Where do you think WW3 will start?

[Gustavo S. Buschle]

Albert Einstein once said, "I do not know with what kinds of weapons the Third World War will be fought, but the Fourth World War will be fought with sticks and stones."
I don't personally think that after the cold war anyone wants to start another one.

 

[God's Clown]

Has to be Germany starting it. They started World War 1 and 2, so they must think "Third times a charm right?"

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Although you make some good points, you may want to change your tone.
Sounds like your defending Hitler just and teensy weensy bit.
But you can't have war without 2 opposing sides.
I'm not saying your a Nazi, that would be ridiculous, but we did sort of give Hitler a chance with 'appeasment' in which we let him be for a bit but he continued to take land so we got invovlved.

Really?

I will have whatever "tone" I damn well feel like having. I'm not defending Hitler, obviously. I said, literally, that you can't blame the entirety of WW2 on Hitler alone. That's not defending Hitler. It's called knowing a thing or two about history.

*sigh* what i'm saying is you should always make a point of the neccesity to go to war with Hitler, and tone is very important actually, as it changes peoples perception of you.
And i do know know i thing or to about History, i'm studying it.
And i never said that you were defending Hitler, just that it sounded a bit like it.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

ity to go to war with Hitler, and tone is very important actually, as it changes peoples perception of you.
And i do know know i thing or to about History, i'm studying it.

I could care less about your "perception" of me. I know what I think, and if you can't be bothered to carefully read posts, I can't be bothered to waste my time re-explaining them.

I should add that it was your country, along with France who pushed the Treaty Of Versailles. Historians have come to a consensus that that treaty was largely responsible for the turmoil that allowed Hitler to rise to power.

Maybe you should care about peoples perception of you, after all you would spending most of your life with people.
And if you read my post carefully, you would see that i said you made some good points and that a war needs opposing sides.
Maybe it's just the way i've been taught, but you need to have both sides of the argument in their.
And yes, the Treaty of Versailles was another factor, as was the wall street crash, The whole fact that Germany lost WW1.
Both sides are to blame, just balance it out.

 

[lettucethesallad]

Well, warfare has changed so much since the other world wars. People don't fight trench wars with all the advancements in technology. A large-scale war now wouldn't involve nearly as many people in the same way as they did back in the day, so we won't have another world war per se.

Global military conflicts are happening pretty much all the time. I guess what could happen is that some country who wasn't a member of, say, Nato attacked a country that was a member of Nato, making all of Nato retaliate. I'm not sure how likely it would be though. Yeah, we're running out of resources, but I'm not sure I see a territorial war in the near future.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Maybe you should care about peoples perception of you, after all you would spending most of your life with people.
And if you read my post carefully, you would see that i said you made some good points and that a war needs opposing sides.
Maybe it's just the way i've been taught, but you need to have both sides of the argument in their.
And yes, the Treaty of Versailles was another factor, as was the wall street crash, The whole fact that Germany lost WW1.
Both sides are to blame, just balance it out.

So, you have now made three posts, dropping the fact that wars take two sides? I think maybe we understood that fact already, but thanks.

I care about the people close to me. I do not care about *your* perception of me. You're some random dude on the internet.

I think this conversation as gone past it's origins on WW2 now, and on to something more personal, you just need to balance arguments by giving both sides of the argument.
Otherwise it does look like your biased.
And angry.
You seem angry.

 

[Penguin_Factory]

The middle east is looking like the most volatile flash point right now, but who knows how that could change in the future.

My pet theory is that a world war like the two we've experienced in the past is pretty much impossible due to the fact that all of the world's current and potential super powers have access to nuclear weapons. I don't think any of them would be willing to risk a world war turning nuclear.

That doesn't rule out the possibility that we could have a more lop-sided war with US/France/UK fighting China or something, but to me that's different from WWI and II where you had more or less equal alliances of countries going up against each other.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

I think this conversation as gone past it's origins on WW2 now, and on to something more personal, you just need to balance arguments by giving both sides of the argument.
Otherwise it does look like your biased.
And angry.
You seem angry.

Haha, don't flatter yourself. There is a big difference between strong language and being "angry."

Once again I refer you to the not caring about your perception concept.

Now you've just confused me, i don't believe i said anything about strong language, or perception, or flattering myself, not sure how you got that, maybe it was your PERCEPTION of me.
Had to do it.

On a related note i find it intresting that you can trace back a century of war to one gunshot.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

Some foolishness in the Balkans. Obviously.

That, or in space, assuming we ever manage to invent some shit that enables proper interstellar travel. Sooner or later, we'll probably find someone out there that doesn't like us much. Wars between different species from different planets (or negative space wedgies w/e) count as "world" wars, right?

