World War III: will there ever be one?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=81256
Printed Date: November 29 2024 at 17:35
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: World War III: will there ever be one?
Posted By: The T
Subject: World War III: will there ever be one?
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 01:31
|
Simple question. Just out of curiosity. I really think it's highly unlikely, at least not one centered on US-Europe as in the past two... Opinions? ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 01:41
|
Ever is a long time. I think it's very unlikely in the foreseeable future, though. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 01:57
Not anytime soon. Wars are fought between nations and thanks to the European Union and global capitalism there are not many left. 
|
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:01
|
If there is, it won't be called WWIII. It'd be too cliche at this point.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:05
What? That is not even remotely true. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Vompatti wrote:Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:11
|
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:12
|
Are there even wars anymore? Everything is just 'conflicts' now.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm
|
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:26
It's just a matter of time (but I hope it will be a long time)  .------------- 
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 02:50
|
I think its highly unlikely we will ever see a WWIII.......besides nobody has any money to fight such a war. -------------   
|
Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 05:55
|
Count on it. In our lifetime. ------------- "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken |
Posted By: yanch
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 06:25
| Probably yes. Unfortunately, as long as ideology is so divisive around the world and there is the insistence that one ideology is "better" than others, the potential for a massive war is possible. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 06:31
I have trouble believing that you honestly believe all ideas are equal. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 06:42
|
I don't think he does (another idea). Maybe he believes that the expectations and consequent actions engendered by the attainment of differing goals have shaped the types of confrontation we encounter today. The camoflague of the term 'ideas' will never disguise or democratise the underlying reason for conflict: morality. (and I suspect you know this) ------------- 
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 06:51
|
The idea of a global conflict happening nowadays seems rather dubious. It would need an open opposition between nations or alliances of nations able to find a reason to fight against each other. In fact, I have some "scenarios" about it, but I'm not sure everyone would see my theories about the separation of European Union, a war between Russia and a European-Mediterranean union including Turkey, a Pan-Arabic democratical federation, an undercover economical war between China and India becoming an open conflict... as very serious. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 07:57
|
Some say the cold war was WW III so the question is will #4 happen? Perhaps we already have that in the so called global war on terrorism. So who needs a world war when that one is neverending? ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 08:10
|
Probably not, although if there were, it wont be the kind of conflict we feared throughout the cold war, and it will never be referred to by our leaders as a 'world war'
Such terms are slowly being erased from the 'news speak' dictionary, along with 'economic depression' As H.G Wells wrote in his book "The New World Order" the only way to avoid another world war is to bring the world under a system of global governance, with one world bank, one language, one religion, one army. He wrote "many will oppose the new world order, and will die protesting it" If there was a shred of truth in Wells' vision of the future, the one world army (NATO?) will actually be in a constant state of war, with countries who don't want to sign up to global governance. Peace through the simple stamping out of all those who oppose you. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 08:40
Yeah, but removing morality entirely wouldn't exactly solve the problem...
That would be silly since there was very little actual conflict. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 08:42
|
^ I didn't say I was one of those who do. In terms of the actual destruction accomplished, certainly not. But then it depends on what you include in the cold war, what happened in Cambodia for instance was communism vs. capitalism to a certain extent. It had genocide. What more can you want? The pursuit and escalation of nukeular (nuclear to most of us) weapons hasn't benefited any one other than those who made money off of producing them. The waste products from all of that will be a danger to humanity for a long time to come even if you dismantle all the weapons. Perhaps you over-estimate the likelihood of the world ever really being made an orderly place? On a lighter note: ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 10:48
|
There will surely be a WW III, most likely centered on religion rather than political ideology. The more interesting question is whether there will be anything left for a WW IV. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 10:53
Terrible things happening in Cambodia does not imply "world war". The pursuit and escalation of nukeular (nuclear to most of us) weapons hasn't benefited any one other than those
Nuclear weapons are overrated.
Where did I say that I thought that would ever happen? ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 14:54
|
We're already experiencing it.
