Wwiii Watch

Alasdair
Badges: 14
#61
Report 12 years ago
#61
(Original post by tctc)
I admit its not goin to be like the tension before ww1 and 2.. but there is a possibility.. we are not the ones who decide. I dont think the americans are that stupid to bomb the countries you stated but you never know... I dont think it will be WW as in european.. and think it will be more centred around asia and africa.
It's not so much a geographical question as it is one of the nature of the war. IF you're talking geographical, the War on Terror is already a World War.

However, a World War in the term that is implied by World War III (ie being somehow analogous to WWII or WWI), requires that there be an all out effort between two equally matched sides. And an equally matched side to challenge the US doesn't exist in Africa, or apart from China, in Asia. And the US won't go to war with China, nor the China with the US - they both rely on each others economies too much...
reply
tctc
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#62
Report 12 years ago
#62
(Original post by alasdair_R)
It's not so much a geographical question as it is one of the nature of the war. IF you're talking geographical, the War on Terror is already a World War.

However, a World War in the term that is implied by World War III (ie being somehow analogous to WWII or WWI), requires that there be an all out effort between two equally matched sides. And an equally matched side to challenge the US doesn't exist in Africa, or apart from China, in Asia. And the US won't go to war with China, nor the China with the US - they both rely on each others economies too much...
The sides dont have to be equal for it to be a world war.. a world war is when several countries take on several more countries... the axis powers and the allies etc. Not just two countries slogging it out. No i mean the most likely composition to sides in WW3 would be middle asian countries v america, (canada and UK will prob follow bush) and it will be a similar sitiuation to the second world war but instead of poland its isreal... The war on terror isnt really a war.
0
reply
tctc
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#63
Report 12 years ago
#63
ditto...
0
reply
Byronic
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#64
Report 12 years ago
#64
(Original post by tctc)
and not only the gift of foresight, but the gift to read my mind.. amazing.
You are mentally delayed.

I admit its not goin to be like the tension before ww1 and 2.. but there is a possibility.. we are not the ones who decide. I dont think the americans are that stupid to bomb the countries you stated but you never know... I dont think it will be WW as in european.. and think it will be more centred around asia and africa.
Delayed.
0
reply
tctc
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#65
Report 12 years ago
#65
Im delayed how so? Ive never been called that before usually its the opposite.
Explain your logicall reasoning, if you have ever.
I dont mean africa as in the sterotypical african countries... i mean Egypt etc.
0
reply
dsch
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#66
Report 12 years ago
#66
Nationalism is waning. There isn't going to be any war like China versus USA (let's get ready to rrrrumble!) because most nations with capitalist ideologies are becoming cemented together by shares and the like; nobody is going to support military action that might end up with the destruction of the company they have millions invested in. Wars of the present and future are based on ideology and the supporters that subscribe to each ideology. The 'war on terror' isn't really UK and USA vs. Afghanistan and Iraq, it is capitalism and liberalism vs. Islam. This is the mould of things to come. World war doesn't mean every nation is involved in bloodshed, many could take Swiss mentality and silently profit while nobody is paying attention. Who knows what will happen with African nations? Will they even be populated by the time WW3 might come about? That is quite an assumption to make with the disease, political ineptitude and the growing frontiers of Islam.
0
reply
cottonmouth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#67
Report 12 years ago
#67
(Original post by alasdair_R)
On the rise from 'minute' to 'very slightly less minute'. To be quite honest, I think most of the electorate see through the BNP. Hence why, for example, Respect have more seats in Parliament than the BNP and the Greens came a lot closer to getting a seat last election.

And even what little support the BNP has is based on a giant example of *** hoc ergo propter hoc.
They go into deprived areas and say 'You're deprived' 'There's immigration' hence 'You're deprived because of immigration'. But, even with the help of the insular mentality verging on xenophobia the English have had going on for centuries and the connivance of large sectors of Fleet Street, they're still going nowhere fast...
True dat
0
reply
cottonmouth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#68
Report 12 years ago
#68
(Original post by tctc)
Thats only cause voters for respect all are the same type of anti-british people who live in there own segregations.
and for **** sakes all you ***** are complete **** wits there is more to the BNP than immagration policies, read there manifesto before you try and say what they do
**** ***** whore **** **** **** **** slut ****** yes no when ouch.


Which sounds more intelligent? Shall i set up a poll?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (234)
39.39%
No - but I will (40)
6.73%
No - I don't want to (43)
7.24%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (277)
46.63%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed