PDA

View Full Version : World War III, is it possible?



the Alternate
07-28-2006, 03:36 PM
Everyone knows that the "Cold war" is shown to be over. That the world "now has the only one pole"... But is it so?
There is the thread, where the opposition of Israel and its arab neighbours is discussed. But it is interesting to me because of its geopolitical orientation and its reflection to the situation in the world community. In fact we'll be able to see two resistance points: at the one side - a "civilized" countries (maybe former "western hemisphere") and an Arab world... The main question is the place of Russia (which is still gonna be able to "push the button") and former "third world" - China and India... Nobody knows, what is about to happen if the alert changes to "Red". Is our civilization counting the last minutes? The tension in the world relationships is increasing.. and the "civilized" war can do nothing about it... France is not able to manage their problems with immigrants from the North Africa, US is slipping in finding a new foe but doing nothing to stabilize the situation... The society is "too democratic" and has exausted the inner tools for self protection...
And what if the Iran will make their own A-bomb???? the Consequenses of its launching gonna be unforseen... And I have no doubts that if they gonna have one,they will launch it.. The "West" is blaming Russia for its actions in Chechnya, but just imagine, that Iraq is at "your own backyard"? What will be your reaction?
That is something to think about for all of us.. Maybe "West" should stop searching their own narrow benefits and try to find the solution for all the "civilized" world?
What if the current trends will head to increase? The world will have 3 or 4 extreme poles? And the war be inevitable? The war with no winner but only the loosers...

Marco
07-29-2006, 01:30 AM
Sure it can. It's just a question of how much can the governments hide their mistakes. That's what keeps World War III locked into a cell, always ready to explode. Iran will, indeed, use their A-type bomb, but surely not to damage the western countries (as they have always helped Iran). The arab world would become a factory of terrorists and the US would be pretty fucked up (even if the rest of the world would be too).

I surely hope that World War III will not be written in future history books.

Sin Studly
07-29-2006, 05:51 AM
I surely hope that World War III will not be written in future history books.

After WWIII there won't be any history books.

pathfinder
07-29-2006, 06:37 AM
World war IIII will be fought with sticks and stones again.

Amiralanal
07-29-2006, 09:52 AM
yeah! world war 3!! i cant wait to kill some goddamn australians.

0r4ng3
07-29-2006, 09:55 AM
I don't quite understand why the next war should be called World War III. If I remember correctly, WWII started because of events following the first. If there's another war, I'm pretty sure it will have nothing to do with WWII.

I know this doesn't have any real meaning, but whatever.

Nineteen Seventy Nine
07-29-2006, 10:31 AM
I don't quite understand why the next war should be called World War III. If I remember correctly, WWII started because of events following the first. If there's another war, I'm pretty sure it will have nothing to do with WWII.

I know this doesn't have any real meaning, but whatever.

Ahh, so it would be called World War I, Part II.

Sin Studly
07-29-2006, 11:30 AM
World War III will be called, in retrospect 'The World War'. You think the survivors will know anything but how to dodge the glowing white zones and avoid getting their skin eaten by muties?

Paint_It_Black
07-29-2006, 07:55 PM
If there's another war, I'm pretty sure it will have nothing to do with WWII.


You mean you trust the Germans?

It will be called WWIII if a large part of the world takes part in it. WWII wasn't named because of its connection to WWI, it was named because it eccompassed most of the world. In fact, before WWII the first world war was known as the Great War, if I remember correctly. They didn't expect there would be another war of such magnitude. But when there was, I think they decided to just start calling them World Wars and numbering them.

Also, the next world war will certainly have SOMETHING to do with both previous World Wars. All of history is connected.

0r4ng3
07-29-2006, 09:34 PM
I know it's all connected, but this one seems less connected than the rest. I mean, if this war were to occur, it's not exactly against Germany, and it's not mostly based in Europe.

Heh, I feel stupid debating something as trivial as the name.

