Do you idiots really think we should wait until an Israeli or American city is nuked before we confront Iran?

Bush hasn't "lost it."

You've lost it.

I think the argument is over: confront. In what way should we confront Iran?

and really, the issue was Bush's self admited lack of speaking skills. Saying the phrase "world war 3" in ANY context for any president or prime minister is just stupid. Bush is just stupid in front of a camera, we all know it and can get over it. But it still can be damaging.

The longer he stays in office, the more I see the reason why he does so few appearances in front of the general population.

I mean shit, if his people didnt put him in front of only pre-screened republican or military (re: "pro-bush") audiences, he'd be on the news constantly with his foot directly in his mouth.

DaddyHalbucks 10-18-2007 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzzy (Post 13254524)
Is it really possible to be this naive?

Sure it is. Remember 9/ 10/ 2001?

What's your excuse today?

:helpme


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123