Quote :

"this is kinda like how ww2 started" is not a credible mechanism for today's world. Its quite lazy actually. "

If people think WWIII will be a delayed continuation of WII, they should probably brush up on their world history. To me, WWI seems like a much more obvious point for comparisons to begin, given the entangling alliances of powerful states at the time and how a powder keg incident sparked the war to begin with (assassination of Archduke Ferdinand). I'm not sure what type of incident would be needed to set everything off this time around, but the fact that people ITT can't even agree on who would be on each 'side' just goes to show you how complex and strained international affairs are right now. It's still probably intellectually lazy to compare our current state of affairs with ones 100 years ago, but I definitely see them without even really trying.

8/9/2017 2:34:52 PM

Quote :

"Probably Muslims vs Non-Muslims and North Korea vs everyone."

B4C once again showing his complete ignorance of world affairs. He does realize all muslims aren't allies, right? There's this group called Shias, and this group called Sunnis, and they oftentimes don't get along very well.

8/9/2017 2:54:12 PM

If you want to know how the end times will begin Sep 23rd, watch this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn_l2yS6H2o

8/10/2017 7:53:39 AM

Ways WWI could be similar to the current situation:

Territorial exchanges and "horse trading" between competing powers had been conducted in a particular way for the past century in a relative stasis. Such conflicts were limited and typically highly asymmetric. Since the decision-markers were all conditioned to this type of conflict, they saw no problems in escalating a diplomatic situation or risking the outbreak of conflict, because they saw such conflicts as typical. They did not consider credible the tremendous critical-mass building until it was too late and the spiral into the abyss had already begun.

Ways it was most definitely different:

Colonialism, as a broad philosophy, left the world up for grabs for whatever major power could take it. Subjugation of satellite states was profitable on the average (Iraq and Afghanistan are not). Political alliances matched with strong trading blocks, the nations fought other nations they had relatively little trade with (very unlike modern US-China relationship). The major waring powers had similar political (traditional, typically monarchal) structures between each other. Technology was rapidly improving the lives of the poor and middle class at rates unique in all of history (running water and electricity secondarily). Military technology had also rapidly changed, opening up multiple new theatres of war.

8/11/2017 11:46:54 PM

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-turkey-idUSKCN1AY17Z?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New%20Campaign&utm_term=%2AMorning%20Brief

Quote :

"ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan on Friday said German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats were enemies of Turkey and called on Turks in Germany to vote against major parties in next month's elections. The comments are some of Erdogan's harshest yet against Merkel and her Christian Democrats, illustrating the widening divide between the NATO allies and major trade partners. Ties between Ankara and Berlin have been strained in the aftermath of last year's failed coup as Turkish authorities have sacked or suspended 150,000 people and detained more than 50,000 people, including German nationals. Germany has voiced concern that Erdogan is using the coup as a pretext to quash dissent. Erdogan, an authoritarian leader whose roots are in political Islam, has accused Germany of anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim sentiment."

[Edited on August 18, 2017 at 12:23 PM. Reason : a]

8/18/2017 12:22:42 PM

I'm starting to wonder if WW3 will happen before the next American Civil War.

8/18/2017 9:08:08 PM

The world was not connected it was easy for a few to convince the maases that the "other side" was evil, crazy, savage, or not even human. the whole world is together now. theres no way people would wage a war over something that doesn't affect them while watching snapchats roll in from the battlefield. chinese boys are more loyal to the nba bpl and video games than the party.

the old way is over. long term widespread suffering is also over. there will still be regional war in areas impacted by fsmine and climate change but never again on a global scale. technology prevents the suffering and misinformation necessary to motivate people to kill.

humans never wanted these wars in the first place and cant be tricked into anymore.

8/25/2017 6:27:43 AM

https://sofrep.com/88485/analysis-turkey-seeks-iran-alliance-kurds-us-pull-wanes/

https://www.slavorum.org/where-do-slavs-migrate-the-most/

Check out Germany slyly taking over, haha.

Quote :

"humans never wanted these wars in the first place and can't be tricked into anymore."

This is an interesting statement to me. Humans are the ones in power that lead other humans into war. In that respect it's kind of a weird circle where humans don't want to go to war until they get in power and then lead everyone else to war.

[Edited on August 25, 2017 at 2:04 PM. Reason : a]

8/25/2017 1:58:19 PM

Quote :

"long term widespread suffering is also over"

LOL. Yeah most of sub-Saharan Africa, South/Central America, and poor parts of China, India, and war zones in the Middle East are all just lovely right now. No pollution, corruption, poverty, violence, oppression to speak of.

8/25/2017 2:02:55 PM

^This. I can't believe that a person with operational eyes and ears (or even just one or the other) can believe that there's no widespread suffering.

8/25/2017 2:45:56 PM

we are obviously working off different definitions of widespread and also probably different definitions of what would be a world war.

