Discussion
The world seems to be rapidly becoming a more unstable one these days. Bombs falling in Afghanistan, Syria and probably other places. Tensions building between the US and China, Russia and NK. Even (unlikely) talk about war between UK and Spain over Gibraltar. So I put it to you PHers, as I know there are a lot of knowledgeable people on here (which I'm not in all honesty!) what is the likelihood of us seeing WW3 in the next few years?
Pretty remote.
WW1 was only a world war because the countries involved (well Britain anyway) had colonies all over the world, and WW2 was really 2 overlapping wars fought for different reasons.
North Korea will keep pushing until someone stops them but that won't lead to a world war. China is a bit more worrying but they are clever enough to stop short of causing a big war, a limited skirmish is the worst that's likely to happen.
WW1 was only a world war because the countries involved (well Britain anyway) had colonies all over the world, and WW2 was really 2 overlapping wars fought for different reasons.
North Korea will keep pushing until someone stops them but that won't lead to a world war. China is a bit more worrying but they are clever enough to stop short of causing a big war, a limited skirmish is the worst that's likely to happen.
China says North Korea tension has to be stopped from reaching 'irreversible' stage
and
China piles pressure on North Korea by banning coal imports
and
Air China to halt flights to North Korea from Monday: report
I think it likely that once the little fat man in NK realises he doesn't have unconditional support from his idealogical big brother in the north, he just may decide that he doesn't want to be the second deified dead leader of a non-existent country.
One down, a few to go...
and
China piles pressure on North Korea by banning coal imports
and
Air China to halt flights to North Korea from Monday: report
I think it likely that once the little fat man in NK realises he doesn't have unconditional support from his idealogical big brother in the north, he just may decide that he doesn't want to be the second deified dead leader of a non-existent country.
One down, a few to go...
We are arguably in a far better place than we were at several points in 20th century history.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, were all fanatical ideologues to one degree or another, though it may well be argued that Stalin was less dangerous than his predecessor Lenin.
Hitler continued to allocate vast resources (in men and rolling stock at least) to the resolution of 'the Jewish question', in the face of losing disastrous battles to the east, south and west.
Stalin and Mao baulked at nothing in the creation of their utopias; each knowingly destroying 20-60 millions of their own citizens.
Trump isn't an ideologue, he's a greedy business man.
Putin may miss the 'good old days', the NKVD and KGB, but is playing the tough guy, (I'm sure he is quite tough), amongst a growing Stalinist revival, as (mostly) young people miss the romanticised version 'good old days' that they never lived through personally.
China needs to ship as many people (and goods) out into the world to support it's burgeoning population, and while they may be using the vestiges of the power of 'the party', they clearly have no real loyalty to Maoist-Marxism.
True, self-destructive evil requires an ideology.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, were all fanatical ideologues to one degree or another, though it may well be argued that Stalin was less dangerous than his predecessor Lenin.
Hitler continued to allocate vast resources (in men and rolling stock at least) to the resolution of 'the Jewish question', in the face of losing disastrous battles to the east, south and west.
Stalin and Mao baulked at nothing in the creation of their utopias; each knowingly destroying 20-60 millions of their own citizens.
Trump isn't an ideologue, he's a greedy business man.
Putin may miss the 'good old days', the NKVD and KGB, but is playing the tough guy, (I'm sure he is quite tough), amongst a growing Stalinist revival, as (mostly) young people miss the romanticised version 'good old days' that they never lived through personally.
China needs to ship as many people (and goods) out into the world to support it's burgeoning population, and while they may be using the vestiges of the power of 'the party', they clearly have no real loyalty to Maoist-Marxism.
True, self-destructive evil requires an ideology.
Interesting thanks. My parents lived through the cold war and they said it was a very worrying time. I just wondered if this felt the same. The older people on here are more well equipped to answer that. I also wonder how much of the perceived anxiety is caused by the tabloids sensationalist headlines. I honestly don't know who or what to believe nowadays.
A lot of it is just for show, Trump called China everything under the sun, then China agrees to put pressure on the NK fat bloke and Trump says they are 'not currency manipulators'. It's obvious Trump was making veiled threats to China's economic interests simply to leverage them into a defensive pact over NK.
