It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


WW3 will start this summer "This is how it will play out"

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on May, 22 2010 @ 08:00 AM
reply to post by gncnew

Iran is not building nukes. even US intelligence services proved that.

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 08:14 AM

Originally posted by usmc0369
WW3 will start this summer “This is how it will play out”
WW3 will start this summer and will play out like this. I have come to this conclusion from watching what is going on in the world now. I truly believe we will be in a world war in the next month are to and this is what I think is going to happen.
1)North Korea is going to strike South Korea as soon as they truly believe that the South is going to strike them for sinking there ship. They will use NUKES on the South and the U.S. will be dragged into the war because of all of the U.S. service members that dies in the first strike. China will set back for the time being and let us fight it out I will talk more about China latter.
2)Arabic world attacks Israel (Led by Iran). Iran and the rest of the Arabic world will see that the U.S.A is way to stretched out fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Korea to do anything to stop them. They will attack Israel with everything they have, at the same time Iran will launch an Indirect Fire Attack on the U.S. Logistics and supply depot in Qatar, and Kuwait killing thousands of American soldiers and contractors without any warning. At the same time they will strike Americas major operation bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. After this takes places the U.S. will not be able to counter attack Iran unless they use Nukes. They won’t. (The U.S. and coalitions forces will have thee hands tied fighting for their life’s in Afghanistan with no resupply or reinforcements in sight. Israel will believe that its only chance to survive will be to use Nukes.(They Will) The radioactive fall out from it will kill many more Americans in Afghanistan.
3)U.S stock market crashes and the all mighty dollar drops to not being worth the paper it is printed on. The U.S. is thrown in to chaos. The people in the U.S. will start fighting with each other to keep what they still have left.
4)Russia ceases the opportunity to rebuild the Soviet Union, and takes over much of Europe and the EU is no more.
5)CHINA now ceases the moment and invades the U.S. thru Mexico with the help of South America, and Cuba. NATIO and the UK set this one out, they have too much on their own home front to dill with. The Chinese will split the U.S. in half but will not use Nukes because they don’t want to destroy the land they just want the land, and want to kill as many Americans as they can. This will makes Americans stand up and fight for there once great nation, and they will put aside there deference’s with each other. Some of the worse urban fighting known to man will take place during the Chinese invasion and they will lose many more troops then they thought they would lose trying to fight house to house street to street. (This will greatly hurt the Chinese economy and weaken them to the point that The Soviet Union will attack China and try to come the only and great’s supper power of mankind.
6)The Soviet Union hits China with everything they have. Nukes and Bio Weapons will be used by both sides. Because of the attack the Chinese have to give up on the War in the U.S.A. and South America is beating back. Battered and hurt the U.S. survives, and rebuilds its self but never fully recovers.
7)In the End no one sided wins the war. Korea, China, The Soviet Union, Most of Europe, and the Middle east are now Radioactive Waste lands. 40% of the world’s population will be killed off in the War, another 35% will die off do to the Nuclear winter. This is how I see WW3 starting and playing out. Tell me what you think.
Mods please move if I put this in the wrong Form.

In my opinion, points 1 and 2 are very excessive reactions based upon coming to the "conclusion from watching what is going on in the world now".

They therefore discount the points that follow for me.

I would agree if the world leaders in question were all jacked up on coc aine though.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by Skellon]

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:13 AM
reply to post by usmc0369

Well ... thats sums it up in A possible way

I tend to believe that the future you are describing is a Dark future.

Since I believe in Light & Love I hope that noone of this will happen!!

Threads like this only feed the fear in people. What a waste of Positive Energy!

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:40 AM
reply to post by usmc0369

Very unlikely scenarios.

As soon as NK attacks the South, especially with Nuclear weapons, it's ceases to be a State, the Nuclear retaliation from the U.S. will destroy it.

Iran is Persian, not Arabic, they will not "Lead" an Arab attack on Israel. Most Arab States in the M.E. fear Iran even more than Israel. Even if they were to try, the end result is the same as in N.K., only this time with Israel attacking them with Nuclear Weapons. Israel will suffer losses, but in the end they will prevail, even without U.S. assistance.

Russia is in not shape to take over Europe.

China will not invade the U.S.

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 05:07 PM
I don't think China will invade US, it would more likely be China in the guise of helping N.Korea will take over, a classic strategy. They may even let N.K have a few pops, then step in so that S.K territory is lost which is more territory for China. China aren't known for stupidity they know Russia is just itching for a window to take out some of China on its borders. Russia also knows that any attept to reform the USSR would be a very long campaign which would greatly reduce military power along the Chinese Border Of which China being on a high about taking N.K would take a chunk of Russian Territory knowing Russia was in the throws of trying to reform USSR.
So IMO plays out like this maybe....... talking from a Chess Players point of view.......
1. UN sanctions
2. N.K spit the dummy
3. S.K spit their dummy
4. US steps in but is told to wait by UN emergency meetings
5. UN asks China to have words and send in peace keepers
6. China assume control of N.K Land Grab UN style (En Passant)

This might happen but seeings as all options are open I thought add one of my own.

p.s Iran...????well they would sieze the prize they sort back in the 70's Irans TRUE GOAL. I reguard Isreal as Irans False Flag and would merely take pops at....rather than all out war that would come as soon Persia was restored (Queening A Pawn).

