Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I was just watching this video called 'The Road to WW3' on Youtube and I must say as interesting as it was... also quite scary! The guy was talking about many things but the main point he brought up was that it's the rich bankers that control the american government and Obama and all other recent presidents are more like a 'puppet' and it's the bankers that do the things behind the scenes.

    He was also saying that Syria & Iran are the last independent oil sellers in the middle east and allies of Russia & China. And if America took over both of those countries it would mean that China would have to give into the american dollar? (or something along those lines I forget) Which would result in the commence of WW3.

    It got to me sort of thinking (and scared ) how much of this is true and how long we have. What are your thoughts? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Russia and China could not afford a war against NATO. Aside from being unwinnable due to NATO's nuclear weapons, NATO has much stronger conventional forces - especially with regard to naval and air power.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick100)
    Russia and China could not afford a war against NATO. Aside from being unwinnable due to NATO's nuclear weapons, NATO has much stronger conventional forces - especially with regard to naval and air power.
    I doubt that NATO countries will get involved if the war happens.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dilan97)
    I was just watching this video called 'The Road to WW3' on Youtube and I must say as interesting as it was... also quite scary! The guy was talking about many things but the main point he brought up was that it's the rich bankers that control the american government and Obama and all other recent presidents are more like a 'puppet' and it's the bankers that do the things behind the scenes.

    He was also saying that Syria & Iran are the last independent oil sellers in the middle east and allies of Russia & China. And if America took over both of those countries it would mean that China would have to give into the american dollar? (or something along those lines I forget) Which would result in the commence of WW3.

    It got to me sort of thinking (and scared ) how much of this is true and how long we have. What are your thoughts? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4

    Sounds like a load of ill-informed, idiotic, scaremongering bull****.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Giving into the American dollar for the financial benefits that become apparent behind it will lead to WW3? How?

    I won't even ask the reasoning behind the suggestion that there'd be any conceding to the USD in the first place.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mockery)
    Giving into the American dollar for the financial benefits that become apparent behind it will lead to WW3? How?

    I won't even ask the reasoning behind the suggestion that there'd be any conceding to the USD in the first place.
    It's all about major currency, which is the dollar, and that is not good for the growth of China apparently.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Londonburger)
    I doubt that NATO countries will get involved if the war happens.
    Given that NATO views an attack on one nation an attack on all they sort of have to.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The United States isn't the only one with plans for "world domination".

    China has grand plans too - however, the nature of the Chinese/the East Asian is one of intelligent patience. China are aware that their time will come, even if in 100 years.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by concubine)
    Sounds like a load of ill-informed, idiotic, scaremongering bull****.
    Sorry but that's exactly why I asked, I wasn't sure.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks for the replies everyone! It's interesting to see the world in a different light to what I normally know of.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Why would China want a war when they can just slowly take over the world one Yen at a time?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    The United States isn't the only one with plans for "world domination".

    China has grand plans too - however, the nature of the Chinese/the East Asian is one of intelligent patience. China are aware that their time will come, even if in 100 years.
    I don't think the world will exist in its conventional form in 100 years, so the chinese better hurry up.
    • Study Helper
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Some people love conspiracy and there are plenty of those if you care to look:

    Illuminati and New World Order
    Federal Reserve System
    Extra-Terrestrials
    Philadelphia Experiment
    9/11 is a U.S. government planned operation

    Nuclear weapons (it could be argued) have kept the world from descending into WWIII through the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. The fear of that concept must stay fresh in the minds of citizens and leaders because the outcome is pointless.

    However, they don't prevent regional wars and civil war.

    There is some real truth in the U.S.' fear of DPRK gaining nukes. Not from the fear they will attack the U.S. with ballistic missiles, but from the fear that DPRK with nukes could invade South Korea using conventional forces with the threat they would use nukes if the U.S. or Japan intervened.

    That threat is a real and present danger and why China is now roused. DPRK using a nuke in anger would ensure their own destruction. The whole world would be thrown into turmoil and potentially millions would lose their lives.

    That is something the world nor China will not allow.