-------------   
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 16:26
The Pepsi/Coca-Cola war doesn't count. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 16:36
|
You only need a mad messianic and charismatic leader. Chavez was dangerous, luckily his own contradictions make him a clown more than a leader. If it starts probably will be in Middle East. Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 16:39
I think he is referring to Microsoft vs Apple. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 16:49
No, you don't need a "mad messianic and charismatic leader": see World War I. You just need nations and imperialisms. And the war won't start in Middle East... Or only if the USA want it. And I hardly see Obama as a "hawk". |
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 17:17
| One could only hope and pray that the third major whorled cornflak't e-laminates us awl from this more tall coy-ole. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 20:50
Imperialism will always exist, but a mad charismatic leader could pull the trigger as in WWII (I don't know how we survived Bush, maybe because he lost his charisma too soon), not Obama, but in USA you have the power and some really mad men, just imagine a Fred Phelps in the Government....That's a scary thought.. Iván
-------------
|
Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: September 17 2011 at 21:29
|
I find another "World War" like the two previous ones to be unlikely but, as the world topples into Great Depression II, more widespread military conflicts between nations seems likely. The United States' unnecissary military and monetary presence in so many nations understandably ratchets up tensions but engaging in a traditional war with the US for almost any country would be suicidal. -------------  Time always wins. |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 01:07
|
I wasn't referring to anything specific. We're experiencing a new kind of war though but we're just not told about it. -------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 05:28
I think this is the most accurate description so far. Firstly lets look at a definition of world war: From Wikipedia (I know, not gospel!): "A world war is a war affecting the majority of the world's most powerful and populous nations. World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in multiple theaters" If we take this literally, you could argue that world war is already underway. The 'war on terror' has seen attacks in the UK, US, EU, Bali, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Israel/Gaza and possibly soon Syria and Iran too. The Russians and the Chinese are already implicated by the technical and economic assistance to Irans nuclear program, believed by the west to be a weapons program, and of course both countries reticence to support the west at the UN, when dealing with the likes of Iran. As I said earlier though, I don't think we'll see the kind of conflicts that defined the last two world wars. This new type of war, will entail the collapsing of currencies and the subsequent ram raiding and impoverishment of nations by the IMF, who buy up public infrastructure of countries to whom they have issued loans, and channel the wealth up the pyramid to the global elites. All the while, the Muslim extremist, and the "right wing nut job" will be waiting in the wings, to be wheeled out every time the people need reminding why they must give up their liberties. The new type of war is not nation against nation. It's a battle of perspectives, and the two sides are not defined by the left wing/right wing paradigm. The war is between the people of the world and their ruling masters. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 07:19
I think it's about time we declared victory on the war on drugs and send everyone home.  The Islamic and Christian extremists are certainly itching for a war. I say we lock them all in a cage somewhere and let them settle it and keep us out of it. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: yanch
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 08:04
Hi Henry, I don't believe all ideas are equal, just that at this point there are "ideas" followed strongly enough to prevent total national and global cooperation. There are still enough groups with just enough power to cause enough conflict to keep things unstable. As long as that exists, the possibility of WW lll will exist. It's an over-simplification, but I believe it is true. Just my opinion.
|
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 20:49
This. Pretty much. War doesn't necessarily have to involve physical conflict and ergo no deaths. Obviously death is happening though in certain places. In Greece people died. People died or were badly injured in London recently. Then of course you have Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and many other middle eastern countries. You then get situations like Norway. Yes that was an isolated incident but the current economic climate will potentially mean even more problems arising. Lots of mini civil wars. Plus the constant fighting between the west and the middle east. Then as Andy said, an economic war too. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 21:01
|
Well agreed it would most likely not be a Europe/US centered one because, well that's ridiculous in today's world. Given how integrated the world is #3 may truly be a world war..maybe no "center" at all. I could see that as well since traditional wars havn't been fought since..Korea? Since there is only yes and no I'll say no, but really there's of course a chance but I highly doubt it. 2 theories exist about what will happen in the post cold war world: Fukuyama & Huntington and I'm much more inclined to believe the first. Of course theory means nothing since according to another, a war with the US and China is inevitable but I don't buy that one either. end poli sci rambling |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: September 18 2011 at 21:31
|
