Is 3rd world war close?

[Chuck]

The belief that a war in Europe would be swift, decisive and 'Over by Christmas' is often considered a tragic underestimation — the theory being, that had it been widely appreciated beforehand that the war would open such an abyss under European civilization, no-one would have prosecuted it. This account is less plausible on a review of the available military theory at the time, especially the work of Ivan Bloch, an early candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize. Bloch's predictions of industrial warfare leading to bloody stalemate, attrition, and even revolution, were widely known in both military and pacifist circles. Some authors such as Niall Ferguson argue that the belief in a swift war has been greatly exaggerated since the war. He argues that the military planners, especially in Germany, were aware of the potential for a long war, as shown by the famous Willy-Nicky telegraphic correspondence between the Emperors of Russia and Germany. He also argues that most informed people considered a swift war unlikely. Moreover, it was in the governments' interests to feature this message widely in their propaganda, for this encouraged men to join the offensive, made the war seem less serious, and promoted general high spirits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_World_War_I#Over_by_Christmas

This parallels so much with what happened over Iraq. Now I hear US has plans to attack Iran. One thing can lead to other as happened before first world war... so again history gonna repeat itself?

 

[Woodrow]

We were very much closer in October of 1963. Those of us who were in the Military then can now reflect back to that month and see that for 30 days we stayed at the all out launch stage and were just waiting on the final word. We and the Soviet Union were armed, and prepared to launch. At any given moment every major city on earth was within 15 minutes of multiple Nuclear strikes.

Somehow Kennedy and Kruschev were able to come to an uneasy agreement that eventualy resulted in massive cut-backs for both countries.

Somehow war was avoided then. Inshallah it will be avoided again. But, our acts of stupidity will at some point go beyond any turning back, unless we all put forth an effort to end any need for war.

 

[snakelegs]

We were very much closer in October of 1963. Those of us who were in the Military then can now reflect back to that month and see that for 30 days we stayed at the all out launch stage and were just waiting on the final word. We and the Soviet Union were armed, and prepared to launch. At any given moment every major city on earth was within 15 minutes of multiple Nuclear strikes.

Somehow Kennedy and Kruschev were able to come to an uneasy agreement that eventualy resulted in massive cut-backs for both countries.

Somehow war was avoided then. Inshallah it will be avoided again. But, our acts of stupidity will at some point go beyond any turning back, unless we all put forth an effort to end any need for war.

i remember how scared i was then, but i am even more scared now.
i hope it can be avoided, but have serious doubts that bush has any interest in avoiding it.
may i be wrong!

 

[Woodrow]

Perhaps there are still enough memories of Viet-Nam to keep us from getting bogged down into another no-win situation. In Viet-Nam we started with good intentions, but overlooked the desires of the people in South East Asia. We are on the edge of making the same error in the Mid East. However, I think there is still enough common sense floating around in the world to show us that we can not tell other areas of the world how to live.

The irony is that so much of the world is convinced it is all about oil. But, with a little bit of effort, no nation needs to be dependent on Mid-Eastern oil. We made a big error in shifting our needs to be dependent on the oil states and it has resulted in bad feelings on all sides.

 

[karim]

i think no but at the same time i think yes because like we know Iraq i sbeing attack all the contry is against them...

 

[Woodrow]

Very few people in the USA desire us to be in Iraq. It is a no gain situation and of no benefit. The fear is how to get our troops safetly out of Iraq now that we made the mistake of getting in there. It is sort of like grabbing hold of a Tiger. You know you need to turn it loose, but how do you turn it loose without getting killed.

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

This parallels so much with what happened over Iraq. Now I hear US has plans to attack Iran. One thing can lead to other as happened before first world war... so again history gonna repeat itself?

History has been repeating... like a broken record. I have documents that are 2500 freaking years old, that make exactly the same complaints I hear about today! Here's an old one from the Middle East concerning the arrival of the Jews in Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile:

Be it known to the king, that the Jews that came up from your city have come into Jerusalem; and they're rebuilding the rebellious and evil city, and have finished the walls, and are digging out the foundations. Be it known now to the king that, if this city is built, and the walls finished, they will not pay tribute, impost, or toll, and this will damage the revenue of the kings. Now because we eat of the salt of the palace, and it is not nourishing for us to see the king's dishonour, we advise the king, that a search be made in the book of the records of your fathers; so shall you find evidence in the book of the records, and know that this city is a rebellious city, and hurtful to kings and provinces, and that they have moved sedition within the same of old time; for which cause was this city laid to waste. We announce to the king that, if this city is rebuilt, and the walls finished, by this means you shall have no portion beyond the River.

As you can see, not an aweful lot has changed! But to answer your question about the World War. I'm not very worried. If China gets ticked off... then we have some real problems!

Ninth Scribe

 

[Keltoi]

The chances of a world war are very slim, primarily because of the nuclear threat involved. China isn't too dangerous as far as their conventional military is concerned, as long as they don't sneak attack or anything like that, but nobody wants to get involved in a conflict so large and chaotic that the nuclear arsenal is considered. I'm afraid the wars we will see will be proxy wars, small countries, insurgent type enemies. The major powers aren't too excited about the possibility of facing each other in an armed conflict.