Same story with Russia; Putin has dug himself a hole with Assad and Trump is facing heat for his relationship with Russia - Backroom deal done for The US to lob some missiles at Syria to disprove the Trump/Putin love in, then down the line Putin can make some 'concessions' by removing Assad in return for dropping sanctions over Ukraine. Trump and Putin bith get what they want by 'de-escalating' tensions. Russia doesn't give a s
t about the missile strike - behind the scenes they've been letting Israel bomb syrian arms shipments to Hezbollah so they really aren't in it for any other reason that a strategic foothold in the region - given they back Israel they have no real desire to support Iran - they're simply flexing myscoes and distracting from their Ukraine adventures.
it's politik real - the big military forces - USA, China & Russia are effectively working in concert and for a world war to happen you'd need at least two superpower blocks to go to war - Russia can't afford a war against Nato, China has no interest in any form of conflict against its biggest export markets as it would ruin their economic rise to power - what you are seeing between Russia and America is mutually agreed sabre rattling to shore up Putin's support ahead of the election as the archetype hardman and justifying his military spending during Russia's recession, Trump wants to flex his muscles to show he isn't a obama man of in-action and again wants to shore up support fir the republican friendly defence industry, China doesn't want to get shut out of the USA market so is sacrificing NK to make a deal. Afghanistan these days is little more than a training and test ground for the air force and special forces.
I doubt it will even kick off in NK. fat boy will make gis usual noises as the US fleet sit off his coast while china piles on the economic pressure then he'll negotiate a deal via the chinese to guve up the nukes in return for the US withdrawing from SK and the chinese taking over peacekeeping duties and sending him lots of cake, he'll proclaim he has 'beaten' the US when in reality Trump probably wanted to pull out all the US forces from babysitting SK in line with his underlying desire to no longer be the worlds policeman.
Same story with NATO; trump calls them useless and suggests US might pull out and stop acting a security for Europe and paying the bill - EU countries who've run down their military to pay fir generous social care suddenly realise Putin has a military threat and up defence spending - Trump says NATO is relevant after all now he's got the socialists to cough up for some (probably US supplied) weapons to defend them against Putin who is now doing a roaring trade selling arms to Iran et al thanks to some nice testing marketing of his new arsenal on call of duty / syria level.
Tl;dr
Various leaders using mutually agreed posturing to reinforce their own autocratic regimes
various regimes having pre-planned scuffles to show off weaponary they want to sell to improve their defence exports
scaring people on the internet into thinking WW3 is coming so they can shovel money into their defence friend;s accounts whilst cutting welfare and services.
Doing deals at the end of it all making everyone think they have saved us all from dusaster ensuring they get re-elected.
Same story with Russia; Putin has dug himself a hole with Assad and Trump is facing heat for his relationship with Russia - Backroom deal done for The US to lob some missiles at Syria to disprove the Trump/Putin love in, then down the line Putin can make some 'concessions' by removing Assad in return for dropping sanctions over Ukraine. Trump and Putin bith get what they want by 'de-escalating' tensions. Russia doesn't give a s
t about the missile strike - behind the scenes they've been letting Israel bomb syrian arms shipments to Hezbollah so they really aren't in it for any other reason that a strategic foothold in the region - given they back Israel they have no real desire to support Iran - they're simply flexing myscoes and distracting from their Ukraine adventures. it's politik real - the big military forces - USA, China & Russia are effectively working in concert and for a world war to happen you'd need at least two superpower blocks to go to war - Russia can't afford a war against Nato, China has no interest in any form of conflict against its biggest export markets as it would ruin their economic rise to power - what you are seeing between Russia and America is mutually agreed sabre rattling to shore up Putin's support ahead of the election as the archetype hardman and justifying his military spending during Russia's recession, Trump wants to flex his muscles to show he isn't a obama man of in-action and again wants to shore up support fir the republican friendly defence industry, China doesn't want to get shut out of the USA market so is sacrificing NK to make a deal. Afghanistan these days is little more than a training and test ground for the air force and special forces.
