So in school were having a debate about How World War 3 will start. Dont ask how the debate started because I can't remember.
I just want to see different peoples views on this matter.
[B][U]My Views :[/U][/B]
I think that World War 3 (if it does happen) will start somewhere in the Middle east, namely between Israel and Iran. The reason I think this is because in the past 5 - 6 years, relations between these two countries have been getting tenser and tenser. Both nations have been preparing for any type of intrusion either by building defensive weapons or building offensive weapons. Last year a sudden spark may have occurred between the two nations and could have started a war. So what stops this spark from happening in the future. One might say the control of the United Nations will stop any spark happening all together, but it should be pointed out that America currently has the power to start war with any country as seen through many instances like the Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan wars. Seeing as America is a very close ally to Israel, it could assist the Israelis to attack against Iran as well as get permission from powerful world groups such as the UN.
Another reason I think World War 3 would start in the Middle East is because of the amount of conflict taking place not only between countries, like Israel and Lebanon, but within countries. In the last 2 years, we have witnessed around 4 uprisings and riots in the Middle East, the most significant being Syria. A world wide conflict would have happened last summer had Iran and Lebanon not convinced the Syrian government to give up their Chemical Weapons. What would stop such a crisis from happening again in another country ?
Therefore I conclude that World War 3 will start (if it ever does happen) in the Middle East region of the world.
A war between 2 or 3 countries isn't a world war. Or are you implying that other countries will get sucked into it and it'll spread?
It won't.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is not debating - read the sticky" - Megafan))[/highlight]
I mean it will spread through alliances.
So Israel will attack Iran. Then China and maybe Russia support Irans Defence while the US and NATO help Israel Attack
[QUOTE=Tarado;44323154]I mean it will spread through alliances.
So Israel will attack Iran. Then China and maybe Russia support Irans Defence while the US and NATO help Israel Attack[/QUOTE]
Iran doesn't have nukes. Notice how the only countries that ever get directly attacked the ones without nuclear weapons?
Save India and Pakistan of course, but even they only have border disputes, not a fullout invasion, and their disputes have never escalated.
[IMG]http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/52987c1d6bb3f77d2dd21772-1200-924/kim-jong-un-23.jpg[/IMG]
This should explain how.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is not debating - read the sticky" - Megafan))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Tarado;44323154]I mean it will spread through alliances.
So Israel will attack Iran. Then China and maybe Russia support Irans Defence while the US and NATO help Israel Attack[/QUOTE]
Israel will never attack Iran, if it did, the US would never support it. If the US and NATO were involved, Russia and China would never rush to Iran's aid.
[QUOTE=ChickenLegGuy;44323361][IMG]Best Korea[/IMG]
This should explain how.[/QUOTE]
North Korea has no real allies and no one feels like invading them.
[quote="Bernhardi—Germany and the next War. Ch. VII."]Our next war will be fought for the highest interests of our country and of mankind. This will invest it with importance in the world’s history. “World power or downfall” will be our rallying cry.[/quote]
When a superpower's morals or ideals are at risk and it calls its allies to arms in the aid of preserving that superpower's culture, that is when World War III will start.
World War III won't start in the Middle East simply because of M.A.D. Neither ex-Soviet countries nor NATO would allow World War III to start over a conflict like that. Especially because Israel is not in NATO.
Probably when the entire world sinks into economic turmoil. War is good for the economy
I don't see it happening anytime soon but it would probably be a nuclear war between the two future world superpowers India and China, and eventually Europe + USA would get involved.
Oh hey another one of these threads.
The only thing I foresee is economic sanctions. A second cold war, if anything extreme.
The strength of international law is debatable at this point, as I'd like to believe it could deter escalation, yet the United Nations has been appearing very weak over the last couple of years in dealing with crises. It is very unlikely that NATO would respond to any crisis with a direct declaration of war, and it is even less likely that a third world war will begin within the next 30 years (I say 30 because I don't know what the political atmosphere of the world will be like by the 2040s). At the same time, lots can happen or change in thirty years...
[QUOTE='Poesidan [GAG];44324847']Oh hey another one of these threads.
The only thing I foresee is economic sanctions. A second cold war, if anything extreme.
The strength of international law is debatable at this point, as I'd like to believe it could deter escalation, yet the United Nations has been appearing very weak over the last couple of years in dealing with crises. It is very unlikely that NATO would respond to any crisis with a direct declaration of war, and it is even less likely that a third world war will begin within the next 30 years (I say 30 because I don't know what the political atmosphere of the world will be like by the 2040s). At the same time, lots can happen or change in thirty years...[/QUOTE]
Yeah I'm leaning towards the likelihood of a second Cold War as well.
I would say World War III would start with Russia and America but it would also drag England and possibly a fair bit of Europe with it.
To my knowledge the state that England is in is simply - If America and Russia go to war England would either have to help America (Which would also remove the main export of Oil to England which is Russia), fight against the Americans with Russia or simply take no part. The problem is that because of the EU if one country go's to war, the others will need to help.
Simply put Obama and Putin very well could easily start another large war, even worse thanks to nuclear weapons and the treaties from after World War I and II.
