Why haven't they declared that this is world war 111?

Question

I'm so sick of hearing about our soldiers getting killed or coming home in severe deprestion. My opinion this is world war 111. What are they calling this war?

Answer 1

Depends what "war" you're talking about? The War in Iraq, the War in Afghanistan, or the War on Terror. A few people are admitting that all three are part of a global war of civilizations between the West and Radical ISlam, but they are immediately attacked as racist and war mongers.

Answer 2

Technically speaking this is not a war-it is a conflict or police action; wars are declared by Congress. The last formal war we were in was World War 2. Korea was a conflict and the U.S. went in as part of the United nations commitment to protect South Korea., Vietnam is a little cloudier as the Gulf of Tonkin resolution passed in Congress wasn't a declaration of war but did authorize the military to go and fight so depends on how you split hairs on declaration of war and other SEATO nations sent troops also. First Gulf War was again U.N. sanctioned and other Arab countries sent troops also. But since no declaration of war then it isn't a war; the military fights, kills and dies either way so really what is the difference?
This isn't WW 3 at this time-no mushroom clouds or biological weapons have been used.

Answer 3

I hate to sound like a student of history but I am, the biggest wars in our recent history ( korea, vietnam, gulf war 1 and 11, civil war) are all terribly small in the terms of a world war. Do you realize that the combined casualty totals in the 2 actual world wars were over 100 million people. To put that in perspecive it would be like wiping over a third of the north american continent off the earth. The war on terrorism has cost not even 100000 (terrorists, un troops, americans ie). And less then a dozen countries. To call this a world war is not even close to what happened 60 years ago when over 50 million people were killed, this isnt even a comparison.
If all of Nato was conscripted, there entire militaries and factories and resources enabled, when you have to give up your pots and pans, your money, build bombs shelters in your backyard, when your food is rationed, when you cant drive to save gasoline to fuel tanks and planes, when you cant drink because your assigned a duty of watching for fires in your neighborhood caused by bombs going off, when you have to turn in your car for steel, when and when, none of this has happened, when it does happen, you will know, and I hope to heck it doesnt!

Answer 4

Mainly because it is the lead-up to a global war.

Wars today are too lethal to decide on a direct-confrontation basis. (Just ask Saddam Hussein's army -- if you can find any survivors)

Rather, the ' war' is fought in snippets, usually through proxies. A good example would be Syria's latest claim that it "chased' the Israeli Air Force out of eastern Syria, with their new anti-aircraft systems, which "cannot be spoofed".

Right.

How did the Israeli air Force make it all the way into Eastern Syria (from the Med, to the west) without being detected?

The answer is, the latest Russian multi-freq radars were spoofed. For Ivan and the Syrians, and -- the Persians -- it's back to the drawing boards. For the Israelis -- and the U.S., it's one more bit of freedom -- we still have a technological edge.

The Israelis have just demonstrated that they can reach anywhere in Syria -- or other points in the Mid-East -- at will. the implications for folks working on surreptious materials are obvious. For now.

wsulliva

Answer 5

Well, because it's not a World War, why because it's only America fighting this War! Not the French, not the British (anymore), not the Russians (ha ha ha!), etc.....
Also, World War 1 and 2 followed in rapid secession and happened to involve several Nations, not just America.

Answer 6

I had a similar question myself... From an exterior viewpoint, this Israeli tactic is doing not something to get their abducted soldier decrease back - that's purely inciting greater violence and breeding greater hate between the two components. Had it been the Palestinians doing the top same element as Isreal is at the instant doing, the international community might have sent troops in a heartbeat. the place is the UN in this? the place are the humanitarians of the different international locations? it variety of feels to me that Israel isn't purely at the same time punishing the Palestinians, it is likewise terrorizing them. i don't see how anyone can call this something yet terrorism. no count the dimensions of the protection stress budget, terrorism is terrorism. i don't understand why there is silence from the international community approximately this. that's a terrible injustice for my section.

Answer 7

They're calling it The Iraq War or the War on Terror.
And yeah, it sucks that soldiers are getting killed, but it's necessary.
Because in the Declaration of Independance, it states that America will help any country that wants or needs our help, and then we'll give their country back to the people, then they can govern it however they want (In Iraq's case it's democracy).

Answer 8

WW III would have to involve regular forces from a number of countries fighting it out toe to toe or using Nukes.
All else is merely warm up. I think that we are about at the stage, compared to WWII of the swallowing up of smaller states. Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia etc.

The War on Global Terror seems to get the most hype from the White House.

Answer 9

It is not a world war because the rest of the world is not involved. As a matter of fact if you look at the causality rate it not even a police action (Korea). Frankly more people have died because of weather than the shrub's war. It does not even come close to a world war.

Answer 10

I suppose that depends entirely upon whom you ask.

One of my favorite clips regarding this most recent fiasco, sums it up in about 3 minutes, and actually makes reference to your statement, suggesting that the last few years has in fact been the beginning of the 3rd world war.

I used to think this was a bunch of fringe blather until I started researching neoconservatism, 15 some odd books later, Mr. McNamara is not completely wrong, and that's the disturbing part.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tmP8Bgof6KE

Neoconservatives are perhaps more accurately neo-fascists they all wear suits, speak eloquently and speak in loving tones about democracy and liberalism and then pursue policies and mechanisms to destroy those very things, creepy, subtle and just slightly evil.

Personally, I submit that the US and the west in general would do well to limit itself to the strictly necessary wars. The offensive against Taliban elements of Afghanistan was entirely militarily justifiable and necessary.

The "war of discretion" as George Bush Sr. referred to the (re invasion of Iraq as as) is exactly that, discretionary and not entirely something we prepared for.