Future World

[Warluster]

The Times

False or Full?

By Frederick Sunderland

A new day has proposed many things for many countries. Recently the King of Saudi Arabia emerged from his bomb shelter, or so it seems, to announce it will no longer allow any foreign troops on its soil.

This comment was most likely aimed at the US, though not directly, but the Chinese leader underlined this quite clearly with his statement

The People's Republic of China supports your nation's sovereignty and vows to protect you against American Imperialism.

This damaged comment was not received well in the US, as shown by the US Presidents reply, and he cemented that America has no interest in Arabian politics.

Ever eager to prove he is happy with China, the US President released this to The Times today:

China is acting as they act, and I cannot nor will I attempt to divine any activity on their part.

Though he did quickly add, in somewhat response to scandolous Mr. Tier's New York Press article:

I believe that freedom of speech is required in a fully-functioning democratic society.

This conflict over Arabian oil and the Kingdom is proving that China and America both, obviously, have interests regarding the Middle East. But will this escalate to the war of our time?

Our Foreign Affairs Reporter thinks so, stating stoutly that it is most likely either this will cause a war, or a issue in Tibet. Can the world afford a new war? It seems President Murat wants none, as proven by a comment to The TImes:

My view of the Tibet issue is that the nation of China has full claim to the region of Tibet. It is not my business to decide whether someone should be free, only their choice.

And we have yet to hear the view of Europe? Will they stand by the US if such a war breaks out, or perhaps aid China, fi they deem it fair? And through all this; does the King of Saudi Arabia, really want a war?