Silk Road forums

Discussion => Philosophy, Economics and Justice => Topic started by: kushkush on February 03, 2013, 06:23 am

Title: The Next World War
Post by: kushkush on February 03, 2013, 06:23 am
when is world war 3 coming? :o .... i wanna know !
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: seshat on February 04, 2013, 12:29 am
I simply dont think there is a population willing to fight it
has anybody else had this thought?
i mean WWI and WWII or any war before the internet or even TV, you could stage and fabricate from the start and i imagine convincing a population to march in boots and gun was  A LOT easier before the internet.
Perhaps when globalist leaders lose all faith in humanity or regard of humanity rather, and start dropping the nukes on eachother.
but if there will be a WWIII i just dont think there is the nationalist anger there anymore, to get people riled up like you could in the past, you know?
I hope so anyways.
cheers

_seshat
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: Knomo on February 04, 2013, 12:35 am
Yeah I don't think there will be another World War like the other 2 either. There will be a major war tho, but that will probably be fought through drones and missiles/nukes.

Gonna be fun ::) 
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: seshat on February 04, 2013, 12:50 am
agreed
there is a lot of tension around the world. I think china and japan are all of a sudden not getting along again, which does seem uncomfortably like a pretense to something
Israel's Bibi netenyahu is practically foaming at the mouth by now about killing some Muslims , my god that man is mad...
All the Islamic countries continue to get hit by flung dung from the west, dont seem too happy about it... the recent israel bombing in syria? Iran and russia didnt think very well of that...
Germany and many others are "realizing" there is something up with their gold being held at the federal reserve... more tension..

if not a big war, there will be massive civil unrest/discontent.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: raynardine on February 04, 2013, 01:41 am
but if there will be a WWIII i just dont think there is the nationalist anger there anymore, to get people riled up like you could in the past, you know?

Unfortunately, uneducated working class people in large quantities still exist, which means they have fodder for their nationalist propaganda.

So long as people are starving and have no other option, there will be soldiers.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: sniper123 on February 05, 2013, 06:49 am
but if there will be a WWIII i just dont think there is the nationalist anger there anymore, to get people riled up like you could in the past, you know?

Unfortunately, uneducated working class people in large quantities still exist, which means they have fodder for their nationalist propaganda.

So long as people are starving and have no other option, there will be soldiers.
As long as they can keep up the drug war. We might see another world war in our lifetime. If we were to go to war tomorrow. What do you think we would use a majority of the population that is found in our prison system? If you were rejected parol and looking at life behind bars. Someone came along with opportunity for a chance of restricted freedom and you were honored for serving your country. Would you fight? I don't think it would be hard to convince a judge to grant you the ability to serve if your crime was drug related.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: TheJolllyRoger on February 05, 2013, 06:29 pm
Id love to see Iran hit a nice good spot to "Soften" the Israelis who think their invisible, just to remind them their really not :) and are occupying (illegally) other peoples Country like, Palestine, Syria and the Lebanon.

"Iran have balls, i like balls!"
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: Meatgrinder on February 06, 2013, 11:42 am
I see North Korea are planning to test another ICBM with a possible nuclear load...

But in all seriousness, who'd be the first country to bear arms and actually "start a conflic/war" .. in your opinion?

Iran or N Korea?
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: thedopestjunkie on February 06, 2013, 01:43 pm
I fear that Israel will drag us into the next major world war. Fought mostly with drones and missiles like someone mentioned.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: shakedown street on February 08, 2013, 01:55 pm
World War III is currently being fought. You are on one of the battlefields.
The global war on drugs has to have cost more in terms of dollars and lives wasted than the first two World Wars combined.

What a waste.  ;.{
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: kushkush on February 08, 2013, 10:37 pm
that what i thought too world war 3's not gonna happen but my friend told me it might due to religious; Christan vs Muslim   ::)
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: TheJolllyRoger on February 08, 2013, 11:08 pm
Christan vs Muslim   ::)

What about Pastafarians and our spaghetti monster god!!? We must arm ourselves and organise on his behalf!!

Whos with me? Spaghetti and meatball suicide vests!..... hey wait we wont need meat, we are the meat!?!

Pastafarians = Winning!

Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: DankSources on February 09, 2013, 05:16 am
We will all be in civil war against are government and each other.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 09, 2013, 05:18 am
I see North Korea are planning to test another ICBM with a possible nuclear load...

But in all seriousness, who'd be the first country to bear arms and actually "start a conflic/war" .. in your opinion?

Iran or N Korea?