The situations you guys are talking about would all lead to civil war and possibly regional war. if so then you would have to consider the war on terror arab spring isis situation a world war already. i dont.

i

8/26/2017 2:00:49 AM

not sure if this helps:

Quote :

"world war 'w?rld '?wô(?)r/Submit noun noun: world war; plural noun: world wars a war involving many large nations in all different parts of the world. The name is commonly given to the wars of 1914–18 and 1939–45, although only the second of these was truly global."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war

Quote :

"A world war, as it is commonly understood, is a large-scale war involving many of the countries of the world or many of the most powerful and populous ones. World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in many theaters. While a variety of global conflicts have been subjectively deemed "world wars", such as the Cold War and the War on Terror, the term is widely and generally accepted only as it is retrospectively applied to two major international conflicts that occurred during the 20th century: World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945)."

8/26/2017 11:29:54 AM

Quote :

"different definitions of widespread"

So if the suffering affecting all of Chad and Sudan isn't affecting all of Africa, it isn't widespread? What is your definition exactly?

8/26/2017 1:11:57 PM

im operating off of the definitions that were just posted above. i think its awful that things are bad for so many people but i dont see anyway that or anything else mentioned in this thread would cause the major superpowers to go to war.

i dont disagree that major regional wars will be fought but i dont see how someone who doesnt consider the cold war or war on terror as world wars could think there will be another world war.

maybe socialists or nazis taking over the us in a revolution could lead to a world war but thats about all i can imagine and is near impossible

8/27/2017 3:37:15 AM

Intellectually, what exactly do you have to gain by trying to dismiss the notion of potential/hypothetical third world war in a thread that's clearly rooted in a creative mental exercise?

8/28/2017 7:56:52 PM

It takes much more creativity to imagine a future that is different from the past. In fact, its not very creative at all to take previous situations and plug and chug countries into them for today's world.

I especially worry when Americans talk about world war like it is inevitable because Americans already do not take war seriously. Perhaps this is because Americans have never actually been under siege but I think the mindset of the people in this thread that certain events are red lines and once they are crossed, must lead to total war is a pretty disgusting mindset and is one that has been indoctrinated and not one that is shared across humanity.

The mindset I see in this thread is actually the greatest threat to peace in the world.

8/29/2017 10:47:15 AM

Quote :

"The mindset I see in this thread is actually the greatest threat to peace in the world."

wat

8/29/2017 11:55:44 AM

It's Earl dude

8/29/2017 12:19:16 PM

Obviously. Just not sure what's inspiring this particular episode.

8/29/2017 12:34:32 PM

NK fired a missile over japan

8/29/2017 12:44:10 PM

There won't be any sides. It'll be brother vs brother.

8/29/2017 12:52:25 PM

^^So what if the somewhat unexpected happens and another country altogether attacks NK? Like Japan? I mean I assume we'll see it coming because they'll let us know what they're getting ready to do, but if NK pisses off enough other world leaders, it's possible that it may not even involve us.

8/29/2017 1:20:51 PM

The fact that you all already think there will be a WW3 makes you vulnerable to being manipulated into one by default. I'm betting on the fact that current technology like the internet and social media makes it extremely difficult for large, powerful populations to be manipulated into war again. Obviously, the American population has a level of brainwashing that adds risk to that bet and the power held by the US rivals the rest of the collective world power.

The main problem is that you, as Americans, nor your parents or grandparents have ever actually lived through war. This allows you to look at it as a game or something that is not so serious. You detach yourselves from the violence happening in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, etc. Add that to the fact that you have all been manipulated into accepting pointless wars gives good evidence that it COULD happen on a larger scale. Maybe your media/politicians will tell you that China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, and Venezuela all pose a threat to you, and you will buy into it. That is a world war.

I don't think this is something the American people would fall for but given unforeseen circumstances that create further instability in this country, a population that believes world war is inevitable would be a lot easier to manipulate than one that believes world war is obsolete, unnecessary, and a thing of the past.

Even though I think it can't happen and am betting it won't happen, there are people in this thread who would be ready to go to nuclear war over a small island in the south china sea, crimea, or a country like Iran and North korea simply possessing a powerful weapon. Its scary that these people exist. Some of you need to spend a week in a war zone to really understand how serious war is.

People in this thread aren't using language like "WW3 could start with..." but are using the phrase "WW3 wil....". That small detail tells everything from a psychological point of view. It tells me you are mentally prepared to get behind total war on a global scale over something that hardly even affects you. Thats irresponsible and scary. I don't think I am giving society too much credit but I definitely underestimated the power of your privilege.

8/29/2017 2:35:48 PM

Safe to say that all of our grandparents lived (if not fought) through WW2.

Korea and Vietnam to a lesser degree was experienced by many of our parents.

Seriously, the sheer amount of bullshit you spew onto this website is staggering.