[edit on 22-5-2010 by DreamerOracle]

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 06:01 PM
Fantasy, showing a poor grasp of geography and the world.

Q. How does iran invade Israel, being as they are some distance away.

Q. If Russia invades Europe how can NATO remain sitting to the side, being as NATO comprises most of Western Europe.

Q. Why am I responsing to a poorly conceived thread.


posted on May, 22 2010 @ 06:15 PM
I think Obama was wrong when he decided to continue the war in Afghanistan (and extend it to Pakistan). That's a point many voters will have left him. Because the only thing to win in Afganistian is fear, violence, pain, anger and hate.

Now, to get to these multiple scenario's: you're sketching worst cases with an underlying assumption that all these nations and blocks are driven by blood thirst and greed.

North Korea is a very strange one, good point made that there might be a violent surprise, but at the same time people know North Korea is a one trick pony: threaten and be bailed out with food, etc, loosen up again. It's a strange political vulcano with it's own timely eruptions.

For the rest of it: believe in hope, not fear.

I had a very bad time with George W., although as a character he could be quite funny. Politically, in international perspective, he was a reckless bull of #. And he (and Co). was the one originating the mess we live through, he was the putting it on the bill, let's not forget that.

Apart from the war in Afghanistan (Aaiks!) Obama is much more on speaking terms with the world. As a citizen I would like to thank him for that, but I oppose his war in Afghanistan.

Obama winning the Nobel prize was first of all a statement against the international politics under Bush. As a sign of hope. That's the way I understood the whole thing, and I didn't oppose it.

Personally, I think Obama finds himself only worthy to the prize if he solves the Palistinian conflict. I hope he does, though on this one I fear. The Democrats can not be harsh without cutting electoral toes. So that's something for his second term.

It's mostly Americans who read and react on this forum, and as a citizen of some nice liberal European country with good but vigilant social services and excellent medical care, I am sometimes really dumbfounded by people who think social medicare is a wicked thing. Certainly, you would need to have a good and easy system, but you can not be opposed to the idea of some collective certainty. Yet people do.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by Spinoza73]

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 06:16 PM
China and Russia do not have the logistics to wage such wars. England Germany France and other EU countries will not be push overs in Europe that that Russians could just walk in.

The Depression is global none of these countries are in any position to do what you speculate. N. Korea might be crazy enough but thats about it. Most of what you see going on is contrived and if there are any wars it will be by agreement to push some agenda the common people are unaware of.

Here we are in 2010 with large segments of the worlds population still angry and threatening war with each other over thousands of years old religious dogma, race, left vs right, rich vs poor, and dumbed down by media they don't even know what socialism vs capitalism is etc. etc. And you think it's all just random?

If there is a war it is because it was planned for a specific reason not just some random act.

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 06:23 PM
So all Arabic countries will attack the US, and China will do so as well even though the US is the largest importer of Chinese goods. And they would do that becaaaaaaause?

Also, the old "rebuild the Soviet Union" is kinda laughable. I think th OP might have watched too many James Bond movies.

Also, Cuba would attack us with their formidable army (lol), together with South America (which btw isn't a country) because South American countries would gain...well...what exactly would they gain?

This thread is nothing but fear mongering based on no facts whatsoever.

Nice story though

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by usmc0369

I think that's a bit of a stretch Devil Dog. I have been feeling like the next big war is about to pop off also, but all those scenarios happening is not very likely. But hey, if it does, I'll go back in the Corps as an officer and lead Marines.....bring it!

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 08:43 PM
Someone agrees with you. The Hopi also predicted that WW3 would begin with Persia (Iran).
Iran Revolutionary Guards Commanders Prepare for War http://(link tracking not allowed)/9iSOyg

[edit on 22-5-2010 by FifiLamoreaux]

[edit on 22-5-2010 by FifiLamoreaux]

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 08:58 PM
Nobody is going to invade the US.

Americans will continue to do a very fine job of destroying America themselves.

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:42 PM
Your senerio just dosen't work. The US is primarily a Navel Power not a Land based Power. Most of our Navel Power is currently not engaged.

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:30 AM
lol the Russians know what happens if they come Walzing in through Finland to Europe.

that happened in the last World War.

posted on May, 26 2010 @ 08:49 PM
I can see war in korea, but I personally doubt China would back up the North if the north was the aggressor, they just have too much to loose economically by loosing the western markets. I don't see China wanting any war, they have a strong economy, they just have to wait and eventually they will be the biggest super power, its just a matter of time.