Between those two, North Korea for sure. Iran is so far away from starting a war it's such a joke how much the western media (and Israeli and Israeli-friendly politicians which includes pretty much all US politicians) have hyped up the whole charade. Even if they did have nukes, which they don't, they have vast oil wealth and plenty to lose by starting a war with Israel/US/NATO. The ayatollah is not some apocalyptic madman bent on self destruction, but a politician looking at self preservation just like every other world leader in spite of what the hasbara trolls would have you believe.

North Korea OTOH has far less to lose because they're a poverty stricken country whose citizens eat grass to survive. A few more sanctions, or maybe China cutting them off, could easily make their great leader try and start a war to keep the regime from imploding. And they already have nukes. So why isn't there all this hype about North Korea? Because Israel does not see North Korea as their mortal enemy. It's ridiculous how anyone actually buys into the hype about Iran. Although I see WWIII as unlikely, the greater threat to start a war than North Korea OR Iran is Israel. Without a doubt. If Iran does eventually go nuclear it will be because of the constant provocations of Israel that they felt the need to do so to protect themselves. Any country would feel persecuted after having their military installations sabotaged and nuclear scientists assassinated on their own soil.

/rant off
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: Hungry ghost on February 09, 2013, 09:09 am
I think a conflict between China and Russia is possible. China is expanding rapidly as we all know, however as climate change becomes more severe over the next fifty years, much of Chinas prime agricultural land will move northwards. By this I mean that while much of Chinas most fertile land will become either flooded or arid, much of the southern reaches of sparsely populated Siberia will become viable for agriculture. I can see China wanting to annexe some of this.
        Or the major world powers could squabble over the remaining oil resources....oh wait that's already happening!
         Those of you who think a worldwide old fashioned war is unlikely have just been lulled into a false sense of security by the 70 odd years of relative peace(and only by living in our insulated gated communities, the western 'democracys' ). As the worlds population continues to grow wars will be fought over the traditional reasons: land and resources. It's already begun in many parts of the world.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 09, 2013, 10:28 am
I think a conflict between China and Russia is possible. China is expanding rapidly as we all know, however as climate change becomes more severe over the next fifty years, much of Chinas prime agricultural land will move northwards. By this I mean that while much of Chinas most fertile land will become either flooded or arid, much of the southern reaches of sparsely populated Siberia will become viable for agriculture. I can see China wanting to annexe some of this.

Possibly. But probably not because both are nuclear powers. And because of the certainty of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) it's been an unbroken truism so far that nuclear powers don't fight hot wars against each other. I would think this would be especially true between two nuclear giants like Russia and China.

Furthermore, the perceived threat of US imperialism always at their doorstep should be enough to keep them unified.

Quote
        Or the major world powers could squabble over the remaining oil resources....oh wait that's already happening!

Actually this has really become much less of a concern over the last few years because of the technological advances to exploiting shale oil and gas. The US is poised to overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer by 2017, a net oil exporter by 2030, and self-sufficient by 2035. Hard to believe but you can look it up as confirmed by western energy agencies and the IAEA.

And as we all know, the fight for oil is the primary reason for the heavy involvement of the US military in the Middle East. 

Quote
Those of you who think a worldwide old fashioned war is unlikely have just been lulled into a false sense of security by the 70 odd years of relative peace(and only by living in our insulated gated communities, the western 'democracys' ). As the worlds population continues to grow wars will be fought over the traditional reasons: land and resources. It's already begun in many parts of the world.

I think MAD has a lot to do with that "relative peace". Not to say nuclear or biological materials by a terrorist organization doesn't pose a threat. But to think it would spark a "world war" I think is a stretch because countries that can be bombed back knows no one wins in a nuclear war.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: Hungry ghost on February 09, 2013, 11:24 am
Yeah I take your point that the threat of nuclear weapons makes it difficult to imagine large scale conventional warfare between nuclear powers. It's kind of an uneasy peace though.
      The extraction of oil from oil shales and continued reliance on burning fossil fuels however is only going to accelerate the disruptive effects of climate change. My concern is that ever increasing world population combined with increasingly unreliable weather affecting harvests and water resources will lead to conflicts.
         Obviously the next "world war" will not resemble the previous two. The concept of a "world war" is fairly hazy. Perhaps the third world war will only be viewed as such retrospectively by future historians?
          But yes, perhaps the days of major powers fielding armies of hundreds of thousands of infantry against each other are over.
           
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 09, 2013, 12:55 pm
      The extraction of oil from oil shales and continued reliance on burning fossil fuels however is only going to accelerate the disruptive effects of climate change. My concern is that ever increasing world population combined with increasingly unreliable weather affecting harvests and water resources will lead to conflicts.

True. Good point.

Quote
         Obviously the next "world war" will not resemble the previous two. The concept of a "world war" is fairly hazy. Perhaps the third world war will only be viewed as such retrospectively by future historians?
          But yes, perhaps the days of major powers fielding armies of hundreds of thousands of infantry against each other are over.