8/29/2017 2:41:55 PM

Quote :

" Perhaps this is because Americans have never actually been under siege"

Tell me more about the American cities that were bombed/sieged/invaded during those wars. Its almost as if any comment that doesn't hold up under the first context that comes to your mind is bullshit.

It must have been so hard for your grandparents hearing about war on the radio. NYC experienced 1 day of war and people still haven't recovered. Maybe somewhere near Santa Barbara got shelled once.

[Edited on August 29, 2017 at 2:49 PM. Reason : perhaps things are intentionally taken out of context,but i think its due to contextualized learning]

8/29/2017 2:47:15 PM

Quote :

"The fact that you all already think there will be a WW3 makes you vulnerable to being manipulated into one by default. I'm betting on the fact that current technology like the internet and social media makes it extremely difficult for large, powerful populations to be manipulated into war again."

I'll lend some credence to this. A sense of inevitability causes someone to prepare for it rather than fight to avoid it. A good example in science is the fact that we are considering terraforming Mars rather than fixing the problems here.

I'd like to see a good example before I agree with your second statement. For instance, in 2001-2003 when the case was being made about Iraq possessing WMDs, the internet was not in the state that it is in now (no ubiquitous Facebook, for instance). Perhaps, even just having Facebook back then would have somehow spread the counter arguments much more widely.

Quote :

"NYC experienced 1 day of war and people still haven't recovered."

Can't even say NYC experienced, two specific buildings were targeted (a few others hit from collateral damage) but you could go a few blocks north and absent the commotion of first responders and what was on the news, you'd never know it was happening. That being said, the psychological impact of having zero clue how many more attacks are going to happen and where I think provides reasonable basis to recognize the fear was real and widespread. I remember people were being taken out of school left and right in Jacksonville because everyone there thought Lejeune was going to be hit.

[Edited on August 29, 2017 at 3:34 PM. Reason : a]

8/29/2017 3:30:13 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to see a good example before I agree with your second statement. For instance, in 2001-2003 when the case was being made about Iraq possessing WMDs, the internet was not in the state that it is in now (no ubiquitous Facebook, for instance). Perhaps, even just having Facebook back then would have somehow spread the counter arguments much more widely. "

I'd like to agree, but we ended up with Donald Trump as president in 2017

8/29/2017 9:44:14 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to agree, but we ended up with Donald Trump as president in 2017"

Yea that's why I was saying I'd like to see a good second example at least, haha.

8/29/2017 10:05:10 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to see a good example before I agree with your second statement. For instance, in 2001-2003 when the case was being made about Iraq possessing WMDs, the internet was not in the state that it is in now (no ubiquitous Facebook, for instance). Perhaps, even just having Facebook back then would have somehow spread the counter arguments much more widely."

I don't think my logic applies to the US and Iraq or even NK (which is why i made the "greatest threat to world peace" statement.) Americans as an exception, typically don't care about what happens to countries they can't find on a map. You have to remember its a nation built on white-supremacy and even non white-supremacists still mostly adopt the lite version--- American exceptionalism. They don't give a shit if millions of yellow or brown people die. Its part of the culture.

8/30/2017 7:55:17 PM

Quote :

"a population that believes world war is inevitable would be a lot easier to manipulate than one that believes world war is obsolete, unnecessary, and a thing of the past"

I'm not worries about the populations, I'm worried about the leaders. I think war should be obsolete, but leaders of the world do not. If Trump and Putin and Kim decide they want a war, then it's coming and there's nothing we can do as a population to stop it.

8/30/2017 8:14:48 PM

The US has basically been in continuous was since its founding. We are not a peaceful people

9/2/2017 1:16:11 PM

Quote :

"The US has basically been in continuous was since its founding. We Humans are not a peaceful. people"

[Edited on September 2, 2017 at 2:51 PM. Reason : a]

9/2/2017 2:48:32 PM

^That is basically another version of the Donald Trump "many sides" statement.

9/2/2017 3:46:38 PM

How so? We are not a peaceful species. Earthworms are. Humans are not.

In the context of modern US history, nazi sympathizers and racists are the ones causing problems and sparking violence, not the counterparts on the left. One side says kill them all or kick them out. The other side says "stop saying that shit."

Trump's remarks are entirely wrong when viewed in context. Out of context, they're just uninformed.

9/3/2017 6:57:42 PM

You are trying to equate the aggressive, imperialistic foreign policy of the US with "human nature" which is just wrong all around. Other nations have not been in continuous war and only a handful of nations have spread violence across the globe.

In general, humans are only violent when their basic needs are in peril. The US is a huge exception largely because if you have a view of white supremacy you can externalize your violence. Its not violence if the people you're killing aren't actually people.

