Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Having watched todays news it seems we cannot ignore the huge conflict between Western society and the Islamic world. This clash of cultures will somehow be behind any future world war.
Again, someone does not seem to understand the notion of 'world war'.
Quote:
It is only a matter of time before the nations of Europe and North America send armies into the middle east to squash the terrorism that has spread far from the middle east.
Actually, armies from Europe and North America recently invaded and deposed a regime which exerted control over the majority of the area where IS operates. They replaced it with a regime that was unable to exert that control, and out of that power vacuum emerged IS.
Sorry, some Triumph Of The Military Will is not the panacea here. We seem to have a problem learning from history, even when that history looms large right there in the rear-view mirror.
Quote:
Only so many times will they tolerate bombs and shootings in places like Paris, Brussels or Florida.
You're very confused if you think military action in Asia will prevent terrorism in the United States carried out by American-born citizens. How about Boston? Planning to invade Chechnya? Russia might have a problem with that... considering that Chechnya is part of Russia.
Quote:
Replay of the ancient crusades??? maybe. What will draw in other powers will be the fate of the valuable oil resources of the region. Those resources alone are worthy of world war.
Those that value Middle Eastern oil hardly want the massive destabilization of yet another invasion of the place.
Quote:
Right now barbaric nations control much of that resource. My vote is for a middle eastern centered conflict starting the next world war.
Did you just hit the 2003 replay button? Remember? We were going to invade Iraq. They were going to welcome us with open arms. Then they were going to embrace democracy because, hey, everyone must want to be democratic. Then the rest of the Middle East was going to look on in awe at how super-terrific it was in democratic Iraq and say to themselves "Hey! We want some of that democracy, too!" and a wave of democracy was going to sweep across the region.
Remember that?
Now, remember what actually happened? Because every last assumption about that plan was fundamentally wrong.
Your 'solution' sounds like it would be about as effective. But whatever debacle it created, it most certainly would not anything deserving of the appellation 'world war'.
You know...there doesn't have to be a World War III. We all talk like it's just going to happen someday. We can have major wars between big powers, but there's no reason to expect any kind of world war to erupt anytime in our lifetimes.
Eintsein said "WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones"
Relax with the WW3 neurosis, already.
Ain't gonna be one.
We VERY NARROWLY avoided it in October of 1962. More by pure luck than design. Our survival was by a razor thin margin that could have just as easily gone the other way and then no one posting on this forum would be here. Neither would the forum or even the internet. Since then, national leaders in a position start such a conflict have been a lot more careful about the sabers they rattle. It was a severe dose of terrifying reality that is an antidote to testosterone fueled machismo.
Europe -->Russia causing trouble OR
Asia-->Japan/China causing trouble.
There are hostilities and territorial disputes going on in Asia now mostly between Japan and China and Japan and South Korea. Japanese are also planning to arm themselves again and many people there are unhappy with their lives and the economy. If Japan starts more trouble, they could drag in the US and China and Korea (North and South) may join forces.
Second to that may be something in Europe. The economy there is getting worse, and many of the people there seem to be becoming more nationalistic. The western European countries are badmouthing Eastern Europe again. Didn't WW1 start for a very stupid reason, also? Russia seems to want to start trouble to gain prestige, so I wouldn't rule out their starting a war.
These areas have a lot of pride issues and hostility and territorial disputes. They are also well-armed. Recipe for war.
Most likely China will get too big for its britches and make a power grab in the South China sea which is contested by several countries. Then China and Japan will get in a small conflict, the US will back Japan, Russia will back China, as will North Korea. Pretty soon brinkmanship will come to a head and if something were to go wrong, the flashpoint would be there. China and Japan wouldn't really WANT open war, but with Putin being the instigator he is, he'd probably do something to force Japan or the US to act.
Again, someone does not seem to understand the notion of 'world war'.
Actually, armies from Europe and North America recently invaded and deposed a regime which exerted control over the majority of the area where IS operates. They replaced it with a regime that was unable to exert that control, and out of that power vacuum emerged IS.
Sorry, some Triumph Of The Military Will is not the panacea here. We seem to have a problem learning from history, even when that history looms large right there in the rear-view mirror.
You're very confused if you think military action in Asia will prevent terrorism in the United States carried out by American-born citizens. How about Boston? Planning to invade Chechnya? Russia might have a problem with that... considering that Chechnya is part of Russia.
Those that value Middle Eastern oil hardly want the massive destabilization of yet another invasion of the place.
Did you just hit the 2003 replay button? Remember? We were going to invade Iraq. They were going to welcome us with open arms. Then they were going to embrace democracy because, hey, everyone must want to be democratic. Then the rest of the Middle East was going to look on in awe at how super-terrific it was in democratic Iraq and say to themselves "Hey! We want some of that democracy, too!" and a wave of democracy was going to sweep across the region.
Remember that?
Now, remember what actually happened? Because every last assumption about that plan was fundamentally wrong.
Your 'solution' sounds like it would be about as effective. But whatever debacle it created, it most certainly would not anything deserving of the appellation 'world war'.
Your right about the Iraq war not being world war, never claimed it was one. However the smaller wars and conflicts between western powers and those of the middle east could be precursers to a real world war. If a large block of Muslim nations united, or if ISIS succeeds in creating a new caliphate then yes we could be dealing with a huge world war, especially if they draw in powerful allies like China.
Now for your criticism of my view that Western military power to curb terrorism. Let me remind you that we had very little terrorist activity in the US during the time we had all the bad guys tied up fighting us in Iraq. Our aggressive military action also served as a deterrence to those who otherwise may have taken action against us. With the weak foreign policy of late we are now an open target for them. They now see weakness and they are taking advantage. Will an aggressive stance toward them end terrorism?? No of course not, but it will reduce it. If we also restrict them from visiting or immigrating to western nations we could really slow down their activities. Have you not watched the news?? When is enough enough? There are 50 dead Americans in Florida today, I know I have seen enough. IMO the we should be hitting them (ISIS) hard today, in fact the ground in ISIS land should rumble nonstop, just so every one of them knows we are ticked, and we are coming for them.
Europe -->Russia causing trouble OR
Asia-->Japan/China causing trouble.
There are hostilities and territorial disputes going on in Asia now mostly between Japan and China and Japan and South Korea. Japanese are also planning to arm themselves again and many people there are unhappy with their lives and the economy. Didn't WW1 start for a very stupid reason, also? Russia seems to want to start trouble to gain prestige, so I wouldn't rule out their starting a war.
I think by 2050 . since demographics change. UK,France and some EU countries will have civil wars between native population and muslims due to increase of muslim populations. London .Paris is already majority non-native
then muslim establish Islamic States there. and Russia will invade and save Europe. but liberal left agenda of US will want to save Muslims and ignite war between USA and Russia . then USA will win and leave Europe in a mess
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What will World War III be about? Future tellers?