    Then there is Iran - an unstable regime with al-Qaeda or sympathisers gaining access is the unthinkable risk. In the words of Spotswoode 'it would be 911 times 100'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick100)
    Russia and China could not afford a war against NATO. Aside from being unwinnable due to NATO's nuclear weapons, NATO has much stronger conventional forces - especially with regard to naval and air power.
    debateable, China and Russia have far more nuclear weapons than NATO [unless russias decreased significantly since i last checked] Natos nuclear defence is held up more or less by America... France/Britains is in essence littlemore than a second strike force to be used as a last resort and despite Russias current military they are swiftly rearming with some very nice new toys for instance many of their newer missile systems are at the very least at a par with American ones and some are better.
    Plus if this hypothetical warwere to occur at a slightly later stage i think it would be safe to say that Russia and China would have [at least combined] a military force more than capable of squelching the Americans especially with the new jets theyre developing and bringing into service..
    And finally on a more economic side both china and russia have the ability to squelch europe and america economically ... china can dump treasury bonds destroying the american financial system and russia can severe oil and gas ties to europe which would make it fairly hard to wage any kind of war...
    All hypothetical of course but it would be interesting to see how it would play out.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    debateable, China and Russia have far more nuclear weapons than NATO [unless russias decreased significantly since i last checked] Natos nuclear defence is held up more or less by America... France/Britains is in essence littlemore than a second strike force to be used as a last resort and despite Russias current military they are swiftly rearming with some very nice new toys for instance many of their newer missile systems are at the very least at a par with American ones and some are better.
    Plus if this hypothetical warwere to occur at a slightly later stage i think it would be safe to say that Russia and China would have [at least combined] a military force more than capable of squelching the Americans especially with the new jets theyre developing and bringing into service..
    And finally on a more economic side both china and russia have the ability to squelch europe and america economically ... china can dump treasury bonds destroying the american financial system and russia can severe oil and gas ties to europe which would make it fairly hard to wage any kind of war...
    All hypothetical of course but it would be interesting to see how it would play out.
    The US and Russia have similar numbers of nuclear weapons, and in any case NATO has enough nuclear weapons to destroy most of the Russian and Chinese populations. The British and French arsenals alone are adequate for this purpose.

    Russia and China's combined air force is smaller and less advanced than the American air force and their navies are puny in comparison.

    Economically Russia and China have no advantage either; NATO is over half of the world's economy and its current peacetime military budget is about half of Russia's GDP. And most of America's oil comes from the Americas. Europe would almost certainly be able to maintain access to African and Middle Eastern oil.

    There is no reason to believe that two relatively poor nations should be able to take on countries much wealthier and just as resource rich as them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick100)
    The US and Russia have similar numbers of nuclear weapons, and in any case NATO has enough nuclear weapons to destroy most of the Russian and Chinese populations. The British and French arsenals alone are adequate for this purpose.

    Russia and China's combined air force is smaller and less advanced than the American air force and their navies are puny in comparison.

    Economically Russia and China have no advantage either; NATO is over half of the world's economy and its current peacetime military budget is about half of Russia's GDP. And most of America's oil comes from the Americas. Europe would almost certainly be able to maintain access to African and Middle Eastern oil.

    There is no reason to believe that two relatively poor nations should be able to take on countries much wealthier and just as resource rich as them.
    The UK may well have enough missiles to destroy most of the main population centers in Russia but Russia has more than enough to completely remove the UK from the map in the most literal sense of the word. Russia has what around 8500 [as apposed to americas 7700] warheads mounted on submarines, trains, planes, fixed silos etc. a first strike by them would be devastating to all nato countries, a second strike by them wouldnt be much better.

    Size is hardly a factor in any possible scenario here... americas surface fleet may be larger than theres but one missile/torpedo and its gone simple... in the kind of war the only time where numbers matter is in deliverable nuclear weapons and seeing as Russia is rolling out brand squeaky new missiles as apposed to the ageing trident and minutement they do have an advantage there, plus their FOBS is pretty handy meaning they can strike anywhere any time...
    Their airforce may be smaller but its becoming more modern, both china and russias new stealth planes arew superior [if i recall correctly to the figures] than the f22 and theyre cheaper.

    I strongly disagree there, economically they are both titans especially china which is the largest manufactuer in the world... you blow them up the global system is going with them... China has the potential to economically ruin the US and the world quite easily... of course it would be a purely pyric victory for them seeing as theyd go down to but the point stands.
    Access to oil wasnt really the point i was driving at, if europe could still get oil and gas from the middle east and africa the price would go through the roof and without the worlds money lender behind them they would not be able to afford to import it regardless.

    Although if you actually think about it its purely academic in any nuclear war russia is gone so is america, china and europe all in one giant mushroom cloud... there would be no winners although russia would probablydo best oweing to the remoteness of much of it which would escape most of the nasties falling from the sky.

    China and Russia arent exactly poor nations? China and russia have some of thew wealthiest people in the world in the countries having a generally poor populaiton is a non point in this debate...
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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