Is this the opening stages of WW3?

[OzoAndIndi]

So we are deciding on wether or not to attack Syria. At the same time Russia sends 2 warships to the mediteranian stating they will bomb Saudi Arabia if we bomb Syria.

So U.S. bombs Syria, Russia bombs Saudi Arabia, U.S. Bombs Russia and Russia Bombs U.S. = WW3?

So.. basically take an uninvolved hostage to make a point? That always goes over well. How helpless is Saudi Arabia to not respond to a threat of being used like that.

Attacking Syria is stupid anyhow. If chemical weapons were used against their own.. be like our government doing something horrid against us and someone else attacks us for it.. wtf.

[Puck]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO

Canada would join the US. Don't play dumb.

Ugh I know, you guys always drag us into your bullshit.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

To be honest it almost seems like "We take care of Russia's problem and they take care of our problem, but we both pretend to be angry at each other."

[Airwaves]

So.. basically take an uninvolved hostage to make a point? That always goes over well. How helpless is Saudi Arabia to not respond to a threat of being used like that.

Attacking Syria is stupid anyhow. If chemical weapons were used against their own.. be like our government doing something horrid against us and someone else attacks us for it.. wtf.

Holy shit. People need to inform themselves alot more then posting. Stop reading your American and western news and read some middle eastern news. Do yourselves a favour and go read al'jazera and find out on what is going on.

What does this have to do with what I quoted? Well Saudi Arabia has been giving American made guns to the rebels in Syria since almost the start of the war. American news doesn't report well on this stuff because they are your allies and oh you don't bad mouth allies!

What about reporting on Israel fighting in Syria? They have had forces in there since almost the start as well. They have been assassinating leaders and high ranked people. Hell they assassinated an IRANAN general and all his escorts when his was in Syria so he couldn't talk to Assad.

America has been fighting in this war since it started. They have just been using there "friends" to do the fighting.

[Eyechewer]

What about reporting on Israel fighting in Syria? They have had forces in there since almost the start as well.

Prove it or I call bullshit. No single Israeli soldier or activity in Syria (apart from the weapon convoy bombings) since I think at least 2000

[ruinshin]

You do know that the U.S. have a $1.2 trillion debt to China, right?

You do know that's not how national debt works, right?

It's not really "debt".. China buys bonds, they don't get them, but they generate a certain amount of money a year. That money generated is the "debt" that's owed. The US isn't getting a load from China. China has such a "large" (it's actually pretty small overall, and they have the most) stake in the US debt because it's still the best money making investment around.

It's not even all that close. They can't come up and be all like "Yo, give us that cash you owe us now" because we don't actually owe them anything.

[The Stormbringer]

No, it would still be far from WW3. The United States would not go to war against Russia even if they bombed Saudi Arabia.

Why not? They would be attacking a nation completely unprovoked. It's like saying, "What's that? You beat up my cousin? I'm going to beat up YOUR cousin instead of beating up you! That'll teach you!"

[Thalian]

You never know. World conflicts start over retarded reasons.

The second world war was started because some people (Jews) emigrated (from the Third Reich) to another country (to Poland).
The first world war was started because a government (Serbia 1914/Syria 2013) was blamed (by Austria 1914/US 2013) for the acts of an insurgency group (Yugoslavic nationalists 1914/Syrian opposition 2013?).

It's been almost 100 years since WW1. I guess a hundred years is enough time for it to be forgotten and repeated. People pay too much attention towards how WW2 started rather than WW1.

[ruinshin]

Not really.

There is no situation where the rest of the world comes out on top of the United States. We spend more on military than most of the world does combined. We can destroy bunkers, bases, ect remotely.

The only thing that "The Rest of the World vs the United States" does is the United States stops giving the pretense of caring about civilian casualties and just starts raining hell down on anyone who is a big enough threat to cause any major damage. And in this case, it wouldn't be the rest of the world (even if the EU is foolishly restricting and scaling back on military power and base while the US is actively TRYING to scale back their involvement by recalling troops and such).

The game is over on any military attack against the United States. One of our subs can wipe life out on the planet. A carrier could single handedly win WW2.

America may not win... But I promise you, the rest of the world wouldn't either.

[PACOX]

Seriously, they way we project our carrier fleets would be an act of war if it were any other nation. One strike group could level a couple before word go to the press. We have 5 (6?) of them.

[Deleted]

You never know. World conflicts start over retarded reasons.

The second world war was started because some people (Jews) emigrated (from the Third Reich) to another country (to Poland).
The first world war was started because a government (Serbia 1914/Syria 2013) was blamed (by Austria 1914/US 2013) for the acts of an insurgency group (Yugoslavic nationalists 1914/Syrian opposition 2013?).

It's been almost 100 years since WW1. I guess a hundred years is enough time for it to be forgotten and repeated. People pay too much attention towards how WW2 started rather than WW1.

WW1 started with clear intents on all side. Franz Ferdinand was just the match that blew up the powderkeg. What would the West be so interested about in Syria / a global war that they'd be willing to escalate to such a sizeable conflict ?

[Jaxi]

Prove it or I call bullshit. No single Israeli soldier or activity in Syria (apart from the weapon convoy bombings) since I think at least 2000

You'd be a fool to think Israel doesn't have Mossad in there snooping around. They've already bombed them a few times in the past couple of years.

[Ghaleon]

No russia doesn't have the balls to do it, and even if they did they'd be swiftly crushed.

[Willas]

Not even close.

[Mortore]

There will be no WW3 since that would, most likely, result in a very (VERY!!) serious loss of human lives (compared to any other war) in all of the nations involved in the war, due to the high war technology everyone has now. Sure, some nations are ahead of the other when it comes to war technology, but still both are very capable of doing serious damage to one and another. I would dare to say, that no nation is interrested in destroying the life on our planet => no WW3.
Btw IF there would be a WW3, Syria wouldn't be the trigger....

EDIT:
Almost everyone says that "russia doesn't have the balls to do it". I think, that if Russia declared an ultimatum, the US would not have the balls to interfere either.. So quit the "balls" discussion. No one has them, since it wouldn't be worth it for anyone

[prwraith]

I see the thread is bashing the US even on the first page.

[Grummgug]

Will Obama even attacj Syria??? Polls show strong opposition to it.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ttacking-Syria

By 60 to 9 percent, according to this poll, those surveyed believe the US should not intervene militarily in Syria. The percentage of those favoring intervention increases to 25 percent when the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons is factored in – still far less than the 46 percent who say “no” to US intervention under such circumstances.

[Paulosio]

No it's not. The US will lob a few missiles at Syria. Everyone will be up in arms and then in a couple of years it will be someone elses turn to get some missiles lobbed at them.

[Deleted]

Holy shit. People need to inform themselves alot more then posting. Stop reading your American and western news and read some middle eastern news. Do yourselves a favour and go read al'jazera and find out on what is going on.

What does this have to do with what I quoted? Well Saudi Arabia has been giving American made guns to the rebels in Syria since almost the start of the war. American news doesn't report well on this stuff because they are your allies and oh you don't bad mouth allies!

What about reporting on Israel fighting in Syria? They have had forces in there since almost the start as well. They have been assassinating leaders and high ranked people. Hell they assassinated an IRANAN general and all his escorts when his was in Syria so he couldn't talk to Assad.

America has been fighting in this war since it started. They have just been using there "friends" to do the fighting.

The Emir of Qatar is always right

[Theronus]

The USA is responsible for 39% of the WORLD'S military spending

for comparison, #2 is china at 9.5%

The USA spends 750% more on its military than Russia

people just don't comprehend the gap between the USA's military in EVERY facet of war and the rest of the world. it's almost immeasurable. if the USA decided to take over earth, the only thing that could stop it would be a nuclear strike that would kill us all. our navy, air force, army, technology, firepower, EVERYTHING is superior to ANYTHING the rest of the world could throw at us COMBINED.

luckily there is no money in another world war and whatever awful things you wanna blame the US for, we're never going to put 7,000,000 people in an oven
the fact you can bitch and retain your tongue is proof that the US isn't so bad but it's naive to expect anything better. if the US didn't throw its weight around then eventually hitler the second would pop up somewhere, or maybe NK grows a pair and launched a nuke at someone

I'm laughing so hard at this I can't possibly think of something to say.