Possible future world war three scenarios?

a reply to: blueman12

He has openly stated that his goal is world peace. He not only says he is for it he is the first president to meet with the N Korean leader to try to end our longest running war. He moved out embassy to facilitate peace in the middle east, that's why all his predecessors called to do it, because it is essential for peace there but Trump actually got it done. Promises made, promises kept.

originally posted by: Arnie123
I could possibly see the taking of Taiwan as a prelude, but I've always figured it'll happen in the South China Sea with an embolden fledging chinese navy.

At some point, a lesson will have to be learned, the HARD way.

We all know chinas affinity for being bullies on the high sea, ramming and even sinking fishing ships. Chances are they'll be getting bolder and eventually challenge American naval might.

I'm sceptical about the Taiwan scenario. China has too many interests and is not stupid enough to start an overt conflict over it.

I find the prospect of an overt military conflict between China and the US more and more remote every second...

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I know Japan has been pursuing a Nato style agreement in their neck of the woods with the express purpose of defeating China's expansion desires, with all the hate in that area it could easily kick off a fight.

Didn't the ruling party fail to amend its "defensive" constitution? I.e. Japan will still not expand military; nothing has changed with the constitution?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I know Japan has been pursuing a Nato style agreement in their neck of the woods with the express purpose of defeating China's expansion desires, with all the hate in that area it could easily kick off a fight.

We've also been humoring the idea of lifting their restrictions towards and offensive military capability. While a lot of Japan is opposed to such idea, many have been warming up to the idea as it could alleviate them of a US military presence... Or so, a short documentary I watched recently said.

But the attempt to amend the Constitution failed though, didn't it?

originally posted by: tom farnhill
a reply to: AnakinWayneII
well since 1776 the US has been involved in 222 wars and given the way they keep tormenting Iran i can see that it will be the US war machine that starts a 3rd world war

The First Gulf War involved massive, massive numbers of troops - but no third world war resulted. I think we'll be okay with whatever occurs...

Iran, under societal pressure within and struggling with a poor economy, announces it's time to take out Israel. they form a coalition. they attack.
Israel wins with nukes.
does it escalate?

or;

Islam is united under al-Mahdi. the New Caliphate refuses to sell oil to nonbelievers.
Europe gives in.
China does not. here comes a very large army out of the East.
too big for the USA to get involved (assuming Yellowstone hasn't flattened us).

Most realistic global error can be the gap between rich and poor, meaning there is not any middle class any more - only poorer people who argue between conservatism and liberalism. So, there comes a Greatest Civil War or The First World Civil War.

Aah, question was why to believe that, like strongly. We see how the internal policies of each country are broken. Do you know any country where things are okay?

originally posted by: SaddledMummy
Most realistic global error can be the gap between rich and poor, meaning there is not any middle class any more - only poorer people who argue between conservatism and liberalism. So, there comes a Greatest Civil War or The First World Civil War.

Once people can manufacture their own goods with 3D printers and grow their own food with vertical farming machines the people will start using their own currencies. When this happens the monarchies of the World will start pushing buttons.

originally posted by: ElGoobero
Iran, under societal pressure within and struggling with a poor economy, announces it's time to take out Israel. they form a coalition. they attack.
Israel wins with nukes.
does it escalate?

or;

Islam is united under al-Mahdi. the New Caliphate refuses to sell oil to nonbelievers.
Europe gives in.
China does not. here comes a very large army out of the East.
too big for the USA to get involved (assuming Yellowstone hasn't flattened us).

The second scenario seems extremely, extremely unlikely.

Refusal to sell oil to nonbelievers? Never gonna happen. More likely to be visited by Von Neumann probes this century...

originally posted by: AnakinWayneII

originally posted by: ElGoobero
Iran, under societal pressure within and struggling with a poor economy, announces it's time to take out Israel. they form a coalition. they attack.
Israel wins with nukes.
does it escalate?

or;

Islam is united under al-Mahdi. the New Caliphate refuses to sell oil to nonbelievers.
Europe gives in.
China does not. here comes a very large army out of the East.
too big for the USA to get involved (assuming Yellowstone hasn't flattened us).

The second scenario seems extremely, extremely unlikely.

Refusal to sell oil to nonbelievers? Never gonna happen.

I hope you are right
hard to underestimate the fanaticism in certain circles over their, especially in Teheran. and lots and lots of angry males familiar with guns and full of hate. the previous 'caliphate' owned a big chunk of real estate. the next one might do better.

originally posted by: SaddledMummy
Aah, question was why to believe that, like strongly. We see how the internal policies of each country are broken. Do you know any country where things are okay?

But not to the point of global destruction...

originally posted by: SaddledMummy
Aah, question was why to believe that, like strongly. We see how the internal policies of each country are broken. Do you know any country where things are okay?

But not to the point of global destruction...

If there is a critical number of countries where internal policies tensions are nearly on to boiling point, then these countries will not be able to deal with each other in foreign policy either.

a reply to: AnakinWayneII

So, im thinking that in the first place does not occur some kind of N-Korea/S-Korea type conflict or Russia/US, but massive numbers of internal conflicts like yellow jackets vs black jackets vs macron state in France or brexitarians vs EU-unionists vs catholics vs protestants in UK and Ireland, Scotland... or Hong Kong vs mainland vs uigurs vs tibetians vs taiwanese in China... or any kind of antifa vs anything in US... etc.

Then, when we all are in some level on chaos and anarchy, some governments are falling, some democracies change to dictatorships, then greater bloodshed between countries begins. Everywhere. There are no 2 parties, there are hundreds at a time.

a reply to: AnakinWayneII

They already effectively have a military, they are only limited by name and deployment locations.


Japan has to realize that sooner or later they will be forced to square off with china, and considering the history it will be ugly so they are smart to talk about joining forces.

a reply to: blueman12

I believe he did make a pledge to defeat ISIS, he must have done it because the media hasn't called him a failure in that respect.

My take given the requested guidelines is that Iran and Israel will get into a full scale war sooner rather than later. Iran may inflict massive damage on Israel with infrastructure and casualties of ten percent or higher. Israel will nuke Iran back to the stone age and destroy the Islamic State. Damage and causalities will exceed 70% and the Islamic State will collapse internally and cease to be any kind of power.

The world will rush medical supplies and infrastructure to Israel and Iran will be given what's left over. It will take Iran a century or more to repair the damage and by that time their oil will no longer be important in a world run on fusion power.

Just my take on watching geopolitics as a student since 1965. My best and I hope it doesn't happen but it's leaning in that direction.

As long as war makes people rich, War and a constant need for conflict around the world will continue untill every last penny of profit is sqeezed out, Unless a devine miracle World peace breaks out and then no profit to be made = No war to be made.

a reply to: 11SK1180 You have a point and it's valid. There's always the chance global warming could threaten our extinction and then war will become passe and we will strive to save the planet in peace.

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
If the USA or China or Russia is destroyed by some kind of accident or rouge action then yes, the rest of the world will polish their helmets and dive in on each other. But with these big three nations in power, it will be a slow drip to NWO.
All "we" need to do is get rid of the handful of nations that have yet to join a centralized world bank.

Shouldn't be too hard, no need for a world war, just keep doing what we are doing - crushing these stragglers in slow mo.

As long as it isn't controlled by White people only because that is just down right Nazi agendas. They would love that and will still cause WW3 among other races.