Is World War III a possibility in the near future?

Reply 40

ottom

8

It's been a 'possibility' since 1945.

Reply 41

Clip

19

Original post by ridwan12

"Middle Eastern Arabs: Dicks. Everyone hates them. They hate each other. Couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag."

I disagree with the likes of Iran, Saudi Arabia who basically own Pakistan's nukes and the rest of the UAE/Qatar they could make life difficult for the west without a shot fired.

If a WW3 occured the ME would be a major ally to both sides. With many regional powers e.g. Saudi and Iran being rivals.

It doesn't change anything. The only value they would have is for their geography. They can't fight. Look at the Iran-Iraq war - best part of a decade of two groups of utter knobs killing each others' civvies because they can't really do anything else.

Reply 42

Rakas21

21

Original post by ridwan12

"Middle Eastern Arabs: Dicks. Everyone hates them. They hate each other. Couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag."

I disagree with the likes of Iran, Saudi Arabia who basically own Pakistan's nukes and the rest of the UAE/Qatar they could make life difficult for the west without a shot fired.

If a WW3 occured the ME would be a major ally to both sides. With many regional powers e.g. Saudi and Iran being rivals.

Sunnis would tend to back the west and Shia's the east. That being said their militaries are small and with only 2 years warning (war is rarely sudden - there's a long build up of increasing threats) most of Europe could switch to domestic coal supplies.

Reply 43

Ggmu!

Original post by Clip

It doesn't change anything. The only value they would have is for their geography. They can't fight. Look at the Iran-Iraq war - best part of a decade of two groups of utter knobs killing each others' civvies because they can't really do anything else.

Russia and a combined western force couldn't decimate some mountain fighters over decades lol.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 44

Clip

19

Original post by Ggmu!

Russia and a combined western force couldn't decimate some mountain fighters over decades lol.

Posted from TSR Mobile

No one ever said the Afghans couldn't fight. They've been doing it for hundreds of years - you'd think they'd be good at it, at home, with no rules and in one of the most remote parts of the world.

Reply 45

Old_Simon

12

In a different form I think WW 3 has already started. It is going to be slow and on / off much more with local outbreaks of state / non state aggression all over. Many stable states and institutions have already broken down, there are ideological wars going on, religious fundamentalism and fights for scarce resources. Global anarchy is already upon us.

Reply 46

Ggmu!

Original post by Clip

No one ever said the Afghans couldn't fight. They've been doing it for hundreds of years - you'd think they'd be good at it, at home, with no rules and in one of the most remote parts of the world.

I'm poor with my groupings but I assume you don't consider Afghans Middle Eastern Arabs?

To be honest I'm not sure how 'Arab' is even defined anymore.

Lol unfortunately I think that's all they're good at.

Reply 47

Rakas21

21

Original post by Ggmu!

Russia and a combined western force couldn't decimate some mountain fighters over decades lol.

Posted from TSR Mobile

We won the war swiftly, its the occupation we lost. To be fair we could probably win if we were ruthless enough to ignore the rules of modern war.

Original post by Old_Simon

In a different form I think WW 3 has already started. It is going to be slow and on / off much more with local outbreaks of state / non state aggression all over. Many stable states and institutions have already broken down, there are ideological wars going on, religious fundamentalism and fights for scarce resources. Global anarchy is already upon us.

One theory I read was during the cold war there were very few truly neutral independent states which meant that they effectively did what they were told.

With the collapse of the USSR and China playing the friendly capitalist game with foreign policy states have become more independent and unpredictable.

Reply 48

navarre

20

If there was a world war, I'd reckon Russia and China would fight on the same side. They seem to be good allies with a common cause of disliking the West, poor human rights records and are both dictatorships. I'm not sure how India would swing; it's a fast growing power, and will soon be one of the largest economies in the world, and has 1.2 billion people. I think if there were to be a third world war, there would be three main sides as opposed to 2, 1984 style. There are just too many conflicting interests.

Reply 49

Clip

19

Original post by Ggmu!

