What is the criteria for a war to be called a World war?

Answer 1

When the majority of the nations of the earth are involved, usually with a 'superpower' on each side. Until then, wars are considered regional conflicts, proxy wars, great patriotic wars, etc.

Answer 2

It will be recognised when it happens, if it happens.

The war of 1914-18 was known as "The Great War" at the time and afterwards.

The usage "The First World War" has been traced to a book of that title from 1933, but there is no well-known earlier reference. By geographical and national reckoning it was fully appropriate but the title looked at the cataclysm as something horrendous and new, not simply first of a series. We're looking at this from a different viewpoint.

"World War II" appeared in the British press in September 1939, converting The Great War into WW1 by necessity. This before the entry of Italy, or Japan*. The world-wide spread of the conflict, at least on a naval basis; was clearly seen.
(Battle of the River Plate, Dec 1939)


*though Japan was at war in China, and had been with the Soviet Union.

Answer 3

There is no "official criteria". However if the war involves more than 14 countries from 3 continents, new technologies are developed, it has a pretty good chance.
If you're trying to promote the idea that the war with terrorism is World war III, you theory is incorrect. You see, it is not countries fighting countries. It is a group of people fighting countries.

Answer 4

It's my understanding that a war becomes a world war when two or more opposing allies are in conflict. WWI was a world war because the German/AustroHungarian/Italian allies fought against the western allied powers of Britian/France/US. WWII involved the same allied powers, just in a slightly different configuration. As someone earlier said, when NATO becomes involved...since NATO didn't exist before these two wars, that's not completely accurate but the idea is right. When allied forces (world super powers) are involved in a conflict, then it is a world war.

Answer 5

It has been a World War in the past when you have the majority of countries in the world involved in the war whether by sending troops or simply declaring war.

Answer 6

fortunately we have only had two world wars. What they had in common was that the nations involved had signed mutual defense agreements with other nations so an attack against one was an attack against all.
As a rule mutual defense agreements keep the peace or at the very least limit the extent of the war. When they fail to do so the results are often disastrous

Answer 7

those wars have been international, and in touch many hundreds of thousands of persons in significant international locations international. significant powers confronted one yet another and rather fought one yet another. It wasn't a huge united states as against many small international locations, in an attempt to maintain the small international locations out of the administration of different medium-sized international locations. that's what's rather happening interior the so-called "struggle on terror," with the midsection East being saved out of eu international locations' administration by making use of U.S. occupation. easily, a respectable argument would nicely be made that what we call the "chilly struggle" replaced into international struggle 3. basically because of the fact the U.S., Europe and the U.S. in no way confronted the nuclear holocaust that all of us feared on the time, does that propose it wasn't a international struggle? Do the various hundreds of thousands killed (Korea/China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Angola, Ethiopia/Somalia, Cuba) could be from the U.S. or the U.S. for it to qualify? easily, i might say that destiny historians will record the "struggle on terror" as "the U.S. empire's final gasp attempt to maintain international dominance." form of like the British in India. If a three-way struggle between the U.S., the Europeans, and China erupts sometime interior the subsequent two decades, which would be "international struggle 4." And make no mistake - it rather is going to be nuclear on all 3 facets - and that i does not take any bets on who might win.

Answer 8

Spent 20+yrs in the US Army and here is the deal, if you see the other guy over the hill and you smile at him and he shoots at you, your in a f---ing war!

Simple don't you think !

Drafted in 1971 for that war and stayed as an enlisted nurse until I retired in 1991 after the first war Iraq in 1991.

Answer 9

The World is in one right now. Islamic fanatics and the countries that support them, are waging one against the Western World.They will not stop until we're dead or Islamic ourselves. The only problem is most of the World doesn't know it.

Answer 10

War on two fronts. Asia and the Middle East. I don't think the world is ready to announce WW3...that is just messed up.