Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Troubling evidence : World War 3 imminent

page: 2
49
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Thanks for all the responses

Indeed prior to WW2, Spain and other regions had big social issues and unrest.
I didn't want to mention it, but Hitler campaigned on antisemitism and blamed jews for all of Germany problems
and Europe let him act for so long.

We see the exact same things now, Jew bashing, social unrest, financial troubles ...

If I had to estimate, I'd say at most 10 years before the next 'big' war.




posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


I agree with all you have said except this


The elite didn't expect the revolutions happening everywhere from egypt to wall street. Their worst nightmare is people power. They now realize their grand scheme has failed and they won't be able to impose their dictature on us. The Internet (among other things) opened the sheeple's eyes.

The elites did know exactly how and when these revolutions would happen as they have been behind the scenes funding them for a long time, the designed the economies to collapse, the protests and any civil unrest, they control the media and have paid disinfo agents posting on sites such as this.

Never for 1 minute believe that they are running scared or are not in control, they are the ones who pressure the goverments to pepper spray the protesters in 1 city and ignore whats happening in the next.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthChilde
 


You do know that the US does not need to know what china is doing as China is the US's pet? why do you think they are selling all of their tech to China?



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 05:19 AM
link   
With the sheer lack of new wealth being created I think we've been left with only 2 choices.. either states devolve into internal strife to resolve the issues or we get dragged into some kind of external conflict.

Since the political social economic and militaristic landscapes are very similar to those in the interwars years I honestly can not help but feel we are verging on a similar end.

But it seems unlike most I also see a return to more conventional means as we did in WW2.

In the run up to WW2 the notion was the "bomber would always get through" making all future wars quick and decisive which would put an end to the big wars as we knew them.

This notion was based around using strategic bombing as total war.. Total war that included the use of chemical and biological weapons on your enemy to ensure they lost the ability to wage war.

Yet those weapons of mass destruction where not used to end the enemies ability to wage war and so WW2 turned into the more conventional war we know today.

It must be remembered that even late into WW2 (1944) Germany developed nerve agents like Soman and while they had stockpiles of chemical agents specialised troops and delivery platforms they where never used.

Today we put the same faith/concern in weapons of mass destruction making war of that scale either quick and decisive or MAD.

Yet if you dig a little deeper you'll see in a number of instances where we are returning to earlier conventional weapons types such a the MOP (that some feel will be used on Iran.)

The MOP is based on 1940s design by Barns Wallis (the Earthquake bombs) but with the development of nuclear weapons these types of design where taken out of service in the late 1940s (the last was the T12 cloudmaker) and replaced with nuclear counterparts.

The return of such conventional weapons indicates to me (as in WW2) that we are moving away from the relative safety and worry of MAD into very unsafe ground of conventional warfare.

I hope I am wrong but fear I might be right.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by rbnhd76
Man, I sure hope not.

"These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. .."

quote from the godfather

Different times, maybe 30-50 years?

It's not gonna be pretty.


Clemenza....

Star for a great quote from the GREATEST movie ever made.

Also, remember what he said right before this...which will help bring this post back on-topic:

"How bad is it going to get? Pretty damn bad...."



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I agree with Brian Gerrish statement, where he says tptb dont want cross country wars but internal wars in order to clamp down on the public and install marshall law. They absolutely need a suppressed public if they are to press ahead with thier criminal NWO. These people in power are serious scum of the earth, some of them are damn pedophiles and some in the belgium government actually went to a castle that was known as the castle of death for children to carry out thier hideous criminal worshipping! Sorry, getting off topic


There will be internal civilian wars against establishements. What absolutely terrifyies tptb though is this, they do not want the public to reach those in power, when the troubles arise you will see the bankers leave the country out of reach. At which point the place to take over will be parliament and buckinham palace in the UK. If we dont take these places over and install the publics right to rule then all will be over and we will be killed off. Mind you we are already being killed off.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 





The elite didn't expect the revolutions happening everywhere from egypt to wall street. Their worst nightmare is people power


oh wow.. oh # how gullible can you be? You obviously underestimate "them" badly if you think they cant predict people reactions and react appropriately. Plus wtf do you call revolution? Egypt? Its worse there now, open your eyes. Everything was planned. Your sad attempt to reassure yourself by convincing you and others that you people are free and have the power to change things is laughable. You obviously dont have a clue? Reality denier? Let me make it easy for you to understand in one #ing sentence: changes will come... with billions of deaths. The huge amount of living humans, the fragility of today's society where a lot of people are dependant, the conditioning, the poisoning of environment, food and ofc the human nature (oh no it is surely not love) will make any major change, a bloodbath. Call it a world war or whatever its the way things rebalance themselves.

Well you are thinking like this for a reason. Without taking into consideration the weakness of the human mind, new age religion made her work.
edit on 23-11-2011 by _damon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   
The economic crisis is the worst after 1929 or even worse, because today we have a global economy.

Another issue is the unresolved political questions after the end of the Cold War. The Russian English media writes constantly about that. The missile defense is the latest in a row. The CFE treaty for conventional weapons was abandoned by Russia in 2007 and yesterday, by USA towards Russia (it includes all European states). Let alone the conflicts around Georgia, Kosovo,...

A new Middle Eastern war may be the last piece that will turn the scales. We already have the warning of Russian general chief of staff Makarov that a regional conflict near Russian Central Asian borders (understand Iran) may grow to nuclear and worldwide war. The question is how much Russia will allow before it strikes. And why should it strike in first place?

Seems there is much hidden hi-tech on both (all) sides. The US robotic spacecraft and now hypersonic glider missile are just two pieces of that tech that surpasses our imagination. What to say about molecular manufactured on nano scale robots - warriors that may be enough in numbers to overwhelm the Russian missiles on the ground. Russia on the other side revealed the existence of space-based weapon laser called Polyus in 1980s. Buran shuttle was intended as a nuclear payload (both against the existing treaty for non militarization of space). Despite both projects were abandoned by Gorbachev, we don't know what is developed in secret meanwhile. We already know that some ICBM have as reentry vehicle a scramjet. How about the unending secret space crafts called under the code names Cosmos? They use Plesetzk launching pad in the North, different from the civilian Baikonur. Last year, such "defunct" Kosmos collided with the commercial Iridium. The official version was accidence...can you imagine the vast space much larger than the entire planet, and two bullets flying with that speed hit each other? Iridium was maneuverable, while Kosmos - not (officially). Later it was acknowledged that the "defunct communication satellite" weighting 1 ton (1000 kg) was nuclear powered. Defunct for some 10 year service of a nuclear generator? Or may be a nuclear payload on orbit, against the treaties. Russian general chief of rocket space forces in an interview hours before the collision said they had alert preparedness to launch missiles in less than 120 seconds...That means they indeed feared the collision could be a first strike EMP, or feared their own nukes on Cosmos. Because the orbits in space are calculated long before any "accidental collisions".

There are more details that could be considered. One may add the NATO expansion, the Georgian and other regional wars, the US nuclear capable ships in Black and Baltic sea, the Russian ships and planes going to Venezuela with nuclear payload during Obama election. Do we need to remember the words of Putin and generals during the Bush last term? They openly warned of preemptive strike.

All that leads to the idea (hope only idea) that indeed WW3 has been prepared for all that time. It is important to realize that WW3 will start in seconds and end in hours or maximum days, whatever the result. I.e. we will not have some escalation known from pre WW1 and 2, even less exchange of diplomatic declarations of war in old fascioned honorable way. If we look for escalation, it builds up right now - in the Middle East. The real first nuclear strike will be surprising.

Another question rises - does someone want that to happen, someone different from the attacker? The attacker is obviously Russia plus China. I do not imagine the vice versus scenario.

All Russian weapons are offensive or designed for offensive war. US weapons especially the newest shield are defensive. It started to be like that since Reagan's Star Wars - USA prepared to neutralize the Soviet missiles, while USSR improved the invulnerability and penetration capability of the missiles. Nothing changed so far, only the weapons are better.

"Que bono?" said the Romans. Who benefits? Will Russia benefit? Certainly not USA if it is the first stricken country. Is there someone behind scene, as in Terminator's Skynet, who actually will benefit if the 2 (or more) biggest powers on Earth attack each other, especially if Russia is the first to attack? Could that someone be off-world entity?

Together with 2012 scenarios, WW3 may have a quite narrow window of opportunity. If 2012 is what we are told to be: if there will be continental shift as we were shown on movies, what does it matter several dozen nuclear bombs, would say an attacker. And the population could be saved for both WW3 and planetary cataclysms in the underground cities, that seem to exist on both sides.

Could the people be saved WITHOUT WW3??? Why don't the superpowers unite in that to limit the impact of the coming catastrophe? Who is against that, and is he a human entity? Soon we will have all answers. Hope not too late.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
My greatest fear is an Israeli attack against Iran.Even using conventional weapons against these nucleur sites can create a radiological disaster for the region.And god help us all if Israel uses nukes.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
[[double post]]
edit on 23-11-2011 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
At the very least we're staring down the barrel of another Missile Crisis. When nations get into pissing contests everyone loses.... unless you have defense contracts or sell oil, that is.


Russia's warning to U.S.


edit on 23-11-2011 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


Russia thinks its about to happen as well and they are openly sympathetic to Iran. The Russians have even targeted, or are threatening to target, our missile defense systems in the region.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
We are the controllers of our own destinies.

As Lennon said 'What if they threw a war and no one showed up to fight it?'

The cards are indeed stacking up, but that does not logically mean that it is inevitable.

I like to think that we are more informed now than the average person in 1944, and as such, understand better what we have the power to do and not to do.

We can create a new meme, a new way of being, if only we want it.

Be the solution, and take your power back!

We can still avoid this violent and economic conflict, and, if we love our children, we will.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by AllUrChips
WW3 has been goin on for the last 10 years. A world war is classified as one in which more than 3 countries are involved. But as to your op, WW2 was a different animal! COMPLETELY. As was vietnam, even you could say the current wars going on. The next BIG war will be hell like no other when nukes are being arbitraily being launched with reckless abandon. IMO
Here is from wiki: World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in multiple theaters, and last for multiple years. The term has usually been applied to two conflicts of unprecedented scale that occurred during the 20th century, World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945), although in retrospect a number of earlier conflicts may be regarded as "world wars". The other most common usage of the term is in the context of World War III, a phrase usually used to describe any hypothetical future global conflict
edit on 22-11-2011 by AllUrChips because: (no reason given)



A world war is a war affecting the majority of the world's most powerful and populous nations. World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in multiple theaters. The term has usually been applied to two conflicts of unprecedented scale that occurred during the 20th century, World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945), although in retrospect a number of earlier conflicts may be regarded as "world wars". The other most common usage of the term is in the context of World War III, a phrase usually used to describe any hypothetical future global conflict.
Wikipedia

"A world war is a war affecting the majority of the world's most powerful and populous nations" Did you purposely edit out this part to help substantiate your claim? I believe we are close to WWIII, but not yet.
edit on 23-11-2011 by FreeThePeople because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


TheOracle,

While I believe you are right that WWIII is near, there is a lot of evidence that the protests/revolutions are all controlled by the same people who are starting up the World War. I just wrote a related thread with evidence earlier www.abovetopsecret.com...

The World Wars are pushed for by the tax exempt foundations to bring about changes to the way we live



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   
America has been at war now for quite some time and I don't see the economy getting much better because of it, in fact many of our current woes are because of wasteful war spending. I don't see ww 3 on the horizon any time soon, at least not America, instead if things continue as they are now, we are looking at a sweeping change of how the American system works in the 25 years or so.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllUrChips
WW3 has been goin on for the last 10 years. A world war is classified as one in which more than 3 countries are involved. But as to your op, WW2 was a different animal! COMPLETELY. As was vietnam, even you could say the current wars going on. The next BIG war will be hell like no other when nukes are being arbitraily being launched with reckless abandon. IMO
Here is from wiki: World wars span multiple countries on multiple continents, with battles fought in multiple theaters, and last for multiple years. The term has usually been applied to two conflicts of unprecedented scale that occurred during the 20th century, World War I (1914–1918) and World War II (1939–1945), although in retrospect a number of earlier conflicts may be regarded as "world wars". The other most common usage of the term is in the context of World War III, a phrase usually used to describe any hypothetical future global conflict
edit on 22-11-2011 by AllUrChips because: (no reason given)
[/quote


I don't think you understand the meaning of a "world war" it is a literal term where nearly every populated continent in the world is involved (just as your "Wiki" stated (don't forget Wiki's are from just people like you and I so don't always believe everything you read.
Also, why does everyone think the next "big one" i.e. "Worl War" will be nuclear? More likely than not it will be fought with conventional weapons.
Case in point, WW1 was fought with chemical weapons so everyone naturally assumed WW2 would be as well... my Dad who fought under Gen Patton in the 3rd Army said they carried their gas masks for several months then threw them away when it was clear the Germans weren't going to use gas, he said the Germans threw theirs away about the same time. Something not too well known was Hitler told his 'people' developing new weapons he didn't want anything to do with chemical weapons having suffered through an attack that blinded him for a time in the 1st WW. (he apparently didn't mind using gas on the Jews however). but on the battlefield he was firmly against it so it never happened.
Same as Nuclear bombs, some generals wanted to use it in Korea but Truman decided not to and the rest is history.
So don't automatically assume if there is a global conflict it will automatically be nuclear!



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   
After the second world war I dont think it realy ended.
America has been at war with some one and at times more than one countrie.
They have a standing army in most countries now.

The Free countries are fighting hard to stay free.
But You are lead to belive that They are the ones starting the fight.

If Adolf had won the world war.
More people would be fighting back.
And by now we would have defeted them.

So why are you Not fighting back now?



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


Well since i know a little bit of economy and the situation in Greece i can tell you that the argument with the electricity bill tied to taxes does not hold and can not be used to support your theory. This particular argument is flawed because in this country nobody was paying any taxes so they were obliged to come up with solution to collect tax revenue. www.vanityfair.com...
As for your thinking i consider it fairly logical. Although, i think that they don;t need a world wide scale of war. Take for example the war in Libya, as pointed out by some media UK, alone, on "invested" $500million (bombs, arms etc) will earn $300 billion in contracts to repair the damage that they have done to Libya (Libya pays of course).



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by pinksheep
After the second world war I dont think it realy ended.
America has been at war with some one and at times more than one countrie.
They have a standing army in most countries now.

The Free countries are fighting hard to stay free.
But You are lead to belive that They are the ones starting the fight.

If Adolf had won the world war.
More people would be fighting back.
And by now we would have defeted them.

So why are you Not fighting back now?


Your post doesn't make sense, If Hitler won the war who would be fighting him? And how do you know he would be defeated?
So who do you think we should be fighting back with? Hitler lost!





new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join