Whose next?

[Jon_in_london]

Whose next on the hitlist? dont be shy folks! post your opinions in my wonderfull 'whose next' poll-thread!

[iain]

You missed the most obvious option : France.

[Tmy]

New Mexico has been getting upity! Take out Roswell before its too late.


Do people think that we will be in a perpetual state of war?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by iain
You missed the most obvious option : France.

Whe-hey! to recover those Salic lands that the French unjustly claim to be the realm of France!

[arcticpenguin]

I heard Bush say "we think Syria has chemical weapons". I think we should concentrate on finding them in Iraq first.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by iain
You missed the most obvious option : France.

Yeah, I'd vote for them too, and didn't that Belgian chappie make a disparaging remark about the Queen? And the Welsh are looking a bit dodgy these days, I mean, what kind of name is Llewellyn? J-Dams are too good for them, lets drop the MOABs!

[Hypocolius]

Oh yeah, Zimbabwe needs to be taught a thing or two as well! This is fun isn't it?

[Flo]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Whe-hey! to recover those Salic lands that the French unjustly claim to be the realm of France!

Maybe, but what kind of interim-government do you have in mind ? Where will you find the suitable bunch of opposants in exile ? How do you plan to deal with (gasp !) French looters ? Do you have any idea of the extend of the demands of a liberated (gasp !) French populace ?

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by Flo

Where will you find the suitable bunch of opposants in exile ?

What about all those useless Hugenots that are cluttering up South Africa? De Klerk is a pretty French sounding name, maybe we can overthrow Chirac and install him?

[iain]

Originally posted by Hypocolius


What about all those useless Hugenots that are cluttering up South Africa? De Klerk is a pretty French sounding name, maybe we can overthrow Chirac and install him? I think De Klerk is Dutch (it translates as "the clerk"). He might be interested though.

Alternatively, both the British and the Germans have controlled large parts of France at various times over the last few hundred years so maybe some sort of power sharing deal could be worked out.

Given the Norman origins of the British Government, it could be sold as a "French Government in Exile".

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Flo


Maybe, but what kind of interim-government do you have in mind ? Where will you find the suitable bunch of opposants in exile ? How do you plan to deal with (gasp !) French looters ? Do you have any idea of the extend of the demands of a liberated (gasp !) French populace ?

Since France is technically English, they would have to be moved. Maybe they could all seek asylum in Jordan and Syria? oh, no- thats the palestinians.

[Flo]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Since France is technically English, they would have to be moved. Maybe they could all seek asylum in Jordan and Syria? oh, no- thats the palestinians.

So you mean, I'm technically English too ? Quelle horreur ! :eek:

[arcticpenguin]

Cuba didn't make the list?

[Earthborn]

I voted Syria. Pretty obvious I guess.

And I will make a prediction:
If the US goes after Syria, the Brits will back out. They will feel SOOO used for the US's plan for what they think is a 'New American Century' and 'World Domination'. And Tony can't sell another war to his people.

However, fear not: there will be another country willing to join the War Against Syria. Which one? France! Yep, you heard that right. Time to boycott everything British.

How do I know? I'm just extrapolating from the Past: Iraq was a British colony, Syria was French. It's just going to be like in the good old colonial days.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Flo


So you mean, I'm technically English too ? Quelle horreur ! :eek:

Non, its just France thats English. Not the French. ;)

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by iain

Alternatively, both the British and the Germans have controlled large parts of France at various times over the last few hundred years so maybe some sort of power sharing deal could be worked out.


But we'll need a figurehead. Hmmm, let's think about this. Ideally someone with strong German ties. Figureheads need to have no obvious political axe to grind, and look good on a stamp. Some form of Aristocrat would get right up the Frenchies noses, so that's a good idea then. Anyone know a good aristocratic Anglo-German family that we don't need any more?