Paint_It_Black
07-29-2006, 11:27 PM
Heh, I feel stupid debating something as trivial as the name.

No, you raised an interesting point.

When thinking of WWII it's easy to think mostly of Europe, but don't forget there was a lot of conflict in the Pacific and in Africa too.

We'll have to wait for WWIII to start before deciding how much the events of WWII helped lead to it. I'm sure you're right that it won't be connected at all compared to WWI and WWII. The connections will be more subtle.

It may be the case that a World War, as we think of it, can't even happen in this day with our level of technology. An extended ground war anywhere is unlikely. I expect to just keep seeing more conflicts like those in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Justin is probably right, and if we do have another World War it'll just be a sudden nuclear nightmare, and nothing like previous World Wars.

Marco
07-30-2006, 01:44 AM
After WWIII there won't be any history books.
meh, I guess you're right

sKratch
07-30-2006, 02:05 AM
An extended ground war anywhere is unlikely. I expect to just keep seeing more conflicts like those in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Uh... ¿Que?
Upon some thought I think you mean pushing fronts back and forth on the ground, because by all means, Iraq is an extended ground war.

the Alternate
07-30-2006, 03:26 AM
It seems, you guys didn't understand me. I meant that the next world war will not start in Europe. It will be caused by the growing difference between the well-being of the "civilized" world and the other part of it. That is the reason of a growing hate...
The trouble is that the governments start being too tough and are denying any compromisses (point the finger to the US). The governments that choose the opposite way - their nations will be "eaten" by the arabs (point the finger to France) - in Europe... There is an imminent conflict of interests between different powers in the world... And the Europe (especially the UK) should make a choice, with whom they are.You can't deny also the power of Russia and, of course, China and India. You should also be aware, that the resourses are not infinite...
the main question is what policy to choose. How the opposing forces will be looking within 20 years...

wheelchairman
07-30-2006, 04:12 AM
I think the obvious connection between WW2 and now (and likely the possible WWIII) is that the conclusion of WW2 set the tone for political and social progress worldwide, not to mention layed the groundwork for international cooperation.

The end of WW2 for Americans created an economic boom (ending long term recession) and brought in 40 years of paranoia of your neighbor as part of the political game.

In Denmark it meant the decision to create the welfare state as well as in the rest of Western Europe to various degrees.

Japan just became really really creepy. But their war crimes in WW2 were just disgusting, so there is no way to know if this is part of a new pattern or not (likely not.) It did however mean that Japan became completely demilitarized and focused on it's economy.

After WW2 the European countries really couldn't hold on to their colonies anymore, and the colonies really could tell.

Paint_It_Black
07-30-2006, 12:18 PM
Uh... ¿Que?
Upon some thought I think you mean pushing fronts back and forth on the ground, because by all means, Iraq is an extended ground war.

Well, Iraq is an occupation. The war was won quickly, and by that I mean defeating the government and legitimate army. And yeah, I did mean something along the lines of fronts shifting, and high deployment of troops and armoured vehicles by two opposing forces. You know, traditional conflict.

thewalrus
07-30-2006, 02:45 PM
World war IIII will be fought with sticks and stones again.


Yes, after the world's population has been blown away thanks to ingenious American and Russian weapons of mass destruction, there'll be only a few primates fighting each other with sticks and stones.

the Alternate
07-31-2006, 05:21 AM
The end of WW2 for Americans created an economic boom (ending long term recession) and brought in 40 years of paranoia of your neighbor as part of the political game.

Not even the end of that war, nor itself the WWII. Americans raised their economy with the sacrifices of Europe. Offers and loans created good base for the US not introducing into the bloody mess at the Eastern or Western fronts at the Battlefield. The longer the war would continue, the more benefits the US would carry out of this. Americans had never seen the WAR. That's why they're doing like hawks.. The Vietnam was a good lesson but it didn't last until today.


The end of WW2 for Americans created an economic boom (ending long term recession) and brought in 40 years of paranoia of your neighbor as part of the political game.