I'm quite sure it will never start. Most nuclear weapons are rusting away on top secret depots somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Russia and USA are too well-brained to ever start a nuclear war.
A conventional war might happen though, tensions are getting higher every day.
I hope it won't happen because there will be a lot of bombs, missiles and nuclear warheads. Nothing like the "good ol' times" I'm sure.
WW3 is inevitable.
It will most likely start with a series or a single false-flag event of some sort.
[QUOTE=Katla;44332162]WW3 is inevitable.
It will most likely start with a series or a single false-flag event of some sort.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't go as far as to say it's inevitable.
In the current age, what it all comes down to is money. A world war would be insanely pricey that I can't think of any current superpower bothering to start one.
The current superpowers seems to have bonded with trades and export, and they all gain from it.
If a world war were to start, I'd guess it'd be in the form of 2 future hegemons fighting.
[QUOTE=booster;44332989]In the current age, what it all comes down to is money.
If a world war were to start, I'd guess it'd be in the form of 2 future hegemons fighting.[/QUOTE]
Well, the current economic paradigm is losing much of its steam and is coming to a slow end. So it might be plausible that a world war will come with it.
Prehaps the clearly distinct western and eastern blocks can be considered as being these two hegemons? US, Israel & friends [B]vs[/B] russia, china & friends.
Russia and China definitely aren't friends.
[QUOTE=Slarav;44328386]I'm quite sure it will never start. Most nuclear weapons are rusting away on top secret depots somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Russia and USA are too well-brained to ever start a nuclear war.
A conventional war might happen though, tensions are getting higher every day.[/QUOTE]
WWIII doesn't have to be nuclear. A conventional war, if big enough, could still be called WWIII.
[editline]23rd March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=booster;44332989]
If a world war were to start, I'd guess it'd be in the form of 2 future hegemons fighting.[/QUOTE]
So like NATO and some organization formed by Eastern countries? Because that seems pretty possible today.
I'd wager it'd be between the EU, NATO, Israel, their puppets (Mexico, etc.), and Russia, China (possibly, since it relies heavily on the West for the economy), North Korea, Middle Eastern terrorist cells and whatever M.E. governments are sufficiently corrupted by their influence to join a war.
The Third world war will be taking place on a world gifted and cursed by the concept of globalization, and we will suffer war on every continent because of it. Nuclear weapons or not, it will end poorly for us all.
Russia's actions in Crimea might very well be the first sparks to start a small fire which will grow into a large inferno later.
[QUOTE=maximizer39v2;44333790]WWIII doesn't have to be nuclear. A conventional war, if big enough, could still be called WWIII.
[editline]23rd March 2014[/editline]
So like NATO and some organization formed by Eastern countries? Because that seems pretty possible today.[/QUOTE]
"A conventional war might happen though, tensions are getting higher every day."
Tensions caused by Russia, North Korea, China etc....
The world superpower is going away from America and to China, and people dont like it.
Change is happening, and war will follow.
No it isn't. China is on the verge of economic collapse.
The world is far too intertwined to support a world war.
I have serious doubts that WW3 could happen any time soon. It's a common opinion that war can kickstart economy but a war on a large scale, world scale can have more issues than advantages. It's due globalization and how every big country's economy depends to some degree on the rest of the world. For example Russia depends on Europe and if they launched some major invasion they would lost a lot of income.
It all comes down to money and at this point it would be extreme gamble to go to big war.
Albert Pike already has the guide. For those who say this letter is fake, do more research. This is cray cray.
[url]http://www.rense.com/general80/pike.htm[/url]
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is not debating - read the sticky" - Megafan))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Marden;44338651]I have serious doubts that WW3 could happen any time soon. It's a common opinion that war can kickstart economy but a war on a large scale, world scale can have more issues than advantages. It's due globalization and how every big country's economy depends to some degree on the rest of the world. For example Russia depends on Europe and if they launched some major invasion they would lost a lot of income.
It all comes down to money and at this point it would be extreme gamble to go to big war.[/QUOTE]
Money is made in war, in my opinion. Jobs are created to support the demand for food, weapons and ammo. The United States benefited greatly because of the war and became one of two super powers because of it.
If a huge war broke out, the United States would quickly get out of its recession.
And if we look past the most silly view on wartime economics people have, the economy would collapse as war went on. Assuming they didn't collapse outright through lack of trade.
i could honestly see china siding with america. china and russia don't really have the strongest of favors, and china likes israel because they sell them US weapons designs, specs, and models. china's economy is so heavily reliant on the west, that might be enough for it to side for economic reasons.
[QUOTE=Masterofstars;44337935]No it isn't. China is on the verge of economic collapse.
The world is far too intertwined to support a world war.[/QUOTE]
Have to agree with this. China needs our money and we need China's labor.
I still think it will be very interesting to see what happens when Africa becomes industrialized and steals the labor from China. The lowest bidder always wins, and can China really support even lower wages when many Africans would be willing to work for less? This is just armchair speculation, but considering our factory jobs went to China, I can easily see China's going to Africa.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.