|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 13 hours, 32 minutes
|
Alright, here's my theory about World War 3
#23659279 - 09/19/16 04:21 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
In my opinion, here's what's gonna happen:
The minute China develops a decent navy and air force, there will be a big alliance between Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan. All with massive armies.
- North Korea will dessimate South Korea and secure that peninsula. - China's new navy and air force will chip away at Japan. - Chinese ground forces combined with the Pakistanis will roll over south east Asia and India. - Iran's entire forces will roll on the middle east. - Russia and Turkey will take over A large chunk of Europe - Upon seeing this, the Saudis will flip on their side and go after Northern Africa - Brasil will be the landing base for the Russian's and company
In the meantime,
- England and France will cling on to Western Europe - The US Navy will be over stretched - The US Air Force will fly to Japan and England - The Japanese will be tangled up with North Korea and China, essentially paralyzed.
And then suddenly, the world as we know it is gone.
All they are waiting for is for China to secretly build an navy and air force.
--------------------
Edited by Patlal (09/19/16 04:22 PM)
|
Ezuma
Gontish Wizard



Registered: 12/02/13
Posts: 8,423
Loc: Roke
Last seen: 10 months, 21 days
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23659286 - 09/19/16 04:22 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
why does everyone around here seem to assume China wants to directly control the world? I think the Chinese are too smart for that, given the headache world domination causes the US
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 13 hours, 32 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Ezuma]
#23659297 - 09/19/16 04:26 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ezuma said: why does everyone around here seem to assume China wants to directly control the world? I think the Chinese are too smart for that, given the headache world domination causes the US
The US actively tries to limit civilian casualties. I doubt they will. The US could completely invade and destroy the Middle East if it wasn't for the civilian issue.
--------------------
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,363
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 24 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Ezuma]
#23659306 - 09/19/16 04:28 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
probably cause of the whole Tibetan shit going on. They wanna take it over like its their country! Bastards 
Interesting layout Patlal. Looks pretty legit, hopefully will will not see if it becomes true
-------------------- "What you must understand is that your physical dimension affects everyone in the higher dimensions as well. All things are interconnected. All things are One. Therefore, if one dimension is broken or out of balance, then all other dimensions will experience repercussions." - Pleiadian Prophecy 2020 The New Golden Age by James Carwin PROJECT BLUE BOOK ANALYSIS! (312 pages!) | Psychedelics & UFOs | Ready to Contact UFOs? | The Source on Mushrooms | Trippy Gematrix | Dj TeknoLogical | Fentanyl Test Kits R.I.P. Big Worm || The Start of the Ascension Process was 2020. Welcome to the Next Great Era of Earth 🌎🌍🌏
  Oregon Eclipse Festival 2017 :: Aug 19th - 21st :: Pure Paradise   Very Effective LSA Extraction Tek | 💧 Advanced Cold Water LSA Extraction Method 💧 |  Mescajuana - Mescaline with Marijuana | DMT Dab Bongs | UFO Technology! Shpongle
     
|
Ezuma
Gontish Wizard



Registered: 12/02/13
Posts: 8,423
Loc: Roke
Last seen: 10 months, 21 days
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: LogicaL Chaos] 1
#23659321 - 09/19/16 04:35 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
the Tibet thing has been going on for ages. No one wants an outright war with the US, not Russia and not China and certainly not that insignificant shithole North Korea. War is always about economics, and there is nothing to be gained from taking on a super power the like of the states in outright open warfare. I genuinely think the days of traditional war are gone, as it just isn't profitable. What's profitable is keeping smaller proxy wars going on incessantly in the third world, that way everybody gets a cut, and relatively few of our civilians or institutions are endangered
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 13 hours, 32 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Ezuma]
#23659417 - 09/19/16 05:11 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ezuma said: the Tibet thing has been going on for ages. No one wants an outright war with the US, not Russia and not China and certainly not that insignificant shithole North Korea. War is always about economics, and there is nothing to be gained from taking on a super power the like of the states in outright open warfare. I genuinely think the days of traditional war are gone, as it just isn't profitable. What's profitable is keeping smaller proxy wars going on incessantly in the third world, that way everybody gets a cut, and relatively few of our civilians or institutions are endangered
Never underestimate your opponent. - Sun Tzu
While you're doing that, never over estimate your capabilities either.
General Van Riper has proven that point with flying colours during the Millennial Challenge of 2002. Biggest most realistic war game ever devised by the US. The Scenario was Blue team (the Allies) vs Red team (A religious extremist insurgency group in the middle east) kind like ISIS essentially.
Van Riper was Red Team. One the first day of this ultra realistic simulation, he managed to cripple the US navy using row boats. It was suppose to be a 14 day wargame and Red crippled Blue on day 2. They had to reset the game.
I'm not kidding either. Look it up. Millenial Challenge 2002.
--------------------
Edited by Patlal (09/19/16 05:17 PM)
|
Moonshoe
Blue Mantis


Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23659438 - 09/19/16 05:17 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I disagree. Future wars between powerful nations will be waged with cyber, economic and biological warfare, not conventional air, sea and land power.
The real question is which nation will be the first to develop and weaponize a super intelligent AI.
Whichever nation achieves this first will rule the world overnight, without a single shot being fired.
Alternatively a nation will develop a super - virus and release it to depopulate an enemy nation without anyone being able to tell who perpetrated the attack, thus avoiding nuclear retaliation.
Or a nation will detonate an EMP over an enemy shutting off their power grid.
Or they will orchestrate an economic collapse that will make them the new defacto superpower .
Using tanks planes and ships to wage world war 3 would be like using spears to wage world war 2.
--------------------
Everything I post is fiction.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23659466 - 09/19/16 05:26 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
The Chinese military is still manufactured like their shitty products, quantity over quality. Their training is garbage and their infrastructure corrupt to no end, there's little reason to believe they'll become the threat they never have been. Japan steamrolled their toothless hoard last time around and the balance hasn't changed.
Russia isn't a big step forward in that regard... the only time's Russia has played a major role in Europe was when Western Europe was at war with itself and Russia was allied to either side, coming in from the rear and taking absurd casualties.
US and co are another story: Germany, France, the UK, Japan, South Korea and Israel. All of whom have well trained and well equipped armed forces, with much less petty corruption stripping the gears.
If it came to a conventional war between these nations, it would end fast. Only MAD protects Russia and China, its the only reason they can bluster as much as they do.
|
billy jowl
blah



Registered: 12/11/12
Posts: 1,496
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Ezuma]
#23659508 - 09/19/16 05:43 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
- North Korea will dessimate South Korea and secure that peninsula. - China's new navy and air force will chip away at Japan. - Chinese ground forces combined with the Pakistanis will roll over south east Asia and India. - Iran's entire forces will roll on the middle east. - Russia and Turkey will take over A large chunk of Europe - Upon seeing this, the Saudis will flip on their side and go after Northern Africa - Brasil will be the landing base for the Russian's and company
In the meantime,
- England and France will cling on to Western Europe - The US Navy will be over stretched - The US Air Force will fly to Japan and England - The Japanese will be tangled up with North Korea and China, essentially paralyzed.
Wait... Absolutely no where in this scenario did you mention Canada, or the obvious role they'd play in WW3?!?
You're scenario is deeply flawed. It's a widely known fact Canada will be the instigators in this coming fiasco. It's exactly like the media calling BLM rioters "Protesters"
I predict Canada will be exposed for what it truly is! The charade has gone on far too long...
--------------------
|
PatrickKn



Registered: 07/10/11
Posts: 20,564
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: billy jowl] 2
#23659575 - 09/19/16 06:05 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Countries are slowly becoming uninvadable. Economic warfare will become the new norm.
|
trekie
Metal man


Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 11,085
Loc: Larger cities
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: PatrickKn] 1
#23659717 - 09/19/16 06:48 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
World War III will start in Africa or southwest Asia. It will likely start with India vs Pakistan. They will nuke each other then China's horde will come in and clean up.
Russia aggression will continue with it regaining man of its former Soviet states. They won't start chipping away at the Baltic states till Turkey is kicked out of NATO.
Turkey will continue it's March towards a totalitarian state. Turkey will eventually take over parts of Iraq and Syria will either get in a war with Iran or the Saudis.
Africa will see a strong man rise to power and get a nuclear weapon via north Korea . Depends on what country but the war for resources have been going on for years. Likely in the horn of Africa or southern. Africa .
North America greatest threat is from within. The USA power projection is unparalleled to anyone else. The Navy only ensures that no nation could even come close to our shores. China and our economy are so intermingled that we depend on each other. No way either would risk self economic destruction for a little land.
-------------------- I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
|
Bodhi of Ankou
*alternate opinion blocks path*


