Pages:
Author

Topic: World War 3 - page 10. (Read 13245 times)

hero member
Activity: 1246
Merit: 529
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
May 18, 2017, 05:54:47 AM
I think world war 3 is more than about nuclear war. I think there are even more powerful weapon there that is hidden to the public and will only be unleash if a war happens. Not mentioning biological weapons and nanotechnology. Theres also a possibility that world war 3  will be a cyberwar or a ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE taking the world.
As you say biological weapon exist but are considered war crime to used it in a war, taking aside the terminator ending you speak, it could be like a resident evil weapon as well

I don't think there would be any hesitation to use what weapon may be advantageous for any nation. if you think about it, bio war and nuke war would pretty much have the same harrowing effect on a lot of innocent people and the world in general. simply put, if a third world war breaks out, it probably would put the human existence in the brink of extinction
hero member
Activity: 574
Merit: 506
May 18, 2017, 05:31:00 AM
There is no need to use nuclear bombs... Look at the çivil wars taking place on earth. They're much worse than nuclear bombs...

You only say that out of ignorance (funny, given nickname youve chosen) Wink you consider civil war worse, because it is something you are familiar with through the media.

Nuclear bomb doesnt rape women and children, sure. It "only" evaporates them, the very air surrounding them, infects the very earth and every tree left standing with lasting radioactive izotopes that will act as time bombs against anybody, who will come closer. Nuclear bomb doesnt only kill people in the area, it effectively makes the area unhabitable for many generations. People and animals, who survive the initial blast will die either of poisoning or if they are especially lucky - will be turned sick and infertile.

I find nothing as terrifying as nukes, since they actually end life. All life. They are closest thing we are ever going to get to Grim Reaper.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout

"Late or delayed effects of radiation occur following a wide range of doses and dose rates. Delayed effects may appear months to years after irradiation and include a wide variety of effects involving almost all tissues or organs. Some of the possible delayed consequences of radiation injury are life shortening, carcinogenesis, cataract formation, chronic radiodermatitis, decreased fertility, and genetic mutations."

As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me

There will be no nuclear war, trust me. In 1945, the Americans were able to use the nukes because none of their rivals had that kind of weapons. But things have changed now. Almost a dozen nations possess nuclear weapons as of now.
Americans can now use nuclear weapons but the consequences of a nuclear explosion and contamination for a long term site stops them. They have enough conventional weapons to attack any country.

How long the radio-active contamination is going to last? I am asking this because almost immediately after Nagasaki and Hiroshima were destroyed in the nuclear attacks, the Japanese started rebuilding them. If the contamination was still there, then they wouldn't have done that.

Japanese didnt know long term effects of nuclear warheads... and neither did the Americans. In 1945, the nature of fallout poisoning was still very poorly understood.

If we are talking only about survival, the area of blast will stop being extremely lethal in about two months. However since radiation effectively bonds itself with solid matter (houses, trees, earth) it will stay extremely poisoning unless those objects are removed. We are talking about organ failure, infertility still births and malformities among children. Not to mention cancer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1344
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
May 18, 2017, 02:51:45 AM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me

There will be no nuclear war, trust me. In 1945, the Americans were able to use the nukes because none of their rivals had that kind of weapons. But things have changed now. Almost a dozen nations possess nuclear weapons as of now.
Americans can now use nuclear weapons but the consequences of a nuclear explosion and contamination for a long term site stops them. They have enough conventional weapons to attack any country.

