WWIII started and ended with the Cold War. Fortunately, a large-scale invasion never coalesced.
I believe, with the advent of large multinational corporations dominating the economies of most countries (even large ones) there will not likely be large-scale wars like a World War for some time (if ever). There's not doubt in my mind that Iraq was invaded to ensure the stability of Exxon/Mobil, BP, and Gulf's oil supply in the Middle East for the next decade or so, even if they "aren't pumping oil out of Iraq." Regardless, these companies have a vested interest in the oil-producing regions of the world staying stable, and, relatively, peaceful.
IMHO, large-scale conflict is unlikely. The only powers capable of sustained large-scale wars are the two biggest trading partners on the planet. A war between the two would cause economic collapse for both. Continental Europe is stable, and, with the advent of the Euro, and open trade, will likely remain so for some time. Russia lacks the economic resources to start, much less maintain a force necessary to sustain, a large-scale war effort.
Most of the Middle Eastern countries have relatively small to medium armies and would have to ally to start anything big. However, if more than two allied in this manner they'd have most of the Western world breathing down their necks faster than you can say "oil".
No major threats from Africa, South Asia, or the Pacific. China has too much to lose by starting anything with the U.S. or Europe (not counting the distance factor). South America, like Africa, does not have any countries with the economy necessary to sustain a large-scale war (maybe Brazil).
WWI and WWII were really the same war with a 20-year ceasefire. Today's world does not have the formal alliances that existed during those wars. NATO and SEATO are still around, but have been diluted when their mission was wiped out by the collapse of the Soviet Union. There is no more Warsaw Pact. China has few military alliances (if any) with any other major countries in the world (just a few weaker satellies it controls like North Korea and Vietnam). Most other countries that might be able to sustain a large-scale war are either part of NATO/SEATO, or do not have a large standing military.
While the U.S. publicly supports Israel, and pronounces their right to exist, this conflict with Hezbolah, Palestine and Lebanon has been going on for millenia, and will continue to do so. Unless someone does something REALLY stupid (like lob a nuke, chemical or bio-weapon) it will likely stay a series "regional" conflicts, much like it always has.
2006-07-13 19:33:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
World War I and WWII were all out war between blocs of the major powers of the day.
Full scale economic war as well as bullets and bombs were involved.
Assets and monies were seized, as were bank funds.
There is nothing even close to that happening in the world today, and it is unlikely to develop soon.
Twenty to thirty years from now, when the USA is in more direct competition with the powers then (probably China and what is left of the European Union, or possibly corporate interests) THEN there is a chance of all out war.
This conflict in the Mid-east is the same old backwater bush league crud that has been going on since we invented war thousands of years ago.
Over-reacting to it is the worst thing we can do. As cold as it sounds, a few thousand dead a year is nothing compared to the millions of dead a year of a major conflict.
2006-07-13 19:57:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by aka DarthDad 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The dangerous element today is George Bush. He has been totally on the side of Israel and his Middle East policies have lead to this escalation at the present. WW111 is not starting unless Bush has really not learned anything, and I still don't think that the leaders in the Middle East are stupid enough to start the War of Wars.
Those of you that are religious, please pray that George Bush can see his way to at least not make things worse in the Middle East. Until the republicans can be relieved of duty for a very long time.
2006-07-13 19:16:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by zclifton2 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, it's been going on since 1972 when the Palestinians killed the Israeli Athletes at the Olympics. The Yom Kippor War. The Iranian Hostage crisis in 1979. Bombings in Germany aimed toward US serviceman. Bombing of a couple of planes in the 90's. Bombings in Sri Lanka, Philippians, India, New York City Twice, London, Spain, Israel, Muslims targeting Christians all over the world including Egypt.
The radical muslim has been at war with the rest of the world since the seventies, we just haven't admitted it until 9/11
2006-07-13 19:13:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by .45 Peacemaker 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If no other countries get involved, then it will NOT become a third World War. If some countries get involved in an effort to cool down the tension, it will become a notable conflict.
However, if an assassination occurs or a country suffers a surprising & devastating attack, then history would show that a World War is possible.
2006-07-13 19:10:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by amg503 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Too soon to tell, and, we are watching the North Koreans. Japan and China are suitably concerned... Kim Jong il seems to be a bit 'mental', a man who doesn't have enough frosting for a cake... or, who lacks the important parts to make the sandwich...
He is an isolationist, a control freak, and mass murderer of >2.5 million of his own people, and, thanks to Bill Clinton, and his exchange of Loreal Missle Navigation technology, a National Secret, for campaign contributions, (Bhudda Gate/China Gate) the Chinese and the Koreans can target Miami Florida, and every city in the Americas!
Now, don't you feel better, Demo-libs?
Still waiting for YOUR game plan, platform, and statement of integrity!
2006-07-13 19:21:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nahhhh.... those people fight each other all the time... don't sweat it. It will take a nuclear conflict to touch off WWIII and nobody wants to make all the oil radioactive.... least of all the U.S. It might be prudent to keep an eye on India and Pakistan though... if anybody starts it, I bet it will be one of them (or both).
2006-07-13 19:11:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by eggman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You know I think the war for oil could be called wwIII in a way
2006-07-13 19:08:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
WWIII officially starts when the declarations of war are signed and sealed. You're way ahead of yourself.
2006-07-13 19:07:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mandi 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pretty scary, huh?
I am thinking it's high time to start looking toward the clouds. Jesus must be coming back sooner than I thought.
2006-07-13 19:11:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by LastNerveLost 3
·
0⤊
0⤋