I doubt it will even kick off in NK. fat boy will make gis usual noises as the US fleet sit off his coast while china piles on the economic pressure then he'll negotiate a deal via the chinese to guve up the nukes in return for the US withdrawing from SK and the chinese taking over peacekeeping duties and sending him lots of cake, he'll proclaim he has 'beaten' the US when in reality Trump probably wanted to pull out all the US forces from babysitting SK in line with his underlying desire to no longer be the worlds policeman.
Same story with NATO; trump calls them useless and suggests US might pull out and stop acting a security for Europe and paying the bill - EU countries who've run down their military to pay fir generous social care suddenly realise Putin has a military threat and up defence spending - Trump says NATO is relevant after all now he's got the socialists to cough up for some (probably US supplied) weapons to defend them against Putin who is now doing a roaring trade selling arms to Iran et al thanks to some nice testing marketing of his new arsenal on call of duty / syria level.
Tl;dr
Various leaders using mutually agreed posturing to reinforce their own autocratic regimes
various regimes having pre-planned scuffles to show off weaponary they want to sell to improve their defence exports
scaring people on the internet into thinking WW3 is coming so they can shovel money into their defence friend;s accounts whilst cutting welfare and services.
Doing deals at the end of it all making everyone think they have saved us all from dusaster ensuring they get re-elected.
^ Good observations Goaty Bill & nyxster
There's a lot of instability, mostly self-generated it has to be said (the huge news of a bomb in Afghanistan this week should be put alongside the 7,500+ other attacks the US made in the past 3 years across 6-7 countries). As Kim Jong-il said, if it wasn't for their nuclear weapons they'd be in a similar position to Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan, which is probably the most rational thing he's ever said.
But I don't think he'll be the initial aggressor and I think his external support is on the wane. A lot of what is said is sabre rattling and perpetuating the myth to the population rather than meaningful indications of intent to the outside world. Demonstrations of power yes, but not a prelude to conflict I think. It's how that external sabre-rattling is perceived / spun and to what advantage it will gain - qui bono?
Syrian situation is yet another ill-advised foreign adventure contrived around supplying your enemy to fight another of your enemies but unfortunately, once again, it's put the US/Russia in opposite corners - this I see as a potential problem that certainly won't get better any time soon - everyone has again painted themselves into a corner and framed the story of evil tyrants [that were only recently being feted and brought in from the cold] so there is no backing away; certainly not with a belligerent businessman at one of the helms - economies are generally revived by conflict but anything major with Russia and there won't be any contracts with Halliburton for the foreseeable. Putin is all about face and as long as he doesn't lose much of it we should be OK...
There's a lot of instability, mostly self-generated it has to be said (the huge news of a bomb in Afghanistan this week should be put alongside the 7,500+ other attacks the US made in the past 3 years across 6-7 countries). As Kim Jong-il said, if it wasn't for their nuclear weapons they'd be in a similar position to Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan, which is probably the most rational thing he's ever said.
But I don't think he'll be the initial aggressor and I think his external support is on the wane. A lot of what is said is sabre rattling and perpetuating the myth to the population rather than meaningful indications of intent to the outside world. Demonstrations of power yes, but not a prelude to conflict I think. It's how that external sabre-rattling is perceived / spun and to what advantage it will gain - qui bono?
Syrian situation is yet another ill-advised foreign adventure contrived around supplying your enemy to fight another of your enemies but unfortunately, once again, it's put the US/Russia in opposite corners - this I see as a potential problem that certainly won't get better any time soon - everyone has again painted themselves into a corner and framed the story of evil tyrants [that were only recently being feted and brought in from the cold] so there is no backing away; certainly not with a belligerent businessman at one of the helms - economies are generally revived by conflict but anything major with Russia and there won't be any contracts with Halliburton for the foreseeable. Putin is all about face and as long as he doesn't lose much of it we should be OK...
In the past:
It was normal to conquer empires
It was normal to fight wars
People were used to hardship
People were used to being told that they would be required to make "sacrifices"
We didn't make vast amounts of money dealing with just about every nation on Earth
We didn't regularly go on holiday to lots of different countries
We didn't regularly see blogs or talk to people of forums like this from lots of other countries
So it was easier to tell people we were going to fight another country.
Now it's going to be a lot harder. Can you imagine how quickly a conflict would become untenable if the supermarkets were empty, the internet was down, rations were introduced, car use restricted, gas masks given to children, holidays virtually outlawed, body bags piling up, taxes spiraling up and rumours of all savings accounts being seized to pay for it all.