Registered: 06/02/09
Posts: 24,778
Loc: Soviet Canukistan
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: trekie]
#23660213 - 09/19/16 10:31 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
There will be small bouts of low intensity warfare from here up until tech reachs a state where they feel comfortable launching a nuclear assault and parrying incoming strikes. This will wipe some areas out and leave others un touched. Having successfully wiped out the majority of its biomass humanity will regroup and reform as a markedly different entity. The now unused resources allowing explosive regrowth, eventually we start colonizing other worlds. Many dank memes are made.
|
Turtletotem
Dutch Delight



Registered: 09/02/13
Posts: 3,763
Last seen: 4 years, 11 months
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou] 1
#23660341 - 09/19/16 11:41 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Sounds interesting, Patlal, but you left out nuclear weapons in your theory. I think atom bombs have changed the nature of warfare for ever.
Proxy wars in nations that don't have them, and economic/cyber warfare against nations that do.
--------------------
|
zZZz
jesus


Registered: 12/28/07
Posts: 33,478
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23660502 - 09/20/16 01:27 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
u are wrong op. slap urself silly why dont u
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal] 3
#23660586 - 09/20/16 03:02 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The USA and its allies, which dishonorably sometimes includes my own country, will be the aggressor of WW3.
The enemy is domestic, not foreign.
Americans will have to literally take over their country from their government because unlike a UN peace force, they won't nuke their own cities.
You may laugh, but the next time you vote after November may literally be with a Pakistani UN blue helmet and a local militiaman together guarding the polling place.
Americans, all this talk of taking your country back, you may have to put that into practice.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh



Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,473
Last seen: 3 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante]
#23660591 - 09/20/16 03:11 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I'm a beliver in the 3rd world war being Mutually Assured destruction
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
|
Quote:
Seriously_trippin said: I'm a beliver in the 3rd world war being Mutually Assured destruction
I believe in nuclear weapons as a deterrant between nuclear powers.
Problem is that a nuclear power like the US Government could butcher its own population or invade lets say Canada and Mexico to unite even more states while keeping the UN at bay with nuclear weapons.
All you have to do is launch one MIRV'd missile and the 12 major cities of a nation turn into a billowing mushroom cloud 20 minutes later.
How can we stop your government from killing you if it goes rogue?
And it sure looks like its going rogue, your police is militarized to the extreme. All they have to do is declare a relatively peaceful protest a riot and bam, there you go.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
abltsandwich
JFK = Jelly Donut




Registered: 06/16/09
Posts: 11,537
Loc: Dildoville
|
|
One important factor no one's mentioned yet: The reptilians and the NWO.
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: abltsandwich] 1
#23660607 - 09/20/16 03:22 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The reptilians and the NWO.
Theres no such things as reptilians, that's David Icke's recollection of the 1980s TV miniseries V backing up into his sense of reality.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
abltsandwich
JFK = Jelly Donut




Registered: 06/16/09
Posts: 11,537
Loc: Dildoville
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante]
#23660609 - 09/20/16 03:24 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
No no no the reptilians, the grays, tall whites, et al. are all fighting for supremacy and domination of the human race. It's true, the clues are everywhere. Watch YouTube if you don't believe.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante] 1
#23660611 - 09/20/16 03:25 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The US won't be facing civil war or invading Western nations anytime soon
This is paranoia to an extreme
|
rackem



Registered: 11/27/09
Posts: 14,024
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89]
#23660614 - 09/20/16 03:27 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
cant have domination without a war.. when ww3 happens, im headed for the hills to live without a damned smart box in front of my face for 16 hours a day.
who gives a fuck who wins at that point.
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89]
#23660618 - 09/20/16 03:28 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Ask a black guy about the police and he'll probably say it already has begun.
And y'all are striking up wars like that little girl in that christmas story lit up matchsticks.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante]
#23660622 - 09/20/16 03:32 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Asante said: Ask a black guy about the police and he'll probably say it already has begun.
Considering the prolific black on everyone homicide rates, that wouldn't be surprising.
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89]
#23660633 - 09/20/16 03:41 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Its more than the shootings, its the policing style and incarceration rate over trivial offenses. Putting young black males in prison or the morgue is a government industry still. I say still because it never really stopped.
But lets get back ontopic of World War Three.
My bet is on the US as the instigator or aggressor. You're also being VERY provocative towards Putin who is not the kind of guy to be provoking too much.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante] 2
#23660664 - 09/20/16 04:13 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
We can't go to war with Russia, because of MAD. Its a shame Putin isn't American.
I think the destruction of our ecosystem is more tangible threat than WW3
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,797
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89]
#23660685 - 09/20/16 04:39 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
There are few people more unamerican than Putin, he is a classical Russian "Great Leader" and I mean that as a compliment.
Russia cant have an Obama, Clinton, Trump, they're not gonna make it.
Let's hope he keeps things under control and won't get too expansive.
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Moonshoe
Blue Mantis


Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Asante]
#23660958 - 09/20/16 08:18 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Unless we find a way to solve the global methane holocaust and the dozen other global ecological cataclysms brewing on the horizon we better kick world war 3 off soon or we won't have time.
--------------------
Everything I post is fiction.
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 13 hours, 32 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Moonshoe]
#23660985 - 09/20/16 08:31 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Just cut your beef consumption in half and spread the word. Methane will drop. Farmland will shrink and overall every positive things will increase.
--------------------
|
PatrickKn



Registered: 07/10/11
Posts: 20,564
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal] 2
#23661079 - 09/20/16 09:28 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The wars and conflicts that are taking place right now are the final vestiges of uncontrolled territory - tactically. The reason wars take place in the middle East has largely been to prevent other groups from taking control of its resources and creating a formidable superpower decades down the line. Whether those groups are religious fundamentalists that are close with the area, Russians or Asian powers - the fight is - in the grand scheme - a (hitherto failed) effort to quasi-colonize parts of the Middle East long enough to ensure their propped governments can withstand invasion from outside forces, and from rebels within.
The end goal is to make countries uninvadable, so that countries who have the largest stakes in the international economy can reign supremacy through trade.
As it stands, any country that can be invaded by the United States is a country that can be invaded by Russia as well. Wars won't end until all areas of the globe have been modernized into uninvadable territory.
An example of a country that would have been invaded if it were possible is Iran. What many don't realize is that Iran has a population of 75 million people - nearly the size of Germany. That's a war that can't be won considering Iran has a sizable militarized police force and a military with a third as many soldiers as the United States, it would degrade into total warfare and would only come to resolution with the use of nuclear weapons - something that just won't happen as nuclear weapons are for ending wars, not conquest.
That's not even considering that Iran has allies. It's completely uninvadable by any single force, and it would take a world war sized effort to do so without counting it's allies as well. Another country that would have been invaded if it were possible is North Korea, which boasts the fourth largest ground army in the world. For any country to take powers like these on is suicide. You might win the war at the cost of leaving yourself open to attack by another country when your military has been strained thin fighting the other one.
This is the direction all countries are building up to. I use Iran as one example of many. China has such a big militarized police force and military, that it would retain sovereignty if all the armies of the US, Europe and Russia combined tried to attack it. However their military structure is a purely defensive one, they are ill equipped for large scale invasions and for good reason. It's much cheaper to defend than to invade - and they've focused their economic resources on pure growth - and have positioned themselves as the strongest player in economic warfare the world will ever see.
A lot of people don't realize that this is the most peaceful period in thousands if years. It's not just a smaller percentage of people per capita dying per year from warfare, it's actually fewer in number itself despite the world holding the largest population in history. The scale of wars today is considerably smaller since the end of WW2, and it's been in a downward path since. Everything has been a cold war (something that has never quite ended) squabble over influence in a region, or internal civil warfare. These are all coming to an end as nations become more equipped to resist occupation, and more equipped to suppress internal uprisings. Countries like the United States, Russia, China and most of Western Europe are already at this point uninvadable, and can counter any domestic uprising as well.
For these reasons, I don't think we'll see a war on the scale of WW2 for a few centuries. Economic warfare is starting to truly determine where power is rather than brute force - largely because countries you attack economically become less equipped to fight a war. Need money to fight a war.
Edited by PatrickKn (09/20/16 09:49 AM)
|
Bodhi of Ankou
*alternate opinion blocks path*


Registered: 06/02/09
Posts: 24,778
Loc: Soviet Canukistan
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89]
#23661149 - 09/20/16 09:53 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: We can't go to war with Russia, because of MAD. Its a shame Putin isn't American.
I think the destruction of our ecosystem is more tangible threat than WW3
Personally I think that's going to be the primary cause. When coastal cities start getting wiped out in the next ten years all the strain and desperation is probably going to be funneled the same way it always is. Into war.
|
Turtletotem
Dutch Delight



