Let’s see…the old Bush sent the troops off to war in Panama, Iraq, and Somalia. Where do you think the New Bush will send the troops? He is trigger happy, just like his dad, and he likes to follow in his Dad’s foot steps. Therefore, I expect he will get the USA involved in similar action in the same places in the world.
First, there is Latin America. GW speaks some Spanish, so he is the most eager to start there. Remember the Alamo! With the Elian situation fresh on people’s minds, I predict Cuba is a likely target. No longer a cold war strong hold, it is just a Banana Republic ripe for the picking. Maybe he will send troops in to get Elian and bring him back? A rescue mission, yeah that’s it.
Next, GW is a Texan so the oil rich Mideast is another likely target. With the USS Cole navy shop bombing and Palestian-Israel conflict going on, Bush will have an easy time sending troops there. Look for the Gulf War II coming soon to TV stations.
Also, there is Asia. However, I doubt he can do much there. That area still seems off limits from the Vietnam fiasco. Africa could be a good target. Europe does not seem likely. There are the problems in the former Yugoslavia and former USSR, but I think GW would find it hard getting involved. Besides, those areas are too cold and poor to interest a Texan.
So my nominees are 1. Cuba 2. Somewhere in the mideast.
Jeez, wasn’t one of Dubya’s major campaign points that we should have a real spiffy military, then not use it anywhere? So my money says no wars, and no interventions either.
Pansy-ass isolationist. Bet he wouldn’t even have kicked Saddam out of Kuwait.
Dubya will provoke a fight with Iraq, because Saddam made his Poppy look like a wimp, and he needs a war to distract the populace from his stolen “Presidency.”
(The inauguration this Sunday ought to be interesting – this will be the first time a President is sworn in by the judge who selected him…)
This is really dumb. First off, Saddam never made Bush look like a wimp. Saddam lost. Next, no one is going to just attack Cuba. There’s just no reason.
Now Colombia (not Columbia, unless you think Bush is going to send federal troops to resore the Confederate flag to the South Carolina State House) is a definite possibility, but I personally think Bush is only about as likely as Gore to get involved there. It would depend on popular opinion and Congressional action in regards to drug policy.
As for crap about the “stolen presidency”, if you aren’t going to shut up about it, or even only mention it when relevant, at least have the politeness to make the links you provide say something of substance, rather than just offer to sell me crap with Bush’s face and the word “fraud”. You know, perhaps something that’s actually amusing.
First of all, anyone who thinks Iraq made papa Bush look like a wimp has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. That was simply the most crushing and total military defeat in the history of modern warfare. Like I’ve said before, Coalition forces (and yes, it was a coalition) could have invaded Iraq and taken over, but that plan was vetoed by Arab members of the Coalition.
Clinton, by the way, has “intervened” in more conflicts than any other president.
Now, as for the OP, I think Bush’s primary objective will be the middle east, probably some more Iraqi killing, and his secondary objectives will be harmless commies like Castro.
Why fight in Yemen? Well, there are a lot of good reasons. First, it’s the southern bottleneck of the Red Sea, so we can blame them for trying to stifle trade through the Suez Canal. Second, they blasted the Cole, so they’ve got one coming to them. Third, it borders with our buddies the Saudis, whom we might be able to convince that they have an interest there. Fourth, it is a fomer English colony, so we might be able to get them in on it, too; moreover, while we were fighting and losing in Vietnam, the Brits were winning a similar war in Yemen. Fifth, it’s a convenient excuse to justify the existence of our Air Force base on Diego Garcia. Sixth, it will require large and expensive support from our Navy, who’s starting to feel a little left out of these things. Seventh, they don’t have squat with which to oppose us. And finally, to throw a bone to those of us tree-huggers, it will be pointed out that the Yemeni thirst for rhinocerous-horn daggers is one of the primary causes of rhino poaching in Africa.
What’s not to like about kicking their asses? Hell, let’s go now!
Well let’s see, he could lob some missiles in an unprovoked fashion at the Sudan or Afghanistan, maybe he could just shoot some more at Iraq if he’s facing domestic problems.
It’s going to be pretty difficult for him to start a war though seeing as pretty much all of our peace keeping forces are at full deployment.
This has got to be one of the most ironically ignorant OP’s I’ve ever read.
Bill Clinton’s been exporting cans of American Whoopass all over the world.
Ya know, I was just thinking, it’s been quite a while since we’ve had a truly spectacular display of ignorance and bigotry around here, and then…
Right. GWB will dispatch troops to invade one or more countries in Central or South America, for no other reason than bacause he speaks a bit of Spanish.
Right. Even though Elian Gonzalez was returned to Cuba at the direction of a US court, GWB will direct that Cuba be invaded to bring him back to the US, in defiance of said court order.
Right. GWB will invade an unspecified location in the Middle East, either in revenge for the Cole bombing (which US investigators have blamed on Osama bin Laden, currently resident in Afganistan) or to somehow benefit Texas oil interests. In addition, Israel and Palestine are no doubt shocked to discover that they have suddenly become “oil rich” countries, and located on the Arabian Gulf, to boot. Furthermore, according to the OP, the current conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is somehow directly linked to the Cole bombing. Finally GWB is going to send troops “there” (wherever there is; apparently national borders in the mideast region do not exist) even though the author of the OP seems to have no idea what their mission might be.
Once again, national borders mean nothing. Which part of Africa, I wonder, and why? The whole continent?
Right. Any military intervention that GWB may commission will be decided entirely on the basis of gross national product and average temperature of the target country.
I respectfully suggest that the author of the OP read up a little bit on world affairs before attempting to post to GD on same.
Let’s see… Clinton sends troops to Kosovo, Haiti, every trouble spot under the sun.
George W. states repeatedly, throughout the campaign, that it’s arrogant for the U.S. to play policeman of the world. Then, once elected, he appoints a Secretary of State who’s extremely reluctant to commit U.S. troops around the world.
Where, exactly, did poster #1 get the asinine notion that George W. Bush is a hawk?
There was a rumour he once went to Mexico for a holiday but I’m just worried he doesn’t know how to apply for a passport so he’ll just send the boys in first to secure the ground.
Nothing like a well-travelled Head of State, helps inform decisions ‘bout all those tricky furriner folk.
If cold wars count, it’ll be China for sure. It’s a good thing his daddy let the commies in on how to build small efficient nukes, cause the son is sure going to force them to make a whole bunch more with that Buck Rogers space shield thingy he wants to bust the budget with.