Yeah let's hope so. WWIII to future historians could possibly involve large scale drone warfare, or even cyber-warfare. China has unveiled their first generation drones at an airshow last year. I suspect they'll start deploying them over the South China Seas and over the islands they have disputes with Japan over as soon as they're ready for public consumption. 
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: PlutoPete on February 09, 2013, 01:11 pm
The only 2 countries really likely to start a world war are USA and Israel.
USA needs constant conflict to feed it's weapons industry, has there been any period since world war 2 when the USA hasn't been fighting somewhere in the world?
A world war will eventually be forced just by Americas inability to live within it's means, it can never pay off it's national debt.
Israel thinks that international laws apply to everyone but them, their guarantee of US support no matter what they do could easily trigger a global conflict.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: THUMBSuP. on February 10, 2013, 09:22 pm
China is with America and the Soviets pushing fear onto N. Korea...
but Obama and his administration have some dirty tricks up their sleeves..
to make some "unfortunate events" look like "someone else's" fault..
and that's when hell will break loose.

Drones? i hope no one here is really "for" drones..?
drones hovering over our states watching EVERYONE'S EVERY move?
constant "state of surveillance".. not to mention Obama has already given
the military the "Okay" to kill U.S. Citizens on AMERICAN SOIL if "deemed proper".


:) 2013 is the year. we either stand up or lay down.
we have all slowly forgotten our Constitutional Rights.. and only remembering a few.
which are being removed.

be prepared for Marshall Law.. be prepared for the genocide of another race.
go learn about the peaceful disarmament act or whatever.
the government wants to "remove all firearms from the people in a PEACEFUL WORLD"..
then stock pile stock pile stock pile stock pile all Military ammo?
if we don't have guns... why do you need more?

wake up.

/thumbs
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: Caparino on February 11, 2013, 04:40 am
It's already too late. Things have been in motion and shit hits the fan within a couple months.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: looselucy on February 11, 2013, 05:17 am
I simply dont think there is a population willing to fight it
has anybody else had this thought?
i mean WWI and WWII or any war before the internet or even TV, you could stage and fabricate from the start and i imagine convincing a population to march in boots and gun was  A LOT easier before the internet.
Perhaps when globalist leaders lose all faith in humanity or regard of humanity rather, and start dropping the nukes on eachother.
but if there will be a WWIII i just dont think there is the nationalist anger there anymore, to get people riled up like you could in the past, you know?
I hope so anyways.
cheers

_seshat
[/quote

Brother, I wish you are right, but we had the internet back in 2003 when Bush II invaded Iraq and kind of sleezy Rice and Powell were stirring the pot. Meanwhile media whore Judith Miler was running the front ppage of the NY Times, and your average  statesman hadn't  a clue. Amazing those of us who were paying attn had better intel than your average senator-or not.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: lesseroftwoweevils on February 11, 2013, 12:03 pm
Y'all motherfuckas be trippin'. I can't definitively say that there won't be a world war in the future, but it seems VERY unlikely to happen during any of our lifetimes. Why you ask?

1. Because we live in the age of "mutually assured destruction" policies, where any global war between two nuclear-armed superpowers effectively destroys them both. This formed the narrative during the Cold War (although there were inadvertently numerous close calls due to paranoia/technological failures) and it's even more true now. No one, not even North Korea, wants to actually use their nukes. They simply want the political leverage that comes along with them.

2. Because of the strengthening economic ties between countries. This is especially important when talking about Chinese and U.S. relations. Why would either country want to start ANYTHING with their biggest trading partner?!

3. Because we've become an increasingly more globalized world, especially with the advent of the internet age. When you can talk to people around the globe instantaneously, it becomes more difficult for governments to pit us against one another. Compare that to five or six decades ago, when the passing of information was measured in HOURS/DAYS, not milliseconds.

Simply put, it ain't gonna happen, at least not in the next hundred years or so. No one's going to sacrifice billions of lives and the economic stability of the world for minor political gains and/or religious convictions.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 11, 2013, 01:44 pm
Y'all motherfuckas be trippin'. I can't definitively say that there won't be a world war in the future, but it seems VERY unlikely to happen during any of our lifetimes. Why you ask?

1. Because we live in the age of "mutually assured destruction" policies, where any global war between two nuclear-armed superpowers effectively destroys them both. This formed the narrative during the Cold War (although there were inadvertently numerous close calls due to paranoia/technological failures) and it's even more true now. No one, not even North Korea, wants to actually use their nukes. They simply want the political leverage that comes along with them.

2. Because of the strengthening economic ties between countries. This is especially important when talking about Chinese and U.S. relations. Why would either country want to start ANYTHING with their biggest trading partner?!

