Taking into account the recent Russia/Georgia, what do you think the possibility of World War 3 would be? How will it be waged? Who will it be between? Why will it happen? Just anything, but please let's not be irrational.
World War 3: Possible?
- Thread starter curlycrouton
- Start date
Recommended Videos
yeah its gonna happen sooner or later, when oil runs out in the west, what is not far from happening. even a small shortage in oil couses huge problems in the US, after the storm some refineries where out of power, and suddenly all the americans found themselves without fuel for their cars.
if you see that a number of large countries is on the rise with oil consumption, there's got to apear a shortage sooner or later, and then its just a matter of how far people will go to reach their goals. if you see that most of peoples lives are hard to imagine without oil (needed to make plastic, wich is just about everything nowdays enz.).
if the oil runs low, and if diplomacy fails, i do think there will be war, maybe not full scale as we know it, but perhaps more economical focused. the use of *unofficial* troops might be high, becouse who says it was not some rebel group that blew up russians oil pipes?
so, buckle up and hang on
if you see that a number of large countries is on the rise with oil consumption, there's got to apear a shortage sooner or later, and then its just a matter of how far people will go to reach their goals. if you see that most of peoples lives are hard to imagine without oil (needed to make plastic, wich is just about everything nowdays enz.).
if the oil runs low, and if diplomacy fails, i do think there will be war, maybe not full scale as we know it, but perhaps more economical focused. the use of *unofficial* troops might be high, becouse who says it was not some rebel group that blew up russians oil pipes?
so, buckle up and hang on
Oil running out will probably lead to serious international tensions.
Combine that with possibly parts of the world flooding causing mass migration if Al Gore was right...
Then again it won't happen so easily, with most developed countries able to threaten others with nukes.
If it does happen then I'm guessing it's gonna be China (maybe with Russia and some middle-eastern countries jumping on the wagon) against the EU and the US. But that's just a wild guess.
Combine that with possibly parts of the world flooding causing mass migration if Al Gore was right...
Then again it won't happen so easily, with most developed countries able to threaten others with nukes.
If it does happen then I'm guessing it's gonna be China (maybe with Russia and some middle-eastern countries jumping on the wagon) against the EU and the US. But that's just a wild guess.
It will happen, though hopefully not in my lifetime, and came dangerously close to happening back in 94 or 95. Not entirely sure of the year but that's not the point.
The US at one point used special rockets fitted with sonar to map some of the polar ice caps, these did not explode and posed no danger to human life. The only problem with them was that they had to fly over Russia and looked like regular missiles to any radar system.
Because of this the US would notify the Russian government prior to each launch. However, the day of one launch the message did not get through to the right people and when the Russian radar picked it up it was assumed to be an attack by the Americans. The Russians readied their nuclear weapons for an all out assault but just before launch the message made it through and a nuclear war was just barely avoided.
If I could find the book I read about this in I'd give you links to articles, but I've no clue where I put it.
The US at one point used special rockets fitted with sonar to map some of the polar ice caps, these did not explode and posed no danger to human life. The only problem with them was that they had to fly over Russia and looked like regular missiles to any radar system.
Because of this the US would notify the Russian government prior to each launch. However, the day of one launch the message did not get through to the right people and when the Russian radar picked it up it was assumed to be an attack by the Americans. The Russians readied their nuclear weapons for an all out assault but just before launch the message made it through and a nuclear war was just barely avoided.
If I could find the book I read about this in I'd give you links to articles, but I've no clue where I put it.
Russia is none too happy about NATO moving so close to their borders, and the issue with Georgia has something to do with that in part. The U.S. is still at war with Iraq and there has been talk about going to war with Iran for a couple of years now. If smallers wars like this keep breaking out all over the world, its only a matter of time before two of the bigger powers start butting heads over something. Its not progressing like it did before WW2, so I don't think it's something that will happen in the next few years, but who knows.
EDIT: I think I know what you are talking about now, in regards to Texas? The thing about that is that it isn't a gas shortage really, the gas is there, but there is no way to get it in there because of all the roads being out, and who knows how many actual gas stations are left anyways. However, in light of the overall level of destruction, gas is the least of those people's worries.