[Flo]

Originally posted by Hypocolius


But we'll need a figurehead. Hmmm, let's think about this. Ideally someone with strong German ties. Figureheads need to have no obvious political axe to grind, and look good on a stamp. Some form of Aristocrat would get right up the Frenchies noses, so that's a good idea then. Anyone know a good aristocratic Anglo-German family that we don't need any more?

You're wrong on that one. The French would love nothing so much than having an aristocrat at the helm. Make that a religious figure, protestant, with strong views on sex and food abstinence ... ;)

[KillerBob]

The Vatican?

That Pope guy opposed the war, you know. We should frag him next! ;)

[iain]

Originally posted by Hypocolius


But we'll need a figurehead. Hmmm, let's think about this. Ideally someone with strong German ties. Figureheads need to have no obvious political axe to grind, and look good on a stamp. Some form of Aristocrat would get right up the Frenchies noses, so that's a good idea then. Anyone know a good aristocratic Anglo-German family that we don't need any more? Prince Charles it is then, or Charles XI to give him his correct new title. I'm sure the French will be delighted to be finally free of their evil Republican tyranny. Hey - Saddam has his Republican Guards, France is a Republic - spot the connection. (OK the US is a Republic too, but that's different of course).

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by iain
Prince Charles it is then, or Charles XI to give him his correct new title. I'm sure the French will be delighted to be finally free of their evil Republican tyranny. Hey - Saddam has his Republican Guards, France is a Republic - spot the connection. (OK the US is a Republic too, but that's different of course).

Brilliant, and we can ship the Queen off to Australia, (who after all voted for her:eek: ), so who does that leave?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by iain
Prince Charles it is then, or Charles XI to give him his correct new title. I'm sure the French will be delighted to be finally free of their evil Republican tyranny. Hey - Saddam has his Republican Guards, France is a Republic - spot the connection. (OK the US is a Republic too, but that's different of course).

Foisting Charlie on a foreign country would, Im sure, be against the Geneva Conventions.

[Hypocolius]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Foisting Charlie on a foreign country would, Im sure, be against the Geneva Conventions.

Possibly, though I'm not sure they would complain too much, after all his domestic arrangements have a certain French flavour to them!

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin
I heard Bush say "we think Syria has chemical weapons". I think we should concentrate on finding them in Iraq first. Nahh, you are getting it all wrong: We didn't find them in Iraq, so now we must look elsewhere. Syria also claim not to have'em (like Iraq), so by the same logic we used when attacking Iraq, we can now attack Syria.

--- I say we, because as you may or may not know, my country took part, albeit only symbolically.

Hans

[Bearguin]

I thought you guys were going to get rid of our Canadian Dictator next.

I mean, we stole your green jacket, isn't that reason enough for war?

[Mel]

I'll vote for France too. It will be fun to watch them protest fighting THAT war.

[Michael Redman]

As the Middle Eastern summer is uncomfortably hot, we should summer in North Korea (where the winters are too cold) and return to the Middle East to enjoy the moderate winter. Using our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, we can engage Iran and Syria at the same time.

[DrChinese]

Originally posted by iain
You missed the most obvious option : France.

Saddam has had plastic surgery to make him look like Edward James Olmos, and he is living safely on the coast of France right now.

I have this from a very highly placed official in the Defense Department, they received a tip from a "credible" source.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Mel
I'll vote for France too. It will be fun to watch them protest fighting THAT war.
Can't go for France. They actually have nukes, and it is a well known fact that we only attack countries with potential nuclear capability. That's why North Korea is out too.

But if you really want to hit France where it hurts, let's invade their wimpy surrogates: Canada. (Besides, it's so convenient!)

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
As the Middle Eastern summer is uncomfortably hot, we should summer in North Korea (where the winters are too cold) and return to the Middle East to enjoy the moderate winter. Using our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, we can engage Iran and Syria at the same time. I expect that you'll be needing all your bases for the next war. 'Course, not all of them may be available.

[Kiri]

I was told by a talking carp that Planet X may be creating WMDs to distribute to the Free Mars terrorists for use against NASA in retaliation for littering their planet with defunct spacecraft... Best to strike now, I think, before this gets out of hand!

[jj]

Now we've gone and done this war, we're on the hit list next, everyone's. Europe is going to attempt to ruin us economically. The lunatics will feel free to murder anyone they can, and the pacific rim will see it as a way to get their economies back at our expense.

In other words, we're the bigtime losers in this.


And we haven't even seen the bill, yet.

[Supercharts]

I picked Iran.
Iraq is west.
Afghanistan is east.
Squeeze Play! A forced out at second base.

[Agammamon]

It'll be the Netherlands. Since the War On Drugs has failed so miserably here we have to prevent the American public from seeing a nation that has manage to deal with the fact that adults are capable of doing something other than sitting around all day stoned if left to their own devices. And it'll distract people's attention from the fact that since we can't find any WMD in Iraq the Bush Administration has changed its reasons for going to war from self defense to liberating an oppressed population.

[Bearguin]

Originally posted by Tricky

But if you really want to hit France where it hurts, let's invade their wimpy surrogates: Canada. (Besides, it's so convenient!)

???????

I though we were Englands children. You can have Quebec if you want it, but aside from Maple Syrup and Hockey sticks, not sure why you would.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Gods Advocate

???????
I though we were Englands children. You can have Quebec if you want it, but aside from Maple Syrup and Hockey sticks, not sure why you would.
No way, eh? Alberta has the oil fields. We also don't attack countries without oil fields.

(In case anyone is wondering, it has been know for many years that Viet Nam has some of the most promising areas for oil exploration in the world.)

[Seismosaurus]

I doubt anybody is "next", at least not for a good long while. But assuming that's wrong, then I would say Syria. It sounds like they're already starting to set people up for it.

Whether the Brits will go along will depend on how good a case is made for it. It's next to impossible that we will do a France and actually oppose the US on this, but it is possible that we would limit it to special forces, supporting US supply lines through Iraq - anything short of sending in large numbers of ground forces.

Iran I doubt, for the simple reason that they are already on the path away from fundamentalism and towards democracy. There's a long way to go there, but the best policy would be to just leave them alone to get on with it.

[Baker]

I voted on The Third Moon of Planet X since you guys are on to us yes we plan on taking over all of the middle east one nation at a time. hehe:D

[crackmonkey]

Let's just do this alphabetically. Albania.

[a_unique_person]

Gibraltar?

I think the troops need something easier. Perhaps a tinpot dictatorship in the third world would be good practice.

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Holland

Thanks Earthborn for compromising the Dutch militia's defense plans!

Hogerhand

http://www.hogerhand.nl/home_e.html

Know your enemy GWBush! Study their tactics.;)

I am sending a picture of myself to Holland to be used as a beach dummy : )

Iran

[Flo]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Foisting Charlie on a foreign country would, Im sure, be against the Geneva Conventions.


Well, I guess we'd like him if it was for his vegetarianism ...;)

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by jj
Now we've gone and done this war, we're on the hit list next, everyone's. Europe is going to attempt to ruin us economically. The lunatics will feel free to murder anyone they can, and the pacific rim will see it as a way to get their economies back at our expense.

Did any of the above happen to the Axis powers after WWII? Germany and Japan seem to be doing fairly well for themselves these days and they lost the war!

The Arab world seems more pissed at Saddam for being such a pushover (after all, the Arabs seem to respect vulgar displays of power) and the Europeans are falling over each other lining up for post-war reconstruction contracts.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Seismosaurus
Whether the Brits will go along will depend on how good a case is made for it. It's next to impossible that we will do a France and actually oppose the US on this, but it is possible that we would limit it to special forces, supporting US supply lines through Iraq - anything short of sending in large numbers of ground forces.


I doubt that very much. I dont think the British public will stomach even a limited military action any time soon.