There have been world wars far before the ones during the 20th century, so I won't doubt that there would be some war that could be dubbed as a third ww. Some of the most important before the 20th century: Mongol invasions; Timur conquests/Timurid invasions; 30 year war. -------------   
|
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 05:28
i hope the world is spared for Timothy Mcveigh and Anders Behring Breivik copycats  -------------  
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 05:37
Sincerely hope I've misread this, but did you mean to type: I hope the world is spared from Timothy McVeigh and Anders Behring Breivik copycats?  -------------
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 05:43
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 05:49
|
I sure hope so - otherwise what to do with all that C-4 that I got for Christmas? Seriously though, to think that we´re going to be peaceful on a global scale for the rest of our existence seems a bit far fetched. In a little while we´re going to be 9 billion people... ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 06:02
Indeed, although China doesn't own quite as large a chunk of US debt as is sometimes thought. They have also been in the process of dumping some of it already. They have also invested some of it in hard assets, like land and property in Africa. The Chinese are already drilling for mineral resources in Africa and western Australia. This is one of the reasons, in my opinion, why NATO is working to establish a permenant military presence in North Africa. Lets remember though, that the Chinese economy, while it's GDP is growing by around 9% + a year, is not immune to global economic downturn. If the west slips into a deep depression, and can't afford to buy China's crap products, then their exports will fall sharply, and in a short space of time. If the crisis in the Eurozone precedes another major banking crisis, then that could mean a collapse of our monetary system; worldwide. In short no customers = no vendors. A complete re-setting of the global monetary system will be required; a kind of 'year zero' approach. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 06:12
|
By the way, it's a big lie that nothing is made in the USA anymore. I went to the refrigerator to confirm that my bottle of sriracha chili sauce was made here.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 08:59
Well yeah, that's why I don't buy it amongst other reasons as well, but I wont go into it now because I'm kinda tired and also dont feel like poli sci nerding this place up!But also depends on your semantics and definitions. I've heard the 7 years war described as a "world war" which I could understand, and there was of course the Cold War which some also call one, so maybe we've had 4! If you believe the "War on Terror" is one as well then we're in our 5th. But that's silly since it's hardly a global effort, nor on a global scale really. We can't call everything world wars now people  |
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 09:10
-------------
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 11:30
 ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: colorofmoney91
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 11:37
|
Ever? Yes, definitely. But not very soon. I expect that I'll probably be an old man by the time China or extra-terrestrials decide to take over. ------------- http://hanashukketsu.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - Hanashukketsu |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 11:42
|
UK Business secretary Vince Cable likens economic crisis to war..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14967061" rel="nofollow - BBC article ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 12:28
|
I hope not. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: johnobvious
Date Posted: September 19 2011 at 12:43
|
Does most of the Muslim world hate Israel? Are there an exceedingly large number of megalomaniac leaders in this world? Is oil still the main source of energy on the planet? Are there 100's of millions of religious zealots roaming around, looking to impose their BS on anyone and everyone? As long as those 4 things remain true, I see it as inevitable. ------------- Biggles was in rehab last Saturday |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:16
|
I think a "world war" would likely come years from now from an unexpected place, like Mexico; say the Mexican government seizes all the assets of their drug gangs and becomes one of the wealthiest countries in the Western Hem, eventually massing well-armed troops at the US border waiting to take back the Southwest and most of the Coast. Now you have a Pan-American conflict, Canada and Britain get involved, the new United Tribes of Mesopotamia join South America, Russia and China send troops to both sides .. IT'LL BE A MESS, PEOPLE Or maybe not. |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:35
I can't imagine that happening. Seems even more unlikely than Russia or China launching a surprise attack on the west, and that is also improbable, imo. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:50
|
i think World War III is gonna be fought mostly on the internett, as it is the bloggers, the govourments, file sharing sites, Wikileaks and other hacker leagues, so the war is gonna be fought against govourments and highly skilled hackers (and it is actualy started, it is just not scene by the naked eye) the other side is the economy and where youre interests are, and how you chose your friends (as it always is),
-------------
|
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:56
|
World War III? Was there ever really a WW II? Some historians see the majority of conflict remaining in the world a direct result of resource allocation at Versailles. Essentially, WW I never ended. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">  https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:57
So....World War XP or maybe iWar? ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 04:58
-------------
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 07:26
|
World War 8? Rushed out before everyone got a chance to really try out World War 7. World War Lite, tastes great, less killing. World War Zero, tastes just like the original world war only no casualties. World War 1999 in which the moon gets blasted out of orbit? World War, the Next Generation... ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 11:07
No. The US "war on drugs" and the idiocy of the Mexican government of not having the balls to just legalize by itself will actually create the opposite: a narco-state, where corruption is at all levels, when the drug cartels have people in every single position in government, and where there's only the illusion of rule of law. While a few people get extremely rich of course. -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 11:43
Versailles was just an excuse (As the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was an excuse for WWI), the Central Powers were formed by totally different countries (except Germany) and even the Italians were part of the allies since 1915. The imperialist Japanese Empire was enemy of Germany in Micronesia. The reasons for WWII were mainly expansionist and a common racist environment, even if Versailles would had never happened, the anti-Semite feeling of part of Germany and Italy would had caused WWII. IMO of course Iván -------------
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 21 2011 at 13:45
No, Versailles wasn't "just an excuse": for the German right-wing, it was the main motive for revenge against the Allies, especially France which really wanted to keep Germany down after the first World War. The Versailles treaty made Germany lost all its colonies, the Danzig corridor and other parts of Poland, the region of Schleswig-Holstein (near Denmark)... and pay an enormous retribution to France. If Germany would have only been asked to retrocede Alsace-Lorraine to France, the German population would have not felt this treaty as a "diktat": it would have been a small defeat, just like another war. The harsh conditions of the treaty were the very core of the German nationalist diatribes of the 20's to 30's. The success of Hitler was due to his social-economical demagogical propaganda, his anti-communism AND his nationalist propaganda. Let's say his anti-semitism and his racism were the "cream on the cake" for many people, but not the main cause of WWII. By the way, anti-semitism wasn't very developed in Italy which, in the contrary, had always seen the Jewish community with positive views since the "Black Death": in Venice (Venezia), the leaders of the ghetto managed to keep the plague out of the town and were awarded for their jobs. Some of the most important leaders of the Fascist Party were jewish, including Mussolini's son-in-law! A last word about Italy: in the first World War, this country could have fought with the two empires (Germany and Austria-Hungary), since the three nations were originaly in league as the Triplice. If the Allies hadn't talked about the Terre Irredente, it's not sure Italy would have chosen this side: there was also a rivalry with France about Tunisia, and the situation in Ethiopia/Somalia was tense between UK and Italy. In the 30's, UK and France had a pro-Italian diplomacy, until they refused to endorse the expansionist appetites of Mussolini (who, then, turned towards Hitler, in a move first motivated by opportunism). Would the French and English governments allowed Italy to invade Albany and Ethiopia, maybe the Fascists legions would have fought against the Nazis! |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: September 21 2011 at 16:43
WWII was definitely more global, with the Pacific being a huge theatre Actually, ever since I was old enough to realize that the cold war was a non-issue (even if you threw first your nuke missile, you automatically lost, since the other side would do it too almost instantly, therefore creating two losers and no winners), I came to realize that the next war would be the muslim world against the occidental-christian world ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: September 21 2011 at 17:07
Oh, Good Lord, again... It's not even sure that one side or the other would be united! In the Muslim world, there are two countries which are not from Arabic culture and could fight each other for the domination of the Middle East: Turkey and Iran. - Turkey is often seen by Arabic countries as the Ottoman empire - the former "oppressor" (and the former military alliance with Israël wasn't a good promotion for Turkey as leader of the muslim world). It would have hard times to lead an united "Muslim world". - Iran? Since it's suspected to develop nuclear weapons, the other muslim countries could chose to ally with the Occidental-Christian to be protected. Anyway, the two countries want to the local powers - and this may lead them to create a muslim federation turned against them. Thinking about it, France is beginning to have a good reputation in Tunisia and Lybia, not to mention the links with Lebanon, Algeria and Morocco. Maybe not all christian nations would be at bad terms with the muslim world... And for this "Occidental-Christian" world... I'm not even sure the European Union would stand united before the next decade! |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 23 2011 at 07:39
Depends how you define united. If the politicians go to the bother of standing shoulder to shoulder in photo shoots, outside the EU Parliament declaring 'we are united' then there is good cause to suspect they are not. The EU in its current form is doomed, imo, but it's not the end of the world. In fact, it's a very positive opportunity - once the dust of economic ruin has settled - countries can start to claw back some control over their own laws and their own soveriegn currencies. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: September 23 2011 at 13:58
| I think we will in the next century. It will be a war over resources, not ideologies, though. |