ForumsWEPRThe World War III Theory

400 66991
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

World War I and II are futile to the might-be incoming war, the third World War.
You might laugh this time, but it will happen. Due to the recent events of the 21st century, it will happen. Some of the events are: 9/11, Sabah crisis, and N.K.'s declaration of war. So be prepared. I think it would be a nuclear war. But cyber warfare is more likely than the former.

[quote]"Wars will subside, but war can't be prevented" ---------- Anonymous

  • 400 Replies
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,408 posts
2,680

China won't fight.

But they could finance or supply the other side.

The US suck at interventions. Look at Vietnam. Communist. Afghanistan. Wrecked. Iraq. Unstable. [insert other country]. [insert seriously undesirable condition].

Korea, lasting armistice, SK prospering. Gulf War, epic win. Sometimes it works.

They invaded for the oil.

Sure, in the long run the plan was to have an ally there for some economic and political support. Instead it's a mess.

Iranians fight Saudis. Iranians attack Israel.

Nobody wants a two-front war. Either would be suicide, but they'd go for Israel first due to more recent tensions. Syria might join in, but they're already on shaky ground.

China and Russia mobilise to defend Syrian interests.

I think this'll happen long before Iran makes nukes. But I doubt they'll send actual troops unless other stuff happens. Weapons, vehicles, supplies, training. If Assad falls, then it might be in their best interests to support one of the rebel groups instead of sending troops because the US doesn't have a great record for faction-fighting.

Europe stays neutral.

Doubt it. The EU already condemned the violence against protesters.

America tries to get Japan to fight China. Japan fails horribly to dent the Chinese.
US desperately mobilises India. China mobilises Pakistan.

Japan and India want to stay as far from war as possible. They wouldn't do anything unless they were hit first with something more than a border shooting.

China calmly stops trade with America, crippling the US economy.

They're making more cash from the trade than we are. But they might limit certain items, like things containing precious metals.

A nuclear weapon is used. DEFCON one.

I think this would happen before most of the other events, possibly by NK.
Nerdsoft
offline
Nerdsoft
1,274 posts
680

[quote]China and Russia mobilise to defend Syrian interests.


I think this'll happen long before Iran makes nukes. But I doubt they'll send actual troops unless other stuff happens. Weapons, vehicles, supplies, training. If Assad falls, then it might be in their best interests to support one of the rebel groups instead of sending troops because the US doesn't have a great record for faction-fighting.[/quote]
You overestimate the aggressiveness of China. Trust me, they wouldn't fight. I'm pretty sure their entire army is just there for show, anyway. They don't need it.
Maverick4
offline
Maverick4
6,815 posts
1,030

The major problems with your scenario are globalization and Russia/China's inability to power project outside their immediate region.

The EU-NAFTA-China trade circle accounts for the majority of world trade and world GDP. Basic politics holds that the tripod is the least stable of shapes; one leg goes, errbody fails. China won't stop trade with the US because they'd have no market large enough to account for the drop in trade; the US would get the last laugh as the entire world economy hits the fan.

Having an army numbering in the tens of millions is great, until you have to send them any considerable distance for any legnth of time. You'll need planes and ships to carry the men, plus planes and ships for their equipment and supplies, plus the fuel to get everything to move, plus doing that for as long as the conflict endures... All that costs money, and a large army costs a lot of money. Iraq and Afghanistan have cost a few billion to the US, and that was a fairly minor conflict in terms of troop sizes and equipment expenditures. Then you have to defend and maintain supply lines for all those forces, which could potentially stretch thousands of miles. Plus theres the whole fact that China is pretty much a one trick pony; all their eggs are in the "land based military" basket, so to speak. They don't have a combat operational air craft carrier (and only recently acquired one for training) nor the ships or doctrine for a carrier group. In comparison, the US will be launching the first of 10 Ford class supercarriers, to eventually replace the Nimitz class.

I could go on and on, but to summarize: China and Russia are a threat to those nations geographically placed next to them. Three or four thousand miles away? Not so much.

gman144
offline
gman144
156 posts
2,940

There going to be a war eventually because there is no way that the U.S. is ever going to pay the 12 trillion dollars that they owe other countries.

Maverick4
offline
Maverick4
6,815 posts
1,030

We won't pay it. The US could quite easily inflate their dollar out over the next 50 years and pay it back in worthless paper, but theres laws for that. But what would anybody actually do, sanction us? xD

EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,408 posts
2,680

There going to be a war eventually because there is no way that the U.S. is ever going to pay the 12 trillion dollars that they owe other countries.

Closer to 17, but only 5 trillion is to other countries. A trillion of that is to China, but most of the rest is to much closer allies like Japan and the UK. Nothing worth a war over.

We won't pay it.

Most likely, but I'll be elsewhere if they jack up the taxes.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

Well, i jump a side a little, but doesnt 5 or even 6 diffrunt fleets, some with diffrunte allies and ideaoligy who sit right next to each other, suppirting diffrune sides is quite an explosive situation?

(The fleets - US, UK, Russia, Syria, Israel, France)

Nerdsoft
offline
Nerdsoft
1,274 posts
680

UK - eh. We're pretty much America's lapdog. France - separate fleets? We share an aircraft carrier. Syria - you have no idea what's happening there. They are in no position to fight anyone. The problem lies in Israel, Russia, America and China. The Mid East hates Israel. People in the west, who have never been to that region, think it's the source of all the fighting. It's not.
There are Sunnis, Shias, Sufis, Wahhabis... to name just a few. It's complicated. But they all hate Israel.

danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

Dude, i am from Israel. I know these.

The Syrian 'fleet', or more correctly, seashore rockets are still very very dangerouse. Dont underistimate them (i hope i wrote it correctly).

What i find funny is that the rebels claim Assad is a Israeli and Iranian agent, Assad say the rebels are Israel agents, Lebanon Sunnis claim Hizbhulla are Israel agents. And so on Hizbhulla on the Sunnis. A bomb on that Hizbhulla-Shias ruled street? Israel did it. One in a Sunnis ruled one? Israel again.

Its just so sad how every side just play on this shamefull easy card of hating Israel.

rychus
offline
rychus
1,318 posts
2,340

What is love?
Dont hurt me... don't hurt me...
No more... No more...
^
|
|
Countries should focus on loving each other than making war >

Kennethhartanto
offline
Kennethhartanto
248 posts
7,685

Its just so sad how every side just play on this shamefull easy card of hating Israel.


Personally, i like israel in the bible ( the chosen people, the country of god, etc), but i don't like the country that exist in the world right now. i think that US supported you guys out of religious purposes only, there are no other reasons to keep a blind eye to what YOUR country did when they just calmly broke the armistice between you and Palestine, and just blitz across the borders of palestine to take over lots of their territory. it just doesn't make sense when Iraq and today Iran was just accused of having WMD's and they are quickly given out an economic pressure or ( as in the case of Iraq) were quickly neutralized militarily, you guys did more than that and did an aggression to palestine territory and the US just turn a blind eye. you guys aren't even given an economic pressure by the UN and you're wondering why the arab countries hate you? of course they would hate you and wished for your country destruction.

that would explain their conflicting claims of your country interference. it's an easy card to hate israel because your country made it possible by your own aggressive policy. had Israel had'nt commit that act, the arabian peninsula's rejection of Israel would be smaller ( i know that on the start of the proclamation of the country, Israel WAS hated but they should settle it with treaties and deals with other countries, that's what the diplomatic embassy was used for). had your country had not basically cut Palestine into two, that would be one reason less to parade in the front of the UN embassy. even though i myself was a catholic, i'm ashamed because your country had not think about that possiblity.

and about the syrian fleet. they can't use it without central organization, right? in the current condition as it is now it's not likely that the SSM would be used against your country. if they are stupid enough to use it, then the Assad government would be guaranteed to fall ( i don't think they want that ) with your retaliatory capabilities. end words, don't underestimate YOUR country retaliatory capbilities
EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,408 posts
2,680

Personally, i like israel in the bible ( the chosen people, the country of god, etc)

You mean the slave-thrashing, genital-mutilating warmongers? I'm sure they were decent when they weren't slaughtering everyone (other than occasionally the virgin women) around them because their god loved/s the smell of burning flesh and blood.

seashore rockets are still very very dangerouse. Dont underistimate them

How good would the defense systems like Iron Dome do against them?

Its just so sad how every side just play on this shamefull easy card of hating Israel.

Well, it is the "odd one out" in the region, making it an easy political target. Everyone around it is similar enough that they may dislike each other, but they dislike Israel more. It's viewed like dropping North Korea into France or Canada.

in the current condition as it is now it's not likely that the SSM would be used against your country

Yep, Syria has too many internal problems to plan an external war. Maybe if they win and recover they could, but not any time soon.

don't underestimate YOUR country retaliatory capbilities

Indeed, but they must be justifiably retaliatory (no preemptive strikes) or the US leaves them on their own, so they'll have to take a decent beating first. Being tied up like that is militarily annoying.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

Kennethhartanto - Diplomatic realation? With who? ALL OUR NEIGHBORES/ARABS decleared war on us at 1948. Only after 1967 other states actualy started to look at us. Befor it USA didnt supported us.

And the "spliting the palsestinians to two" - have you seen the map? What is your idea, building a huge bridge or giving them 60% of our already small countery?

And even that 1967 war was a suprise attack, i belive that you think that when Poland attacked Russia in 1920+-, ot wasent a "blitz" and so on.

Another thing - last time i checked, we didnt fought the palestinians, but the Eygeptians, the Syrians and the Jordenians and Lebanon. Not the poor innocent weak palestinians. So please, cut the crap. You talk like we slaughter them daily. And they were supported by the USSR.

And for last - how religion as anything to do with it? Last time i checked most of USA is Protestans, and the seconed majority is Chatolic.


Plapatine - with all the respect, Iron dome is not a magik stick. It handle high angle rockets earth - earth, not any harming object. And the Syrians have the top technoligy in that, thanks to our russian friends.

EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,408 posts
2,680

with all the respect, Iron dome is not a magik stick.

Of course not, but it worked pretty darn good against the small stuff. Apparently there are systems out there for this sort of thing, but their effectiveness is questionable.
danielo
offline
danielo
1,776 posts
660

The things all these terrorist throw at us are toys compared to the russian artilary Syria is getting.
You know what the well known Quassam is made of?
1 steel pipe from a signpost, some iron balls/nails, fuel, technical knowlede. Thats it. You can make one at home. (Not that i will NSA, its just for say).
But thats not the case ( I thought on it after writing all of this, sorry...).
Iron dome > high arc projectiles.
Anti-ships are a diffrunte type. There are systems against it, but its a arm race.

And then there is the Russian top rank missles. Flying just Cm away from the sea in a massive speed, hiding from Radars and so on. Called Nahuye if i remmeber correctly. Google it.

Anywho, the Surian army &quotroffetionality" is fighting against a higher technolidgy

Showing 151-165 of 400