Registered: 09/02/13
Posts: 3,763
Last seen: 4 years, 11 months
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23661219 - 09/20/16 10:17 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bodhi of Ankou said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: We can't go to war with Russia, because of MAD. Its a shame Putin isn't American.
I think the destruction of our ecosystem is more tangible threat than WW3
Personally I think that's going to be the primary cause. When coastal cities start getting wiped out in the next ten years all the strain and desperation is probably going to be funneled the same way it always is. Into war.
I think the same, and it's not just coastal cities getting whiped out.
Climate change means exactly what it says on the label; the climate will change. Wet places become dry, dry places become drier, other places become friggin soaked.. food production will be thrown in disaray, etc. etc.
This will lead to massive movements of populations, war, famine, disease.. it's gun be bad.
Thankfully I live in the Netherlands. The sea will claim us long before shit starts to get really ugly.
--------------------
|
Ezuma
Gontish Wizard



Registered: 12/02/13
Posts: 8,423
Loc: Roke
Last seen: 10 months, 21 days
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23661704 - 09/20/16 01:09 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I still don't think there will or can be a world war 3. Traditional warfare doesn't make sense anymore
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh



Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,473
Last seen: 3 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Ezuma]
#23661739 - 09/20/16 01:21 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I think it's plausible but it'd end so quickly
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
Bodhi of Ankou
*alternate opinion blocks path*


Registered: 06/02/09
Posts: 24,778
Loc: Soviet Canukistan
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Turtletotem]
#23661844 - 09/20/16 01:53 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Turtletotem said:
Quote:
Bodhi of Ankou said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: We can't go to war with Russia, because of MAD. Its a shame Putin isn't American.
I think the destruction of our ecosystem is more tangible threat than WW3
Personally I think that's going to be the primary cause. When coastal cities start getting wiped out in the next ten years all the strain and desperation is probably going to be funneled the same way it always is. Into war.
I think the same, and it's not just coastal cities getting whiped out.
Climate change means exactly what it says on the label; the climate will change. Wet places become dry, dry places become drier, other places become friggin soaked.. food production will be thrown in disaray, etc. etc.
This will lead to massive movements of populations, war, famine, disease.. it's gun be bad.
Thankfully I live in the Netherlands. The sea will claim us long before shit starts to get really ugly.
I was being a little simplistic but yeah, we're basically fucked at this point. Its only a matter of time before basic necessities get cut off to a large amount of people and civility flys out the window lord of the flies style.
|
Moonshoe
Blue Mantis


Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23661926 - 09/20/16 02:16 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It's true . One of the many disasters caused by runaway climate change will certainly be increased small and quite possibly Large scale war and conflict.
--------------------
Everything I post is fiction.
|
Thayendanegea
quiet walker



Registered: 02/20/12
Posts: 7,596
Loc: 7 Lodges Nation
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23661971 - 09/20/16 02:30 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
If there is a WW3, it will be a nuclear one and we are all fucked. It only takes one crazy dictator to start the fiasco from which there is no turning back. Unfortunately, this will be the final purge to bring near elimination of our race, and future balance....thousands of years from that day, to fruition.
The US has one submarine that carries over 200 nuclear warhead equipped missiles...each one 30 times as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb. I would assume the Russians have something similar. But, my guess is that WW3 will start from a launch by Kim Jung Un and then overreactions by the superpowers. Once a missile is launched, there is only about 7-10 minutes till impact...not a lot of time to make sound and rational decisions.
Dialogue and tensions are currently as bad as they were during any time during the Cold War according to our top military strategists.
-------------------- Look Deep Into Nature,and Then You Will Understand Everything Better. Albert Einstein
|
Bodhi of Ankou
*alternate opinion blocks path*


Registered: 06/02/09
Posts: 24,778
Loc: Soviet Canukistan
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Thayendanegea]
#23662003 - 09/20/16 02:38 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Im thinking once the states and Russia believe themselves to be capable of launching an attack and parrying enough of the incoming warheads to not be obliterated they will launch an attack. Laser systems are almost at that point, which in my view is why theyre getting so belligerent with eachother. A fundamental shift is on its way, and its gonna be nasty. With the submersion of major cities *cough* new york *cough* and coast lines, even without war, this world is going to be radically restructured and altered within the next few decades.
|
Thayendanegea
quiet walker



Registered: 02/20/12
Posts: 7,596
Loc: 7 Lodges Nation
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23662014 - 09/20/16 02:42 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah....who wants to be under the ones that get through though. Star wars type defenses are certainly a part of the fabric as well as patriot type batteries...but, they won't stop them all.
-------------------- Look Deep Into Nature,and Then You Will Understand Everything Better. Albert Einstein
|
PatrickKn



