How close to a world wide conflict (WW3) are we according to you?

[Kuntantee]

WW3 soon. Really? Maybe at end of 21st century if we fuck the world up so hard and people start to fight for resources.

[Deleted]

WW3 soon. Really? Maybe at end of 21st century if we fuck the world up so hard and people start to fight for resources.

Yeah i don't another WW coming any time soon. Things are going pretty good in the world atm! Well apart from the whole syria and ISIS thing...

[Kuntantee]

Yeah i don't another WW coming any time soon. Things are going pretty good in the world atm! Well apart from the whole syria and ISIS thing...

Syria issue is the manifestation of an emerging power -- Russia. We can expect a similar issue in the pacific in a decade or so. This time, it will involve China and USA.

[ItachiZaku]

Only if Thumpet or The Cunt get elected.

[Sesshomaru]

I've told myself the last couple of years that WWIII will eventually come.
Seeing said conflicts in the Middle East, China wants naval expansion and whatnot, makes

I need to stop deleting everything that I don't find "fitting". We're close to a WW3, but I'd expect it coming within the last 30-40-50 years, or so.

[Kathandira]

I just think people believe there is more tragedy than in the past, because it is more accessible than ever.

Before the internet, and global networking in the likes of what we have today, there was TV and News Papers to get your global information. Unfortunately, a News Paper is only so large, and a News broad cast is only so long. So you never got the chance to read or hear about every little aspect of global issues, even local issues really. It didn't seem as bad as it is today because people were blind to what was going on.

Now that we have a way to immediately share our stories with the entire world, it is much more evident that there is tragedy all over the place. Since people are able to see this at any moment they wish, they feel it is happening more than it used to, when in reality, nothing has changed.

Also to add, the younger folks weren't so quick to read the paper. But todays youth is all over the internet reading every story and sharing it around. We are just all around more aware as a whole than we have ever been before. Tragedy didn't increase, awareness did.

[shadowmouse]

I'm going with "could happen in the next 10 years" with emphasis on could indicating that a possibility exists. I think the danger is that we have gotten comfortable with the idea that everyone can play with brinkmanship but that we can successfully disengage. I'm not sure we can. We have a network of treaty obligations that were forged during different times (the Cold War) and with one big "oops" things may get out of hand before the various players realize it.

One danger that I think is too often discounted is social media. Yellow journalism is blamed with having led to the Spanish-American War. Although that is disputed, it serves as an example of the danger social media could present. Stories proliferate and can spark public outrage faster than ever before. In the event of a modern "Remember the Maine" type incident I can see figures such as Trump practically pouring fuel on the fire.

[BuckSparkles]

I can see it as a possibility in 10 years or so. Likely? Probably not, but all it takes is a little push over the wrong edge.

I think a few more years of refugee type issues in EU might see something interesting happen.

As somebody pointed out: Social media can cause far more damage than a story originally was in terms of value.

[Septik]

I think we're pretty close. The war in syria could be the start of something much much bigger.

id be very surprised if the third great war was over some shit eating jawas.

[BuckSparkles]

I'm not afraid of a large-scale conflict, I still believe that if there was a case where Europe as a whole would have to mobilize again, the world would be lost anyway already. This is in nobody's interest.

What scares me ATM is the possibility of some countries in EU going full-strength fascist.

You can thank people like Angela Merkel for that, or other bleeding hearts trying to win feelsgood points with progressive idealists.

[Deleted]

Interesting to see how many people seem to think that the fact that WW3 would cripple the entire planet would actually stop it from happening.
It's not going to start by some leaders saying to each other "ok, let's start WW3". A series of small escalations can set it in motion and before we know it we are right in the middle of it.

[Breccia]

Remember in the 20th century when one country would invade another country, people were all like "no way!" line up and start shooting?

Yeah, we're done with that. If we didn't have nukes, Ukraine would have started some pretty involved military combat. But it didn't.

Nobody wants World War 3. Not even Putin. And especially not China (they have their own problems, and North Korea is increasingly one of them).

[Daethz]

Based on how intelligent I value the average human.
It's very likely to happen.

And i want america to have overwhelming military force when it does happen compared to other nuclear countries.

[Nanaboostme]

All I know is that Human Civilization will wipe ourselves out before an asteroid does.

[Kronik85]

The current climate is a mish mash of more or less every factor that kicked off WWI and WWII.

Economic depression
A demonised religion
An international body failing to deal with a crisis
A country annexing part of another country
A set of treaties and commitments that will pull in every player
The rise of Nationalism in Europe

Pretty surprising we aren't already at war tbh. We just need another Franz Ferdinand and an arms race between 2 countries and it's a full house.

[taliey]

If there is one thing I repeat a lot about war, it is that the Cold War/Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated the futility of war. What is the point of war (in the sense of total war with the delightful addition of nuclear weapons, engaged between 2 superpowers) when both sides are reduced to rubble?

The detriment of war far outweighs the benefits of war. The effects of war resemble colonialism in that regard - the losing side then becomes a sort of 'colony' to the victor.

What the Cold War (and to an extent, the Cuban Missile Crisis) demonstrated, was that war could no longer be a viable option for national supremacy. War is no longer viable for the survival of nations.

[Oviorasi]

If I see North Korean tanks rolling into South Korea I will be watching that very carefully.

[Sentynel]

We will fight an inter-galactic war sooner than a WW3.

[Deleted]

Probably won't happen. And as much as China already know that Russia and the USA are paper tigers, they will have problems much like Russia in keeping thier own state from breaking up in the next 50 odd years.

[Afrospinach]

So very far away I don't think it is a possibility in the near future. All the big dogs are talking even if they are not on the best of terms. NATO would crush anybody. I think for WW3 to happen you have to believe NATO will first fail completely.