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Now you've just confused me, i don't believe i said anything about strong language, or perception, or flattering myself, not sure how you got that, maybe it was your PERCEPTION of me.
Had to do it.

On a related note i find it intresting that you can trace back a century of war to one gunshot.

This is getting kind of sad. I feel obligated to help you out.

You said I was angry. I'm actually quite enjoying myself. When people accuse someone of being angry, they're assuming that the other person really cares. I don't. And therefore, flattering yourself. Nothing personal. You're just random internet guy.

Ah, i have a friend like you, always breaking things down, not a bad thing i suppose, but difficult when your like me and use words differently to other people.
For example, you seemed to be on the offensive (not like swears, but in the offensive/defensive way), therefore i would consider that angry, but other people wouldn't.
Plus when someone says they don't care it often means they do.
And nothing is random, thought i'd add some profoundness in there.

 

[Pontus Hashis]

October 23rd 2077.

Nuclear exchange between USA and China.

Ends in a matter of hours.

War, war never changes.




(or some fundamentaist group will get pissy and access to nukes, looking at the patriots here)

 

[Scrubiii]

It started in 2001. It's just that nobody dared call it that.

Well said good sir.

However, WW4 will be fought by hackers. The aim will be to break into and disable the early warning systems of enemy countries so that the hackers' nation can nuke them with no retaliation.

 

[Sniper_430]

Well the chances of WWIII happening in my lifetime are slim, but we can all specualte cant we?
My theory is that WWIII wont last longer than 1-2 years tops. It will start with in the middle east, a band of middleast nations (mabye extremist anti west with the way things are going) combine in a coalation ( United arab emirates, Iran, and a few of the larger players) maily to safe guard the shrinking oil supplies from any external force. The E.U, U.S or mabye china grows desperate and trys to take the remaining oil. If the E.U starts i the U.S might just look the other way or intervene. If the U.S goes in the E.U might follow, and china mightnt like having a large scale war on its borders and attempts a deal with the middle east. if china goes in (the most likely option in my opinion) they might get beaten back and invaded.

I really have no idea how it will start or even worse how it will end. DEFCON offically put me of contemplating world wars.

 

[Do4600]

I doubt there will even be a World War III as we know it. Everybody knows oil is dead, it wouldn't be profitable to fight over it. We already have the technology to never use oil again, and once oil becomes too rare to be profitable we'll have to use those technologies anyway.

In my opinion the world is too economically connected to fight a World War as we know it. The world population has grown too large and is too dependent on it's neighbors for resources and credit, any serious conflict between superpowers would be extremely costly for both sides and probably bankrupt the nations in the middle or on the sidelines.

 

[Scrubiii]

Um...I'm pretty sure Germany started the second World War when they INVADED Poland.

They wouldn't have invaded Poland if it wasn't for the ridiculousness of the Treaty of Versailles.
The treaty destroyed the German economy allowing Hitler to rise to power and use the German people's hatred and distrust to setup his Third Reich.

Actually, the treaty of Versailles played a very small part in Hitler's rise to power. The German recession of the early 1920's was caused by the treaty of Versailles, but after Stresemann created the Richtenmark to end super-inflation and the Dawes plan and the Young Plan made the reparations payments far less demanding, Germany began to climb out of recession.

By around 1927, they were the most prosperous nation in Europe as they were backed by American investment which gave them an extremely healthy economy. However, because of their reliance on American investment, the Wall Street Crash in 1929 sent them into an even deeper recession, and it was this recession that Hitler used to rise to power.

Until Hitler came to power, Germany's relationship with Western Europe and America was far from "hate and distrust." They were a respected country and Stresemann even took them into the League of Nations under France's sponsorship.

You can blame the invasion of Poland on the the allies for the Treaty of Versailles, you could also blame it on the greed of American stock brokers for causing the Wall Street Crash. You could blame it on numerous other factors as well and in a way it was all of these.

The main reason though, is that Hitler was a German Supremacist. Many countries had a hand in instigating WWII, but Germany's was by far the largest.

 

[PontiusTM]

First two were Germany's fault.....I feel good putting my money on them for a third round.

we've got some reputation to lose right here

 

[meryatathagres]

John Titor has some insight to the topic. Google him if you like, its fun stuff.

 

[Tonimata]

Wherever I might happend to be next time I get my salary denied

 

[Wintermoot]

DELETE THIS POST.

 

[freaper]

I'm hoping in your backyard.

I also can't believe some of you guys are truthfully answering this question.