3. Because we've become an increasingly more globalized world, especially with the advent of the internet age. When you can talk to people around the globe instantaneously, it becomes more difficult for governments to pit us against one another. Compare that to five or six decades ago, when the passing of information was measured in HOURS/DAYS, not milliseconds.

Simply put, it ain't gonna happen, at least not in the next hundred years or so. No one's going to sacrifice billions of lives and the economic stability of the world for minor political gains and/or religious convictions.

Pretty much agree with all of the above and have stated as much already. No way hostilities with China will happen while the two countries are so dependent upon one another for economic survival. And #3 is insurance against something happening like the ridiculous scenario that served as the catalyst for WWI. That it turned into a world war was a farce.
Even if a megalomaniac rose to or seized power like WWII, MAD does stabilize and keeps those people in check.
 
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: lesseroftwoweevils on February 11, 2013, 11:05 pm
Y'all motherfuckas be trippin'. I can't definitively say that there won't be a world war in the future, but it seems VERY unlikely to happen during any of our lifetimes. Why you ask?

1. Because we live in the age of "mutually assured destruction" policies, where any global war between two nuclear-armed superpowers effectively destroys them both. This formed the narrative during the Cold War (although there were inadvertently numerous close calls due to paranoia/technological failures) and it's even more true now. No one, not even North Korea, wants to actually use their nukes. They simply want the political leverage that comes along with them.

2. Because of the strengthening economic ties between countries. This is especially important when talking about Chinese and U.S. relations. Why would either country want to start ANYTHING with their biggest trading partner?!

3. Because we've become an increasingly more globalized world, especially with the advent of the internet age. When you can talk to people around the globe instantaneously, it becomes more difficult for governments to pit us against one another. Compare that to five or six decades ago, when the passing of information was measured in HOURS/DAYS, not milliseconds.

Simply put, it ain't gonna happen, at least not in the next hundred years or so. No one's going to sacrifice billions of lives and the economic stability of the world for minor political gains and/or religious convictions.

Pretty much agree with all of the above and have stated as much already. No way hostilities with China will happen while the two countries are so dependent upon one another for economic survival. And #3 is insurance against something happening like the ridiculous scenario that served as the catalyst for WWI. That it turned into a world war was a farce.
Even if a megalomaniac rose to or seized power like WWII, MAD does stabilize and keeps those people in check.
 


Yeah sorry about that mate, I somehow missed your post. Mutually assured destruction ftw! +1
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 12, 2013, 12:24 am
Yeah sorry about that mate, I somehow missed your post. Mutually assured destruction ftw! +1

No worries. You made some other good points that I hadn't mentioned yet like with China, which is undeniably true. +1 :) It's because of MAD that I wouldn't mind at all if Iran got the bomb, even if it did spark a nuclear arms race among other ME powers. That might even things up a bit instead of having the entire region dominated by Israel and fear of Israel.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: PlutoPete on February 12, 2013, 03:34 pm
Smaller countries will be the spark, the big powers will get dragged into it because of treaties and pacts.
If Israel starts a conflict with Iran or Syria then the USA will get involved, and Russia possibly.
What if Turkey got involved in an Israeli spat, EU partners would have to support Turkey against Israel and what would USA do then?
Bigger surprises than the above have swept the middle east in the last few years, nukes won't stop a war any more.
Title: Re: The Next World War
Post by: jpinkman on February 12, 2013, 08:21 pm
What if Turkey got involved in an Israeli spat, EU partners would have to support Turkey against Israel and what would USA do then?

Turkey's not part of the EU. They've wanted membership for quite some time so as to gain protection under the NATO umbrella from encroaching Russian influences (and to adopt the Euro) but have always been thwarted by anti-Muslim alarmism, the last time a few years ago when Sarkozy drummed up a frenzy of anti-immigrant xenophobia.

Nor is Turkey suicidal in getting into a confrontation with Israel, especially when they consider the US an ally they don't want to lose for lack of a whole lot of friends since that would also antagonize the EU, and it's not like they're particularly fond of Russia. Despite being predominantly Muslim they have long traditions as a secular society that they have a strong interest in wanting to keep in contrast to other Muslim countries. They've also got internal issues with Kurdish separatists that they'd be dumb asses not to resolve before even thinking about a protracted external conflict.

Can't see Turkey seeking a death wish even if Erdogan is a megalomaniac as Israel would have you believe.

Quote
Bigger surprises than the above have swept the middle east in the last few years, nukes won't stop a war any more.

Nukes really only stop wars against other countries with nukes. Doesn't mean wars won't be fought by countries wanting to hold onto the power by preventing other countries from getting nukes as, ahem, we're familiar with the obvious culprits.