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 12:52 AM
Interesting, because a scenario similar to the one you have described was arrived at by me. However, there are some major differences and there are gaps in your reasoning about the actual combat to take place. The best example would be North Korea using nuclear weapons. Though North Korea has tested nuclear weapons and has an active program (off and on anyway), they do not actually have that many nukes let alone reliable ones. Every North Korean nuclear test that I know of has resulted in what is called a fizzle, where the reaction doesn't fully occur and the weapon is weaker than theory or intent meant for it to be. In short, North Korea's small nuclear arsenal is less reliable and weaker than the USA's nuke arsenal in 1945 (US had atleast 3 nukes detonated in that year, everyone near theoretical yield or more even). I estimate that North Korea has no more than 5 nuclear weapons, their functionality questionable, it is possible even that they don't have any devices fully constructed at the moment. However, North Korea does have another asset: their conventional military. NK's military is one of the largest in the world, numerically superior to the USA's worldwide even (NK=>1millionactive+>4millionreserve US=>1millionactive+>1millionreserve). Only a fraction of the USA's forces are in the Korean peninsula and Japan combined. On the other hand, the technology of combined SK and USA forces is vastly superior to NK military technology. However, it is said that numerical superiority has a quality of its own, so hard to say the outcome there. One other thing that has to be taken into account is loyalty of the NK's military, we don't know how loyal it would be once it actually entered combat. As for Iran taking advantage of such a situation, I concur on your prediction of their actions, although whether they will have a nuclear device seems unlikely at the moment(though they could easily have a radiological device by now). However, while running the scenario in my head a couple of times I stumbled upon a possible strategy the US could use in the interim to not only stall Iran, but to also deal Iran a huge setback. The utilization of this strategy is unlikely though because it would involve scorched earth policies and a strategy that many would find distasteful though it worked brilliantly for Sherman in the USA's Civil War. A variation on that strategy however is very plausible, involving a retreat or temporary movement through Jordan. I do not believe all the Arab states would join Iran, though Syria would definitely, and probably Lebanon (but not by its governments choice, but Hezbollah would force it.) I have developed several strategies for various scenarios involving war with Iran, and had them reviewed by people with military experience or in the military (low ranking friends, this wasn't a profesional consultation, just bouncing ideas off one and other) and they were impressed. Two of my strategies are almost foolproof and would result in the metaphorical rape of Iran's conventional forces (the strategies' only weakness is that if a fully functional nuclear weapon were available to Iran, it could devastate US forces and the possibility of mounting effective combat operations against hostile forces.) My strategies do not require US forces to have numerical superiority, the only requirement is for certain forces to be ready to dig into defensive positions, with rear positions ready for them to withdraw when necessary, and for the rest to be able to leave Iraq quickly into neighboring countries. The forces also must be able to improvise in terms of logistics, as in commandeering local resources when necessary (foraging), which poses an ethical dilemma(stealing in order to survive as a viable fighting force).
During a war with Iran, an obscure problem (to the general public) will come into play against the USA: a little African country called Eritrea. Iran has a major base there.To be continued: tommorrow

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:10 AM
My friends been in the military his whole life and he told me 8 years ago in 2010 you'll start to see recruiting commershials for navy in movies and during tv shows. its happening, he also told me that china is preparing to take over canada, and they will use nukes, to destroy the easy coast, and then take over the west coast.

but who knows

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:06 AM
I normally stay out of these type of theads, but I've got to have my two pennorth.

There will be no major military conflict between any of the superpower for a while yet, if ever again.

I lived through the last two decades or so of The Cold War, and I ensure you that we were a lot closer to major confrontation then than we are now.
It was even worse during the early years.

Of course there maybe the odd bit of international fist waving and hand bags at dawn, but no full scale war.

That is not to say that there are no threats.

Korea, The Middle East, Kashmir, Israel etc are all potential flashpoints.
Certainly enough to ensure that the arms dealers maintain their profits.

But the major powers know exactly what is at stake and have no desire to see the world a nuclear wasteland.
Exactly what would be the point of that?

All the major players have too many vested interests to allow it to all go pear the moment.

[edit on 27/5/10 by Freeborn]

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:21 AM
reply to post by Freeborn

I agree, but all it takes sometimes is one lunatic. Look at how World War I was triggered, the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary by a Serb. Look how out of control that got. I don't see something like that happening with the major powers, but say an Iranian diplomat was killed in a car accident in another country, or something similar happened to a North Korean. It could be the same thing with opposing nations. Sometimes people go to war because of just one event, other times many small events lead up to a war, with a final event triggering the conflict. I think that if war occurred it would be a result of many small events leading up to the triggering event. In addition, my friend in the Navy told me that his training barracks(they call them ships though they are on land) is getting pep talks about going to war with North Korea. I got him to say it could just be part of an alertness exercise, to kind of keep the soldiers sharp, but it is possible that something really may go down. Kim Jong Il doesn't exactly have a reputation for making rational decisions also. That could also cause problems.

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 02:31 AM

Originally posted by Silver Shadow
Nobody is going to invade the US.

Americans will continue to do a very fine job of destroying America themselves.

True, haha, like the way we screwed up the ocean recently via oil rig. Then again, something like that could also create a push toward conflict.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in