Third World War

[Robarya]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

[Brajh]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

I believe that North Korea has a standing army of around half a million men. It wouldn't be easy, trust me.

[Mardiva]

I believe that North Korea has a standing army of around half a million men. It wouldn't be easy, trust me.

BUT the US has the most high-tech army, plus the strongest Navy and Air-force.

[Robarya]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

I believe that North Korea has a standing army of around half a million men. It wouldn't be easy, trust me.

Iraq had an army of 375.000, yet they were beaten in ~40 days with negligible casualties for the Americans and British. What makes you think North Korea would be much harder?

[The Romulan Republic]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

I believe that North Korea has a standing army of around half a million men. It wouldn't be easy, trust me.

Iraq had an army of 375.000, yet they were beaten in ~40 days with negligible casualties for the Americans and British. What makes you think North Korea would be much harder?

North Korea would probably lose fast as it would probably be fighting not only America, but Japan and South Korea and all of NATO as well. That said, it could cause regional devastation first.

However, I doubt there'd be the same level of insurgency in North Korea as in Iraq, unless we really bungled things. I guess it depends on how much the average North Korean has bought into "dear leader's" propaganda. Of course, if North Korea used a nuke, we'd probably (sadly) nuke them back.

[Autotelic]

Within 50 years....Israel tries to re-claim the Dome of the Rock and Iran attacks. It blows out of control and suddenly we're in WWIII.

[Linker Niederrhein]

The fail in this thread is actually oozing out of my screen, paranormal ooze-style. It's as if the stupidity of every clueless adolescent with a hardon for violence has become corporeal.

[United Russian State]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

Three wars [if it were to take place sometime during them], is likely too much for USA economy to handdle. It's not like it's even doing good right now, it's trillions of dollars in debt.

[Zandan]

I don't know when or why but I do know that

"I don't know what the Third World War will be fought with, but I do know the Fourth World War will be fought with sticks and stones."

-Albert Einstein

[Robarya]

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.

North Korea would just be another fieldtrip for the U.S. army like Afghanistan and Iraq. When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the occupations that have been pricey and not the wars themselves. Overall the U.S. economy is strong enough to handle it, though.

Three wars [if it were to take place sometime during them], is likely too much for USA economy to handdle. It's not like it's even doing good right now, it's trillions of dollars in debt.

Not really. Considering the U.S. was well-able to fight on two fronts during WW2, and considering it has risen in strength compared with the rest of the world since then, I wouldn't say that minor nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq are much of a problem. And yes, it has a large debt, though I wonder if that's much of a problem in practice.

[Grave_n_idle]

Very soon, it'll start between USA and North Korea

That's not a world war. Who will side with North Korea? They have little allies. (Sure China is one, but they will be surrounded on many fronts by the US, EU, Russia and ASEAN.

China would side with NK at this point.

Not a prayer.

If the US decided to put troops in North Korea, China would actually help them.

As a side effect, they'd unfortunately just have to put their own troops in Taiwan, for strategic purposes, but it would purely be to help their good friends in the US.

[Grave_n_idle]

Within 50 years....Israel tries to re-claim the Dome of the Rock and Iran attacks. It blows out of control and suddenly we're in WWIII.

What exactly do you think Iran is going to attack with?

[Grave_n_idle]

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.

Why would Russia get involved in North Korea?

They'll sit on the sidelines and condemn the US, if the US fires first. They'll offer token support to UN forces, if the US is fired upon.

Not that the situation is likely, either way - the nation most likely to invade North Korea is probably China.

[Grave_n_idle]

Have any of you visited a western capital city recently? It is predicted that within 50 years the native population of Britain alone will be a minority. Already 50% of all live births on the UK are to non-native parents. The next war will be a bitter, bloody and personal inter-ethnic conflict that will begin as a reaction to decades of colonisation of Europe and the US by third world migrants. Those responsible on the far left will be the first to be purged in an act of bloody vengeance against this deliberate act of ethnic cleansing. To deny a people there homeland is asking for trouble. The left will soon regret playing with race as if it was a meaningless variable with no will of its own.

Someone's been reading too many BNP pamphlets.

[United Russian State]

Very soon, it'll start between USA and North Korea

That's not a world war. Who will side with North Korea? They have little allies. (Sure China is one, but they will be surrounded on many fronts by the US, EU, Russia and ASEAN.

China would side with NK at this point.

Not a prayer.

If the US decided to put troops in North Korea, China would actually help them.

As a side effect, they'd unfortunately just have to put their own troops in Taiwan, for strategic purposes, but it would purely be to help their good friends in the US.

Opps, I forgot the word not. I ment they would noy side with NK at this point.

[United Russian State]

Not really. Considering the U.S. was well-able to fight on two fronts during WW2, and considering it has risen in strength compared with the rest of the world since then, I wouldn't say that minor nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq are much of a problem. And yes, it has a large debt, though I wonder if that's much of a problem in practice.

Would Americans really support being in thrid war?

A lot of countires left stronger and a lot went out weakened.

It's debt is going be a huge problem when nations turn it down. Which will happen. Or the largest debt owners of American debt could take control of America by buying it up...but that might be for the best.

[Conservative Ad Droid]

Not really. Considering the U.S. was well-able to fight on two fronts during WW2, and considering it has risen in strength compared with the rest of the world since then, I wouldn't say that minor nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq are much of a problem. And yes, it has a large debt, though I wonder if that's much of a problem in practice.

Would Americans really support being in thrid war?

A lot of countires left stronger and a lot went out weakened.

It's debt is going be a huge problem when nations turn it down. Which will happen. Or the largest debt owners of American debt could take control of America by buying it up...but that might be for the best.

I was thinking about debating this, however, seeing as how your entire assumption is based upon the idea of the American National Debt, I find this an unneeded happening.

[Robarya]

Not really. Considering the U.S. was well-able to fight on two fronts during WW2, and considering it has risen in strength compared with the rest of the world since then, I wouldn't say that minor nations such as Afghanistan and Iraq are much of a problem. And yes, it has a large debt, though I wonder if that's much of a problem in practice.

Would Americans really support being in thrid war?

A lot of countires left stronger and a lot went out weakened.

It's debt is going be a huge problem when nations turn it down. Which will happen. Or the largest debt owners of American debt could take control of America by buying it up...but that might be for the best.

That's a whole other question. But nope, I don't think that a new war of aggression will be politically possible for at least 10 years.

[Strykla]

Please just play Endwar.

[Goldsaver]

Please just read Endwar.

Fixed. The book is much more realistic than the game, but it isn't realistic either.


--

WW3 will likely not happen for a long time.

[Grave_n_idle]

Please just play Endwar.

Why?

[Chernobyl-Pripyat]

Please just play Endwar.

Why?

in a nutshell: After a nuke goes off in Saudi Arabia or somewhere, the world has to buy oil from Russia. Meanwhile, America and Europe make a space laser thing that makes ICBM's useless, then America makes a space shuttle that can drop a bunch of Marines anywhere in the world. Shortly after, some SpetsNaz infiltrate a facility in Finland and use the laser to shoot down the shuttle[called the "Freedom Star"] as its taking off. America declares war on Europe, while Russia rolls into Eastern Europe[At first to help the U.S., but then Poland snitches and it becomes a 3 sided war]

[UNIverseVERSE]

Which is why I propose using high-powered Quantum lasers, instead! Just channel rapid photon energy through a super-strong barrel, and achieve an extremely intensified beam of energy and will, theoretically, vaporize the nuke.

Interesting, if totally fictional. Please think before invoking death rays in discussions about something intended to vaguely be real life.

[Strykla]

Please just play Endwar.

Why?

in a nutshell: After a nuke goes off in Saudi Arabia or somewhere, the world has to buy oil from Russia. Meanwhile, America and Europe make a space laser thing that makes ICBM's useless, then America makes a space shuttle that can drop a bunch of Marines anywhere in the world. Shortly after, some SpetsNaz infiltrate a facility in Finland and use the laser to shoot down the shuttle[called the "Freedom Star"] as its taking off. America declares war on Europe, while Russia rolls into Eastern Europe[At first to help the U.S., but then Poland snitches and it becomes a 3 sided war]

Good description, and you could call it a non-linear game. It's really thought out. One thing that bugs me is that how many people actually know who Tom Clancy is? We do owe most of the credit to him.

[Yootopia]

how many people actually know who Tom Clancy is?

A really crap writer.