This had better be a quick war!

You know why? I just got an email today from a potential employer. Everything was going great, set to have an interview on monday, which I had to fly out for and would have to skip classes for if it weren't spring break next week. But it was spring break, like I said, so it was all going to be okay. Great place to work for doing military contract work, I was really excited about it. Now I find that my interview has been cancelled until further notice because of the war. Security on base has been tightened and we're not allowed on base. Furthermore, they don't know when I can get in for an interview, because they don't know when the security restrictions will be released! Argh! I have less than 2 months till graduation! Double Argh!

So does anybody know how to set fires with thier mind?

I''m used to a country where you see the Army on the streets all the time and you can''t get an interview for a lot of jobs without a background security audit.

I hope for a lot of resons that it''s a short war and I hope you get your interview!

According to this, there''s supposedly a limit before the American public turns on the Bush Administration: the war lasts more than five weeks (length of GW1) and/or more than 200 soldiers killed (roughly the same as GW1).

"Rat Boy" wrote:

According to this, there''s supposedly a limit before the American public turns on the Bush Administration: the war lasts more than five weeks (length of GW1) and/or more than 200 soldiers killed (roughly the same as GW1).

I disagree with that. I think the American Public will give him two months. By summer it will have to be over for Bush to ""win.""

Yes countries can''t be careful enough about casualty figures which makes me think what would happen if it came to a Mogadishu style shootout in Baghdad. People sometimes can''t grasp the fact that even with all the high tech weaponry and training our troops recieve that there are still going to be casualties.

"Ulairi" wrote:

I disagree with that. I think the American Public will give him two months. By summer it will have to be over for Bush to ""win.""

One would think so if the American public wasn''t ""promised"" a quick war. Thanks to Desert Fox, Kosovo, and Enduring Freedom, most people are ""used"" to quick and painless wars; images of massive casulties and lack of progess will tip public opinion towards the anti-war camp.

I think thats rediculous.

If it lasts a year but we are making strong head way and a lot of civilians are being taken care of with food and medicine, I dont think support will wane.

If it lasts 10 days but its horribly violent and bloody and a lot of confusing and mess up sentiments and pictures are painted, if shots of dismembered children (fabricated or not) litter the air waves, the public support will wane rapidly. We all saw the strong Vietnam and Tieneman Square references in the first Animatrix episode. How many of those do you think we need to see before the pot is stirred?

Setting some arbitrary deadline only shows arrogance and ignorance.

Setting some arbitrary deadline only shows arrogance and ignorance.

But thats exactly what the American people are hoping for, quick and painless. If it starts to drag on were gonna get pissed, so we expect a quick one to justify the fact that it''s happening. Arrogant? Yeah, but thats the way we work, hope for the best.

Setting some arbitrary deadline only shows arrogance and ignorance.

That may well be but it''s an acknowledged fact that Bush and Blair can''t let the war go on for very long as getting into a prolonged conflict would be disasterous for what is already marginal public support for the war.

I don''t know about everyone else but the coverage this war is going to get by the media really sickens me. I am all for getting the full picture of major events like this but when I watched the speech Bush made this Monday and some of the coverage ABC proceeded to spew forth I was disgusted.

I don''t know who ABC was trying to fool. The only reason 2/3 of the reporters are down there is because they feel relatively safe. They believe this will be a lopsided victory and they know people out there will eat up all the coverage with little risk to them. It''s all about the money and they are trying to pass it off as a moral duty they must accomplish as reporters.

I am absolutely disgusted.