I'm just wondering this because as long as humans exist, there would always be conflicts. These conflicts' gravity could rise . . .
2007-07-27 17:04:57 · 7 answers · asked by CK 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It could be 28 minutes from now or 280 years from now. When the superpowers square off against each other in two camps, then come back and we'll talk world war 3
Until then, just think regional conflicts, wars between rump states, proxy wars and brinksmanship. If you recall the Yom Kippur War in 1973, a coalition of Arab States (Egypt, Syria and Jordan) were soundly defeated by the Israelis. That was a worse situation than the current conflict and it didn't raise a blip on the world war radar (not that it didn't have the potential to spark a global war).
The next World War will involve a nuclear exchange, how could it not. In the first 30 minutes, nearly a billion people will have been vaporised, mostly in the US, Russia, Europe, China and Japan. Another 1.5 billion will die shortly thereafter from radiation poisoning. The northern hemisphere will be plunged into prolonged agony and barbarity.
Eventually the nuclear winter will spread to the southern hemisphere and all plant life will die. You ask when is the apacolypse, you are asking when will we commit global suicide. My answer is it won't happen soon because the larger superpowers are more rational than the rump states in the middle east.
Our biggest risk is an accidental launch of nukes by one of the nuclear powers.
2007-07-27 18:10:52 · answer #1 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the 1st international conflict replaced right into a protracted time in the past - We did no longer have Nukes. As sturdy as Russia are, they does no longer be a experience for even in simple terms Europe no longer to show requiring america's help. yet another factor, is that Russia have calmed there spending on such militia attributes and as a effect there economic device has revived particularly by using fact of it, what annoys them is the sheer volume of funds the US now could start up yet another chilly conflict, that would plummit there economic device into dyer sort as quickly as back (Russias). u.s. are purposely attempting to pursue yet another chilly conflict, by using fact they know they are able to spend it, and that they know Russia can no longer locate the money for it. it quite is an economic recommendations-set, no longer WW3.
2016-10-09 11:43:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another attack on American soil would expand the fight to more of the middle east, and an attack by Iran on Israel. Also an invasion of India or Pakistan into each others countries. Theres a lot of unstability in the world.
2007-07-27 17:47:08 · answer #3 · answered by jeremy sem 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Is already started; the spark was 9/11 and the first battles of WWIII are Iraq and Afghanistan; who will be next? Iran? Syria? Saudi Arabia?
Who knows?
Keep your head down and your powder dry.
2007-07-27 19:52:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree with one of the above answers.
WW III already Started on the 9th of Sept, 2001
2007-07-27 17:57:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Famine in a well-armed nation where that nation has to cross some other nation's border to eat.
2007-07-27 17:09:13 · answer #6 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
9-11 was that spark.
We are fighting the opening skirmishes of what will be called (100 years from now,) WW3.
2007-07-27 17:10:23 · answer #7 · answered by Tommy B 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