Advertisement
by Valtamia » Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:35 am
by Commandersos » Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:26 am
CornixPes II wrote:
There's nothing to suggest that. If that was a plan it would be transparent. NK will have nothing to gain from doing China's dirty work and they know the whole world has been rallying against them for at least the last decade. Both China and NK know that they cannot stand up against a Europe-America assault, even with China's numbers. If we have Russia as well then it's definitely gameover. We have been at a stalemate for years, and it will remain that way.
by CornixPes II » Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:41 am
Commandersos wrote:CornixPes II wrote:
There's nothing to suggest that. If that was a plan it would be transparent. NK will have nothing to gain from doing China's dirty work and they know the whole world has been rallying against them for at least the last decade. Both China and NK know that they cannot stand up against a Europe-America assault, even with China's numbers. If we have Russia as well then it's definitely gameover. We have been at a stalemate for years, and it will remain that way.
u ignore one fact NK is not an oligarchy it is lead by one guy who just wants to live his little life happily
if u can figure out the rest of the story on how what and why things will happen ....
by United Russian State » Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:59 am
Sibirsky wrote:United Russian State wrote:But the best course to be neutral, remain on everybodies good side. Keep their trust with NK, and make some money in helping them rebuild. The war would also be harder for America and be a bigger hit to it's economy, military, and people. Making Ametica weaker, while the rest grow stronger. The winners are the ones on the side lines.
US vs. NK would make America weaker? Come on now. NK wouldn't be able to do much.
by Chernobyl-Pripyat » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:13 am
by Commandersos » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:27 am
CornixPes II wrote:Commandersos wrote:CornixPes II wrote:
There's nothing to suggest that. If that was a plan it would be transparent. NK will have nothing to gain from doing China's dirty work and they know the whole world has been rallying against them for at least the last decade. Both China and NK know that they cannot stand up against a Europe-America assault, even with China's numbers. If we have Russia as well then it's definitely gameover. We have been at a stalemate for years, and it will remain that way.
u ignore one fact NK is not an oligarchy it is lead by one guy who just wants to live his little life happily
if u can figure out the rest of the story on how what and why things will happen ....
I have not 'ignored' this fact, nor do I think he wants to live his life 'happily'. Not even Kim Jong-il is willing to give up everything he has built just to fire some missiles at people. He has proven that he listens to no-one and works for no-one. He is likely to be a seperate entity in a global war, not a perpetrator. I'm sure he will relish the idea of outliving every other nation and sticking his grimy flag in the remains.
by Hertoria » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:31 am
Ordo Mallus wrote:Call to power wrote:Mars will get uppity again and we'll have to turn the place into a radioactive desertRisottia wrote:Unless you wipe off COMPLETELY life from the planet, that is - which is something that even the world's whole nuclear arsenal cannot accomplish.
unless of course it starts a runaway greenhouse affect in which case we have yet to find life on Venus so...
the US and Russia can destroy the world 20 times over with nuclear weapons, With one chem weapon type the US can kill the world 18 times over (VX ftw). The US itself can destroy the entire planet. Also if any nuclear country wanted to, they can always just detonate them all in space and with all the EMP effects, destroy the technology in the world which would revert us all into the dark age.
by CornixPes II » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:34 am
Hertoria wrote:Ordo Mallus wrote:Call to power wrote:Mars will get uppity again and we'll have to turn the place into a radioactive desertRisottia wrote:Unless you wipe off COMPLETELY life from the planet, that is - which is something that even the world's whole nuclear arsenal cannot accomplish.
unless of course it starts a runaway greenhouse affect in which case we have yet to find life on Venus so...
the US and Russia can destroy the world 20 times over with nuclear weapons, With one chem weapon type the US can kill the world 18 times over (VX ftw). The US itself can destroy the entire planet. Also if any nuclear country wanted to, they can always just detonate them all in space and with all the EMP effects, destroy the technology in the world which would revert us all into the dark age.
The EMP only affects most things temporarily.
by Hydesland » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:36 am
by Andaluciae » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:50 am
Dododecapod wrote:MAD no longer applies. Neither the US nor Russia have sufficient nukes to impose it on one another, nor, honestly, the will to try.
FreeAgency wrote:Shellfish eating used to be restricted to dens of sin such as Red Lobster and Long John Silvers, but now days I cannot even take my children to a public restaurant anymore (even the supposedly "family friendly ones") without risking their having to watch some deranged individual flaunting his sin...
by Dododecapod » Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:30 am
Andaluciae wrote:Dododecapod wrote:MAD no longer applies. Neither the US nor Russia have sufficient nukes to impose it on one another, nor, honestly, the will to try.
Uhhhh...
Deterrence theory indicates that a state only needs 40 guaranteed delivery nuclear weapons to achieve deterrence. Both powers have far more than 40 guaranteed delivery weapons on individual SSBN's, let alone in their total arsenals.
by Angleter » Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:36 am
Valtamia wrote:2030-2050
Over the unification of Europe and control of her many resources, foreign intervention creates a vacuum of war.
It will not be the final war
Europe will be unified and Russia will have collapsed, China, U.S.A., Brasil, Canada, Turkstan, the The Union Of South African Nations will emerge to the world as new powers, with Europe still rebuilding from the war, they can't reclaim a world power spot until 2078.
by Andaluciae » Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:34 pm
FreeAgency wrote:Shellfish eating used to be restricted to dens of sin such as Red Lobster and Long John Silvers, but now days I cannot even take my children to a public restaurant anymore (even the supposedly "family friendly ones") without risking their having to watch some deranged individual flaunting his sin...
by Autumn Wind » Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:40 pm
NK's missiles hardly work.. but they do have tons of artillery, so both Koreas lose once either side starts shooting. America already has troops in SK, so they probably wouldn't send too much extra reinforcements because of Iraq & Afghanistan[would get extra expensive, plus already low support at home]
by The Romulan Republic » Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:44 pm
Commandersos wrote:When?
&
Why?
will the final World War be fought
and
What?
will be the outcome
for those who question the 3rd ww to be the final war my reasoning is simple
too many nukes and too many morons
by Autumn Wind » Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:55 pm
by Brajh » Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:47 pm
by Hydesland » Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:48 pm
Brajh wrote:I don't see why people think China and the US will be on opposing sides. It's not in either nation's interest to fight each other.
by The Romulan Republic » Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:03 pm
Kulverint wrote:Within the next 20 years between NATO and North Korea. I don't know what side Russia will take, Possibly NATO, but not sure. China will support North Korea.
by Farnhamia » Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:29 pm
Autumn Wind wrote:As far as epic wars go, the historical record seems to indicate that the ultimate beneficiary is rarely, if ever, one of the primary belligerants.
Assyria vs. Egypt= Babylon.
Babylon vs. Egypt= Persia
Greeks vs. Persians= Pelloponesian war= Macedon
Romans vs. Persians= Germanic Barbarians
Western Romans vs. Germanic Barbarians= Eastern Romans
Eastern Romans vs. Germanic Barbarians= Persians
Eastern Romans vs. Persians= Rashidun Caliphate
The list goes on.
Napoleon vs. Russians= British
Nazis vs. Soviets= US
Regardless of who starts World War 3, the name of the game would be to deliberately stay out of the game until the 4th quarter, then sweep whoever left standing.
by Zykorinov » Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:51 pm
Tokos wrote:A block to nuclear weapons would still make that kind of warfare very risky, if you mean shooting the missiles down or something. It would be like knife fighting on a national scale: one small mistake, one miss, and a nuke gets through.Political Pilgrims wrote:I don't believe that there will be another major war until somebody develops a counter to nuclear weapons. Whoever gets that first will send the world to hell.
Also, by the time another WW starts, there will be clearly defined sides, like in WWI and WWII. No guessing or what-if's. If not, most nations will remain neutral, and that means it won't be a world war.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Al-Haqiqah, Ashvo, Ask Jeeves [Bot], Atrito, Badnation, Benuty, Boylover, British Arzelentaxmacone, Burnt Calculators, Dumb Ideologies, Eahland, El Lazaro, Ethel mermania, Experina, Floofybit, Grinning Dragon, Hidrandia, Jerzylvania, Nova Zueratopia, Page, Perishna, Sarolandia, The Vooperian Union, Theyra, Tungstan, United Empire Commonwealth, Vassenor, Yursea
Advertisement