user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
If he doesn't have a proper knowledge of the Cold War, then he shouldn't be making comparisons with it, he just sounds foolish. Besides which, I do not think the war on terror could ever be won.
With approval ratings in the low 30's, Mr. Bush is grasping at straws.
I disagree. "Terrorism" is an idealogy without boarders and without a national identity. It was pretty obvious who the target was in the Cold war. The world knew who the Soviets were and who the allies were. Terrorism doesn't have that so it can't be won. It's like the war on crime, it can't be won because it's not possible. Then there are all the other details that I just don't want to get into.
Alike? Hardly. The two are opposites. Put aside the obvious, that being the the soviet union actually was a country we were up against not a organization with no "official" country helping them. The big difference is that both countries knew the power of WMD's and neither wanted to end the world. Terrorist don't remember Hiroshime and Nagsaki, they can not understand the power of those weapons. And there for, are even more dangerous. They wouldn't think twice about using them!
yes there are many valid paralells. If the president was democrat then many on this site, no doubt, would agree too.
There is nothing 'cold' about the war on terror.
I disagree with EVERY argument people make comparing what's happening now in the world with ANYTHING that's come before. Certain People's over-and-over history arguments are proving NOTHING.
by Jyl on Wed May 31, 06 3:59pm
[+]
|
|