These instinctual tendencies are barbaric and can be eliminated with basic education. The problem is, the very small amount of humans who are violent, have characteristics that allow them to gain power over others and use control of resources to exploit others to carry out their violence. Having a system of feudalism or capitalism creates mass vulnerability which exacerbates this phenomenon.

9/4/2017 4:33:22 PM

Quote :

"It's not violence if the people you're killing aren't actually people."

Reminds me of the Soviet Union starving Ukraine to death.

9/4/2017 11:37:30 PM

Elon Musk thinks WW3 will be fought via Artificial Intelligence. He also apparently thinks we live in the Matrix.

9/5/2017 10:33:13 PM

The WW3 comment makes sense presuming we're capable of avoiding nukes. As for the "Matrix" comment, it's a plausible theory gaining ground in physics.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation/

http://gizmodo.com/think-were-living-in-a-computer-simulation-prove-it-1793381182

9/6/2017 7:49:47 AM

It hurts my brain to think about how in the world we would be living in a simulation.

9/6/2017 8:40:48 AM

There's an amazing movie on that from the 70s called World on a Wire.

9/6/2017 8:42:49 AM

https://sofrep.com/89720/turkey-signs-russian-missile-deal-pivoting-nato/

9/14/2017 3:52:12 PM

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-un-north-korean-leader-suicide-mission-n802596

Quote :

"Trump Threatens to ‘Totally Destroy’ North Korea in First U.N. Speech"

This is how it happens.

9/20/2017 4:25:55 PM

thats a war not a world war.

9/20/2017 7:41:22 PM

It's a war that would turn into a world war, I believe is the implication.

9/20/2017 7:46:25 PM

and its coming from a guy who thinks iran will ally itself with isis. (zero credibility)

9/20/2017 8:24:18 PM

It’s nuts the American president is threatening to totally destroy a country.

We’re officially one of the bad guys in the world. We’re lowering the bar for leadership across the board. We’ve had plenty threads over the obama years here on what happens if the US isn’t a world leader and we’re going to see over the next few years what this actually means. I can’t see any way where trump’s comments don’t result in less safety and stability, and eventually more money being dumped into the war machine at the cost of social development. If I knew more history I could give better examples of how he’s taking us down the path that has doomed many other societies.

9/20/2017 10:50:28 PM

^^not zero credibility

http://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-and-chinas-joint-war-game-sends-a-message-to-trump-stay-out-of-north-korea

9/21/2017 12:48:18 PM

^Thats not a world war and if it is, wouldn't be the third considering its already happened. The credibility statement was in reference to his Iran/ISIS prediction

Quote :

"It’s nuts the American president is threatening to totally destroy a country."

I'd consider it progress if we are just threatening it instead of actually doing it.

Quote :

" We’re officially one of the bad guys in the world. We’re lowering the bar for leadership across the board."

We've been the bad guys for a long time. I don't know what makes it official just now but I'm glad you've finally woke up to it.

Quote :

" I can’t see any way where trump’s comments don’t result in less safety and stability, and eventually more money being dumped into the war machine at the cost of social development. If I knew more history I could give better examples of how he’s taking us down the path that has doomed many other societies."

If only you knew our own history, you would know that previous times in the US are the better examples.


[Edited on September 21, 2017 at 2:39 PM. Reason : alreich]

9/21/2017 2:19:01 PM

From FP situation report this morning:

Quote :

"Kurds vote, neighbors threaten war. Voting began Monday in northern Iraq on a controversial referendum that will decide whether Iraqi Kurds will declare independence from Iraq. Iraq's central government remains starkly opposed to the effort and has asked countries to stop buying oil from Kurdistan, and threatened a wider economic blockade. With roughly 30 million ethnic Kurds scattered over Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Turkey, Iraq’s neighbors are eyeing the vote anxiously, and beginning to take more drastic action. On Sunday, Iran halted flights to and from the Iraqi Kurdish region and kicked off military exercises near the Iraqi border. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, subtle as ever, is openly threatening war. He has already staged tanks and troops at his border, saying Monday, “our military is not (at the border) for nothing...We could arrive suddenly one night.” He also endorsed an economic blockade: “Let's see where — and through which channels — will they sell their oil. We have the valve. The moment we shut the valve, that's the end of it.” FP recently ran down some controversy over U.S. military aid to the Kurds."

[Edited on September 25, 2017 at 9:44 AM. Reason : a]

9/25/2017 9:43:23 AM

Quote :

"[quote]Thats not a world war and if it is, wouldn't be the third considering its already happened. The credibility statement was in reference to his Iran/ISIS prediction"

A war between China/Russia/US would be a World War. It would force every single country within regional control of any of those three into combat. To my knowledge this has not happened yet as we are talking about open combat not SF skirmishes and proxy wars.

Gotcha on the credibility part.

[Edited on September 25, 2017 at 11:01 AM. Reason : a]

9/25/2017 11:01:26 AM