Regional skirmishes, possibly to remove NK for example, might happen. I just can't see a proper WW3 given how much everyone involved would stand to lose, how little we'd gain and how used to peace and prosperity we've become.
It was normal to conquer empires
It was normal to fight wars
People were used to hardship
People were used to being told that they would be required to make "sacrifices"
We didn't make vast amounts of money dealing with just about every nation on Earth
We didn't regularly go on holiday to lots of different countries
We didn't regularly see blogs or talk to people of forums like this from lots of other countries
So it was easier to tell people we were going to fight another country.
Now it's going to be a lot harder. Can you imagine how quickly a conflict would become untenable if the supermarkets were empty, the internet was down, rations were introduced, car use restricted, gas masks given to children, holidays virtually outlawed, body bags piling up, taxes spiraling up and rumours of all savings accounts being seized to pay for it all.
Regional skirmishes, possibly to remove NK for example, might happen. I just can't see a proper WW3 given how much everyone involved would stand to lose, how little we'd gain and how used to peace and prosperity we've become.
WW1 and WW2 were not world wars.
WW1 and WW2 were basically European civil wars that America had to jump into and stop the brats squabbling among themselves.
Japan in WW2 was just an opportunistic side-issue that America also had to eventually sort out.
WW3 will not happen.
America knows it cannot touch North Korea because China uses it as a buffer on its borders against the West. North Korea has up to 9m soldiers it can call on within days. America has 1m soldiers it can call on at short notice.
All other countries, like Syria, are just insignificant local issues that are a minor, not major, problem.
The rolling, endless, 24hr news channels and online media know they have to fill their time with "something", so they concoct exaggerated jeopardy to keep you watching, turning and clicking.
WW1 and WW2 were basically European civil wars that America had to jump into and stop the brats squabbling among themselves.
Japan in WW2 was just an opportunistic side-issue that America also had to eventually sort out.
WW3 will not happen.
America knows it cannot touch North Korea because China uses it as a buffer on its borders against the West. North Korea has up to 9m soldiers it can call on within days. America has 1m soldiers it can call on at short notice.
All other countries, like Syria, are just insignificant local issues that are a minor, not major, problem.
The rolling, endless, 24hr news channels and online media know they have to fill their time with "something", so they concoct exaggerated jeopardy to keep you watching, turning and clicking.
No, Tom Clancy didn't predict it so it can't happen!
I don't think there will be a conflict on a global scale any time soon. There may be some localised incidents, but all sides have too much to lose to risk full on war.
I anticipate a build up of arms and lots of willy waving in the next few years, which whilst alarming, is something that's gone on for centuries. An interesting idea Trump suggested in 2015 was recommissioning WW2 era battleships, including the Iowa and the Winsconsin. To me that's an indicator that he was planning on upping the military stakes even before he stepped foot in the Oval office.
http://www.g2mil.com/battleships.htm
I don't think there will be a conflict on a global scale any time soon. There may be some localised incidents, but all sides have too much to lose to risk full on war.
I anticipate a build up of arms and lots of willy waving in the next few years, which whilst alarming, is something that's gone on for centuries. An interesting idea Trump suggested in 2015 was recommissioning WW2 era battleships, including the Iowa and the Winsconsin. To me that's an indicator that he was planning on upping the military stakes even before he stepped foot in the Oval office.
http://www.g2mil.com/battleships.htm
TameRacingDriver said:
Interesting thanks. My parents lived through the cold war and they said it was a very worrying time. I just wondered if this felt the same. The older people on here are more well equipped to answer that. I also wonder how much of the perceived anxiety is caused by the tabloids sensationalist headlines. I honestly don't know who or what to believe nowadays.
My cold war (as an old guy 
)https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
The image is the one they put on our television screens nightly as a national emergency warning test accompanied by a long high pitched note.
Apparently if the worst occurred, we would have localised instructions. (we wouldn't, because we didn't live in the US)
We also had weekly casualty reports from Vietnam rolling down the screen - the second of two not so cold episodes in the cold war.
There weren't one or two wounded, missing or killed each week, there were hundreds.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff