Would the U.S. be on the winning side of WWIII?

If it comes to WWIII there will be no winners. Simple as that.

There will be will be no winning side of a WW3 period.

Originally posted by mattifikation
20 people enter a room. 5 have guns. 4 of the people with guns kill each other and half the other people in the room. The other guy with a gun hides under a table until the shooting stops. You're left with 10 people, only one of them has a gun. Who's got the power?

How many bullets are left?

Interesting theory you propose, which I guess would only apply given nuclear war. I don't know enough about the economies of Brazil and South Africa, but I wonder how much of their economic strength depends on the rest of us North of the equator. And how self sufficient they'd be with other major countries economies on a state of flux.

Lets hope we never have to find out.

I agree. Let's hope *very strongly* that we never have to find out. :-)

I'd be suprised if their economies weren't very strongly tied to many of the countries that would be going bye-bye. The advantage Brazil and South Africa would have is that if you have good economic policies before an event, you'll probably still have good economic policies after it.

Though it would suprise me if ANYONE was still around after a nuclear war... less fallout is still fallout, after all.

I am no longer afraid of nuclear war. I know that the guy that is supposed to turn the key or push the button will not do it. We control the moles down in the holes. We, the temorary keepers of this biosphere will ressist evil forces and live on. Our mind control is based on self preservation. If any interference is attempted the attacker can no longer maintain life.
Hey, how do you know if your a reptilian?

It seems unlikely that WWIII would go "Nuke" it is not in the best interests of any of the world powers. If we managed not to go Nuke at the "Bay of Pigs" and the rest of the ColdWar it doesn't seem like it's going to happen now.

With tha said, I think if WWIII does start it will start off with some kind of Nuclear attack... most likely a lost russian/sold Pakistani/underground Iranian bomb or dirty bomb used by a terrorist orginization, I'd guess against Isreal. The World Powers know that a Nuclear conflict ends badly for everyone. But a religious fanatic who believes they are doing some Gods Work by killing off as many of the enemies as possible.....to those people Heaven awaits the martyr.

If a low-yeild nuke went off in Isreal ... It seems that Iran would bare the brunt of the retaliation. Would Russia come to their aid? I doubt it. Iran needs Russia far more than Russia needs Iran and Russia would know that the US would be backing Isreal, since that seems to be what the US does. Various parts of the middle east would take the opportunity to attack Israel. Or at least I think that would be the case. It's possible that the horror of a Nuke would actually pull the ME (and most of the world) together.

If the ME did disintigrate into a more widespread conflict.... Turkey and Egypt would either make it or break it. If they jumped on the attack Isreal bandwagon then the US would get involved which could pull Russia into the conflict (out of a belief that the ME can't be controled soley by the US). At that point it gets ugly... depending on who is in the White House... a bunch of NeoCons would probably think a nuclear option 'could work'

This scenario fits the idea of a global elite profiting off of war/keeping the planet confused/distracted and also fits the idea that the global elite are just really sick groups that make lots of money from others misfortune (as opposed to actually pulling the strings).

The whole string of events has a whole lot of what if's/maybe's .... that just make it seem that there is no WWIII coming anytime soon.

The other possible spark could be China/Taiwan but both sides seem to be making money so I also don't think that's going to happen soon.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


from what i get out of the scriptures and seeing how the world stage is getting set up with the focal point of bible prophecy being the middle east------i would say that the usa and allies will come out on top dealing with iran and possibly militarily with north korea.if pres. bush is 1 of the kings of the north of daniel 11:40-45 he or his replacement will take care of a few more arab countries "to crush terrorism" of course before he or a german european replacement marches into israel------possibly under a pretex of wanting to "help" them.after this i fear we will be betrayed by our european "allies" and by turkey------we end up being slaves to the final resurrection of the so called"holy"roman empire led by a german------this roman empire in its turn gets crushed by the asian hoards and russiah after 3 1/2 years of our captivity and at this end Messiah returns to stop the final climax of ww3 which would destroy all life if He left us alone.

If the third ww is nuclear, there will only be losers and bigger losers.

If it is a limited war, confined to the mideast, then the mideast will all be losers.

I don't think that the US China and Russia will start lobbing nukes at each other but they may chose to use nukes in the mideast then try to get the free oil afterwords.

Some additional things to think about. If a serious war breaks out in the mideast will China view this as the correct time to invade Taiwan? I don't think that the US would have the resources to do much if they were tied up in the mideast.

Hopefully, we won't get sucked into a big mideast war.

reply to post by Manincloak


it is a proven point of history that the usa has used nuclear weapons in the past to ensure the defeat of a then enemy but now ally--------do you really really believe that under the right/wrong circumstances that we would never use nukes against an enemy again?especially if we thought we had a fool proof anti-missile system/laser beam defence?and i garantee you the religious beliefs of ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs of iran are so brainwashed into their minds that they absolutely believe that if they die in a jihad "holy war" against those they think are infidels while they try to convert them at the edge of a nuclear sword-----their reward is heaven with 72 virgins and a little boy for their"pleasure"------and these guys care nothing at all if their people and their land is burnt to a crisp as a result of their madness.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


will the usa be on the winning side of ww3?yes!if the battle of armageddon is the final climax of ww3 then the 1/10 of us that survive the start of this war 3 1/2 years before will be on the winning side---we finally see it G-Ds way and give up resisting Them and Messiah will say it is my people and they will say Yahvah is our G-D.zechariah 13:9

I suppose that when conventional explosives were first used militarily, there were a bunch of armchair generals sitting back saying things like, "Oh, only so-and-so's ever actually USED explosives before, so let's not forget who the bad guys are!"

Why are there a million threads on this site (and thousands of other sites) about World War Three, who will win it, who will fight in it, what will cause it, and who the bad guys are....

.....And yet.....

...There are no threads contemplating who will extend the olive branch? Nobody wants to discuss who will prevent World War 3, we just want to blow everything up so we can hurry up and see who wins it. Doesn't anybody realize that the real cause of World War 3 will not be oil, religion, nuclear weapons, or terrorism?

The real cause is people who act like animals. We all have differences, we all want things, we all need things, and we all have to share. We don't have to kill each other, we just do, because the easiest way to get what you want is to kill whoever has it. But we have intelligence. We don't need to let our animal instincts drive us to kill for dominance. We have the ability to talk, rationalize, and use diplomacy.

So, who will win World War 3? As I've already said, the people who don't fight in it will be the winners. The losers will be everyone who wanted lower prices at the pump and decided starting a war is the best way to get it. The losers will be the ones who sat back and called other countries "warmongers" but never had the guts to say, "hey, if you do this, we can't be friends anymore." The losers will be the ones who saw somebody else arming themselves, and instead of asking, "hey, you don't need to do that, we won't let it come to war" they said "well we're gonna make more bombs too then."

And will the U.S. be on the winning side of World War 3? Only if we, the U.S., end our imperialism and start working towards making peace with the world. Because we can only be on the winning side in World War Three if we are on the side that prevents it from happening.

With nuclear weapons around I dont think anyone could win, do your really think a minority of people surviving a nuclear winter would be considered a win?

Sure we would WIN. We got stronger nukes. If we Americans were to be on the losing side of this battle in any stage of the war then I assure you We the Elite Americans will BOMB the WORLD. USA FOR THE UBERWIN YO!

reply to post by Observer_PR


some attitudes have become just plain tedious.

[edit on 23-10-2007 by grover]

I would say it depends on ones definition of WW111

I will say we as a human race will not see a total nuclear war that would totally destroy Earth, it's not allowed and will be stopped.

I will even go as far to say that you will see a showing of ships that will be meant to stop and it had better stop.

SCARY it will be

It's a scary situation to imagine indeed. And yes we have used the almighty nuclear weapon in the past, but as a response to an attack on us. Having said that I don't envision the US or any other country with nuclear capabilities using a nuke for an offensive attack or to start a war. It is very possible that if WWIII were to take place that not one nuke would be used. Which is what we could all hope for.

And I suspect that the only time a nuke would be used is in defense from or retaliation for an attack...which is why we would never attack a country with nuclear capabilities and vice versa.

So it seems a conventional war would most likely be fought. And I see the US as being too bogged down as it is and who knows where else to win that war....

"Would the U.S. be on the winning side of WWIII?"

No. And perhaps more importantly. there would be no-one to witness the 'winners' glory. The winners would recieve an uninhabital carcenagenic planet for their efforts.

I'm actually looking forward to something happening, it would fulfill the biblical prophecies, and if they are fulfilled in the apocalypse, then chances are they'll be fulfilled with a judgement aswell - and then the followers of lucifer will be held to account.
or not?

I'll go with the "or not," for reasons not the least of which are that this isn't a thread about religion, and would be best left as such. A good thread stays on topic, after all.

Besides, of all the things that can affect the outcome of a war, "prophecy" holds the least sway. It may affect people's motivations to fight, it may give people hope or take it away. However in the end the winners will be the ones who didn't die, not the ones who prophecised their own survival.

As far as the war not going nuclear, I'm pretty sure I've read that military analysts believe that China would go nuclear right from the outset of a war with America to destroy the U.S. Navy. This could easily escalate into a nuclear conflict between everyone.

However, if the war was contained to the extent that none of the nuclear powers attempted direct attacks on the mainlands of the other nuclear powers, then a nuclear holocaust might be avoidable... but I doubt it.

No one will be on the winning side of WW3 or ANY war for that matter.

War is a product of unimaginative thinking, too quick to attempt diplomatic outcomes.

When people die, we all lose.

Originally posted by mattifikation
As far as the war not going nuclear, I'm pretty sure I've read that military analysts believe that China would go nuclear right from the outset of a war with America to destroy the U.S. Navy. This could easily escalate into a nuclear conflict between everyone.

Really? Where did you read that? Wonder in what context they'd feel the need to use nukes at the start of a war? To take over Taiwan? But I don't see why they'd use nuclear weapons right in their own backyard in that case.