Registered: 07/10/11
Posts: 20,564
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou] 1
#23662070 - 09/20/16 03:01 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Tensions are getting belligerent because the US has been pushing the nuclear balance to it's side for many years now, and Russia is (openly and unsecretly) unsure as to whether the defensive assurances of mutually assured destruction are still in play anymore or if America is too far ahead in that regard to ensure it's destruction should it attack.
Largely it comes down to defenses against nuclear attack itself, the United States has stronger defense despite both having similarly sized arsenals on high alert status. Putin has talked about this imbalance in public speaches fairly recently.
The question is whether or not someone will initiate an attack for the sole purpose of ending it all. No good could possibly come from initiating a nuclear war, and people in power - despite their failings - are well aware of this. There is no strategic advantage to going to war with Russia, there wasn't one during the entirety of the Cold War either.
That tensions are heating up doesn't necessarily mean nuclear warfare is close in our future. Russia, despite being angered over the increasing imbalance in nuclear deterrence, has zero cause to attack - and in my mind we're completely uninvadable as they are.
Any takeovers or changes of power for the biggest nations in Earth will be from economic warfare, psychological manipulation of populations, and continual proxy warfare in undefended regions.
|
Thayendanegea
quiet walker



Registered: 02/20/12
Posts: 7,596
Loc: 7 Lodges Nation
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: PatrickKn]
#23662140 - 09/20/16 03:31 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Great points...but what if a hacker were to get into one of the surveillance computers and make it appear that there was a launch when there really wasn't? 7-10 minutes is not a lot of time to make a thorough evaluation ...there has already been one very close call because of misinformation.
It is a very scary world we live in and there are thousands of Islamic extremists that would love to do away with civilization. Lets hope they don't get that chance.
-------------------- Look Deep Into Nature,and Then You Will Understand Everything Better. Albert Einstein
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23662469 - 09/20/16 05:36 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Iran
I don't think Iran would last very long in a war with the US, Iraq also had a formidable Army, and that came to absolutely nothing. Occupations are always ugly, but in a conventional war I doubt they would hold out for long.
Same goes for N Korea, who were saved by the Chinese hoard last time around.
Quote:
Bodhi of Ankou said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: We can't go to war with Russia, because of MAD. Its a shame Putin isn't American.
I think the destruction of our ecosystem is more tangible threat than WW3
Personally I think that's going to be the primary cause. When coastal cities start getting wiped out in the next ten years all the strain and desperation is probably going to be funneled the same way it always is. Into war.
Could be, things are definitely going to change drastically when 2/3rds of the human population are starving or dying of thirst.
|
PatrickKn



Registered: 07/10/11
Posts: 20,564
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Repertoire89] 2
#23662987 - 09/20/16 08:12 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Repertoire89 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Iran
I don't think Iran would last very long in a war with the US, Iraq also had a formidable Army, and that came to absolutely nothing. Occupations are always ugly, but in a conventional war I doubt they would hold out for long.
Same goes for N Korea, who were saved by the Chinese hoard last time around.
Iran has an active duty force of ~550,000, with reserve force of ~1,800,000, for a total of nearly 2.5 million soldiers if attacked (for reference, the US has about 2.2 million total, and it would never commit that many to an invasion like that. Army policy is not to go into a battle unless there are 3 american soldiers to every 1 of the enemies anyway). That's not including a large police force. They have 50,000,000 more citizens than Iraq, and significantly more in number and more accurate anti-air defense systems in place. They are more ethnically homogeneous compared to Iraq, and would continue a fight long after their military is crippled ensuring a difficult occupation. Iran could be defeated in a world war scenario enough to cripple it and send it's remaining troops back home to await terms of surrender, but it cannot be invaded and occupied in it's current state. Especially when it's alliance with Russia and (to a now smaller extent) Syria is taken into account.
Granted, we have a far superior military than Iran. That's not up for debate - and yes we would destroy a large amount of their military capacities from afar before a ground invasion. However imagine a country the size of Germany buckling down it's defenses militarily, though with more soldiers, more tanks and more artillery capabilities and you begin to get a broad picture of why it's strategically impossible to attempt an occupation of it without instigating a world war effort to do so. We've barely been able to contain Afghanistan and Iraq, countries with considerably smaller populations, weaker military infrastructures and considerably different ethnicities living amongst each other (and with the support of half their countries while doing so!). Once Iran's military is destroyed, they would revert to guerrilla warfare and ware us thin until it effectively became a Vietnam scenario - except with near non-existent support from the inhabitants of the region. Imagine a fight not with 2.5 million soldiers, but with 15 million able bodied citizens forced to fight back.
On North Korea, yes they got saved by China. But you also need to realize that the Korean war was the deadliest war in terms of ratio for the American Army (other than the civil war) and the 5th deadliest war overall. We also were fighting with 20+ other countries after the North Koreans had pushed their military all the way down. The North Koreans were pushed out of South Korea, effectively counter-invaded. However an occupation of North Korea was not in the cards despite all of that. Occupations are much more extensive and deadlier for the aggressors than counter invasion and defense is.
Edited by PatrickKn (09/20/16 08:15 PM)
|
Bodhi of Ankou
*alternate opinion blocks path*


