Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If WW3 Did Kick Off, Would There be Sides?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Please take not I said IF not WHEN as know one bar the ones in power know about an possible, upcoming world war.

Now who would the sides be?

Well, in my opinion, it will be NATO and South Korea vs Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. Which would be the "main" war if you will.

As we know, relations between the US and China aren't the best and have some what detoriated (spelling) over the past year. If they did eventually go to war the majority of NATO would aswell. But, would Britain? Despite Britain constantly licking America's arse and go to wars which America starts, I'm not so sure we'd take part. Relations between UK and China have actually improved. (Chinese PM visited UK on a 3 day visit)

Link: www.bbc.co.uk...

However, Britain and Russia never really got along. The current relations, I'd say is "ok", not as good as China but not bad. Here's a link to the UK PM visiting Russia:

www.bbc.co.uk...

The Korean war would inevitably kick right off if a world war did start. With everyone distracted on the two "major countries" China and Russia.

Now this leads me to the Middle East. Israel seem to be the most hated country there. With Iran, Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Turkey willing to go to war with them. Also, Russia have recently said they are moving a ACC and 2 subs down to the Med Sea, pretty much due to their base in Syria.

Well, that's what I think. Would be great to here other peoples opinions.
edit on 1-10-2011 by Krono because: (no reason given)
edit on Sat Oct 1 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krono

Now who would the sides be?


Probably: link

Or maybe something pretty close to that...



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
israel vs the arab countries. Nato will back up israel. china might back up iran & friends.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
An interesting tangent to imagine is not a world war with two sides, but rather a world where a precarious geo-political situation creates several overlapping conflicts. I can think of a ton of flashpoints that could all go off at once:

Kosovo, Cyprus, Palestine, Syria, Kashmir, Taiwan, North Korea, Ukraine, etc.

But if you buy the whole rolling up into alliances theory, just watch the middle east. It'll probably start there. Everyone else usually has a cooler head.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
WWII was concentrated on the japenese and mostly Germany, but I fear WWIII if it were to start today would be more of a free for all. Seems to me the people of the earth are more divided than ever. There would be more pairing off of countries fighting each other rather than towards a common enemy. It would just be a series of regional wars scattered around the globe. Given todays context, very few could allie themselves with another while have to confront their own enemies. Hopefully I'm wrong because an end to that would be nowhere in sight.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
There will never be a WW3, as that would imply nuclear powers...in which case a nuclear exchange would happen and every country would be wiped out. That is why having a massive conventional military is only useful in going to war against countries that are no real threat or have much in the way of military, technology etc it is a pointless...why America in particular continues to spend so much when faced with this fact i have no idea.
edit on 1-10-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Maybe because the USA will start WW3, ever thought of it that way?

2nd



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Redevilfan09
 


And America would get turned in to a glass crater along with every other country. The goal of War is usually to acquire something...not much to acquire if you pretty much end civilization and most of the human species imo.
edit on 1-10-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geoneo99

Originally posted by Krono

Now who would the sides be?


Probably: link

Or maybe something pretty close to that...


Just finished reading that, well, wow. If true, I hope the war doesn't kick off for atleast 5 years cause I wanna be ready. I wanna take out those whom are orchestrating this before it happens.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
The answer to your question is simple. If WW III is fought on the concept of MAD there won't be much left and the survivors will slide back into the horse and buggy age. It would not be a good thing and it would make the destruction of WW II look small by comparison. My best,



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
I agree with nato and south korea vs iran, russia, china and n korea. I would include Israel and India with nato. There would also be a ton of people willing to fight against the west. Probably Cuba, Venezuela, El Salvador, Colombia, Ecuador, Argentina, Brazil, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, Phillipines, Chechnya, Turkey. I think there is alot more hatred for America/western Europe/Israel than we think and millions more would take up arms.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krono

Just finished reading that, well, wow. If true, I hope the war doesn't kick off for atleast 5 years cause I wanna be ready. I wanna take out those whom are orchestrating this before it happens.


My sources in Russia said that WW3 will start just in 2017, but it could be mistake because they also need time to get ready

Be quick in taking those orchestraitors out, mate!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   
I am of the belief that it is off and running.
And not in a prophetic "look at the signs" religious nut way.
I mean, we are in a secret cold war, we are trying to put a cap on the mideast for a reason unknown (only to the people) and the populations are revolting.

edit on 1-10-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by modeerftahw
 


Not Cuba. I have always had this strange feeling that Castro, in the last few decades, has come to be see the American people as endearing, just not the American government. I don't know why, I have always just felt that way. Maybe it's that respect at the end of a lifelong struggle against an enemy.
edit on 1-10-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
It would be the Nato alliance less several major members, The North American Union, the Asian allied forces of the BRIC nations, Most of South America and parts of Africa would be No man's land with sides changing like the weather, and Australia would be annexed probably by the Asian Alliance.

It is unlikely nukes will be used until end-game, and in that case it would be nothing less than total destruction. The safest place to be from a purely nuclear survivability standpoint would be southern parts of Mexico and Central American nations. There might be pockets in Canada, Siberian Russia, and India that may be survivable too. Nowhere would be safe from socio political chaos though.

