WW3 is only a matter of time. - page 2.

JLynn171

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 27, 2015, 06:37:00 AM

Quote from: BillyBones on June 27, 2015, 05:33:35 AM

Very long way to go, WW3 never happen unless and until the United States of America and Russia fight with their Nuclear power arms and immunizations. Any time the WW3 happens that would be one and only country has to be blame is the United States. If anyone watch keenly Centuries back, Current event, and forthcoming years events will know the reason why, the US have been blamed.

The United States is the most probable candidate to provoke another World War. But at the same time, we should not ignore the other possibilities. There is a chance that a future India vs Pakistan conflict could emerge in to a World War, especially if the ISIS joins on the Pakistani side, to fight the Indians. Pakistan is having some 60-70 nukes in their possession, and they are likely to use them, or pass them on to the ISIS, if a defeat against India seems feasible.

the media and cleverly wrote out speeches by a man who is a great speaker will twist words that we believe until its too late

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: BillyBones on June 27, 2015, 05:33:35 AM

Very long way to go, WW3 never happen unless and until the United States of America and Russia fight with their Nuclear power arms and immunizations. Any time the WW3 happens that would be one and only country has to be blame is the United States. If anyone watch keenly Centuries back, Current event, and forthcoming years events will know the reason why, the US have been blamed.

The United States is the most probable candidate to provoke another World War. But at the same time, we should not ignore the other possibilities. There is a chance that a future India vs Pakistan conflict could emerge in to a World War, especially if the ISIS joins on the Pakistani side, to fight the Indians. Pakistan is having some 60-70 nukes in their possession, and they are likely to use them, or pass them on to the ISIS, if a defeat against India seems feasible.

BillyBones

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Very long way to go, WW3 never happen unless and until the United States of America and Russia fight with their Nuclear power arms and immunizations. Any time the WW3 happens that would be one and only country has to be blame is the United States. If anyone watch keenly Centuries back, Current event, and forthcoming years events will know the reason why, the US have been blamed.

JarvisTechnology

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

It is matter of time but as per my search
china is developing rapidly and is set to overpass america economically too. Wink

They have good army, will this cause some agressive actions .
I am sure if china keeps growing in its populace they will need more land to suport its population so war might be inevitable there Sad

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: rayhan on June 23, 2015, 11:51:40 AM

I don't see that trusting someone can be a foolishness. It's true, that China betrayed India's trust, but what if that had not happened. Then Nehru would have been a hero. Isn't it? Pakistan has betrayed India many times. Most recent was of Kargil war I suppose. Indian PM was hugging Pakistan's PM in Pakistan, and Pakistan's army were captuing posts after posts in Kargil region.

China has been quite aggressive in all of its territorial disputes, and they have used force on more than a dozen occasions in the past 50 years or so. India is not the only victim of the Chinese aggression. Check these incidents:

1. Johnson South Reef Skirmish, 1988 (with Vietnam)
2. Battle of the Paracel Islands, 1974 (with Vietnam)
3. Scarborough Shoal standoff, 2012 (with Philippines)
4. Sino-Soviet border conflict, 1969 (with USSR)

The Chinese, without any provocation invaded the disputed territories in all four incidents. They were successful in #1, #2, and #3, but got their asses kicked by the Soviets during #4.

JLynn171

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Quote from: otrkid70 on June 02, 2015, 07:40:42 PM

We read it in the news every day.

The world is about due for another war Worldwide. Populations have exploded and Mankind are stepping on each others toes. China is Claiming rights to the Spratly Islands and just about everything near it. The U.S. is still doing battle in Afghanistan,Iraq,Syria. Russia is testing the Limits of All of Europe and it's neighbors Doing Flyovers with Bombers almost everywhere. The stories are endless and so are the countries ever growing as they get involved.

Is this the fate of Mankind? Is this the way to control the problem of over population?

This is not just a chance of WW3 anymore this is only a Question of when.

