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.
I'm just curious what happened to the future of Mexico if a ww3 starts today since Mexico is next to the U.S. I believe a ww3 would be possible to happen this century things are not getting any better.
There's rumors here that government of Mexico secretly has atomic bombs in the state of Sonora.
MAD makes the odds of WWIII minimal at best. The number of war deaths per 100,000 inhabitants of earth continues to plummet despite all of the perceived instability. Things have been much worse at other times since the end of WWII than they are now.
MAD makes the odds of WWIII minimal at best. The number of war deaths per 100,000 inhabitants of earth continues to plummet despite all of the perceived instability. Things have been much worse at other times since the end of WWII than they are now.
I disagree...the elite groups of the world have developed (are developing) complex systems of survival for example, "underground" cities are becoming more and more popular...since they ( a subsample of the population) can survive an all out thermonuclear exchange without actually destroying the world or making it totally inhabitable then the odds for a third world war increase under this premise...
The two World Wars, and the Cold War, were actually, a single confrontation, in three acts, between the handful of established democracies and various dictators with alliances occasionally changing. In the end, the democracies won, and several of the losers are now well along the path toward proven democratic status -- usually defined as 100 years of transfer of power exclusively by peaceful means.
That leaves only the rogues -- backwaters like Iran and North Korea -- and terrorist / criminal organizations to worry about; the United States has emerged as the only true economic/ military / diplomatic super-power, and while a lot of us would like to see more international efforts of the type that (on the second try) deposed Saddam Hussein, that's not likely. Just as some baseball fans automatically root against the New York Yankees, many diplomats often advise closing ranks if one nation begins to dominate.
And the election of a known, but untested rebel as the American President (not to mention the continuous carping by a self-designated "elite" who didn't get things their way), clouds the picture.
But having said that, it needs to be recognized that international tensions are nowhere near the levels that those of us who grew up during the Cold War, myself among them, can recall.
It also should be pointed out neither Mexico nor Russia qualifies as anything close to a "proven" democracy; Russia has been free of the Soviet system for only about 25 years, hasn't made much progress toward either democratic, corruption-free institutions, and has much infrastructure not yet developed; and Mexico, despite a few suprises here and there, remains largely dominated by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI).
We all have a long row to hoe, but I don't see anything particularly threatening on the horizon.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 06-06-2017 at 08:44 PM..
MAD makes the odds of WWIII minimal at best. The number of war deaths per 100,000 inhabitants of earth continues to plummet despite all of the perceived instability. Things have been much worse at other times since the end of WWII than they are now.
You wouldn’t say that if you live in Libya, iraq or Syria or in a country that the United States is trying to bring freedom to.
The two World Wars, and the Cold War, were actually, a single confrontation, in three acts, between the handful of established democracies and various dictators with alliances occasionally changing. In the end, the democracies won, and several of the losers are now well along the path toward proven democratic status -- usually defined as 100 years of transfer of power exclusively by peaceful means.
That leaves only the rogues -- backwaters like Iran and North Korea -- and terrorist / criminal organizations to worry about; the United States has emerged as the only true economic/ military / diplomatic super-power, and while a lot of us would like to see more international efforts of the type that (on the second try) deposed Saddam Hussein, that's not likely. Just as some baseball fans automatically root against the New York Yankees, many diplomats often advise closing ranks if one nation begins to dominate.
And the election of a known, but untested rebel as the American President (not to mention the continuous carping by a self-designated "elite" who didn't get things their way), clouds the picture.
But having said that, it needs to be recognized that international tensions are nowhere near the levels that those of us who grew up during the Cold War, myself among them, can recall.
It also should be pointed out neither Mexico nor Russia qualifies as anything close to a "proven" democracy; Russia has been free of the Soviet system for only about 25 years, hasn't made much progress toward either democratic, corruption-free institutions, and has much infrastructure not yet developed; and Mexico, despite a few suprises here and there, remains largely dominated by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI).
We all have a long row to hoe, but I don't see anything particularly threatening on the horizon.
America is the number 1 terrorist, where ever usa goes to spread democracy you will find death, destruction and chaos, and its only good at fighting people with stones. america is not the good guy, the world knows that now. so dont try to keep on pretending that america is morally above all
Agree the U.S is the problematic country is facinating at the time lol they go to attack other countries and steal their wealth resources of course those things are not disscuss in the American media guys after all that was the begining of the porpuse in Irak with the U.S
IF there was a Third World War and Mexico was involved they would be on the side of the US.
IF the US was smart it would use the opportunity to seize parts of Mexico that it should have taken in its own best interests long, long ago.
We are not headed towards WWIII.
I hope Mexico remains neutral, why should Mexico fight against Russia or china, they have never done anything to Mexico, (actually America is the country that has always meddle in Latin American affairs) and I don’t think china or Russia would bomb Mexico. Actually the only country that ever used the atomic bomb is America, and they use it on civilians not on a military or industrial complex. Mexico should worry about the USA booming them more than Russia or any other country.
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.