[Seismosaurus]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


I doubt that very much. I dont think the British public will stomach even a limited military action any time soon.

So long as we don't have large numbers of regular troops in harm's way, the public don't really care one way or the other. Sad but true.

[richardm]

I don't think we'll need to do anything to Syria - I reckon that they'll be sufficiently alarmed by what just happened in Iraq to fall into line.

North Korea are also making conciliatory noises now. I'm going to vote for one of the North African countries who have the terrorist training camps.

As for whether the British public would support military action - I don't think the question will come up. Britain will give moral and logistic support, and probably special forces that we won't hear about, but won't be likely to send in the big bunches of troops anywhere soon - we can't afford it, for one thing (not unless those artifacts get a good price, hem hem). As Seismosaurus says, so long as it's not our people who are being shot at, the public don't really care very much.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


I doubt that very much. I dont think the British public will stomach even a limited military action any time soon.


.. If it comes to that, the British public didn't have the stomach for Iraq, but it went ahead anyway. If there's a Next Time Round you might find that since it was so "easy" this time, the support is stronger than you might think.

[Tricky]

I think you folks are overlooking the obvious. Cuba has several parallels with Iraq.
Brutal dictator
Executes some dissenters
Has been impoverished by sanctions
Has tried to send killers to US (when they emptied their prisons)
Probably has some WMDs left over from the Cuban missile crisis

Plus, they have the advantage that they are godless Communists. The only thing better than attacking countries with the wrong god is attacking countries with no god.

[Earthborn]

Tricky, I think you're right!

More parallels:
- The Iraqi regime had a program of government provided rations for the people to get through the US led war. The Cuban regime feeds its people too.
Noth Korea starves its people and is not attacked!
Ergo: this is just the old capitalist versus communist thing. Since capitalists believe that people should feed themselves, they oppose regimes that feed their people.
- France, Russia and probably Germany too all have/had reasonably normal relations with both.

So, obvious... :D

[Seismosaurus]

Okay, how about this : forget who is most likely next, which regime would you actually like to see destroyed?

Assuming it could be done fairly quickly and bloodlessly, which of the world's governments deserves not to exist any more?

Tough one; I vote Somalia. Those warlords have it comin'.

[Kiri]

Originally posted by Tricky
I think you folks are overlooking the obvious. Cuba has several parallels with Iraq.
Brutal dictator
Executes some dissenters
Has been impoverished by sanctions
Has tried to send killers to US (when they emptied their prisons)
Probably has some WMDs left over from the Cuban missile crisis

Plus, they have the advantage that they are godless Communists. The only thing better than attacking countries with the wrong god is attacking countries with no god.

"Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war..."

C'mon, everyone! You know the words!!

[Kiri]

Originally posted by Seismosaurus
Okay, how about this : forget who is most likely next, which regime would you actually like to see destroyed?

Assuming it could be done fairly quickly and bloodlessly, which of the world's governments deserves not to exist any more?

Tough one; I vote Somalia. Those warlords have it comin'.

The Bush regime. I think the UN should resolve that the USA is occupying North America illegally, and must remove it's troops from the continent.

[Seismosaurus]

Originally posted by Kiri

The Bush regime. I think the UN should resolve that the USA is occupying North America illegally, and must remove it's troops from the continent.

LOL!!!

They could ask the French for troops to go and do the job. That would be highly entertaining... :D

[Kiri]

Originally posted by Seismosaurus


LOL!!!

They could ask the French for troops to go and do the job. That would be highly entertaining... :D

Yes, France backed by NATO! They could drop millions of leaflets on our troops, each showing a pic of W and asking, "Why die for this man?"

NOTE TO MILITARY TYPES:
It's just a joke, guys.

[Mel]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
Let's just do this alphabetically. Albania.

LOL!! Great idea. Slowly but surely every known terrorist will wind up in Zimbabwe and that will be that!