World war III will start officially with a nuclear terrorist attack in either the US or Europe. I believe the real culprits will be an organization of Elites using either a US or Israili nuke delivered by a covert blacks ops team, but they will be organized into making it look like a Pakastani nuke delivered by Iranian terrorists. World war III is actually a period that will be known to future historians as the "Great Resource Wars" It will be a series of wars that will start this year probably in late October or November this year and end in a nuclear conflict that will likely occur in January 2015.

The reason Pakistan is targeted first is that Pakistan has the richest lithium deposits in the world. Lithium is used in energy storage technologies and is a critical metal for nuclear technologies as well



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   
i personally think there would be the nuclear crisped and the living soon to be dead apart from 500 million survivors worldwide. the 500 million left will cry out stop this madness and it will be stopped. the scope of world war 3 would be tremendous. people wont know what to do. They will turn to a new global government, a new world order to stop this madness from ever happening again...



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
we've been at war for 10 years already, with ground campaigns in iraq and afghanistan, missile strikes in pakistan, syria, yemen, somalia. when "WW3" comes, it'll be the chinese allied with russia, iran, and pakistan intervening in us/israeli policy, most likely with a chinese first strike tactical nuke. most arab countries will join when they see the opportunity to finally take israel out. europe will most likely sit it out beyond defensive positions. we are pushing china to the brink, i was told in '99 by my co in the army "china, china, china" it's been on the military mind for many many years, back to the 80's at least. the last 10 years of "war on terror" was a scam to bring this about. the bailouts of us banks were nothing more than a monetary centralization tactic to prepare for what is headed our way. the only thing we have to fear from china is a nuke, they know they can never occupy the us, hawaii possibly, that's about it.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
I've read a number of interesting articles over the years that suggest the new wars may not involve militaries at all. Instead, you would attack civilian infrastructure to destabilize a nation.

Example: Let's say China wanted to knock out the US in a non-nuclear campaign.

They could try to fight a conventional war, during which their first goal would be to knock out American naval assets, probably in a fire of missiles. If that was successful, they could invade Taiwan to gain control, after what would be a bloody war that would probably escalate on general principle.

Or, they could simply invest some money into destroying civilian infrastructure. With assets on the ground and computer attacks, you could disrupt the power grid, utilites, and transportation networks throughout the country. Break a few strategic pipelines and you create an energy crisis. And it goes on and on.

It's like what we see today. Politics is war by other means, but I'm convinced in the right situation, you can win without doing anything more than making people's lives a hassle. Make things messed up enough in any nation, especially a western one used to conveniences, and you'll be in good shape.

I only digress because it's interesting to think of war as more than guns and vehicles. War, properly understood, is the ability to degrade the ability of your opponent to resist.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by cassandranova
 
Cyber war has been on for a long time now, this is just one of many reports www.ists.dartmouth.edu... an other type of war that we are fighting and is WW3 is the war on terror, no one knows when where who or how many it will be by, this has forced this nation USA to take away ones freedoms, like using TSA . You have not seen nothing yet, 9/11 was bad, (what is coming and it will happen, will be much worse) look at how long it took them from 1993 till 2001 8 years. We are past that now but how many have been foiled or found by the Intel community or by shear luck? They will try and try all it takes is just one time, say a ball game, or a NASCAR race, how many more freedoms would be taken, this is there goal take a way freedoms not by force but by actions?
This is the new war, not mass forces nor bombs, but time and the will, the freedoms we lose by there actions, and fear and that is their best weapon. welcome to WW3, the new kind of war
no face
no army
no waring



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   
New predictions
Shaul Mofaz (Antichrist) in the 28 October- 2011 Israeli Prime Minister After the earthquake in

northern Israel(november)- and the dry lake Kinert He is government end of december/ 2012

And by Imam Mahdi or Jesus will be killed In Jerusalem: 21 december 2012


Shaul Mofaz maybe to rule in the 28 october 2011 untill 21 december 2012 and probably aim mayans from this two time is to rule anti christ

On november Saudi Arabia king will be killed - November 6 is the hidden of his death after


starts War powers

On October 20-28, 2011 comet Elenin(C/2010 X1) near Earth and Asteroid yu55 hit in East Asia And reverse rotation of the(10/october /2011 »

Gas Methane
Perfect Alignment Elenin, Earth, Mercury and Venus. During this alignment the Earth will also pass the route of Elenin so when Elenin has a tail with Debris, all the rocks will hit Earth and it could be raining Fire as the Bible tells us !!! By the way, this stuff is all going to happen when the date is 11-11-11 isn’t that cool !!!

- The sun will rise from the West and the vast skies will become red(

America the great volcano in -11 november 2011()

- will begin its activities - eight days out of the ashes

Syria: earthquake in northern Israel

and Syria And its effect on the dry lake Kinert /In November Jordan to take possession of syria/and

after Exit Western from Iraq/ Iraq by the Jordan in January to take possession of/Fighting with

Turkey in December2011/And in February 2012 At one point, some of Sufyani's army will sink

into the ground./ This place will be known as Baidah and will be located either between Makkah

and Madina-volcano alaise

2012- march-11

Jesus in the the

autumn

of 2012 - comes to earth from the sky - to help Imam Mahdi

theadministration of justice in the earth
emam-mahdi-1431.blogfa.com...






new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join