Originally posted by BlackOps719
With the current state of military threat in the world today it seems at times that the threat of a new Great War appears to be more certain than
- I think that this to a large degree relates to a permanent 'conceit' each new generation seems to have, each new gen has a tendency to see itself
under threat as never before.
The 20th century justified such a view in large part but today, now?
I don't think so.
The basic premise is so far off of the mark.
The "current state of military threat" is so much less than it has been for a long long time as to make the current insistence that the "threat"
is enormous and leading to WW3 laughable.
WW3 might happen by accident but there are no serious global tensions, between 'suitably' armed protagonists, in any way likely to lead to such a
turn of events right now.
Not so long ago we faced nuclear annihilation from the cold war rivalry, we had actual 2 'proper' (for want of a better term) world wars and we had
aggressive and hostile totalitarian political ideologies genuinely attracting the support of the masses in several countries.
To try and claim today's "threat" comes remotely close to any of that and likely to trigger a new "great war" (actually an unfortunate term and
idea that insults the reality of the actual 'Great War' and those who suffered it across the globe IMO) is ludicrous.
The world might not be safe in absolute terms (and probably never will be) but attempting to assess the world's present troubles as so huge and
likely to lead to WW3 is just paranoid day-dreaming IMO.
This is all purely hypothetical of course.
- It would have to be.
- I'll leave the US/UK war story bait for someone else to pick up if they like.
Been there done that, it's just to silly to be doing again.
Maybe we can all see now that Bush snr and the 1991 situation wasn't a mistake at all but a sensible halt leaving Iraq grieviously weakened, properly
contained and subject to international scrutiny.....but not falling apart in a ruinous civil war and as a destabilising menace to the region.
Besides there was no choice in the situation; they did not just 'prefer' not to advance.
There was no UN mandate to do anything but eject Iraqi forces from Kuwait and such a move would have destroyed the international coalition that had
been assembled to do the job.
Sadly the son (and all that junior/middle-ranking wannabe clan from those days who have been running things this time around) seem to have escaped
being afflicted with such astute political sense.
[edit on 4-3-2006 by sminkeypinkey]