Registered: 06/02/09
Posts: 24,778
Loc: Soviet Canukistan
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: PatrickKn]
#23662997 - 09/20/16 08:16 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Absolutely brilliant breakdown of the geopolitics in the region
|
PartoftheSource
NAUT GUILTY



Registered: 05/27/15
Posts: 3,023
Loc: MIDWEST
Last seen: 5 years, 11 months
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Bodhi of Ankou]
#23663207 - 09/20/16 09:08 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah - I agree.

Who was that guy?
-------------------- Shroomery Stickers!
|
Crystal G



Registered: 06/05/07
Posts: 19,584
Loc: outer space
Last seen: 8 months, 6 days
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: Patlal]
#23663246 - 09/20/16 09:19 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: In my opinion, here's what's gonna happen:
The minute China develops a decent navy and air force, there will be a big alliance between Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Pakistan. All with massive armies.
- North Korea will dessimate South Korea and secure that peninsula. - China's new navy and air force will chip away at Japan. - Chinese ground forces combined with the Pakistanis will roll over south east Asia and India. - Iran's entire forces will roll on the middle east. - Russia and Turkey will take over A large chunk of Europe - Upon seeing this, the Saudis will flip on their side and go after Northern Africa - Brasil will be the landing base for the Russian's and company
In the meantime,
- England and France will cling on to Western Europe - The US Navy will be over stretched - The US Air Force will fly to Japan and England - The Japanese will be tangled up with North Korea and China, essentially paralyzed.
And then suddenly, the world as we know it is gone.
All they are waiting for is for China to secretly build an navy and air force.

You should make a YouTube video claiming to be psychic and post it, that way if this comes true you'll get like a billion hits. Then you'll have clients from all over the world offering to pay you $500 an hour to have readings done by you. You'll be booked solid for an entire year and become rich!
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: PatrickKn]
#23663511 - 09/20/16 10:40 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PatrickKn said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Iran
I don't think Iran would last very long in a war with the US, Iraq also had a formidable Army, and that came to absolutely nothing. Occupations are always ugly, but in a conventional war I doubt they would hold out for long.
Same goes for N Korea, who were saved by the Chinese hoard last time around.
Iran has an active duty force of ~550,000, with reserve force of ~1,800,000, for a total of nearly 2.5 million soldiers if attacked (for reference, the US has about 2.2 million total, and it would never commit that many to an invasion like that. Army policy is not to go into a battle unless there are 3 american soldiers to every 1 of the enemies anyway). That's not including a large police force. They have 50,000,000 more citizens than Iraq, and significantly more in number and more accurate anti-air defense systems in place. They are more ethnically homogeneous compared to Iraq, and would continue a fight long after their military is crippled ensuring a difficult occupation. Iran could be defeated in a world war scenario enough to cripple it and send it's remaining troops back home to await terms of surrender, but it cannot be invaded and occupied in it's current state. Especially when it's alliance with Russia and (to a now smaller extent) Syria is taken into account.
Granted, we have a far superior military than Iran. That's not up for debate - and yes we would destroy a large amount of their military capacities from afar before a ground invasion. However imagine a country the size of Germany buckling down it's defenses militarily, though with more soldiers, more tanks and more artillery capabilities and you begin to get a broad picture of why it's strategically impossible to attempt an occupation of it without instigating a world war effort to do so. We've barely been able to contain Afghanistan and Iraq, countries with considerably smaller populations, weaker military infrastructures and considerably different ethnicities living amongst each other (and with the support of half their countries while doing so!). Once Iran's military is destroyed, they would revert to guerrilla warfare and ware us thin until it effectively became a Vietnam scenario - except with near non-existent support from the inhabitants of the region. Imagine a fight not with 2.5 million soldiers, but with 15 million able bodied citizens forced to fight back.
I agree we couldn't practically occupy Iran, more speaking about a conventional war.
You make a good point about their population being more united in general, shock and awe was obviously a big deal in Iraq, likely because of the divisions and past defeats.
Quote:
On North Korea, yes they got saved by China. But you also need to realize that the Korean war was the deadliest war in terms of ratio for the American Army (other than the civil war) and the 5th deadliest war overall. We also were fighting with 20+ other countries after the North Koreans had pushed their military all the way down. The North Koreans were pushed out of South Korea, effectively counter-invaded. However an occupation of North Korea was not in the cards despite all of that. Occupations are much more extensive and deadlier for the aggressors than counter invasion and defense is.
Americans made up almost 90% of the UN forces during the war, and quickly decimated the Koreans upon landing. It was the Chinese that made the war bloody and drawn out.
I'm not for occupations in general. I think it would make more sense to defeat & disarm a nation, cripple their civilian infrastructure, impose a puppet government and blockade from a distance. Occupying on the ground requires more brutality than Westerner's are really capable of at the moment, total war and all that.
|
twighead
mͯó