I don't agree with you saying that they are eager for war though. The situation with Georgia was brought on by Georgia, and Russia retaliated. I wouldn't exactly call that war-mongering.
Where did you hear that? There haven't been any shortages in the US that I know of, and I certainly haven't had any trouble getting gas here in Massachusetts. The price of gas has been fluctuating like mad but I don't think we have any shortages.gragimor post=18.72751.771882 said:
EDIT: I think I know what you are talking about now, in regards to Texas? The thing about that is that it isn't a gas shortage really, the gas is there, but there is no way to get it in there because of all the roads being out, and who knows how many actual gas stations are left anyways. However, in light of the overall level of destruction, gas is the least of those people's worries.
The missile defense system is definitely one of the things Russia is not too happy about. Part of the system is being installed in Poland, and Russia is worried that having it that close to them will neutralize the deterence(sp?) of their nuclear arsenal, which is understandable in a sense. However they are obviously only looking at what is good for them.Angron post=18.72751.771906 said:
I don't agree with you saying that they are eager for war though. The situation with Georgia was brought on by Georgia, and Russia retaliated. I wouldn't exactly call that war-mongering.
The flooding won't be that bad. It wouldn't be the end of the world as we know it and it would go slow enough for us to addapt.D0WNT0WN post=18.72751.771913 said:
Ok, so the Netherlands will be gone, but who will miss them anyway? Just kidding, seriously.
Think of Bangladesh, very poor, very densely inhabited and very floodable.
The flooding of just this tiny piece of the world map would mean millions of people having to move to another country. Thats just asking for trouble sooner or later.
World War 3 is almost a certainty never mind a possibility. History always repeats itself and wars have always and will always happen, it's just a matter of how long it takes the world stage to destabilise itself enough to warrant harsh actions from one nation or another.
I think that what a governments says, and what a government does, is often drastically different. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some crazy conspiracy theorist, but I don't take things at face value.Saskwach post=18.72751.771874 said:
I'm personally inclined to say that so long as the world is ruled by greedy,
Likewise, when you've got Sarah Palin half-threatening to go to war with Russia over Georgia, you can't blame them for being defensive. The prevailing attitude toward Russia in America has never been a fantastic one, and the wounds of the past half century will take at least as long again to begin to really heal. Definitely agreed on the part of Georgia being the instigator of the conflict, although whether Russia's response was proportional is entirely questionable.
On the issue of Nuclear Weapons in general, I think the chance of a power being genuinely stupid enough to actually resort to a nuclear strike is very low. At least, so long as people remain committed to nuclear non-proliferation. The idea of an insane, wholly theocratic government getting their hands on one is *not* a pleasant one.
Studies have shown that the Missile Defense system, which has been in development for the past 50 years or so, is at current almost practically useless. Although successful in some simulations (2 out of 5 missiles were destroyed in tests. Still not a great ratio.) the flight path and trajectory of the missiles were known in advance, and there were no decoys used. If Russia really wanted to nuke a country, it wouldn't be hard. The issue with Poland is the fact that America is giving them economic incentives to allow the installation of the shield - Moscow sees America attempting to revive the Cold War by enroaching ever closer into the Old Warsaw Pact countries. They're afraid of political and economic isolation due to Pro-Western governments, rather than them being grumpy about not being able to commit genocide.KSarty post=18.72751.771929 said:
Likewise, when you've got Sarah Palin half-threatening to go to war with Russia over Georgia, you can't blame them for being defensive. The prevailing attitude toward Russia in America has never been a fantastic one, and the wounds of the past half century will take at least as long again to begin to really heal. Definitely agreed on the part of Georgia being the instigator of the conflict, although whether Russia's response was proportional is entirely questionable.
On the issue of Nuclear Weapons in general, I think the chance of a power being genuinely stupid enough to actually resort to a nuclear strike is very low. At least, so long as people remain committed to nuclear non-proliferation. The idea of an insane, wholly theocratic government getting their hands on one is *not* a pleasant one.
I think things like that happened a few times during the cold war, when one of the two countries was half a button press away from starting a nuclear war over some mistake. Scary.Jobz post=18.72751.771907 said:
Though I think the Cold War showed that there can't really be a war on the scale of a World War thanks to nukes and the threat of mutual assured destruction. Though the story of Endwar (the game/horrible book) showed that if a global anti-ICBM system was put in place and eliminated the threat of nuclear retaliation, such a large-scale conflict would be possible.
So, I'm not gonna say it's completely impossible, but I don't think it'll happen anytime soon. Hopefully atleast not until we manage to colonize a few more planets so we can safely destroy this one.
I see the most likely scenario being one that mimics previous wars - more specifically, along these lines;
-Israel declares war against the Middle East. Either this, or the assassination of a high ranking official of the Iranian community (for example) is pinned on Israel, and then war is declared against them.
-UK and US in particular will back Israel, send peacekeeping forces, financial aid to them, etc.
-Because of this, Russia, possibly China back the Middle Eastern countries, for the same kind of shitty Cold War logic; "They're backing these guys, and we hate their ideology, so we'll back the other guys."
-As in other World Wars, more and more countries will be pulled into the war. Israel will most likely dominate the first ground it claims, and instead of leaving it at that, will advance for more gain.
-I'd expect a lot of threats of nuclear strikes, but none actually follow through.
-War continues to escalate until a decisive blow is struck to one side. I don't believe it would ever leave that area though, whilst many, many countries would be involved, making the death count huge, it would all be situated in that area of the world.
Just a guess in a nutshell, really, but if a war worthy of being called WW3 occurs, I reckon it may happen in a way similar to that.
-Israel declares war against the Middle East. Either this, or the assassination of a high ranking official of the Iranian community (for example) is pinned on Israel, and then war is declared against them.
-UK and US in particular will back Israel, send peacekeeping forces, financial aid to them, etc.
-Because of this, Russia, possibly China back the Middle Eastern countries, for the same kind of shitty Cold War logic; "They're backing these guys, and we hate their ideology, so we'll back the other guys."
-As in other World Wars, more and more countries will be pulled into the war. Israel will most likely dominate the first ground it claims, and instead of leaving it at that, will advance for more gain.
-I'd expect a lot of threats of nuclear strikes, but none actually follow through.
-War continues to escalate until a decisive blow is struck to one side. I don't believe it would ever leave that area though, whilst many, many countries would be involved, making the death count huge, it would all be situated in that area of the world.
Just a guess in a nutshell, really, but if a war worthy of being called WW3 occurs, I reckon it may happen in a way similar to that.
Referring to above post, I don't think that would happen, mostly since the Cold War is over, meaning that no countries would be backing the middle-east countries. Russia no longer hates America with all their soul and would do anything to spite them, and China is too busy building up economic power and whatnot, they're not charging into any wars.
And also, the US or UK wouldn't enter a war to back Israel just against the surrounding Middle-east countries. They didn't the last 20 times this scenario has played out, and Israel ended up fine in all of them. Better than fine, in fact. And, the US would be way too cautious to enter such a war without a really strong reason, for fear of being so heavily criticized and accused of being 'imperial capitalist pigs' intruding in other countries' affairs.
So, a war between Israel and the various Middle-east countries that hate it would stay as such. And Israel would win. Again. And give back all the land it conquers. Again. And run away from the terrorists and wait for it all to happen again. Again.
And also, the US or UK wouldn't enter a war to back Israel just against the surrounding Middle-east countries. They didn't the last 20 times this scenario has played out, and Israel ended up fine in all of them. Better than fine, in fact. And, the US would be way too cautious to enter such a war without a really strong reason, for fear of being so heavily criticized and accused of being 'imperial capitalist pigs' intruding in other countries' affairs.
So, a war between Israel and the various Middle-east countries that hate it would stay as such. And Israel would win. Again. And give back all the land it conquers. Again. And run away from the terrorists and wait for it all to happen again. Again.