Is it really a question of when or how long until they name what U.S has been doing as the start of it years ago

popcorn1

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1027

YER WITH ME IF YOU DON,T SHUT UP Cheesy

cryptocoiner

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

hyperboria - next internet

If World War 3 is only a matter of time. Than how it would start? Who will be fighting who&\? How it will end? And how it's possible if we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the civilization?

Don007

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1007

Live like there is no tomorrow!

Looking at the multiple (terrorist) attacks today, we might should expect a world war against IS regions. Sure, currently already multiple countries are participating in bombing IS, but I think terrorist attacks like today make it only worse for them. Maybe more countries will join the armed forces. Too bad also innocent victims will also be part of the death count, but those people in Tunisia laying down on the beach were innocent too. This world is fucked up.

rayhan

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

be your self

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 15, 2015, 09:36:41 PM

Quote from: rayhan on June 15, 2015, 01:23:54 PM

Not even that, even China is holding on to a large piece of Kashmir which they captured during India-China war in 1962. The dispute between India and China is so old, that it is not possible that it will get under shelves just because of the change in government. I am sure during this new Indian government, the war is bound to happen. Either China or Pakistan or both of them will attack India for sure.

Well... the Sino-Indian conflict occurred more than 50 years ago, and the tensions seems to have cooled down. I hate to say this, but actually it was the incompetence of the Indian rulers at that time (esp. Jawaharlal Nehru), which cost India some 40,000 sq.kms of Aksai Chin. He foolishly trusted the Chinese, and refused to strengthen the border posts along the Johnson Line.

I don't see that trusting someone can be a foolishness. It's true, that China betrayed India's trust, but what if that had not happened. Then Nehru would have been a hero. Isn't it? Pakistan has betrayed India many times. Most recent was of Kargil war I suppose. Indian PM was hugging Pakistan's PM in Pakistan, and Pakistan's army were captuing posts after posts in Kargil region.

edric

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 501

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 19, 2015, 11:17:17 PM

Quote from: edric on June 19, 2015, 11:29:48 AM

Well you did not get what I meant. I meant that through the infrastructure development, it is actually taking the lands and ports for itself, for making military and naval bases. And it does not matter if it is nowhere in exporting arms. It is competing with every top nation in terms of increasing its defense capacity.

I have read about the Chinese investments in countries such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Maldives, especially the ones involving ports and other infrastructural facilities. They seems to be purely for economic purposes. There is no chance that China will get permission to set up naval bases in return for this investment (not talking about Myanmar, there are Chinese bases already there).

Well you probably do not know this, Chinese sub-marines are more active now in Indian Ocean. And if they are more active, that means they need bases to dock themselves once in a while.

Miracal

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

I never really believed the world war III can happen so soon but recently, China said that it might be fucking INEVITABLE if U.S doesn't keep their shit together. They say that the U.S keeps messing with the South China Sea affairs. Beijing said that it would now focus less on defensive capabilities, and step up efforts to build offensive capabilities. I don't think China wants to war but if U.S doesn't back off, China might even use 'out of the border' resources against U.S and that shit will end bad.

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: klf on June 21, 2015, 11:34:05 AM

As China and Russia became more powerful they became more bolder, they want to gain control. And USA would not let that happen. A simple mistake in calculation there could be war.

It is not about China and Russia attempting to gain control. It is about the NATO and the United States launching proxy wars against these nations. The Americans have been building military bases all around Russia and placing their missiles there (Poland, Lithuania, Romania.etc). They are overthrowing pro-Russian governments through covert means and replacing them with the pro-NATO ones (Ukraine, Macedonia.etc). It is the US which is provoking Russia and China, and not the other way around.

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

There is no World War 3, such a thing is no longer possible with today's technology and politics.

Would you sacrifice hundred of thousands of american lives when there would be no need? Would the population, the troops themselves, and their commanders tolerate this needless waste of life?

This is 2015, anything you can accomplish with men on the ground, you can accomplish with far fewer casualties by using bombs. Sure, bombs cost a lot more money, but they've got their friends printing that.

You can't print human lives, that is a toll which can never be fully obscured or ignored. So onto WW3 we go, and our governments are compelled to avoid spending lives, they will naturally resort to spending money to win a bomb war.

Except a bomb war in 2015 isn't a war, not a winnable one anyway. It's the end of civilization, the only way to win that game is to not play. And everyone in power understands this, so I doubt we'll ever see WW3 unless there's mass famine, due to water shortages for example..

klf

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1000

As China and Russia became more powerful they became more bolder, they want to gain control. And USA would not let that happen. A simple mistake in calculation there could be war.

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: edric on June 19, 2015, 11:29:48 AM

Well you did not get what I meant. I meant that through the infrastructure development, it is actually taking the lands and ports for itself, for making military and naval bases. And it does not matter if it is nowhere in exporting arms. It is competing with every top nation in terms of increasing its defense capacity.

I have read about the Chinese investments in countries such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Maldives, especially the ones involving ports and other infrastructural facilities. They seems to be purely for economic purposes. There is no chance that China will get permission to set up naval bases in return for this investment (not talking about Myanmar, there are Chinese bases already there).

edric

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 501

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 18, 2015, 12:11:11 PM

Quote from: edric on June 18, 2015, 11:35:05 AM

No it is not the same. China is not only investing their, but it is contributing in their infrastructure, building ports to dock ships and submarines, supplying arms and ammunition. And China has also deployed its army at Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

Yes. The Chinese investment involves improving the local infrastructure, such as ports and highways. Why this is surprising? And compared to Russia and the United States, China is still an infant in the arms export market. Only third world countries such as Pakistan and Sri Lanka purchase the low-quality Chinese weapons, because they can't afford any Russian or European weapons.

Well you did not get what I meant. I meant that through the infrastructure development, it is actually taking the lands and ports for itself, for making military and naval bases. And it does not matter if it is nowhere in exporting arms. It is competing with every top nation in terms of increasing its defense capacity.

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: edric on June 18, 2015, 11:35:05 AM

No it is not the same. China is not only investing their, but it is contributing in their infrastructure, building ports to dock ships and submarines, supplying arms and ammunition. And China has also deployed its army at Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

Yes. The Chinese investment involves improving the local infrastructure, such as ports and highways. Why this is surprising? And compared to Russia and the United States, China is still an infant in the arms export market. Only third world countries such as Pakistan and Sri Lanka purchase the low-quality Chinese weapons, because they can't afford any Russian or European weapons.

edric

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 501

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 16, 2015, 11:24:12 PM

The Chinese are making investments all over the world, including those in neighboring countries of India, such as Pakistan, Maldives, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. There is no need for India to worry about this. At least they are not moving their heavy weapons and ballistic missiles to these countries, like the NATO is doing in Eastern Europe.

No it is not the same. China is not only investing their, but it is contributing in their infrastructure, building ports to dock ships and submarines, supplying arms and ammunition. And China has also deployed its army at Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

vrm86

hero member

Activity: 676

Merit: 500

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 17, 2015, 08:45:55 AM

Quote from: vrm86 on June 17, 2015, 07:56:58 AM

First person that will make such decision is gonna take responsibility way higher than any other war criminal in history.

I am not sure about that. The Americans nuked Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945, when Japan was preparing to surrender. The Americans would have won the war, even without the nuclear strike. But still, they nuked Japan. Not once, but twice. A total of some 300,000 got killed as a result of the strikes, and millions more were left injured.

That was specific situation for several reasons:
-Japan had already lost that conflict (as you mentioned): there was no military purpose requiring such action
-there was no threat of response
-there was only one nuclear test in history performed before (I suppose that USA considered this as an additional scientific data source)

I said that in terms of response or even chain reaction - attacked country would no longer refrain from same kind of reaction and likely claim that it's justified.

Quote from: bryant.coleman on June 17, 2015, 08:45:55 AM

But this incident was quickly forgotten. IMO, right now less than 1% of the world population even know the fact that the Americans nuked Japan in 1945.

I guess that there is no such fact mentioned in US history school books :/

Topic: WW3 is only a matter of time. - page 2. (Read 6699 times)