WWIII

[Penner]

So, I am going back and moving some old threads/topics of mine over here so here is one that I think deserves it's own thread:

I know that this is more about predicting the future, than predicting an alternative historical line but one has to ask:

What does your version of WWIII would look like? Meaning, what would start your predictions for a WWIII, what the sides will be, and how would it end/lead up too?

[katarn]

Right now, my limited knowledge estimates China oversteps in SCS, wars with local states and brings in US. Only becomes WWIII if Russia or Middle East does something major at the same time.

[Smitty-48]

Right now, my limited knowledge estimates China oversteps in SCS, wars with local states and brings in US. Only becomes WWIII if Russia or Middle East does something major at the same time.

Like Britain in WWI, it becomes a world war the moment the United States enters the theatre war, it's the global hegemon entering a theatre war, which makes a war a world war, because the global hegemon has its assets deployed worldwide, so the war is then going to be fought worldwide as a result, America is a seapower, thus the war is fought on the high seas, but that's not limited to the China Seas, China would attack you worldwide, at the maritime choke points and approaches to, Panama to the Suez, Djibouti to Panama, and in the Arctic as well, all the while both combatants fighting for the high ground in space above.

The arm of decision at this juncture, is going to be the nuclear submarine and associated tactical and strategic weapons, which opens up the whole world, as being within the operating radius.

[SilverEagle]

Right now, my limited knowledge estimates China oversteps in SCS, wars with local states and brings in US. Only becomes WWIII if Russia or Middle East does something major at the same time.

Like Britain in WWI, it becomes a world war the moment the United States enters the theatre war, it's the global hegemon entering a theatre war, which makes a war a world war, because the global hegemon has its assets deployed worldwide, so the war is then going to be fought worldwide as a result, America is a seapower, thus the war is fought on the high seas, but that's not limited to the China Seas, China would attack you worldwide, at the maritime choke points and approaches to, Panama to the Suez, Djibouti to Panama, and in the Arctic as well, all the while both combatants fighting for the high ground in space above.

The arm of decision at this juncture, is going to be the nuclear submarine and associated tactical and strategic weapons, which opens up the whole world, as being within the operating radius.

So then we're already in WWIII?

[Cid]

WWIII gets dodgy as a thought experiment right off the bat. We've had nuclear weapons for the better part of a century now and they've only been used once.

And we have chemical alternatives that make WWI gas look like a picnic.

We're not in WWIII, WWIII doesn't happen until the global hegemon has an enemy they're willing to go WWIII on. Hasn't happened and we've engaged in conflicts since WWII.

I just think its very odd to imagine a conventional war that merits the designation of a world war where civilization doesn't end and we provide our own answer to the Fermi paradox.

[skankhunt42]

I just think its very odd to imagine a conventional war that merits the designation of a world war where civilization doesn't end and we provide our own answer to the Fermi paradox.

100% agree with this statement. I would add that I still have a hard time believing it happens over the hegemon. I feel like religion and the backwards part of the world (Middle East) that utilizes it is the most likely way a Nuclear Weapon gets used. Which to me is the most likely way that genie is back out of the bottle with would cue the Fermi Paradox answer.

[Cid]

I generally hear "we should turn them into glass" from children who don't have a concept of people outside their community, adults who think like children and adults who want the people that think like children to vote for them. I don't generally hear it from the military today (MacArthur and LeMay not withstanding from recent history.) It makes me think we would be unlikely to use nukes, especially when we can instead using something like a MOAB.

[skankhunt42]

I generally hear "we should turn them into glass" from children who don't have a concept of people outside their community, adults who think like children and adults who want the people that think like children to vote for them. I don't generally hear it from the military today (MacArthur and LeMay not withstanding from recent history.) It makes me think we would be unlikely to use nukes, especially when we can instead using something like a MOAB.

I was actually referring to them destroying themselves which would destroy the earth. IE, Pakistan & India fight it out with nukes, or Israel v Iran, etc.

[Cid]

India isn't going to use them, I can see Pakistan. I don't actually see Iran. Iran is a weird duck. They talk a good crazy talk, but I don't see them nuking Isreal, with all of the muslim holy sites that exist there as well, and winning much more than their swift annihilation.

So like one country potentially could trigger it, but it seems unlikely.

[skankhunt42]

India isn't going to use them, I can see Pakistan. I don't actually see Iran. Iran is a weird duck. They talk a good crazy talk, but I don't see them nuking Isreal, with all of the muslim holy sites that exist there as well, and winning much more than their swift annihilation.

So like one country potentially could trigger it, but it seems unlikely.

I hope so, I'd love to live my life without a nuclear war going on anywhere. Would be nice!