World War 3

[Tornado]

And what if Voldemort were to rise to power again? How would the muggle world respond?

I get, like, European gun laws. Guns are too scary to privately possess and all that.





But it seems like everyone would have been saved an awful lot of trouble if someone just shot him in the face.

 

[ClydeYellow]

Let's say Chile, Pakistan, and New Guinea discover these acts and form an alliance against Somalia, and possibly start an invasion.

How would Chile, Pakistan and New Guinea come together to form a military alliance? How would they invade Somalia? Only the armed forces of a few countries in the world have the capability to project force everywhere in the world. And an alliance between countries that distant would also be a logistical nightmare. Chile, Pakistan and New Guinea would probably limit themselves to petition the UN to please ask Somalia to stop their shenanigans.

The scenario you painted could bring forth a new age of regional conflicts but, again, armed confrontation is expensive, and most governments would rather answer to cyberattacks with cyberattacks - as a consequence, the war of the future could entirely take place over the internet, and the nukes of the future may well be DDoS attacks against revenue-generating services and massive thefts of personal data and corporate and industrial secrets.

The plausible deniability that is inherent to any action operated on the internet is an added bonus, too.

 

[Dotini]

General "Buck" Turgidson: Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0003295/quotes

____________________________________________________

Russia is bragging about its nuclear superiority, and overflying many NATO countries, including the UK, with military jets.
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-nuclear-arms-keep-military-edge-over-104446272.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/01/raf-russian-bomber-uk-airspace

The United States has only a partial, qualified no-first-use policy, stating that they will not use nuclear weapons against states that do not possess nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-emptive_nuclear_strike

Now that Ukraine border war, economic sanctions and tanking the price of oil has failed to penetrate the dense Russian mind, the time has come to take the logical next step, preparation for a massive nuclear first strike against Russia. Surely they must not be allowed to strike first, so it must be us.

Chernobyl and Fukushima have proved that radiation poses little to no danger, so the risks are negligible while the potential gains in Russian dismemberment and seizure of resources are immense. We must do the honorable and morally correct thing, and ignore the false doctrine of consequentialism.

Forget ISIS, forget those troublesome radical extremist Middle Eastern problems. In fact, forget everything, and get ready for the greatest fire the north has ever seen!


.

 

[Rage Racer]

Now that Ukraine border war, economic sanctions and tanking the price of oil has failed to penetrate the dense Russian mind, the time has come to take the logical next step, preparation for a massive nuclear first strike against Russia. Surely they must not be allowed to strike first, so it must be us.

Chernobyl and Fukushima have proved that radiation poses little to no danger, so the risks are negligible while the potential gains in Russian dismemberment and seizure of resources are immense. We must do the honorable and morally correct thing, and ignore the false doctrine of consequentialism.

Nawp. Like I've said before, one must be a clinical idiot to provoke a responsive nuclear strike or try checking "will they have the balls to push the red button?". The risks are unacceptable. This will be explained in Part 8 of the Rumyantsev's 'Russia vs. NATO' article series.

Daym, so long time since I promised to translate them and post here. Okay, Part 1 is coming soon...

 

[Dotini]

Nawp. Like I've said before, one must be a clinical idiot to provoke a responsive nuclear strike or try checking "will they have the balls to push the red button?". The risks are unacceptable. This will be explained in Part 8 of the Rumyantsev's 'Russia vs. NATO' article series.

Daym, so long time since I promised to translate them and post here. Okay, Part 1 is coming soon...

It's a joke, son.

 

[Lizard]

Nawp. Like I've said before, one must be a clinical idiot to provoke a responsive nuclear strike or try checking "will they have the balls to push the red button?". The risks are unacceptable.

I just wrote an essay that I used North Korea as an example in. According to one point of view NK won by threatening nuclear war. The Clinton admin gave aid in return for shutting the reactors down. The most notable part of this aid was 500,000 tonnes of oil.

 

[Dotini]

Though there are already lots of World War 3 related topics here in GTP. I would like to sum them up to what those acts, incidents, and wars "might" lead in to. World War 3.

With all this happening around the world at the present. What are the odds of we, heading towards World War 3? Any signs? What will cause it? Where and when will it start? Who are the players? Is it really possible? Will we see it in our lifetime? Are we ready? Is it Nuclear? Who will will use nukes first? Can we do something about it? Share your knowledge, predictions and thoughts about it.

A detailed peek into a potential WW3, happening now. Although personally, I think the situation is far from hopeless.

Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons on Turkey
The Turkish military shot down the Russian warplane on Tuesday, triggering a furious response from the Kremlin and escalating the already hot tensions between NATO and Russia. With Putin warning NATO of “serious consequences,” analysts believe Moscow is willing to unleash a nuclear war over the incident.

Despite the fact that Turkey is backed by NATO’s 5th Article, the chances that Putin will start a nuclear war over the incident with the Russian warplane are very “likely,” according to Pavel Felgengauer, Russia’s most respected military analyst, as reported by ValueWalk on Wednesday.

Felgengauer said Turkey wants to protect a zone in northern Syria controlled by the Turkmens, who are Turkish allies, while the downing of the Russian fighter jet must prompt Putin to either accept the zone or “start a war with Turkey,” which means starting an all-out war with NATO. And the only way Russia could win a war against NATO is by going nuclear, Felgengauer added.

“It is most likely that it will be war,” said Felgenhauer, as reported by Mirror. “In other words, more fights will follow when Russian planes attack Turkish aircraft in order to protect our [Russia’s] bombers. It is possible that there will be fights between the Russian and Turkish navies at sea.”
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/12/russia-picks-nuclear-allies-imminent-war-nato/

 

[W3H5]

Besides Russia and Turkey there is the growing resentment towards middle eastern immigrants swelling into Europe, the segregation of communities down ethnic and religios lines and the fact that multiculturalism is failing.

Political correctness among democratic governments is alienating the natives in many places and if there is a war in Europe I'm guessing it's going to be interracial or theocracy Vs democracy fought in the streets of our citys by it's own inhabitence.

I firmly believe that we've already made the first irreversible steps into ww3 but most people are just to ignorant or in denial to see it.

 

[Lizard]

Besides Russia and Turkey there is the growing resentment towards middle eastern immigrants swelling into Europe, the segregation of communities down ethnic and religios lines and the fact that multiculturalism is failing.

Political correctness among democratic governments is alienating the natives in many places and if there is a war in Europe I'm guessing it's going to be interracial or theocracy Vs democracy fought in the streets of our citys by it's own inhabitence.

I firmly believe that we've already made the first irreversible steps into ww3 but most people are just to ignorant or in denial to see it.

So are you saying WW3 is going to be between non state forces and states? Interesting view on that and plausible. I will get back to you once I have read up a bit.

Although it would mean it would be a restricted war at least at the start. Not this WW2 idea of any means needed.

 

[Com Fox]

No doubt a War is getting closer and closer but I doubt this is WW3. It is more of a European War than a World War as countries outside Europe aren't as effected as bad.

 

[W3H5]

No doubt a War is getting closer and closer but I doubt this is WW3. It is more of a European War than a World War as countries outside Europe aren't as effected as bad.

Yes, when I talk WW3 I do mean mostly Europe, but the middle east is already at war. Europe and the Middle East qualifies a large portion of the Earth's population.

 

[W3H5]

No doubt a War is getting closer and closer but I doubt this is WW3. It is more of a European War than a World War as countries outside Europe aren't as effected as bad.

Yes, when I talk WW3 I do mean mostly Europe, but the middle east is already at war. Europe and the Middle East qualifies a large portion of the Earth's population.

 

[Com Fox]

Yes, when I talk WW3 I do mean mostly Europe, but the middle east is already at war. Europe and the Middle East qualifies a large portion of the Earth's population.

but I wouldn't call it a World War unless the America and Asia-Pacific countries get really involved like they were in WW2.

 

[W3H5]

but I wouldn't call it a World War unless the America and Asia-Pacific countries get really involved like they were in WW2.

'Merica is involved in bombing raids in Asia and the Middle East. Asia has plenty of places that could potentially erupt into conflict but would take a lot of nudging.

 

[Com Fox]

'Merica is involved in bombing raids in Asia and the Middle East. Asia has plenty of places that could potentially erupt into conflict but would take a lot of nudging.

I wouldn't call it a major involvement though, compared to the efforts in WW2 it is rather small to be considered WW3.

 

[Akmuq]

Call it what you want, it would still be a massive war.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Call it what you want, it would still be a massive war.

It's not as simple as calling what one wants; would it be a massive war? Yes. A World War? No.

 

[Akmuq]

It's not as simple as calling what one wants; would it be a massive war? Yes. A World War? No.

I'm not sure that's important.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm not sure that's important.

My apologies, I thought this was the World War 3 thread

 

[Akmuq]

Thread must be renamed to the "Next Big War Thread" to avoid confusion.👍

 

[W3H5]

Whether a world war a simply a bloody big one, it would most likely affect us all in some way, unless one lives in a very neutral Bhuddist nation that is very much out of the way of any major harm...say... Thailand.

Oh, crap. I'll be in Europe for most of next year.

 

[Michael88]

I firmly believe that we've already made the first irreversible steps into ww3 but most people are just to ignorant or in denial to see it.

It's like WW1, I've seen many documentaries about it and it was very obvious that people believed the rising tensions between nations would eventually decrease and they'd eventually find a peaceful solution. Everybody in Europe seemed certain that the nations are already too civilized for a war so they didn't think a conflict was possible until they started drafting and the first bombs were falling.

Feels kind of similar now.

 

[W3H5]

Feels kind of similar now.

Very much so. Except now the bombs aren't dropping, they're being carried around by people.

It might sound mad but I'm preparing for it. Other than a gun I have everything I need; a list of contingency plans, food stockpiles (which I'll have to rebuild when I reach London), war mentality and a whole bunch of other things ready for this event. I can see it happening right now in our media and in or streets, but everyone seems so occupied with fighting out in the Middle East that they aren't aware of the potential threat so close to home.

