Debate World War III

Here is a topic that I've posted on another message board and it was generally received with accusations that I want another World War, but, just to make sure there's no confusion, I DO NOT WANT ANOTHER WORLD WAR.

Now, for a long time I've thought that everything was building up towards a global conflict, and I've wondered what the nature of this war will be. For a long while, the U.N. has shown itself to not be a very affective governing body, but recent unilateral attack by the U.S. on Iraq shows the inability of the U.N. to deal with super powers.

In fact, the U.N. has come under constant criticism for being incapable of enforcing their own regulations. George W. Bush has even compared the U.N. to the League of Nations. The U.N. was established as a Cold War body and it would appear they are not well suited at fighting the growing threat of international terrorism.

The basic questions to be discussed in this topic will be as follows:

What will be the trigger for World War III?

Who will be on which sides or no sides?

What will be the outcome of the war?

How deadly of an effect will the war bring?

As for anyone saying that the U.S. is too powerful to be challenged by any nation, you're right, but World War II especially, showed that alliances make power and not any one nation. So, look at the sites below. These links show alliances between nations and terrorists, but also mention possible triggers and the problems.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107401,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107509,00.html

http://fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108371,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,103358,00.html

I myself believe that France will be a neutral state in another global conflict. I think the most likely triggers for WWIII are the reckless actions of the U.S. I may support the war in Iraq itself, but I do not defend the manner it was done in.

 

World War 3 just isn't near us at this point in time. Let's stop and review.

Middle Eastern Fundamentalist Muslim States - The only effective attacks they're able to muster are terrorist attacks. They have neither the infrastructure nor the technology nor the manpower to fight a prolonged, "proper" war. From there, you'd get insurgencies, but they'd slowly die off, but not before costing a lot.

North Korea - A lot of saber rattling comes out of NK but I'm just not convinced they'd be able to last long, and I think they know it. They'd be swarmed, not just by the US, but by China, South Korea and possibly Russia. In addition, with their crumbling economy, they'll eventually collapse in on themselves.

China - Probably just another Cold War, if tensions somehow escalated to such an unfriendly point. Both the US/EU and the Chinese are just too massive, and too important to the each others economies, to realisticly even consider fighting.

 

Hmmm, on the question of who will spark WWIII... well, I don't have an answer to that. But possible conflicts I can see in the future I reckon are:

1. America will take on a country who are not playing their rules and will indirectly involve other world superpowers, and that could beign with North Korea, which would involve China.

2. Regrettably, I see a civil war between China and Taiwan as the most likely conflict. (although some may argue about the 'civil' bit)

3. I don't think America are done with the Middle East yet, they'll probably move on to Iran and/or Syria next.


- Shen

 

it will be hard to say who will start wwIII in my opinion it might be North korea or another nation. It all depends who dosen't like us we may start one or we may not only the furture will tell

 

First off.. Lets get something Straight.. If a another world war broke out.. it would be the last war.. Because it would end up being an all out nuclear war.. Why Because in todays times.. No country has the power to take over anyone..


Frankly the Way i See it.. War is becoming the thing of the past.. its become to costly and counter productive... There are just to many countries on the same playing level..

 

I don't think that another War World will occur. No nation would be willing to risk lossing so much like after War World II. The recent major manmade problems have been terroristic. These will not last forever as they are not organized. They could organize say if a nation (like North Korea) were to support them. This would then be too risky as the rest of the world would come down on it like a ton of bricks. If a large enough group of terrorists organizes the world might unite a agaisnt them.

 

thank you ciel!
talking as an alien from the outer space, so for now..the guy's with power will keep on the override untill a great change, and for the whole world to open their eyes to see a light.

i agree with you ciel, we have to do our best to stop this.

 

War Is Hell

Hah, While I agree with Ciel above I have a bit more pessimistic approach to life. I feel that talking things over, especially matters like WWIII informs us. We'll share information and ideas and gain a greater scope of how people think and feel about these kinds of matters. As a result, when it's our turn to raise our voces and speak we'll have an answer and an opinion that is informed and intelligent. We can make smarter decisions and hopefully work together more sucessfully to AVOID allowing any such apocalyptic visions to come to pass.

You said you yourself, Miz Ciel "...so even if a War started I probably still wouldn't know the truth about any of those answers". That's why we should talk about it and become smarter so we can make better choices down the road.

Shen and Nephilim_X both bring up what I believe will be the catalyst for such a conflict.

China.

I'm in the military so war is something I pay close attention to (I dun wanna go somewheres and get killed!! ;~; ) and in my pseudo-professional opinion I gotta agree China is a major power and will be a major player in any such conflicts.

North Korea really doesn't have much going for them. Even if they DO have nuclear capabilities they wont fire a single missile. The U.S. Navy has missile submarines (Boomers, or Trident Subs) just sitting around in the Pacific waiting for them to pull something stupid like that, and N. Korea knows it. The one missile they fire at us will be replied with nuclear hell storm that'll destroy thier nation. That fear of retalliation is called MAD- Mutually Assured Destruction and is what kept the US and the USSR from going out into an all out nuclear war the past fifty years. It's official term is deterrance.

It's a scary thought, but it's what's kept the badguys from raining down bad joojoo upon us thus far. Neph said it best before- N. Korea is really simply rattling thier saber.

The middle east in so far is too disorganized to start a third World war. They can stir up real trouble, dont get me wrong, but pulling the entire world into conflict? Not likely.

If there is to be another World War it'll most likely be with China, and Taiwan is going to be the big catalyst. China has passed doctrine 'allowing' themselves to invade Taiwan and return it to thier republic when/if they want to. You can read about it here .

If that happens I can garantee the US will try to intervine and before we know it the US and China will be at each other's throats.

Unlike KaMeKaZi's pessimism I don't believe that war will escalate into a nuclear conflict. Both sides have too much to loose. China knows that the moment she fires her birds our Boomers will promptly dump thier payloads upon Chinese soil. Both the US and China will cease to exist, and no one wins. Deterrance will most likely keep BOTH the US and China from doing something THAT incredibly stupid.

Ah, but what will we do if China does invade Taiwan? If that were to happen SHOULD the US take action and try to come to Taiwan's aid and risk a third WW or should we simply hold our own ground and let that little island go?

 

If china doesa invade taiwan and we don't do anything about it china and maybe a few other countires may think that we don't care about small island and they might try and to take over other small countires this is my opinon and is what I think. If we don't help them a few people here not everone in the us may get mad that the current president didn't do nothing to help a nation trying to break away from china's rule

 

Not just the people of the US, but the people of the world would become angry with us. We were gung ho to stop Iraq and save those guys... and all thier oil. If we left Taiwan to the wolves the world might look at us and say "Greedy Americans, you'll only help those who are financially benificial to your own ends." and our own image declines.

Morally it would be the right thing to do, but at the cost of instigating a major war?

 

I agree with you there but but here is one way to look at this a war to do something good no matter what the intentions are and how good it may seemed to be it may or may not led up to something bad in other words to do good you will be doing something bad in the minds of other people

 

A "Truth is in the eye of the beholder" kinda deal? One man's virtue is another Man's sin?

Vietnam was a war to do good, but ended up being a very bad, very painful struggle. Korea was similar, but with a happier ending. Was doing the right thing in our own eyes justification of starting those wars? Did the ends justify the means?

In the future, would starting a war against China for the sake of those who want to rebel against them be the best thing to do? I understand fighting for the underdog, but at the price of hundreds of thousands of lives?

 

Sorry to break off from the discussion but this had me LOLing. "I joined a volunteer military I hope I don't die!"

 

Mr. Funny

XD Name one person who joins the volunteer military TO die!

 

Kamikaze pilots, suicide bombers...

Edit: Emo kids wanting to angst about Vietnam but can't...

 

Touché, lol, though the military likes to weed out the emo guys who are in it for the angst.

I, myself, have no intention of getting my dumbass killed any time soon. We can leave it at that.

 

I agree. I am not planning to spend a portion of my teenage life worrying about dying everyday, although i do respect those who do. Personally, I don't like the thought of war, I think that negotiation is all that is needed, but I am also a violent person, so I dont know what to think :S
-S

 

Several people have mentioned that they don't think there will be another World War. I disagree. Yes, war is counter-productive (except to weapons manufacturers and as a sort of shock-treatment for fickle countries, but I don't want to get into that) and a huge waste, but it's the world's favorite past time. As long as there is man, there will be war.

As to who will start it, I personally don't have much opinion there. Some likely canidates are the US or Russia, but China is becoming more and more powerful, as well as other eastern contries.

I do have a theory as to how it will end though. Most likely, some extremist group will gain access to nuclear weapons and start a chain reaction. Only a suicidal group or an insane one would actually use nuclear arms as an honest threat. It's stupid to send missils to a country that
also has missils. At that point, it would start a 'if we're going down, we're taking you with us' nuclear exchange.

On a happier note, if that does happen, there is more than enough nuclear weapons to go around. Last time I checked, there are officially suficient nuclear arms to bomb the earth seven times. Woo-hoo for over kill.

 

...So how would Russia start up another World War? At this point it's like saying an asthmatic will start a boxing match.