English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-13 19:58:15 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

20 answers

Well, thanks to Israel..it just did.

2006-07-13 20:01:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A world war is perhaps less likely than most think. What constitutes wars of that scale? It takes multiple countries of matched military might standing in unswerving opposition to one another long enough for their antipathy to be unresolvable by diplomatic means. Who matches America's might? And who would stand against the US that even comes close? Martial power is most aptly characterized at present by a nation's technological prowess. Of the countries that possess any such knowhow, which would side with the Arabs (or perhaps, Persians, as may be the case)? If tensions escalate in the Middle East, it will--in all likelihood--involve Israel. The United States will be obliged to intervene. The UK, Canada, France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Germany, Russia, and China would all either side with America or not oppose it (not in an open war). In short, you're not going to see WWIII break out from the events of the past few weeks/days.

2006-07-14 03:31:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

World War III will be fought (by definition) between the greatest powers on Earth.

The USA is currently the only superpower and it will be decades before any coalition of countries is mad enough or in a postion to directly challenge America.

Fighting a war is extraordinalrily expensive. The current war in Iraq would bankrupt any other country that tried something similar, and there are only a handful of countries with a large enough army to try it.

What is often overlooked is that the USA is not trying to "win" this current war in the traditional sense...ie ultimate destruction and create vast loss of life to the enemy. The USA is fighting well below its capacity.

If the USA wanted simply to destroy Iraq, it would have taken considerable less time than the drive to Baghdad.

Similarly, there is no country that the USA could not outright destroy, so no one wants any of that fight.

If America continues to dominate the world, there will be a fight over resources. Then eventually someone will feel they can call the US bluff. The USA being the country that it is, proud and strong and free, will not allow some recently developed "Third World" power to dictate to them and war will ensue.

Nothing personal, it's just about the money. They will make up any number of supposedly moral reasons, but in the end, the fight will be over land, money, access to markets, newfound valuable territory on the Moon or Mars, whatever.

I call USA vs China and EU in 2041.

The USA will win with the unexpected help of recently developed Artificial Intelligent beings who will expect citizenship rights.

You think you have problems, those poor SOB's will wish they had our meager problems.

2006-07-14 03:18:42 · answer #3 · answered by aka DarthDad 5 · 1 0

Yeah... especially because modern fighter aircracft can carry a much larger bomb payload than WWII-era bombers. If you've seen pictures of Berlin you know what I'm talking about, and modern buildings hurt a lot more when they fall.

The USA has the most bombs and the ability to deliver them any time, anywhere. B2 Spirits took off from the centrel US and bombed Iraq about 16 hours later, and they're very, very hard to see on Radar. Could even take those old YF-12s out of their mothballed boxes and fit 'em with cluster munitions. Death served up in style at Mach 3, courtesy of the US Air Force.

2006-07-14 03:43:39 · answer #4 · answered by Jason 2 · 0 0

The ground was set when GW Bush got installed by the Supreme court in 2000, and it really started when Dubbya invaded Poland--I mean Iraq. We haven't started calling it WWIII yet because the rest of the world hasn't jumped in yet. And this one... this one will involve more nations than every war before it. By the time this war is over, there will be no one left alive on this planet (except the pygmies) that will not have lost someone to the war.

2006-07-14 03:11:38 · answer #5 · answered by Princess Toadstoolie 3 · 0 0

Technology isn't lifting all boats, but we keep adding more boats!
As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
happen if population were stabilized.
It would be much more equitable having each individual fight the
flu on his own, rather than waste resources having armies fight each
other over resources. By stopping the suppression of influenza,
everyone could be on the front lines, instead of just a few good men.

2006-07-14 04:12:11 · answer #6 · answered by imbibe 1 · 0 0

It already started. On the morning of Tuesday, Sept 11 2001.

2006-07-14 03:12:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

in my opinion it will full start in 5 years especially if the usa keeps sending troupes in the same for canada and briten. i think the countries have already voiced there opinion on which side they would be on.What really concerns me is it started with kuiate and it is still going on and also that nobody seems to know what the asian countries are up to they are to quiet so i say as long as everbody is in the news ok but beware of the quiet ones they can be deadly

2006-07-14 03:08:01 · answer #8 · answered by roscoe2penny 2 · 0 0

who know we could be in it know or it could be 100 years from know i mean they have not declare this ww3 yet they might never it could be the next war or the one after that or that you get the point

2006-07-14 09:18:33 · answer #9 · answered by Ashley W 2 · 0 0

i believe world war 3 is in its infant stage. i believe the united states involvement in the Israel and Lebanon war will be triggered by a u.s. helicopter trying to rescue civilians will be shot down over Lebanon. the numbers 1234 run across my mind. maybe not in that order but those numbers somewhere in the involvement.

2006-07-20 01:15:30 · answer #10 · answered by d_trmnd985survivor 1 · 0 0

Some one said to me in the bible it is said that Isreal and its return will caus ethe end of the world. Sound kinda convincing, but not sure if bible says that, and if you can belive the bible. but, it is kind intresting, and with the easter problems sounds like it may happen soon...

2006-07-14 03:35:06 · answer #11 · answered by Call 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers