ForumsWEPRThe World War III Theory

400 66811
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
HahiHa
online
HahiHa
6,617 posts
20,745

Yup, more infos would be helpful if you want an answer.

Although I doubt that a new weapon system of any kind is enough to spark a world war, so I guess it's not so important anyway.

09philj
offline
09philj
2,880 posts
3,160

Do you think this will face action?


If it's handheld, maybe not. If it's a missile or drone, definitely.
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

If it's handheld, maybe not. If it's a missile or drone, definitely.


I now heard it's a railgun turret mounted on a destroyer that fires a 25 pound round at mach 7.
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

Although I doubt that a new weapon system of any kind is enough to spark a world war, so I guess it's not so important anyway.


Unless fired accidentally by a careless gunner to a foreign ship, civilian or not.
HahiHa
online
HahiHa
6,617 posts
20,745

Unless fired accidentally by a careless gunner to a foreign ship, civilian or not.

I don't see how this is relevant. Something similar to this could have happened before with any other weapon type. Nothing changed.

On other news, I thought the railguns they were building were not ready yet because every shot would still destroy the gun turret. Can you please provide an article or something?
FishPreferred
online
FishPreferred
2,818 posts
18,265

On other news, I thought the railguns they were building were not ready yet because every shot would still destroy the gun turret. Can you please provide an article or something?


They're a ways past that, I think, but they might need a lot of replacement parts. It's quite an interesting propulsion mechanism, although the coilgun is almost certainly superior.
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

the coilgun is almost certainly superior.


I find both of them good, but it depend on your preference.

Anyway, let's continue the talk about Russia and China.
China used military intimidation, while in Russia's case there was no fighting.
akshobhya
offline
akshobhya
4,301 posts
10,520

I think the Third World war might be totally
Nuclear/
Against the terrorists.

HahiHa
online
HahiHa
6,617 posts
20,745

Anyway, let's continue the talk about Russia and China.
China used military intimidation, while in Russia's case there was no fighting.

What talk about China and Russia? What events do you speak of exactly? Be more specific.

I think the Third World war might be totally
Nuclear/
Against the terrorists.

War against terrorism already happens. I am interested to see how you would explain "war against terrorism" to become a world war.

As for the nuclear war, I believe this will not happen. Currently no country is stupid enough to launch a nuclear rocket on another country. It might become possible once bigger players completely disarm their nuclear arsenal, which I am sure will not happen soon. Some countries might disarm parts of their arsenal, which is happening right now I think, but never to a degree to threaten the 'balance'. It is probably merely on a symbolic level.
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

What talk about China and Russia? What events do you speak of exactly? Be more specific


Its rather obvious. China wants to spearhead its claims in south china sea using military intimidation, while Russia occupied Ukraine but there was no fighting.
HahiHa
online
HahiHa
6,617 posts
20,745

Its rather obvious. China wants to spearhead its claims in south china sea using military intimidation, while Russia occupied Ukraine but there was no fighting.

Oh, those. Yes, nasty conflicts, I agree. But for now most involved (and uninvolved) parties try to find a diplomatic solution, or we would have seen rockets and drones fly over our head already. I think for now it is improbable that those events spark a world war. Unless you have an idea how those situations might develop to become such a threat?
roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

But for now most involved (and uninvolved) parties try to find a diplomatic solution


What if they didn't find it?
HahiHa
online
HahiHa
6,617 posts
20,745

It is likely that the European Union will declare even more "disciplinary measures" that will do nothing but buy some time to find where they can make some concessions and appease the situation.

I don't know what America would do, but I doubt they would openly attack if, say, Russia marched into Eastern Ukraine. Which it will not do soon because for now the pro-Russian fanatics in Ukraine are doing their job already.

Which is not to say that there is no probability for an escalation. But I feel like none of the parties actually want a world war, and even if/when things get worse, I hold that a world war is not the most likely outcome.

roydotor2000
offline
roydotor2000
344 posts
610

So basically it would be just like the Cold War, but with more advance weaponry and stuff. Right?

UnleashedUponMankind
online
UnleashedUponMankind
11,281 posts
21,760

The EU dont want to loose their face, the russians already have what they want (thats most likely the harbour for their fleet))., so they will find a solutuion... sooner or later, meanwhile some trash-talk from both sides, yadda, yadda, yadda...

America? Not that interested... all inflicted countries dont want a war, surely not america, surely no one from the EU, surely not russia.... and even a new cold war is nothing they rly want.

Showing 286-300 of 400