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

Very few people in the USA desire us to be in Iraq. It is a no gain situation and of no benefit. The fear is how to get our troops safetly out of Iraq now that we made the mistake of getting in there. It is sort of like grabbing hold of a Tiger. You know you need to turn it loose, but how do you turn it loose without getting killed.

Safe passage has been offered to all the soldiers during their exit from Iraq. It's just that Bush won't sign the **** thing!

4. The length of time to make this withdrawl is only one month and we, in turn, will allow your pull-out without attack.

These terms for disengagement were offered on December 22nd, 2006. I have the full document if you're interested in reading it.

Ninth Scribe

 

[deen_2007]

i hate war.....i dnt want to be around wen wars happen..........all this scares me....why cnt the world avoid wars! why dnt we all realise we all are the same old human being, wiv same rights & same funtions.......we shud all love each other, help each other & understand each other......(sorry 4 being so emoitinal...but war scares me....imagine ho those at war now r feeling)......my dwa remains with them....

 

[Keltoi]

Safe passage has been offered to all the soldiers during their exit from Iraq. It's just that Bush won't sign the **** thing!

4. The length of time to make this withdrawl is only one month and we, in turn, will allow your pull-out without attack.

These terms for disengagement were offered on December 22nd, 2006. I have the full document if you're interested in reading it.

Ninth Scribe

Who offered this "safe passage" in the first place? Who has the authority to even negotiate with the U.S. about the future of Iraq besides the elected government? The U.S. military doesn't need "safe passage", what they need is a concrete goal to achieve. That is what is missing in this conflict.

 

[Jibril]

i hate war.....i dnt want to be around wen wars happen..........all this scares me....why cnt the world avoid wars! why dnt we all realise we all are the same old human being, wiv same rights & same funtions.......we shud all love each other, help each other & understand each other......(sorry 4 being so emoitinal...but war scares me....imagine ho those at war now r feeling)......my dwa remains with them....

Maybe you should toughen up a little sister haha. War is bad ofcourse but as long as humanity survives on earth there will be war so don't let it scare you too much. The best thing we can all do to prevent war is to raise our families with good values and teach them wisdom. That way the following generations will hopefully have more wise men than the current ones. And wise men are the best antidote to war.

 

[khushnood]

Maybe you should toughen up a little sister haha. War is bad ofcourse but as long as humanity survives on earth there will be war so don't let it scare you too much. The best thing we can all do to prevent war is to raise our families with good values and teach them wisdom. That way the following generations will hopefully have more wise men than the current ones. And wise men are the best antidote to war.

what u r talking about is an utopic world,as only wise families can raise good generations.:'(

 

[Dawud_uk]

i found the anti satalite missiles tested by the chinese to be very interesting...

after all much of the west's superior technology relies on sat nav, many of the planes, helicoptors, missiles etc would be stuffed as well as all the intelligence used to plan attacks.

i personally think if the US keeps being distracted by iraq, possibly iran and also afghanistan then china might make a play on taiwan and if US tries to stop them they can hit the US satalites and remove most of the US / West's tech advantage.

Abu Abdullah

 

[Zone Maker]

E-bombs can be effective weapons too.

 

[Dawud_uk]

E-bombs can be effective weapons too.

facinating, so the weapons perhaps the US should be fearing on these e-bombs used in space to take out their technological advantage?

given the results of the jihad in afghanistan and iraq at the moment we can see what the result would be if the west lost most of its technology within a few days... read your kipling.

Abu Abdullah

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

^ whoah, maybe something like that can be used when Mahdi Comes and then everyones gotta fight with swords and bows and stuff!!!!

 

[Dawud_uk]

^ whoah, maybe something like that can be used when Mahdi Comes and then everyones gotta fight with swords and bows and stuff!!!!

nope, guns and basic military equipment would work but the electronics wouldnt after such an e-bomb attack so really we are talking about going back to a level of technology in WWII but even then not really so because it would only be over a particular area for a particular time not all the time and not outside the area of the attack.

what are the non nuclear ways of generating such a force?
are they harmful to humans and are there any other side effects? after all we all have electrical impulses running around our bodies and heads also.

Abu Abdullah

 

[Keltoi]

The Chinese "satellite" attack could theoretically take out a few satellites, but the really important strategic satellites are in orbit outside the range of this test. Anyway, satellite technology is mainly useful in pinpoint accuracy with missiles and real-time intelligence sharing. If one of these anti-satellite attacks actually worked in a war situation, it would probably mean the pilot would have to drop bombs with more blast range.

 

[Dawud_uk]

The Chinese "satellite" attack could theoretically take out a few satellites, but the really important strategic satellites are in orbit outside the range of this test. Anyway, satellite technology is mainly useful in pinpoint accuracy with missiles and real-time intelligence sharing. If one of these anti-satellite attacks actually worked in a war situation, it would probably mean the pilot would have to drop bombs with more blast range.

i agree,

but it would take years to adapt the technology and take a step back effectively in their use as the pilots, tank commanders etc wouldnt be trained to work that way.

such a gap would mean those who already fight in such a basic manner such as the mujahadeen would have a massive immediate advantage.

such steps would also cripple the West's economy and so cripple their means to pay for such wars in the present and future.

surely better than the alternatives some of the mujahadeen could consider though which is never ending warfare until the west learns to leave the muslims alone and stopping supporting the apostate regimes in the muslim lands.

Abu Abdullah