Where shall the coalition invade next?

[Shaka_Khan]

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil)

In January 2005, at the beginning of Bush's second term as President, the incoming Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, made a speech regarding the newly termed "Outposts of tyranny", a list of six countries deemed most dangerous and anti-American. This included the two remaining "Axis" members, as well as Cuba, Belarus, Zimbabwe and Myanmar.
I got this idea from the Where Should America Attack Next? thread. :balloon2:

Btw- I took out Libya from the poll since Qaddafi seems to have transformed.

[Banquo's Ghost]

What on earth has Belarus done wrong? :inquisitive:

[Rodion Romanovich]

Where shall the coalition invade next?

Definitely Gah! They are nazicommunistoterroristical worshippers of evilness and a threat to us all! They kill babies for pleasure, they eat dogs and kittens, and they smell bad!

[InsaneApache]

This is the 'where shall the coalition invade next?' thread not the 'why do I hate France?' thread.


Definitely Gah! They are nazicommunistoterroristical worshippers of evilness and a threat to us all! They kill babies for pleasure, they eat dogs and kittens, and they smell bad! :laugh4:

[Spetulhu]

Probably Cuba. It's an ideal target for a short invasion and democratization. Weak armed forces, no WMDs, no neighbors that can easily help. And think of all the exile-Cuban votes the Republicans will score for toppling Castro! :idea2:

[Ja'chyra]

What on earth has Belarus done wrong? :inquisitive:

Watch the Eurovision song contest.:inquisitive:

[Banquo's Ghost]

Watch the Eurovision song contest.:inquisitive:

Ah, good point.

.....:thinking:

Yikes! That means Ireland must be up next and there'll be trials for crimes against humanity... :shocked3: :smash: :eeeek: :help:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

LOL, during the Nineties the US Government warned its citizens not to go to the British Isles because it was racked by Civil War and Terrorism.

Iran, they're going for Nukes and they threaten Isreal. After that Korea, after that Syria, after that Switzerland!

[Sjakihata]

Which will be the downfall of the US as we know it. Swiss Armoured Pikemen and Alpgruppe Neun (with the SIG 551) will slaughter any resistance

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

What on earth has Belarus done wrong? :inquisitive:
Nothing. All the more reason for Bush to invade.

[Ianofsmeg16]

Bring em on, we'll take the world on with our army of sheep, cows and a blind man with a stick!! Watch out for friendly fire!

[Catiline]

On Belarus and Lukashenko

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/116265.stm

Sounds like an ideal ally for the war on terror, except that he's guilty of apparently the worse sin going, being anti democratic.

[Geoffrey S]

Belgium. Who'd notice?

[Ianofsmeg16]

The belgians?

[doc_bean]

:help:

[Upxl]

Np Geoffrey
But if we go down we’re taking you with us.
That or we’ll all emigrate to Holland.

[Viking]

Somewhere cold. It makes for better PC games, IMO. :thinking:

[TB666]

Switzerland.
Their neutrality is sickening.
With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals nobody knows.
What makes a man turn neutral, is it his quest for power, gold or are they just born with a heart full of neutrality ?? :inquisitive:

[master of the puppets]

Switzerland.
Their neutrality is sickening.
With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals nobody knows.
What makes a man turn neutral, is it his quest for power, gold or are they just born with a heart full of neutrality ?? :inquisitive:
weak bowels and shrunken balls.

otherwise i doubt we'll invade anywhere without reaon but i see it most likely a problem involving with north korea.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Switzerland.
Their neutrality is sickening.
With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals nobody knows.
What makes a man turn neutral, is it his quest for power, gold or are they just born with a heart full of neutrality ?? :inquisitive:

Erm...Isn't Sweden a neutral country too? Since the 19th century IIRC?

Or has something changed recently in your country? :inquisitive:

[Viking]

Switzerland.
Their neutrality is sickening.
With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals nobody knows.
What makes a man turn neutral, is it his quest for power, gold or are they just born with a heart full of neutrality ?? :inquisitive:

Where, oh, where were you during WW2? :inquisitive:

[Louis VI the Fat]

I think I'll dig up the Auld Alliance and team up with the Scots for a good old-fashioned plunder raid of Yorkshire. ~:mad

*eyes our Yorkshire life-guard*

[TB666]

Erm...Isn't Sweden a neutral country too? Since the 19th century IIRC?

Or has something changed recently in your country? :inquisitive:

Where, oh, where were you during WW2? :inquisitive:
I guess you guys haven't seen Futurama then ?? :surrender:

[Soulforged]

How about all of them? JA JA JA JA JA :2thumbsup: :devil:

[Divinus Arma]

I see the anti-american anti-administration anti-republican freedom haters are up to no good in this thread.

This is just silly. N.Korea backstabbed us the whole time that Clinton's administration "talked" and "negotiated". Iran has been doing the same thing.

You libs are all talk and no action. Republican Chicken hawks? You guys are chicken chickens. :dizzy2:

God forbid the democratic leadership take on a real issue and trip up their high-and-mighty approval numbers.

Americans love a president that just sits and does nothing. The democrat leadership will do a nice song and dance, but that's about it.



I say we take out Iran but leave them in pieces. Bomb them into dust then screw reconstruction in Iran. Let the mullahs and reformers figure it out for themselves. They "voted" for their leadership, well now they get to pay the price. Just like the Palestinian Authority.

wheeee. fun!: 2thumbsup:

[Keba]

Americans love a president that just sits and does nothing.

Correction ... everyone loves an American president who sits around and does nothing, not just Americans. It means no invading forces will come a-knockin on our doors.

[Franconicus]

Definitely Gah! They are nazicommunistoterroristical worshippers of evilness and a threat to us all! They kill babies for pleasure, they eat dogs and kittens, and they smell bad!
Additionally, they have sex with their sisters and with vergins and with black cats and with cocks.
Invade Washington, I say! They are dangerous:

(unknown American source:)
I say we take out Iran but leave them in pieces. Bomb them into dust then screw reconstruction in Iran. Let the mullahs and reformers figure it out for themselves. They "voted" for their leadership, well now they get to pay the price.~;)

[Radier]

I think we, the west, shall bomb Iran. They hate us so why not... :juggle2:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Correction ... everyone loves an American president who sits around and does nothing, not just Americans. It means no invading forces will come a-knockin on our doors.I am no fan of isolationist US presidents.
Despite instances of poor judgement, the balance of US interventions is still positive by a great margin.

[Shaka_Khan]

Iran Focus (http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6298)


U.S. threatens to bomb Iran sites “after a month” – report

Thu. 16 Mar 2006

Iran Focus

London, Mar. 16 – The United States warned Iran through a secret channel that it would launch military attacks on a number of nuclear sites in Iran if there was no diplomatic progress a month after the Islamic Republic’s referral to the United Nations Security Council, according to a Persian-language website run by associates of the former Iranian president, Mohammad Khatami.

Khatami was quoted by the website Rooz Online as telling allies that he had received a message through a third party from a senior United States official during a visit to Germany last autumn. The U.S. official had warned Iran that the U.S. would bomb the country’s nuclear sites “if there is no breakthrough in resolving Iran’s nuclear dossier a month after the case is referred to the Security Council”.

Khatami said that he conveyed the message to the country’s senior officials and the Supreme National Security Council, but “not much attention has been paid to it”, Rooz reported.

The International Atomic Energy Agency referred Iran to the Security Council at the end of the last meeting of its Board of Governors on March 8. The council can impose sanctions on Iran for violating its international obligations and concealing critical parts of its extensive nuclear program.

Iran’s top negotiator, Ali Larijani, reiterated on Thursday the theocratic regime’s rejection of Western demands that Tehran stop trying to produce fuel that can be used in nuclear power stations or, if highly enriched, in bombs. The United States said diplomacy must succeed to avert a confrontation with the Islamic Republic.

[Samurai Waki]

I guess you guys haven't seen Futurama then ?? :surrender:

Actually its one of the quotes I've had in my sig since October:laugh4: :2thumbsup:

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I voted Venezuela, but it would be cool to ally with Kim Jong and invade China.

[Csargo]

I believe out of all of them I think Iran is next on the list because of their Nuclear program and bad relations with the US and other countries. I voted Gah though because we all now that the US will eventually invade all of those countries plus a couple of more.

[Bar Kochba]

we want iran destroyed ahahahahahha well they r going to have big bombs and their leader is a bit of a fanatic dosent like israel to much so its either the west or iran

[Major Robert Dump]

I'd really for us to invade Iraq next, maybe like a second try except this time get it right and not make sophmoric assumptions in geoplolitics about the miracles a "democracy" can perform in overcoming ethnic, religious and financial interests. Oh, and more troops.

[Fragony]

We dutchies will probably be at war with sir Chavez in a year or two if he keeps eying our islands, we will take care of that one :laugh4: After that, where's the fun at? I say Iran.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You know something that has been forgotten in the rush to blame Bush for Iraq (The mess, that is.) Is that one of the original reasons for invading was to show everyone else the US meant buisness.

No one is taking any notice.

Iran will be next and that is justified, the regime is in some ways worse than Sadam, not only do they do every thing he does, they beleive they have God on their side as well. Add to that Nukes and a hatred of Isreal, plus the possible funding of militant extremists and you have plenty of justification.

As to North Korea, that is unfinished buisness, we couldn't get rid of them in the '50s but all the reasons are still there. If America does this though they need to do it properly, not like Vietnam.

