Turn on thread page Beta

Social Change watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If social change contributed to the effects of the war, surely a war will contribute towards another social change, and this in turn will lead to a further war. Does this mean WW3 is imminent?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cyst)
    If social change contributed to the effects of the war, surely a war will contribute towards another social change, and this in turn will lead to a further war. Does this mean WW3 is imminent?
    No, because your 'logic' is stupid and flawed.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    No, because your 'logic' is stupid and flawed.
    I don't think the newbie meant it as logic. Though I suppose the social change as in the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany caused the Second World War, and going by her logic, if I understand correctly, then what shes trying to say is that, the social change occuring now, ie. the rise of the Americans, then this will contribute to a third world war.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mad Caddie)
    I don't think the newbie meant it as logic. Though I suppose the social change as in the rise of Hitler in Nazi Germany caused the Second World War, and going by her logic, if I understand correctly, then what shes trying to say is that, the social change occuring now, ie. the rise of the Americans, then this will contribute to a third world war.
    No, because American superiority is unquestionable, just look at Iraq. In the first two World Wars, both sides were more-or-less evenly matched. This time, however, America could easily annihalate every other country in the world.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    No, because American superiority is unquestionable, just look at Iraq. In the first two World Wars, both sides were more-or-less evenly matched. This time, however, America could easily annihalate every other country in the world.
    Argueable yes. But if you think about all those countries which allegedly have WMD and given that the majority of them have severed links with the US, or at least are not on good terms with the US, then it is quite possible that if these countries group together, and form an effective army/armies, then they could surely match the US power. Thus causing war.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mad Caddie)
    Argueable yes. But if you think about all those countries which allegedly have WMD and given that the majority of them have severed links with the US, or at least are not on good terms with the US, then it is quite possible that if these countries group together, and form an effective army/armies, then they could surely match the US power. Thus causing war.
    A fair point, but I still doubt that an alliance of every other superpower would be able to match America. I mean, what is there to offer?

    Russia - they have enough problems, what with Chechnya, Putin, general incompetence, etc.

    Britain - not with 'Supertony' trying to save the world, I'm afraid.

    EU - too much redtape ("well, we want a 9 month investigation before we go to war, and after that we'll have another investigation into the reliability of the first").

    The Middle-East - all of those Arabic countries are in a shambles, those
    that aren't sycophantic have already been disarmed by USA.

    India / Pakistan - uh... no.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    Britain - not with 'Supertony' trying to save the world, I'm afraid.
    Indeed, he's pretty useless when he has his heart attacks.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    A fair point, but I still doubt that an alliance of every other superpower would be able to match America. I mean, what is there to offer?

    Russia - they have enough problems, what with Chechnya, Putin, general incompetence, etc.

    Britain - not with 'Supertony' trying to save the world, I'm afraid.

    EU - too much redtape ("well, we want a 9 month investigation before we go to war, and after that we'll have another investigation into the reliability of the first").

    The Middle-East - all of those Arabic countries are in a shambles, those
    that aren't sycophantic have already been disarmed by USA.

    India / Pakistan - uh... no.
    Suppose, but see, Im thinking along the lines of the Arabs. If they form some sort of Alliance, then they for sure have the money and technology to overcome the US?

    Though its pretty certain that this will never happen as Middle Eastern polotics will get the better of them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mad Caddie)
    Suppose, but see, Im thinking along the lines of the Arabs. If they form some sort of Alliance, then they for sure have the money and technology to overcome the US?

    Though its pretty certain that this will never happen as Middle Eastern polotics will get the better of them.
    Firstly, they all hate each other, so an alliance is out of the question. Secondly, all of the independant leaders who opposed the US have been dethroned and replaced, anyway. Thirdly, what 'modern' technology they have is ancient, usually stolen from an abandoned Russian military base.
 
 
 
Poll
Should Banksy be put in prison?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.