PDA

View Full Version : Newt Gingrich says Bush should declare that we are in WWIII



beltman713
07-16-2006, 02:55 PM
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=postman16m&date=20060716

Let's face it, it's WWIII, Gingrich says

(Beltman713: So basically, he wants to get us into WWIII so Republicans can win the elections in November.)

By David Postman
Seattle Times chief political reporter


Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich says America is in World War III and President Bush should say so.

Gingrich said in an interview Saturday that Bush should call a joint session of Congress the first week of September and talk about global military conflicts in much starker terms than have been heard from the president.

"We need to have the militancy that says 'We're not going to lose a city, " Gingrich said.

Gingrich said in the coming days he plans to speak out publicly and to the administration from his seat on the Defense Policy Board about the need to recognize that America is in World War III.

He lists wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, last week's bomb attacks in India, North Korean nuclear threats, terrorist arrests and investigations in Florida, Canada and Britain, and violence in Israel and Lebanon as evidence of World War III.

He said Bush needs to deliver a speech to Congress and "connect all the dots" for Americans.

He said European leaders and some in the Bush administration who are urging a restrained response from Israel are falling short of what needs to be done "because they haven't crossed the bridge of realizing this is a war."

Once that's accepted, he said, "Israel wouldn't leave southern Lebanon as long as there was a single missile there. I would go in and clean them all out, and I would announce that any Iranian airplane trying to bring missiles to resupply them would be shot down. This idea that we have this one-sided war where the other team gets to plan how to kill us and we get to talk, is nuts."

Gingrich was in the area for fundraisers for Congressman Dave Reichert, R-Auburn, 2nd District GOP challenger Doug Roulstone, and the state Republican party.

There is a political element to his talk of World War III. Gingrich said that public opinion can change "the minute you use the language" of World War III. The message then, he said, is, "OK, if we're in the third world war, which side do you think should win?"

Gingrich said he is "very worried" about Republicans facing fall elections and says the party must have the "nerve" to nationalize the elections and make the 2006 campaigns about a liberal Democratic agenda rather than about President Bush's record.

Republicans are now "sailing into the wind" in congressional campaigns. He said, in part, that's because of the Iraq war, adding, "Iraq is hard and painful, and we do not explain it very well." But some of it is due to Republicans' congressional agenda. He said House and Senate Republicans "forgot the core principle" of the party and embraced congressional pork. "Some of the guys," he said, have come down with a case of "incumbentitis."

Democrats have been trying to nationalize the midterm elections and make each race about Bush's record and the Iraq war.

Republicans instead have been trying to localize each race, as in Reichert's challenge from political newcomer Darcy Burner, and make the race about the qualifications and personalities of the candidates, not about a national agenda.

Gingrich says that's a mistake. Republicans, he says, should nationalize the contest, too.

He said that as Democrats make the elections about George Bush, Republicans should make it about House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco. He said voters need to be told "how weirdly San Francisco these guys are voting," and Democrats will "collapse in defeat."

"There's going to be a national conversation in October," Gingrich said of the final sprint to the November election. "The only question is whether it's the Republicans defining it or whether we have some nutty idea that we can run local races, and so the entire definition is on the left."

"This is classic — that Gingrich's solution to Bush's failed leadership is a different 'marketing strategy,' " state Democratic Party spokesman Kelly Steele said by e-mail.

"Democrats believe we need a 'tough and smart' strategy that makes 2006 a year of transition in Iraq and aggressively takes the fight to the terrorists, while Gingrich and Bush seek to elect a new crop of loyal rubberstamps — McGavick, Reichert, and Roulstone included — to blindly support and extend their monopoly on their 'tough and dumb' conduct of the war in Iraq and the larger battle against global terrorism."

This material has been edited for print publication.

David Postman is The Seattle Times' chief political reporter. Reach him at 360-236-8627 or at dpostman@seattletimes.com

Gold9472
07-16-2006, 03:20 PM
He already did. Newt must have missed it.

Gold9472
07-16-2006, 04:29 PM
I forget. Did they have a draft for WWI and WWII?

Gold9472
07-16-2006, 04:31 PM
The World Wars and the Korean War
Conscription was next used after the United States entered World War I in 1917. The first peacetime conscription came with the Selective Service Act of 1940, which established the Selective Service System as an independent agency. The duration of service was originally twelve months. It was expanded to eighteen months in 1941. When the United States entered World War II, service was required until six months after the end of the war. The first draft number ever picked for World War II was 158, picked by a blindfolded Henry L. Stimson out of a goldfish bowl.

As manpower needs increased during World War II, draftees were inducted into the U.S. Marine Corps as well as the U.S. Army.

PhilosophyGenius
07-16-2006, 05:42 PM
Gingrich himself acknoledged that he may run for President in 08. He's a religous zelot as well and seriously thinks this country should be run under Christian rules.

But back to the topic, I think it was beltman or GHD who said that saying something like this is dangerous cuz it puts all 1 billion Muslims in the world on high alert.

beltman713
07-16-2006, 05:45 PM
But back to the topic, I think it was beltman or GHD who said that saying something like this is dangerous cuz it puts all 1 billion Muslims in the world on high alert.
Wasn't me.

PhilosophyGenius
07-16-2006, 05:51 PM
Oh, GHD then.

PhilosophyGenius
07-16-2006, 05:54 PM
Here's the thread where Bush himself said we're in WWIII:

http://yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9998


"Holy fucking shit. I thought this was a joke at first. The year 2008 can't come soon enough. This fucking idiot has to get out of the Oval Office; he's obviously lost his mind. To call going after a couple thousand Al-Qaeda members World War III is very dangerous rhetoric. By uttering World War III, he's put every Muslim in every Middle-East country on even more high alert.

I'm very afraid of what could happen between now and 2008."-GHD

PhilosophyGenius
07-18-2006, 03:25 PM
This needs to seriously shut his big trap already. He's going around on tv talking about this whole WWIII thing putting the whole nation on war mode so he can score a few political points.

AuGmENTor
07-18-2006, 06:33 PM
This is all part of what is supposed to happen in the end days. I think they may be here. I get such a creepy feeling when I read this shit. It feels like the end. It's OK most of you think I'm wierd anyway, so I'm almost expected to say wierd things.

beltman713
07-18-2006, 06:43 PM
This needs to seriously shut his big trap already. He's going around on tv talking about this whole WWIII thing putting the whole nation on war mode so he can score a few political points.
Newt isn't the only one...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/07/17/colbert-its-a-world-war-iii-or-iv/

PhilosophyGenius
07-18-2006, 11:47 PM
Colbert's parodies are becoming 'dangerous' in a sense as well then.