It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is a non-nuclear WW3 possible?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Layaly

I remember when sick meant 'cough cough' or omg ew. wow times have changed...




posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slickinfinity
It's a simple question I think but many complicated factors would determine how it would all unfold but simply asked, could the world powers ever fight a massive war without resorting to the use of nuclear weapons?
I hope we never see either but knowing our past I can't say I'm very optimistic and new technology can be a game changer so what's being kept secret?
War also happens for so many various reasons and in or near allies and fallout always has to be considered but would the person losing the war even care at that point?
If I am to guess I am going to say WW3 will be hell on earth with use of nukes, bio, chem and every nasty tool even using the net as a weapon so in the end we'd be left with a poisoned radiated planet! Luckily I don't really think we will see WW3 because only an insane person would want that.


Unfortunately INSANE PEOPLE run the world, sorry for shouting buti wanted to clarify that one loud and clear. So long as insane people run the planet, expect nothing good to occur apart from free spectacles and a loaf of bread.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

I am really loving your presence on the forum.. the colours around your avatar is like recharge ..

Have not seen you here before, but you reming me of instant soul remedy ? not sure why but



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Layaly

Thankyou i was just having a feeling that someone here was watching, nice to know my av made a dent here lol.

btw i like that,,,, instant soul remedy... sweet.


edit on 6/29/2015 by awareness10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

you gave me shivers all over lol
what the ??? that was cool . I owe you one



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Layaly

yeah ok but you may want to ask your God first to verify that, and no one owes me anything. I'm not real. 'poof'



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Guenter





I often claim that also most focus on the American revolution as the most seminal event in the 18th century, I say it was rather the French revolution


The most seminal event in the 18th Century was neither of those " Revolutions " It was in fact " The Industrial Revolution "



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Say nuclear power A and nuclear power B go at it. They both start off sounding all high-minded and promising not to use the nukes, but in the end, one side will get desperate. Does anyone really think the loser is going to keep his or her hand off the button?



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Say nuclear power A and nuclear power B go at it. They both start off sounding all high-minded and promising not to use the nukes, but in the end, one side will get desperate. Does anyone really think the loser is going to keep his or her hand off the button?
If defeat is a certainty, why press the button at all?



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: ketsuko
Say nuclear power A and nuclear power B go at it. They both start off sounding all high-minded and promising not to use the nukes, but in the end, one side will get desperate. Does anyone really think the loser is going to keep his or her hand off the button?
If defeat is a certainty, why press the button at all?


Because it could save you in a final strike effort.

That one big weapon you've been keeping reserve, the Hail Mary Pass (to use a football term).



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Excellent analysis Mr. Spad.

However I do not think any Pro Russian rebels gonna grab anything in the three Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania), since they are members of NATO and even if it did happen, I don't think Putin (even if he is, IMHO, certifiable) would risk even sending supplies, much less troops, there. He likes being in power too much to risk being in power over a pile of rubble.

North Korea, I believe, is the little dog barking at the chained big dog, but would be running the other way would that chain come off........


edit on 6292015 by BobbyRock because: (no reason given)

edit on 6292015 by BobbyRock because: it needed to be fixed



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

I just said the same thing to someone

I'm not real. 'poof’ >>
yeah ok but you may want to ask your God first to verify that, and no one owes me anything

when you said watching.. I think i was looking at you healing someone

ok I think I get it .. I didn’t pick that that was needed

but please ignore me I am talking out of pure intuition .. maybe you have more answers. please dont think I am a freak.. It is truly bizarre I really can’t explain it.. and I feel like I need to give this energy of yours space to do what is intended .. please tell me I am crazy ha
plus you replied to my extremely random comment anyway no need for empty words and guessing game lets see . I just wasn’t expecting this at all ets call it coincidence .. sorry for talking too much



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Slickinfinity


" I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but world War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

I agree with pretty much all of what you said and hopefully we never have to live through the horrors of any kind of major war no matter how it's fought.

I do think we underestimate the ability countries like Russia and China have with regards to a large scale invasion though and I have seen a few vehicles Russia made in the past that could transport large armies abroad.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Slickinfinity



It's a simple question I think but many complicated factors would determine how it would all unfold but simply asked, could the world powers ever fight a massive war without resorting to the use of nuclear weapons?


It depends on the intended victory conditions. If any side desires a total victory and surrender of the enemy, then "no". There's no more marching to Berlin or Moscow.

If the result is a stalemate continuation of rough status-quo, then possibly.

Most likely future circumstance: China seizes Taiwan successfully and forces neutrality on Japan. Taiwan surrenders quickly; Japan and US fight back but lose eventually politically despite reasonable military success at defense.
edit on 30-6-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 02:26 PM
link   
nuclear bombs are not going to happen today after the disasters triggered by ww2

nuclear bombs have been "BANNED" on this planet, talk about nuclear war is smoke and mirrors and a big fat LIE



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slickinfinity
a reply to: MrSpad

I agree with pretty much all of what you said and hopefully we never have to live through the horrors of any kind of major war no matter how it's fought.

I do think we underestimate the ability countries like Russia and China have with regards to a large scale invasion though and I have seen a few vehicles Russia made in the past that could transport large armies abroad.


Russia is limited by not only logistics but command and control if it is not along its border Russia would be hard pressed to deploy a force of any real size. They would be in about the same boat as the UK or France with no US support. Small expeditionary forces light in nature. And of course we have the problem of Russia's Army being 75% 1 year conscripts. In Georgia once Russian forces crossed that border they lost the ability to communicate with anybody, they could not access the Russian GPS system (that is suppose to have been fixed), and to make matters worse Russia could not gain air superiority, not because Georgia had anything that could stop them but, because the Russians were shooting down their own aircraft. Of the 6 Russian aircraft shot down in Georgia, the Georgians got two, the Russian 3 and it is debated which side got the last one. This does not count many that were just damaged. After the war Russia fired a bunch of officers and tried to fix things but, nothing ever really got done. The money continues to go to high profile weapon systems that look good in parades and not into vital things like command and control.

China just faces to many enemies at sea which is why they have never really bothered to build a large sea lift ability. No point until they get to the point they could defend it.

The US is the only power that can move large scale forces. They make it look so easy that is seems like anybody could do it but, the truth is that ability is extremely expensive.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad





Russia is limited by not only logistics but command and control if it is not along its border Russia would be hard pressed to deploy a force of any real size


During WW II they managed a force of 30 million. I would call that a " real size " Wouldn't you ?



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 05:40 PM
link   
WW3 is already going on i.e. economic war against Russia. With Russians seeking some economic partnership with China to get an offset, it is bound to spread further.



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   
This would be a way..medium.com...




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join