I'm poor with my groupings but I assume you don't consider Afghans Middle Eastern Arabs?

To be honest I'm not sure how 'Arab' is even defined anymore.

Lol unfortunately I think that's all they're good at.

Afghans are not Arabs.

Reply 50

Ggmu!

Original post by Clip

Afghans are not Arabs.

Yeah I suppose that was pretty obvious lol.

Reply 51

Clip

19

Deep.

And utterly ridiculous.

Reply 52

vickidc18

15

No everyones rich & the nuclear deterrents make it very unlikely a full scale world war would happen at least in our life times theres nothing to gain, maybe in the future with water or food shortages, the population of earth is drastically rising & life expectancy too. So who knows?

Reply 53

Sanctimonious

3

WW3 has already started. The war will be purely economic and political, possibly even cyber. It'll only go into military action if rebel groups do something stupid and take out a plane full of Americans. Then it truly would kick off. However, until then everything will be to do with the economy and destabilising the opposition and trying to drain allies.

I believe Putin's next move will be to cut the energy supplies to Ukraine in the winter. This war will be more House of Cards than Call of Duty tbh.

Reply 54

Luketreherne

10

In short no

After the Americans dropped the bombs on hiroshima and nagashagi , people fully understand the full impact of nuclear weapons and let's face it any world war would be a nuclear one that and the interdepedent nature of modern economies.

Reply 55

thunder_chunky

19

Hopefully not, I have too many books to read.

Reply 56

merrill

Original post by navarre

If there was a world war, I'd reckon Russia and China would fight on the same side. They seem to be good allies with a common cause of disliking the West, poor human rights records and are both dictatorships. I'm not sure how India would swing; it's a fast growing power, and will soon be one of the largest economies in the world, and has 1.2 billion people. I think if there were to be a third world war, there would be three main sides as opposed to 2, 1984 style. There are just too many conflicting interests.

Hahaa no. China and Russia dislike each other, in fact China would more likely be on the side of the west if anything. (Even if they had the opportunity to be neutral)

Likewise, India would be neutral or on the side of the west. It's relationship with Russia is pretty much non-existant in terms of defence, they are part of the commonwealth of nations that subscribe to liberalism and democracy and see China as a regional threat both economically and militarily.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 57

N.W.O Resistance

Why would you fight and die in wars engineered by Zionists? why fight for a country occupied by people who are loyal to their own and not yours? It's your people who will be sent to die not theirs. They create wars and profit from them but their own do not fight in them.

Reply 58

merrill

Original post by N.W.O Resistance

Why would you fight and die in wars engineered by Zionists? why fight for a country occupied by people who are loyal to their own and not yours? It's your people who will be sent to die not theirs. They create wars and profit from them but their own do not fight in them.

Not sure if serious. :hmmm:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 59

Yi-Ge-Ningderen

Original post by Clip

Who exactly is going to be taking part in this World War?

Middle Eastern Arabs: Dicks. Everyone hates them. They hate each other. Couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.
Israel: Dicks. Everyone hates them. Can fight, but liable to run out of people before everyone else.
Middle Eastern Iranians: Dicks. Everyone hates them. Can't fight either. Need to use paramilitaries to do their fighting - hence, can't really go to war.
US/NATO: War is too expensive, and public has no appetite for casualties - chances of partaking in conventional war = very low. Most NATO armies (including the US) are a fraction of their Cold War size. The British Army could just about occupy a Ukranian Community Centre at the moment - although we'd do it really, really well.
Russia: Dicks. Everyone hates them. History showed that even when the full resources of the USSR were diverted into warfare, they couldn't sustain it for more than a couple of days.
China: Can't fight. Have never been able to fight. Don't need to fight. Why invade a country when you can buy it?
North Korea: Dicks. Everyone hates them. Could start a war, but have no capacity to do much more than start local trouble for a few months before they run out of everything.
India / Pakistan: Hate each other. Can't fight. No-one gives enough of a toss about them to jump in on their side.

So in conclusion, we are all dicks :biggrin:

Is World War III a possibility in the near future?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you