 

[Dotini]

Fury: Vladimir Zhirinovsky left, urged Putin to nuke Istanbul

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democratic party and Russian presidential candidate in 2012, urged Putin to destroy the Turkish city of Istanbul, killing over nine million people. Zhirinovsky added that Turkey was stupid to shoot down the Russian warplane.

“A nuclear attack can destroy Istanbul very easily. Just one nuclear bomb in the Istanbul Strait will wash the city away,” Zhirinovsky told Moscow Speaking Radio.

“It would be such a terrible flood, the water would rise to between 10m and 15m and the city would [flood],” he continued and added, “And then there are nine million lives.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/putin-told-nuke-istanbul-revenge-6915546

 

[Joel]

Holy smokes the fearmongering in this thread.

Refugees and Pee Cee Ess Jay Double Yous aren't going to cause a third world war.

 

[Akira AC]

I think this is a world war III already, not because it has international media attention, but because almost all states worldwide and the most powerful countries in the world are almost actively engaged in this conflict (except for China which is on their way to protect its infrastructure in Africa).

War between states became a relic once the UN was created, everything was transferred to proxy wars in the former colonies, this in itself was just arming a non official groups or organizations to seize power (from Argentina to Zimbabwe). Now it has become a war between those who have the weapons and resources to seize control or create a new state, a state with international presence, even if the west decides not to qualify IS as state it's structure is based on a state one.

I don't think nukes will be used, but a social worldwide reform is likely to come to or gestate after IS demonstrates that it has the potential to create terror everywhere, once it happens we will understand why it exists and why the foundations of it (CIA, PMCs and FSB state manipulation tactics) should be abolish.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I think this is a world war III already, not because it has international media attention, but because almost all states worldwide and the most powerful countries in the world are almost actively engaged in this conflict (except for China which is on their way to protect its infrastructure in Africa).

Almost actively engaged. Actively engaged, I'd say. Except for 90% of Africa, and China. And India. So there's half the world and more not engaged.

The moment when we were all conscripted must have escaped my attention - have those large, powerful countries sent all their men to battle or, in reality, is it their regular armed forces who are engaged? I think it's the second. WWI and WWII weren't massive because of the number of countries involved but because of the number of civilians rounded up under the gun and sent to fight.

 

[Akira AC]

The moment when we were all conscripted must have escaped my attention - have those large, powerful countries sent all their men to battle or, in reality, is it their regular armed forces who are engaged? I think it's the second. WWI and WWII weren't massive because of the number of countries involved but because of the number of civilians rounded up under the gun and sent to fight.

Here is my point though, Terrorism is based on the idea of asymmetrical warfare, what if regular armed forces consider all opposing non-conscript individuals as the opposing force.

A full scale war between established states will never happen again, mostly because the nasty side effect of a conflict is the economic impact after the fact, perfect example of this was the US invasions of Iraq, established infrastructure was affected or damage to limit the enemy's economic capacity, this also resulted in the US itself being affected by trying to "colonize" the economic and institutional assets present in the country.

It's a world war because the scope of this conflict is global, not just regional, the more time passes, the more varied and different the locations in which attacks take place, more societies will be affected by these terrorist attacks and condemnation of these attacks (and in some cases the support of them) will create more sides and more bipolarity with the situation.

States are taking sides towards this issue, because the foundation of them (their populace) is being affected, effectively forcing all non-conscript individuals to be an active force driving the conflict.

And one must not forget that war has become a business, such economy is based on conflict, the US did not gave those weapons to the FSA for charity alone, the US is also expects close ties to these organizations once they stay on power to gain some kind of economic advantage, which is a recurring theme with several sides in the conflict, so the war is really everywhere even if it's not apparent.

 

[Rich S]

Wars these days seem like proxy wars. USA lost the major proxy wars like Korea, Nam, Iraq as of now. Cant remember if bin laden fought back the soviets or not but another proxy war gone wrong. A new mini proxy battle seems to be liberals and conservatives fighting to minipulate 3rd world laws and policies.

If two crazies happen to take over two world powers at the same time maybe just maybe it could go nuclear. It does take two to tango tho, and if we nuked a country china and russia i imagine would do nothing in response thats nuclear, vice versa.

I like the principle of sealing the US border, were not a commune or a homeless shelter were a country. I also think the syrians belong in red cross camps outside syria but outside USA. The euros cna bring em in at their own risk, i think pacific islands with red cross support and us military support is where they should go. Paying for their safety is ok i guess. But i dont want to live with them, their not american for goodness sakes.

 

[unit-one]

Fury: Vladimir Zhirinovsky left, urged Putin to nuke Istanbul

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democratic party and Russian presidential candidate in 2012, urged Putin to destroy the Turkish city of Istanbul, killing over nine million people. Zhirinovsky added that Turkey was stupid to shoot down the Russian warplane.

“A nuclear attack can destroy Istanbul very easily. Just one nuclear bomb in the Istanbul Strait will wash the city away,” Zhirinovsky told Moscow Speaking Radio.

“It would be such a terrible flood, the water would rise to between 10m and 15m and the city would [flood],” he continued and added, “And then there are nine million lives.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/putin-told-nuke-istanbul-revenge-6915546

Don't worry about this guy. He's practically always like this.