Well, if starting ww3 is their aim, then yes they are, as they have evidently failed.
I'd like to point out that failure is not indicative of a lack of intelligence, more of a lack of means.
Radicals dont affiliate with states, since all states are far too moderate for their liking, so how do you propose that a terrorist attack perpetrated by a small group could ever turn into a full blown world war?
The bold part of your comment is more evidence for my first statement. Secondly, the greatest likelihood is that a radical group will gain control of a state and use that as a catalyst for major military conflict. I would estimate that the expansionist and elitist attitudes of many of the western nations will continue to offend others until a point is reached that extremists of one sort or another gain enough popular support to be brought into power. Either that, or a military coup which gains then control of a state are really their only options.
If there's gonna be WW3 then I would win because my awesomeness will overcome a lot of people. LOL
Well lets just hope that there is NO WW3 because it would totally suck. Peoples will die, politician will be afraid of their own shadow and Hitler will rise from the grave to be a member on ArmorGames. Ultimate awesomeness for the Hitler part though. I think no one will actually win. The will be loss in the winning country. People will be sad and angry and overrun the ruler.
The bold part of your comment is more evidence for my first statement.
Not really. If they were intelligent, they would realise the only way to start a large scale war would be to infiltrate the bodies of state power in the middle east, rather than operate on the outside of them, meanwhile causing merely superficial samage to the west.
I would estimate that the expansionist and elitist attitudes of many of the western nations will continue to offend others until a point is reached that extremists of one sort or another gain enough popular support to be brought into power.
Thats pretty much what happened in Iran and Afghanistan, to a certain extent, and yet these states have been decidedly anti western for decades without getting anywhere near to causing a world war.
Basically, my opinion is that the cynics who say a world war will break out in the middle east are just as mistaken as the naive people who think we can all get along fine. It takes a hell of a lot to start a world war, and a few disunited nutters isnt really going to be much of a catalyst in the long term.
In a nuclear war, we all lose. In a non nuclear war, China has a lot of people and they will need at least a 500 million people to make food. Their armies would be hungry so i don't know if china could attack anyone at a far distance.
What is there to win? Nuclear or non-nuclear there is nothing to fight over that's worth destroying Earth Maybe resources and religion will play a big part in the next war if there is one.. I can see USA sparking the war somehow
Considering most people on this website probably don't know the stability of the military of other countries...this topic will not be accurate in terms of responses. But I believe we will probably all lose...nobody wins in World War.
the big competitors are china, russia, and the us. they're all huge superpowers with a lot of allies. every other country is pretty much just waiting to get wiped off the face of the earth.