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 29,560
Loc: Glenn Gould's Fuck Windmill
Last seen: 1 hour, 46 minutes
|
Re: Alright, here's my theory about World War 3 [Re: PatrickKn]
#23663714 - 09/20/16 11:43 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
PatrickKn said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said:
Quote:
PatrickKn said: Iran
I don't think Iran would last very long in a war with the US, Iraq also had a formidable Army, and that came to absolutely nothing. Occupations are always ugly, but in a conventional war I doubt they would hold out for long.
Same goes for N Korea, who were saved by the Chinese hoard last time around.
Iran has an active duty force of ~550,000, with reserve force of ~1,800,000, for a total of nearly 2.5 million soldiers if attacked (for reference, the US has about 2.2 million total, and it would never commit that many to an invasion like that. Army policy is not to go into a battle unless there are 3 american soldiers to every 1 of the enemies anyway). That's not including a large police force. They have 50,000,000 more citizens than Iraq, and significantly more in number and more accurate anti-air defense systems in place. They are more ethnically homogeneous compared to Iraq, and would continue a fight long after their military is crippled ensuring a difficult occupation. Iran could be defeated in a world war scenario enough to cripple it and send it's remaining troops back home to await terms of surrender, but it cannot be invaded and occupied in it's current state. Especially when it's alliance with Russia and (to a now smaller extent) Syria is taken into account.
Granted, we have a far superior military than Iran. That's not up for debate - and yes we would destroy a large amount of their military capacities from afar before a ground invasion. However imagine a country the size of Germany buckling down it's defenses militarily, though with more soldiers, more tanks and more artillery capabilities and you begin to get a broad picture of why it's strategically impossible to attempt an occupation of it without instigating a world war effort to do so. We've barely been able to contain Afghanistan and Iraq, countries with considerably smaller populations, weaker military infrastructures and considerably different ethnicities living amongst each other (and with the support of half their countries while doing so!). Once Iran's military is destroyed, they would revert to guerrilla warfare and ware us thin until it effectively became a Vietnam scenario - except with near non-existent support from the inhabitants of the region. Imagine a fight not with 2.5 million soldiers, but with 15 million able bodied citizens forced to fight back.
On North Korea, yes they got saved by China. But you also need to realize that the Korean war was the deadliest war in terms of ratio for the American Army (other than the civil war) and the 5th deadliest war overall. We also were fighting with 20+ other countries after the North Koreans had pushed their military all the way down. The North Koreans were pushed out of South Korea, effectively counter-invaded. However an occupation of North Korea was not in the cards despite all of that. Occupations are much more extensive and deadlier for the aggressors than counter invasion and defense is.
Occupations aren't really necessary for many war goals to be achieved though.. I mean what would the point of war with Iran really even be? As long as they don't have nuclear weapons and aren't invading neighboring states, war isn't really a necessity at all - and if they did have a strong nuclear program active - it would not require an occupation to destroy. Sure an occupation would probably be necessary if the goal was economic subjugation - but I don't think anyone could seriously be interested in that at this point.
Numbers are impressive on paper yes, and effective when unexpected - and the terrain of Iran is very difficult - however if the only goal in the war was a crippling of the state and military - it could probably be achieved without significantly entrenching the US in a long term situation - involving an occupation that is at least. The US has the power to significantly cripple their economy (and Russia's for that matter) even without physical weapons.
Case in point? Dem sanctions... and this isn't even considering the havoc we could wreck in combination with industrial cyber attacks as well.
We can fuck their countres hard without even firing a single shot.
|
|