Will WWIII Happen In The Next Couple Decades?

[MatSm]

The Economist argues that there are ominous parallels between the conditions which led to the first world war and today. The Telegraph notes that the economic crisis in Europe is increasing tensions. The New Republic points out that global downturns can lead to war. Do they have enough reasons to say that, how do you think?

Our rulers are becoming corrupt, our people are becoming careless. A single zealot may become persecutor, and better men be his victims. I'm scared.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Will you stop posting stupid threads anytime soon????

 

[brycejones]

Will you stop posting stupid threads anytime soon????

If there was a poll I would vote "no".

 

[Murloc]

this discussion requires defining world war as a premise.

 

[manimal]

ww3 already happened. Wars are now fought with money and influence.



and flatulence as well.

 

[pcgeek11]

ww3 already happened. Wars are now fought with money and influence.



and flatulence as well.

I just fired a round. Do I get a National Defense Medal? That would make three NDM's.

 

[Sonikku]

The moment tensions flared between US/China or something the elite would phone up their subordinates in Washington and demand they calm down and make a deal instead. Losing all that slave labor and factories just isn't profitable.

 

[Brainonska511]

Will you stop posting stupid threads anytime soon????

Post and run: the troll motto.

 

[Mai72]

I'm scared. I'm scared. I'm scared.

You aren't ATOT tuff! We laugh at war. We are men, and some are even trans!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Post and run: the troll motto.

Good to see the mods shut down one of his troll threads :biggrin:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2439732

Hopefully they'll shut him down as he very seldom if ever replies in the threads he starts.

 

[alcoholbob]

WWIII in what sense, you mean total conventional war that bombs industrial nations back to the stone age like in the 1940s?

There isn't a country on the planet that has the industrial capacity to pump out sheer amount of weapons like what the major antagonists of WWII were (well, maybe China today could). Cost of fuel and raw materials are significantly higher today than they were back then. In 1943 the United States naval yards alone were churning out 12,000,000 tons of warships annually.

Even under a total war scenario today with a draft if the US nationalized all shipyards in the U.S. we'd be lucky to manage a few 100,000 tons of production today.

Total conventional war is basically impossible today. Nobody has the money or the industrial capacity to wage it, least of all the United States which is a shell of what it was at the beginning of the 20th century. It would have to be a nuclear war.

 

[nickqt]

WWIII in what sense, you mean total conventional war that bombs industrial nations back to the stone age like in the 1940s?

There isn't a country on the planet that has the industrial capacity to pump out sheer amount of weapons like what the major antagonists of WWII were (well, maybe China today could). Cost of fuel and raw materials are significantly higher today than they were back then. In 1943 the United States naval yards alone were churning out 12,000,000 tons of warships annually.

Even under a total war scenario today with a draft if the US nationalized all shipyards in the U.S. we'd be lucky to manage a few 100,000 tons of production today.

Total conventional war is basically impossible today. Nobody has the money or the industrial capacity to wage it, least of all the United States which is a shell of what it was at the beginning of the 20th century. It would have to be a nuclear war.

Total conventional warfare on the scale of WWII is done and over with.

 

[werepossum]

WWIII in what sense, you mean total conventional war that bombs industrial nations back to the stone age like in the 1940s?

There isn't a country on the planet that has the industrial capacity to pump out sheer amount of weapons like what the major antagonists of WWII were (well, maybe China today could). Cost of fuel and raw materials are significantly higher today than they were back then. In 1943 the United States naval yards alone were churning out 12,000,000 tons of warships annually.

Even under a total war scenario today with a draft if the US nationalized all shipyards in the U.S. we'd be lucky to manage a few 100,000 tons of production today.

Total conventional war is basically impossible today. Nobody has the money or the industrial capacity to wage it, least of all the United States which is a shell of what it was at the beginning of the 20th century. It would have to be a nuclear war.

China could. The USA and Europe could as well, but as our remaining manufacturing is extremely specialized we would have a difficult time ramping up. Shipyards in particular would take years to come online, as would expanding warplane production.

I think we have three huge things in our favor. First, Europe and the USA are under elected rulers, who would presumably become unelected quickly in the case of world war. That gives us a good chance to stop something that is inadvertently started. Second, widespread nuclear weapons promise devastation to the winner as well, and while one go could into a world war promising to avoid nukes there would be little reason for the loser to keep that promise. And third, the only remaining nation with a huge amount of manufacturing is Red China. Being on track to own everything in Europe and America is a pretty strong reason not to break it.

Total conventional warfare on the scale of WWII is done and over with.

You know that's exactly what everyone said after World War I, right? It wasn't called World War I until World War II; before that it was called the Great War and the War To End All Wars.

Being sure there will never be another world war is the quickest way to blunder into one.