[solypsist]

i'm still confused about Iran: North Korea is *known* to have nuclear weapons, today, and is run by a complete nutjob.

Iran *might* be thinking about *maybe* starting a nuclear weapons program that *might* result in a workable bomb in 5-10 years.

Iran is not very democratic, but it does behave in its own rational self interest, which is not true of North Korea.

How can anyone take the Bushies seriously when they say Iran is the threat we should be concentrating on?

[Mongoose]

Iran is next, but all will be invaded with in the next 20 years. And don't get attached to those commie-Canucks, either! I think that you should add France to the list too, or just "Europe". We're gonna learn ya'll good to minunderestimate us!

You freedom-hating-commie-nazees are no match for a 3:36 minute G.I rush!

\/\/3 r 50 2 9\/\//\/ j00!!!!!!1!!!1!1!!!!!11!111!1On!1!1OnE!11!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Actually a war between Europe and America is quite likely in the future, as the two powers come more and more into direct conflict.

Iran almost certainly are working on the bomb. What worries people is that once they have it they'll use it.

[rory_20_uk]

Noth Korea is EXTREMELY rational in its outlook, and has remained so for the last 50 years. All its diplomacy and developments of weaponry points to a country that is very good at playing the political game.

Its development of n uclear weapons is its latest chip in the political arena. Without it the country would collapse - whereas America is currently giving it loads of food and fuel.

~:smoking:

[Lemur]

I think we should invade a place with nice beaches and a small-to-nonexistant army. Give our hardworking men and women a break, you know? Someplace like Fiji or the Micronesian Islands, for example. Sort of a reprise of Granada.

Enough with the deserts. Enough with the surly, huddled masses yearning to breathe free. Let's get some beach time, and take a break.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Actually a war between Europe and America is quite likely in the future, as the two powers come more and more into direct conflict.

I don't think so, both Europe and America would lose a lot by doing it, giving China and former colonies increased power, and they won't use it well, particularly against former colonists. Plus America, if not invaded, will be in serious trouble with Russia and China, among others, possibly teaming up against the USA. Europe as a whole is very important for America as a semi-ally, just as America as a semi-ally is important for Europe. Both areas have very similar social level and cultural values, even though the foreign politics are very different.

What conflict exactly are you referring to by the way?

[Divinus Arma]

Actually a war between Europe and America is quite likely in the future, as the two powers come more and more into direct conflict.



Heh. That's so absurd it's funny. lol.

[Samurai Waki]

...I second Lemur, we need to free the poor and destitute Fijians from their communist dictatorship...:laugh4:

[Justiciar]

Liverpool tbh. ~;)


Actually a war between Europe and America is quite likely in the future, as the two powers come more and more into direct conflict.

Iran almost certainly are working on the bomb. What worries people is that once they have it they'll use it.
Europe would have to be a single state for that to make the slightest whiff of sence. In the far off future, maybe, but within the next century or so? I doubt it.

[Shaka_Khan]

Some of the options in the poll are making news:


Balrusians Protest for 3rd Straight Day (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060322/ap_on_re_eu/belarus_election;_ylt=Aoqa5.OjS1asQIyneEq3i65w24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--)

By JIM HEINTZ, Associated Press Writer

MINSK, Belarus - Thousands of Belarusians demonstrated on a central Minsk square for the third straight evening Tuesday, swelling the ranks of a core group that had spent the previous night to protest the extension of authoritarian President Alexander Lukashenko's rule.

Opposition leader Alexander Milinkevich, who has denounced the election that gave Lukashenko a new five-year term as a fraud and called for a new vote, urged demonstrators to keep up daily protests and called for a major show of strength Saturday...


Venezuela's Chavez: U.S. Has Lost in Iraq (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060322/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us;_ylt=AiAuUftEX4SJjrPBfDHnElVw24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--)

By CHRISTOPHER TOOTHAKER, Associated Press Writer

CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Tuesday that U.S. troops have been routed by a strong resistance movement in Iraq, but haven't pulled out because officials in Washington won't acknowledge defeat.

The United States would also suffer a tremendous military defeat if the Bush administration decided to invade Iran, Chavez told a group of foreign diplomats and government supporters at the Miraflores Presidential Palace...


North Korea Touts First-Strike Capability (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060321/ap_on_re_as/nkorea_us;_ylt=Am305kFiL.qw_zGrwXZELAdw24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--)

By JAE-SOON CHANG, Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea suggested Tuesday it had the ability to launch a pre-emptive attack on the United States, according to the North's official news agency. A Foreign Ministry spokesman said the North had built atomic weapons to counter the U.S. nuclear threat...

[Justiciar]

I was fond of Chavez at first.. now I just think he's a populist wanker with bullshit seeping from his every pore.

[rory_20_uk]

You mean "a politician"

~:smoking: