will it be as bloody as WWI or WWII?
who do you belive would be the major powers on either side?
**express what you think**
2006-09-30 12:47:12 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Yes, pretty much..
Western Civilization against Islamofaschist nations & N.Korea.
Once Iran goes nuclear, the race will be on...
2006-09-30 12:50:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nope, just the same old war that's been raging since the 6th Century... Islam vs the rest.
The Mahdi kicked out the British in Sudan and murdered everyone who wasn't Muslim during the 19th Century and Sudan is still suffering today... guess who's asked to help ! Politics aside though, we should.
During WW1 we kicked out the Turks and establshed Arab nations, giving the land - and the oil - to it's rightful owners, some of which are the very ones accusing us of imperialism.
If we had acted like true imperialists (and I'm not saying we should) these people would be singing a very different tune, if able to sing at all.
If we hadn't acted at all these people would be under a yoke of an empire that is still today criticised for its record of human rights.
Ungrateful children don't make their parents bad.. just sad.
2006-09-30 21:35:03 · answer #2 · answered by jezterfezter 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Look at it like this, every war in the modern world is a world war, in the age of globalisation and instant communication it's difficult for a country not to become involved in a conflict. However, in the sense of a world war in that it is mass slaughter on an immense scale this is NOT world war three. World war one claimed 37 MILLION lives. World war two 62 million casualties - that is almost the population of Britain killed in six years. The "war on terror" has claimed a few thousand lives, they are completely incomparable. The current situation is little different to the red scare in the 50's and 60's - an ideology is declared the enemy, a series of pointless and unwinnable wars will be fought (Korea, Vietnam, bay of pigs) leading to needless slaughter of innocent people, and then everyone will get tired and forget why we were fighting.
2006-09-30 13:08:10 · answer #3 · answered by Mordent 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes. World War III started on January 20, 2001, when the Anti-Christ assumed the office of President of the United States.
When Bush initiates a nuclear attack on Iran, the war will make WWI & WWII look like child's play.
2006-09-30 13:30:01 · answer #4 · answered by manabovetime 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No - World Wars require huge imperial powers - there are none other to rival the US, with the possible exception of China. It's possible that their quest for oil (as they get richer) could cause problems.
The idea that a ragbag of Middle East nations could ever pose a formidable threat enough to start WWIII is far-fetched - terrorism and insurgency, maybe, but they'll never be superpowers.
No-one can compete with the USA - more weapons than the next nine biggest nations put together. A good or bad thing? Well, that's another issue, but I don't think WWIII is upon us.
2006-09-30 13:12:29 · answer #5 · answered by mdr180276 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
not yet but i reckon it is VERY close and it worries me how after 2 world wars and the knowledge that a nuclear war would simply destry mankind that we still are stupid enough to let it happen however i dont reckon germany will be responsible it will definitely be the midle-east vs the rest of world. the muslim fanatics simply wnat to take over the wolrd. like in some marches in london they actually stated that they will not rest til england is a muslim state... SO WHY THE HELL ARE WE STILL LETTING THEM IN!!!! and letting them be violent but if we speak out we are called racist and im sick of it... i am not racist i have several muslim friends and they are nice people but you look at the fanatics and most of them are muslim it is a plain fact we cant avoid.. i think it will be bloodier than the 2 other wars... if it happens then no doubt nuclear and chemical weapons will be used and it wont be so much about people dying on frontline more about innocent ppl like u and me getting mutated, burned, blown up and getting agonising injurie sand dying of starvation and lack of hygeine due to nukes and HE missiles being used from long distances it is a fact if we dont kill everyone on the planet in WW3 then we will all die soon after due to rdiation poisoning not to mention the enviromental factors such as global warming will skyrocket... it is a fact that humanity is at a very close end
2006-10-01 05:02:07 · answer #6 · answered by big D 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes. read the bible it is upon us right now, i believe that. Bloody as WWI and WWII, it is worse in many other ways. People starving, losing their homes, tortured, etc. I think the United States and Europe are the biggest powers .
2006-09-30 23:26:27 · answer #7 · answered by shytown_67 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
With the USA & UK and the good relationship that is begining to form with Russia, and in a small way with China. I honestly think it will be an improbability.
Even with North Korea talking the talk, they would be fools to begin anything - China is telling them not to be so bloody stupid.
It seems - according to very reliable news - that the war against the west is from...................well, read the news.
2006-10-04 08:26:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not yet!
What pisses me off if 'North Korea testing nuclear weapons' nobody mentions China blowing up bits of Tibet with theirs.
The whole world VS Darth Vader more commonly know as Hu Jintao and the peoples republic of communist (oppressive) China
2006-10-03 23:44:13 · answer #9 · answered by Paul G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, theirs too much money involved, unless something major happens, their is no reason for any of the super powers to really get involved in a shooting match.
If you may be refering to the reacent outbreak between isreal and lebanon, consider this, isreal could launch a nuke and get away with it. america wont counter strike because it has dealings in isreal, uk wont launch because it has no reason to, russions wouldnt launch because they have no reason, china wouldnt get involved because it has too many internal problems at the moment, everyone would put ther hands up and state "not my problem" and un/nato would be left to clean up, no reprocussions for isreal.
The most likely start for WW3 would be oil, since we have no alternative to oil at this moment it will probably be the cause of it, world domanice for control would break out to ensure one party prospers on the last few dregs of petrol.
I highly doubt their would ever be a full outbreak of nuclear war. thats too messy for everyone. and is a no win situation for anyone.
Would world war 3 be bloody? wil humans be fighting? yes. so thats the answer, people will be forced to join the ranks as the number of fully trained soldiers deminish, warfare would be for air superiority first off, america and most of europe, uk, france, germany have that covered japan as well would be part of the main super power, russia would join in with the coallition china perhaps depending on how it turns out, same goes for naval power again, superiority goes to the americans hands down, closely followed by europe. on the ground, the coalition would be directing controled tactics while the opponents would be greatly using gurella tactics. what may inluance victory or not would probably be where china's allegance would lie.
Cheers
2006-09-30 13:08:18 · answer #10 · answered by Azure_dragon 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely. The United Nations was founded in the ashes of WW II in the hopes of preventing another great war-- a war we knew we would not survive.
The UN has become a body of appeasement, hatred, prejudice and irresponsibility. Nations continue to do what they did in WW II, but with with one added twist: we have a new brand of Medieval Muslims who "love death just as we love life."
We have learned nothing and have not changed. Evil repeats itself, and evil, by definition is the destruction of life.
We're in trouble.
2006-09-30 13:22:26 · answer #11 · answered by Scott D 1 · 2⤊ 2⤋