It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
While I don't put a great deal of faith into one-off religious predictions, especially from people who outright admit not being a prophet, that is going in one of the directions that makes the most sense for me.
I think there is specifically a lot of room to discuss the different levels of impact and different available reactions for different nations if Yellowstone were to erupt catastrophically.
America would effectively be put down overnight, but others would have some lead time knowing that they had air quality and crop production problems on the way in conjunction with a major economic recession or depression caused by the sudden destruction of a major market.
A quake on the new Madrid fault is another interesting initiating event.
What happens if America suddenly needs a lot of manpower to solve its own problems and isn't able to use all of its fancy electronics or logistical resources overseas, while every other nation on the planet is also in desperate circumstances?
For one thing, I think this might be one of the few scenarios where North Korea really would risk invading the South. I wouldn't be shocked if they immediately saw it as their only chance to break out from under our boot heel and moved the minute they saw we couldn't respond short of a nuclear wear, then hold Japan hostage at nuke point in hopes that we will let it stand, and without the US, the only ones who really have much say in what will happen are the Chinese, and it's probably in their interest to let it happen.
But without the US meddling over there, almost any motivation that the Chinese and Russians had to play nice with eachother is out the window too. The Russians might reasonably fear that a suddenly expansionist China that has already dealt with Korea Taiwan and Japan will begin to eye that vast wasteland and pacific coast with lots of resources and relative few Russians in it, and the Chinese might feel it is time for them to be the only 600 pound gorilla in Asia.
And if Russia and China are in a staring contest, and China and India are in a staring contest, and there's no US for India to turn to, it makes sense for Russia and India to align. This is bad news for every country whose name ends in ISTAN, because Russia and China will need a secure line of logistics between themselves and a plan to keep China out of the Middle East if it comes to that.
Which brings us to the Middle East. Iran is safer with no US, assuming Israel doesn't feel cornered into preemptively nuking everyone who doesn't like them, but they may be in the awkward position of having to choose between Russia/India, the closer powers with whom they have older ties, or China- the side that may seem to have a better chance of winning the war, depending on the specific situation
The Sunni states could fall, they could unite against Israel or against Iran if provoked.
I imagine Europe mostly just trying to hold itself in order in such a chaotic global situation. Financial interests would probably dictate a passive support for China, and their strategic interests would dictate preparation against the possibility of future Russian aggression in Europe.
So allow me to briefly suggest a few plausible scenarios whereby the US could lose enough clout on the world stage for such considerations to become relevant, and invite you to offer your own scenarios or just your own thoughts on what WWIII might be if the US were not such a major factor.
reply to post by ketsuko
I know hence why i said if usa stayed out then EU would likely stay out and come out on tops.
It would likely just be a ME and asian centerd world war.
EU has no beef with any of the Asian players and its only friction with the ME seems to be cause its support of USA foreign polcily, remove the usa you remove the friction with most the ME except maybe Iran and they cant do much.