You know, this ingenious arms were keeping the world in peace, as though strange it sounds.. You know, "a bad peace is much better that a good war".
Either Americans or Russians held the finger off the button pressed because noone was so desperate to loose everything. The whole world. But these arabs are ready...

thewalrus
07-31-2006, 10:07 AM
You know, this ingenious arms were keeping the world in peace, as though strange it sounds.. You know, "a bad peace is much better that a good war".
Either Americans or Russians held the finger off the button pressed because noone was so desperate to loose everything. The whole world. But these arabs are ready...


Agree. But the rules of the cold war aren't working anymore, as far as I can judge that. The huge arsenal of nukes and other weapons doesn't guarantee peace anymore, rather the opposite. A fanatic wouldn't care if his country or his people were blown up by nukes. The more idiots are leading this world, the more those weapons are becoming a threat for humanity. And according to recent developments in the middle-east crisis, there seem to be A LOT of idiots in leading positions... you know... once that stuff went into the wrong hands...

Dude From Dudetown
07-31-2006, 08:31 PM
Why can't people realize that war is stupid and it sucks and it just causes pain everywhere :(

Sin Studly
07-31-2006, 11:03 PM
Why can't people realize that war is stupid and it sucks and it just causes pain everywhere :(

Give this man the Nobel Peace Prize!

*bows*

the Alternate
08-01-2006, 01:33 AM
The more idiots are leading this world, the more those weapons are becoming a threat for humanity. And according to recent developments in the middle-east crisis, there seem to be A LOT of idiots in leading positions... you know... once that stuff went into the wrong hands...

The most times we elect these idiots ourselves, unfortunately.

And in addition. Most people don't need war. But they do need the hate.

Dude From Dudetown
08-01-2006, 05:09 AM
The outcome may come out like in the movie "wargames", but that's extreme.

RickyCrack
08-01-2006, 02:03 PM
The outcome may come out like in the movie "wargames", but that's extreme.

Or like Planet of the Apes, or Soylent Green, or even Mad Max. But of course, those are only extremes.

Not Ozymandias
08-01-2006, 02:04 PM
No, it's impossible.

Dude From Dudetown
08-01-2006, 02:38 PM
No, it's possible all right.

Not Ozymandias
08-01-2006, 03:33 PM
No, it's impossible.

Paint_It_Black
08-01-2006, 03:56 PM
No, it's impossible.

I lol'd.

But why isn't Douche from Douchetown on your ignore list yet?

RickyCrack
08-01-2006, 10:33 PM
No, it's possible. Especially the Mad Max theory. Imagine a world where Mel Gibson drives around all drunk as fuck and when he gets questioned he hits a chick.

Preocupado
08-01-2006, 11:39 PM
Nah, the WWIII won't be the last, nor will it will be the one with the more advanced belic technology. We'll make nature kill us instead. The atmosphere is too fucked up already, just ask your grandparents how the climate changes used to be when they were young. I'm 23 y/o and even i can perceive the changes in the weather and the stations.

Not Ozymandias
08-02-2006, 12:18 AM
I lol'd.

But why isn't Douche from Douchetown on your ignore list yet?
This was our first encounter. I'll give it time.

Ocupation: Offspring
08-02-2006, 12:30 AM
Quite honestly i think there wont be a WWIII. I Mean what dose Japan and Germany have to do with this Mid-East Crisis at all? Only if like Iraq bombs them, and all of that stuff. It mighht just be a Mid-East War. But im not the party pooper war is pointless, but sience there has been quite a few its interesting to me.

the Alternate
08-02-2006, 02:45 AM
Hey guys, you're all walking around the mid-east. But middle east can be only the place where the war begins. Look WWI and WWII began from the events at Balkans... But the whole war took place in the other parts of the planet. You are missing the influence of China and India with over 1 billion people population. All of them have conflicts with muslim countries in their regions. Plus the US that tries to put their feet everywhere. Their invasion can only sky-rocket the troubles in the regions. Also the United (are they?) Europe and Russia from the opposite side. Neither of the great problems in the world is solved and the contradictions are going only more considerable.

About climate. Look, Earth had naturally the periods when the climate became either warmer or colder. Remember the ice ages. Also Earth is entering different areas (by the movement of the whole Soleil System and the Milky Way) of space radiation which are rather considerable to change the temperature by 3-5 C degrees. So I don't think that the whole changes are caused only by antroposphere...

Preocupado
08-02-2006, 12:54 PM
So I don't think that the whole changes are caused only by antroposphere...

Aggravated like fuck by atmosphere then.


Quite honestly i think there wont be a WWIII. I Mean what dose Japan and Germany have to do with this Mid-East Crisis at all? Only if like Iraq bombs them, and all of that stuff. It mighht just be a Mid-East War. But im not the party pooper war is pointless, but sience there has been quite a few its interesting to me.

Even countries that declare a neutral position to a world wide conflict can be forced into war because they have debts with countries that have declared war. And that means they'll have to provide the front line with any resources they can, being considered enemies by the opposing side. The neutral suppliers act like blood vessels, and the opposing side attacks them at theyr own territory.

Not to mention strategic locations and trade routes that will be taken by some side of the war. If this gets to the core of the neutral country's economy, they'll be forced to join the other side and declare war.

That's precisely what made Brazil join the WWII, even when we had a declared neutral position. By the end of the war we had a 2000+ death toll directly connected to the combat.

wheelchairman
08-02-2006, 01:33 PM
There will not be a WW3 soon. Because there is no rival power. You can mention muslim terrorism all you want. But that is nothing. It's just the current focus of paranoia. But it can never escalate to a world wide conflict.

Dude From Dudetown
08-03-2006, 07:43 AM
There will not be a WW3 soon. Because there is no rival power. You can mention muslim terrorism all you want. But that is nothing. It's just the current focus of paranoia. But it can never escalate to a world wide conflict.

True, but if the U.S. gets invloved also with the war with Israel and Lebanon, then other powers will get invloved.

wheelchairman
08-03-2006, 09:48 AM
True, but if the U.S. gets invloved also with the war with Israel and Lebanon, then other powers will get invloved.
Yeah and if the US invaded every single country in Europe that would also cause a lot of commotion.

GBH2
08-04-2006, 08:44 PM
True, but if the U.S. gets invloved also with the war with Israel and Lebanon, then other powers will get invloved.
get out of this thread, you know nothing.

what giant world power happens to be allies with lebanon and also wants to take on the u.s.? hmm?

ww3 is either impossible or very very far away. as wcm said, their are no rivaling world powers. even if these arose, it would be just like the cold war, with both sides too frightened of the outcome to fight.

learn some history and politics, douche.

Ocupation: Offspring
08-04-2006, 09:49 PM
Even countries that declare a neutral position to a world wide conflict can be forced into war because they have debts with countries that have declared war. And that means they'll have to provide the front line with any resources they can, being considered enemies by the opposing side. The neutral suppliers act like blood vessels, and the opposing side attacks them at theyr own territory.

Not to mention strategic locations and trade routes that will be taken by some side of the war. If this gets to the core of the neutral country's economy, they'll be forced to join the other side and declare war.

That's precisely what made Brazil join the WWII, even when we had a declared neutral position. By the end of the war we had a 2000+ death toll directly connected to the combat.
Oh so thats how Brazil got into the war. Well then i change my point of view, i think there will be a WWIII becuz of the Mid-East Crisis and debts, also the price of oil is very high so countries need money to support themselves.

the Alternate
08-05-2006, 02:35 PM
I have never thought that Brazil is the main point from where the war begins to be "World War" :)))

obsessedoffspring1
08-12-2006, 10:38 PM
Why can't people realize that war is stupid and it sucks and it just causes pain everywhere :(

i agree completely