How long the radio-active contamination is going to last? I am asking this because almost immediately after Nagasaki and Hiroshima were destroyed in the nuclear attacks, the Japanese started rebuilding them. If the contamination was still there, then they wouldn't have done that.
full member
Activity: 244
Merit: 100
May 17, 2017, 02:26:34 PM
I think world war 3 is more than about nuclear war. I think there are even more powerful weapon there that is hidden to the public and will only be unleash if a war happens. Not mentioning biological weapons and nanotechnology. Theres also a possibility that world war 3  will be a cyberwar or a ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE taking the world.
As you say biological weapon exist but are considered war crime to used it in a war, taking aside the terminator ending you speak, it could be like a resident evil weapon as well
sr. member
Activity: 1078
Merit: 256
May 17, 2017, 02:21:11 PM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me

There will be no nuclear war, trust me. In 1945, the Americans were able to use the nukes because none of their rivals had that kind of weapons. But things have changed now. Almost a dozen nations possess nuclear weapons as of now.
Americans can now use nuclear weapons but the consequences of a nuclear explosion and contamination for a long term site stops them. They have enough conventional weapons to attack any country.

Nuclear weapons now are just used to deter future aggression on a country. Any nation now can tell that they have nuclear weapons in their arsenal but in actuality they don't. Look at Iraq, Saddam Hussein. America believed that they had WMD, but they didn't find any single one. The UN inspection team already declared that they didn't find any as well. But look what America did to Iraq, they war them that cost a lot of American lives. Saddam was bluffing with Iran when he says that he had WMD because that time Iran has and up to today.
newbie
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
May 17, 2017, 11:58:37 AM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me

There will be no nuclear war, trust me. In 1945, the Americans were able to use the nukes because none of their rivals had that kind of weapons. But things have changed now. Almost a dozen nations possess nuclear weapons as of now.
Americans can now use nuclear weapons but the consequences of a nuclear explosion and contamination for a long term site stops them. They have enough conventional weapons to attack any country.
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1344
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
May 17, 2017, 11:43:14 AM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me

There will be no nuclear war, trust me. In 1945, the Americans were able to use the nukes because none of their rivals had that kind of weapons. But things have changed now. Almost a dozen nations possess nuclear weapons as of now.
sr. member
Activity: 560
Merit: 257
May 17, 2017, 10:17:18 AM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me
It does not have to be like that. First of all, even if nuclear war happen, there will be some places on earth that will not be destroyed by nuclear bombs. So that mean that some pare of human race will survive and continue to live. And if we take that nuclear war happen, and it happen in most larger scale that it could, well that we have nothing to fear, because Terra will not be livable for a long long time. And even if some miracle happen and people survive, there will be technology left to salvage and it wont be stone and sword and axes...
hero member
Activity: 1246
Merit: 588
May 17, 2017, 09:33:27 AM
As per Albert Einstein said that it would not be the world war 3 who could declare the winner else it would be on the world war 4 in which people now only uses a stone sword or an archer. WwIII is worst because of the nuclear war trust me
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1344
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
May 17, 2017, 03:30:16 AM
Yes... the new South Korean president (Moon Jae-in) is a good guy. He is a pacifist and he hates wars. Already he has made it clear that he want to improve the relations with the DPRK. Perhaps the Japanese president (Shinzō Abe) has something to learn from him.
The only issue is that if he hates wars and refuses to get ample protection and then some nut attacks them with nuclear weapons they are kind of screwed.

Moon Jae-in realizes that the best way to protect his citizens from a nuclear attack is to prevent a major war from occurring. The DPRK has refrained from using nukes all these years. Is it wrong to assume that they will continue with this policy for the next 10-15 years, if there is no provocation?
full member
Activity: 193
Merit: 100
May 17, 2017, 03:28:40 AM
I think world war 3 is more than about nuclear war. I think there are even more powerful weapon there that is hidden to the public and will only be unleash if a war happens. Not mentioning biological weapons and nanotechnology. Theres also a possibility that world war 3  will be a cyberwar or a ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE taking the world.
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
May 17, 2017, 03:04:46 AM
England Said they will use nuclear weapons to its enemies.
Everyone knows the consequences of a nuclear war.

Vote Now!
I do think that this current sluggish world war worse because it can last forever. The manifestations of Islamic terrorism is also an element of war. We don't know who to direct them. Maybe the guiding hand of terrorists in Europe is also located in Europe.
full member
Activity: 228
Merit: 100
May 16, 2017, 06:32:24 PM
There is no need to use nuclear bombs... Look at the çivil wars taking place on earth. They're much worse than nuclear bombs...
sr. member
Activity: 630
Merit: 263
May 16, 2017, 05:27:28 PM
I don't like uncertainty. I want to already figure if the war is then you need to start to destroy each other and continue to live on for those who survived. And so all suffer. Besides, war has a negative side and positive.
full member
Activity: 476
Merit: 100
May 16, 2017, 05:13:24 PM
Yes... the new South Korean president (Moon Jae-in) is a good guy. He is a pacifist and he hates wars. Already he has made it clear that he want to improve the relations with the DPRK. Perhaps the Japanese president (Shinzō Abe) has something to learn from him.
The only issue is that if he hates wars and refuses to get ample protection and then some nut attacks them with nuclear weapons they are kind of screwed.
I do not represent In what form and what formats the Third World War has a new one, I am quite sure that this can not be avoided, after all, mankind knows the war all over the world.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
May 16, 2017, 12:32:21 PM
Yes... the new South Korean president (Moon Jae-in) is a good guy. He is a pacifist and he hates wars. Already he has made it clear that he want to improve the relations with the DPRK. Perhaps the Japanese president (Shinzō Abe) has something to learn from him.
The only issue is that if he hates wars and refuses to get ample protection and then some nut attacks them with nuclear weapons they are kind of screwed.
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1344
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
May 16, 2017, 02:56:36 AM
#99
Only one mistake, South Korea is not buying America's anti-missile systems. Trump asked for money for something that'll just put your weapons on their territory. With this idea he was sent. No he will not pay. Fat same problem as the US and Japan.

Yes... the new South Korean president (Moon Jae-in) is a good guy. He is a pacifist and he hates wars. Already he has made it clear that he want to improve the relations with the DPRK. Perhaps the Japanese president (Shinzō Abe) has something to learn from him.
I don't think so. In North Korea the Communist regime. Since it is impossible to negotiate and live peacefully. On the border of North and South Korea are constantly taking place provocations. Or the new President of South Korea have not yet the situation, or he is a traito.

During the late 1990s, the South Koreans were able to negotiate with their northern neighbors. For example, the Kaesong Industrial Park was created in 2002 after such successful negotiations between the two countries.
full member
Activity: 420
Merit: 100
May 16, 2017, 02:29:24 AM
#98
I hope the war will not happen, because it only hurts everyone in this world!

all of us will hope the same thing like you and we know that world war is only bring death to human and we should not make war. but i think the leader of each country must know this and they need to declare about peace in every country so citizen do't have to worried.
Its only natural that each presidents of the different nations doesnt want to start a world war, we are just waitng what will they do to prevent it.

It seems to me that not everyone wants peace. Some rulers are ready to sponsor the war and sell weapons. Only in order to earn money on this. The cost of many people's lives
full member
Activity: 294
Merit: 102
May 15, 2017, 04:29:36 PM
#97
I hope the war will not happen, because it only hurts everyone in this world!

all of us will hope the same thing like you and we know that world war is only bring death to human and we should not make war. but i think the leader of each country must know this and they need to declare about peace in every country so citizen do't have to worried.
Its only natural that each presidents of the different nations doesnt want to start a world war, we are just waitng what will they do to prevent it.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1010
ITSMYNE 🚀 Talk NFTs, Trade NFTs 🚀
May 15, 2017, 02:01:27 PM
#96
There's also a chance that North Korea will be ready to use nuclear weapons at some point and we know they are crazy enough to use them.
They are already testing intercontinental ballistic missiles which can take nuclear warheads till U.S.
We all know that it's great dictator will not even think twice before hitting the launch button. So there is a possibility hanging on our head.
Pages:
Jump to: