ww3 won't happen (hey, I'm not BBB)
11 Oct 2015, 23:16
Forum Gang Premier
you are a balls
you are a balls
WW3
Greetings all I'm wondering if a WW3 broke out what would it be for oil,milk, cheap toys ect, who would be gladiators Usa, Fiji, Vietnam ect and where would it be , Africa, Europe, Asia ect
Leave a reply on what u think
and BBB dont say it wont
Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning Erwin Rommel
Meep Meep Meep Morke
Forum Gang Best website in the world
Meep Meep Meep Morke
Forum Gang Best website in the world
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
45 Replies
12 Oct 2015, 00:23
Pretty sure if it did (however unlikely, thanks globalization) it'd probably be centered where the expansions
by Russia is happening. Built off Ukraine Civil War, Syrian one, etc.
"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
12 Oct 2015, 09:26
Lets set aside for a moment the inevitability of another World War, mankinds history is a recurring record of how much we enjoy killing each other.
Another World War could be fought for oil, but truthfully i suspect that war will break out for mans more basic needs, food and water. We live on a planet with finite resources and only so much space for human expansion, as the population increases, so will the demand on food and water, a demand that is unsustainable.
Where will it be fought, take your pick, probably Asia or Africa, Europe is slightly more stable these days, but the resurgence of Russia on its borders cannot be discounted as a catalyst. Probably not in America though, they prefer to fight their wars in other peoples countries.
12 Oct 2015, 09:50
WW3 won't happen. Ever.
The past is a foreign country.
12 Oct 2015, 10:17
Won't happen, it will take a very stupid reason to start one, but if that stupid reason happen then I say it will likely because of human stupidity.
"Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
-imperium thought of the day
-imperium thought of the day
12 Oct 2015, 10:19
How can you be so sure, what is your reasoning for no WW3?Pablo22510 wrote:
WW3 won't happen. Ever.
12 Oct 2015, 10:22
Think about it, there is nothing to gain in the long run. In the end we just destroyed our planet over something that will only last for a minute.
"Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
-imperium thought of the day
-imperium thought of the day
12 Oct 2015, 11:38
Exactly. Nobody wants WW3, because WW3 would be a nuclear war that would make this planet uninhabitable.
The past is a foreign country.
12 Oct 2015, 14:02
Actually, WW3 probably wouldn't involve nuclear weapons. Pretty things though they are, and expensive to buy, making you part of an exclusive club, no country in their right minds would actually use them.
12 Oct 2015, 14:21
Bingo. And no nukes means no WW3.qwerty1mil wrote:
no country in their right minds would actually use them.
The past is a foreign country.
12 Oct 2015, 14:36
No nukes means a conventional world war...or several long bloody wars between lots of different nations all at once,
British=best. Duh!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
12 Oct 2015, 14:38
Your assertion makes little practical sense, no nukes, simply means a conventional conflict as Comrade Dave just pointed out.Pablo22510 wrote:
Bingo. And no nukes means no WW3.qwerty1mil wrote:
no country in their right minds would actually use them.
12 Oct 2015, 16:34
If WW3 did happen, It probably wouldn't be over oil. There is enough oil IN STORAGE to last the world at least a decade, and even more that hasn't been extracted yet. By the time we do run out of oil, we probably will have a much better way to power stuff and won't even need oil anymore.
Forum Gang Premier
you are a balls
you are a balls
12 Oct 2015, 19:53
No nukes equal no war. The only countries right now capable of sparking a World War are US and Russia. Russia doesn't want that because pretty much everyone to their West would flock to the gun-toting Americans for help, and the US has some, though hypocritical at some points, sense of morale compass in terms of a grand scale war, at least, public opinion. I'm a Californian, and while we do not particularly enjoy the Ruskies and what they're doing, we don't want to have our attention taken away from our bread and circuses
"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
12 Oct 2015, 19:54
As for topic of spark of war, I still feel it would be Russia overstepping in their annexation of Ukraine, although, there have been already 2 cases of broken ceasefires, so whatever
"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
12 Oct 2015, 20:05
That's not WW3.qwerty1mil wrote:
no nukes, simply means a conventional conflict
The past is a foreign country.
12 Oct 2015, 20:11
Following that train of thought then WW1 and WW2 weren't world wars. I think you need to check the definition of what World War means.Pablo22510 wrote:
That's not WW3.qwerty1mil wrote:
no nukes, simply means a conventional conflict
12 Oct 2015, 20:14
No exactly asked for any of the World wars we already had but it happened anyways. It happens because of tangled alliances between countries. I think it would happen because of an incident between the US and Russia. Maybe Iran attacks Saudi Arabia. US takes Irans side, Russia takes Saudi's. Boom. World war 3.Pablo22510 wrote:
Nobody wants WW3, because WW3 would be a nuclear war that would make this planet uninhabitable.
12 Oct 2015, 20:38
Or NATO actually does something to stop Russia's toppling of an established government in Ukraine
"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
13 Oct 2015, 01:25
Some think WW3 would mean martyrdom and going to Heaven. The only thing to deter them is not having the ability to start such a large conflict.
:S
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
