World War 3: Possible?

[Scorched_Cascade]

Sorry to the Americans present but I'm betting on you guys starting WW3. You have a lot of ignorant people, are an extremist consumer country and a lot of people that like to warmonger.

That nuclear shield thing is an example; it seems to be just an excuse to provoke Russia so they start something so the U.S can be seen as the heroes for saving the free nations or some such crap. Looking at trajectory how would having a shield in Poland protect the U.S from extremist nukes (the reason it was made) in the first place? Why wouldn't the attackers just send the nukes around the globe the other way and completely screw the US' system? (I asking out of ignorance here and I'm aware of it if someone does know please do correct me).

I'm reckoning that ww3 will be one of three options:
opt 1: West v East
opt 2: America v Europe (see America's treatment of France when they refused to go to war) v East (minor part mainly just America takes the world)
opt 3: A conflict between two big power or some combination thereof i.e (America, Europe, Russia+subs) which flooded out or otherwise devastated third world countries take advantage of to unite and land grab

Though being conscription age I'm hoping the world leaders just decide that peace and love is better for all.

 

[Ultrajoe]

My bet? Oceanic nations against China.

From there, western countries force to intervene to protect interests in that region and the aforementioned 'peasant rush' occurs.

 

[RetiarySword]

Its not going to happen. There will be tension, and maybe a few small conflicts, but it won't build up to world war.

 

[Typecast]

The third world war will be caused by economy, and will be an economical war mainly along with regional conflicts, in the middle east notably.
Well, I expect an economical war. Economical sanctions, deals getting cut-off, recession, possible depression, propaganda, and re-centralisation of economy.
I see it more likely as the other type of war which directly kills massively.

If that's the case then world war three has been raging for the last 60 years.

 

[000Ronald]

I wrote an essay about this once.

No two civilized countries are going to get into a war. The militaries of the world are too powerful, and should the militaries fail (which they would, inevetably, on one side or both) nuclear warfare would be the last resort. Anyone who leads one of these countries know this, and after looking at how hot the cold war got, they won't let that happen again.

Punchline, and theisis statement; we're not fighting Natzis anymore. We aren't going to be fighiting China, or Russia, or France.

The sort of war we'll be fighting from here on in is terrorist insurgencies. There will be scuffles from time to time between nations, but nothing that will result in WWIII.

Why do I think this? How could I come to such an illogical conclusion? Let me tell you through my eyes.

We've gotten smarter as a warfaring race. We've learned how to kill hundreds, thousands, billions of people with the push of a button. Nuclear weapons make conventional warfare a moot point, because you could just jam a nuke up someone's ass and be done with it.

But no one would do that. No one has the guts to do that, and everyone else is to afraid of the reprocussions to even bring it up. War should be a moot point now, right?

Wrong. Let's look back a little. Remember Vietnam? Remember how gurella warfare worked so well agains us Americans? It worked, and it worked well. We weren't prepared to fight a war like vietnam. We weren't prepared to fight a war that might go on for twenty, thirty years. We weren't prepared to fight a war where we might not actually know where the baddies were. Our armies were trained to fight Natzis, not civilians, which is half the reason so many people were so fucked up after Vietnam.

Our enimies learned from that. They're going to be fighting in a way we can't directly fight back agaist. They could kill us en masse, but since we didn't know where they were, we couldn't do the same.

Not only is that effective military strategy, but it shatters morale. It makes people scared. Anyone could be the enemy; anyone. People don't want to fight that. People are willing to turn a blind eye to it, to save the world from the horror of it all. Our military has learned from our mistakes; we've made more headway than anyone could have dreamed of two years ago and people are still pitching a fit because we may have to occupy the nation for another two years. We could actually win this, and there are people who want to turn around and let them kill each other.

This is the war we'll be fighting from here on in. We've learned how to beat it; we just need to implement it. If we don't, it will make all those people who want chaos to rule the day that much more powerful.

That's my two cent's worth. Apologies abound.

Spoiler: As a side note...

This idea of mine is like Asimovs' Psychohistory; it only works with humans. If an alien race were to get involved in the mix, we'd be starting back over from square one. Just thought I'd add that.

 

[aigamer123]

...and here i am thinking it's already WW3. I hope some country will one day invade Africa so we can enjoy the spoils of 4mb line speed and Xbox 360 live support.

 

[Combined]

Hm. Well, this is a very difficult question, but I'm going to have to say that it will be a very destructive war, but not to a point that it will extinguish human life on the earth, because no one can use nuclear weapons and not fuck themselves in the process.

1.Russia needs resources from all other nations, because when Siberia runs out, they have nothing. Can't use nuclear missiles.
2.China needs Russian territory and strategic resources to further it's economic progress. Can't use nuclear missiles.
3.USA needs territories and resources in Russia and the middle east. Can't use nuclear missiles.
4.Europe needs territories from everyone to expand itself and make more room for people. Can't use nuclear missiles.
5.Middle east nations can't use nuclear missiles, because they want to take over most of Europe, Asia and Africa and establish themselves as dominant.

Basically, the only way it could escalate to a global thermonuclear war was if some nation was stupid enough to launch a nuclear missile. Or a hydrogen one. In any case, if that happens, we're all fucked.

And it'll be fought like this:
Middle East and Russia Vs. All.

Middle East and Russia lose.

That and Russia attacked Georgia in the South Ossetian conflict. That's at least clear, because they were planning this for MONTHS and how they can blame Georgia for taking care of it's territory (In it's own way)is incomprehensible. Russia sucks.

 

[PhantomEnigma]

All wars whether large or small are fought for Power,Fear or Belief therefore debate is rendered meaningless. but on a lighter note....I feel sorry for the people that make all these super weapons...they spend years making these things that could destroy 1/10 of the worlds population in one go and no one ever bothers to use them. War is one of the worst parts of human nature and since we were cave men hitting each other with sticks the sticks have got a hell of a lot more dangerous. Guns can't be put down because others still have them...if everyone put them down then there would be no fear to fight against.

 

[ComradeRussell]

Russia does not suck, and let me tell you this. The people of China and Russia are much more up for a war than say America or Europe.

So think of popular support, the problems of invading russia, the sheer population and economic support that could be sought from a united Russia/China. Seriously the Shanghai Co-op is not to be underestimated.

 

[Blazing Angel]

A WW3 is possible because every contry is on edge and its only a matter of time before the *cough*DA's start pointing fingers and blaming others for there problem(or has that already happened?)

 

[slxiii]

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

"all the americans found themselves without fuel for their cars"

what news are you watching? the only people that lost access to fuel were the ones in the direct path of the storm, 4 million people or so. even still they lost power for a few DAYS, it wasnt a major crisis