NationStates Jolt Archive

We all know that nuclear war is devastating, and most nations will avoid using nuclear weapons wherever possible. But most nations have fewer qualms about going to war and fighting with conventional weapons. So the question is: if a war on the scale of the last two world wars, who would it be between, what would be some of the likely causes?

Oil, possibly water in the future, other resources, "Lebensraum", ideology, etc. Same basic reasons most wars start.

Oil, possibly water in the future, other resources, "Lebensraum", ideology, etc. Same basic reasons most wars start.

Possibly. Some likely causes of such a war might lie within the Middle East, or between Pakistan and India. (Unlikely as that is)

Possibly. Some likely causes of such a war might lie within the Middle East, or between Pakistan and India. (Unlikely as that is)

I don't think we will see a World War arise because of issues in the Middle East or between Pakistan and India (who are having better relations nowadays). Wars are possible, but i don't think things will reach a global level. Perhaps in the future, a U.S. vs. China could develop into a World War, but i think that that is very unlikely as well. But then again, who knows what the future holds?

Actually having a Non-Nuclear World War III or even a smaller scale war would be good, that way we can have cool battles with tanks, planes and guns, yet we don't have to use nukes so everyone looses, kinda like turning off the superweapons in Ra2 because their overbalanced.

Actually having a Non-Nuclear World War III or even a smaller scale war would be good, that way we can have cool battles with tanks, planes and guns, yet we don't have to use nukes so everyone looses, kinda like turning off the superweapons in Ra2 because their overbalanced.

THAT DAMN WEATHER MACHINE.

Actually having a Non-Nuclear World War III or even a smaller scale war would be good, that way we can have cool battles with tanks, planes and guns, yet we don't have to use nukes so everyone looses, kinda like turning off the superweapons in Ra2 because their overbalanced.

Much more fun for the people who deny the horrors of the Holocaust, and other calamities that come with World Wars.

Much more fun for the people who deny the horrors of the Holocaust, and other calamities that come with World Wars.
Yeah I am sure it is for whoever you are referring to.

Most likely it'll be like the cold war, except with shooting and China and NK as the commies. Both would fear ujsing Nukes as that would provoke <Insert Western Superpower here> into retaliation by using...guess what? NUKES.

Yeah I am sure it is for whoever you are referring to.

You, and your posting history on the Holocaust.

You, and your posting history on the Holocaust.

Wow, I don't really know exactly what your referring to, so unless your a IDF or MTAE puppet, this is totally off topic. BTW I never 'denied' the holocaust, I just put it in context as a minor genocide compared to the other ones of history that receive little or no recognition, while Israel justifies it's existence on a strange nationalist cult based on the holocaust.

Anyways, back on topic, troll.

Maybe after a devestating world war (minus the nukes) the world will get along better. I mean for about 10 seconds after WWII the world was pretty peaceful, because everyone was too fucked up afterwards to fight.

Maybe after a devestating world war (minus the nukes) the world will get along better. I mean for about 10 seconds after WWII the world was pretty peaceful, because everyone was too fucked up afterwards to fight.

You know, we might actually get another 10 seconds of peace.

You know, we might actually get another 10 seconds of peace.

IF you were being sarcastic read below \/ If not, just ignore it.

(What I meant by '10 seconds of peace', was the almost immediate outbreak of Soviet/U.S. hostilities and the Cold War in general after WWII)

probably between Communism and capitalism

Wow, I don't really know exactly what your referring to, so unless your a IDF or MTAE puppet, this is totally off topic. BTW I never 'denied' the holocaust, I just put it in context as a minor genocide compared to the other ones of history that receive little or no recognition, while Israel justifies it's existence on a strange nationalist cult based on the holocaust.

Anyways, back on topic, troll.

Which is denying what makes it different. You can say it isn't different all you want, but that makes you a denier, not correct.

Also, as my sig says, I was Mannatopia way the hell back (same one from Rotovia-'s sig), I don't even know who MTAE is.

probably between Communism and capitalism

Whats the score for Capitalist nations vs. Communist nations? One hundred and sixty-something VS. maybe 20, 30 max (probably a lot lower)

EDIT:

I made those figures up btw, I realy don't know.

Which is denying what makes it different. You can say it isn't different all you want, but that makes you a denier, not correct.

Also, as my sig says, I was Mannatopia way the hell back (same one from Rotovia-'s sig), I don't even know who MTAE is.

Just wondering, what difference are you implying?

Wow, I don't really know exactly what your referring to, so unless your a IDF or MTAE puppet, this is totally off topic. BTW I never 'denied' the holocaust, I just put it in context as a minor genocide compared to the other ones of history that receive little or no recognition, while Israel justifies it's existence on a strange nationalist cult based on the holocaust.

Anyways, back on topic, troll.
While true, this is also irrelevant. Are you trying to say that the Holocaust--which was, oddly enough, not limited to Jews--is somehow less important than these other genocides? I would say they are all equally important and should be considered as such, perhaps with more priority in terms of total knowledge and relative relevancy the closer to current times the genocide took place.

While true, this is also irrelevant. Are you trying to say that the Holocaust--which was, oddly enough, not limited to Jews--is somehow less important than these other genocides? I would say they are all equally important and should be considered as such, perhaps with more priority in terms of total knowledge and relative relevancy the closer to current times the genocide took place.

Rwanda anyone?

Rwanda anyone?

Exactly.

Exactly.

Yep...

While true, this is also irrelevant. Are you trying to say that the Holocaust--which was, oddly enough, not limited to Jews--is somehow less important than these other genocides? I would say they are all equally important and should be considered as such, perhaps with more priority in terms of total knowledge and relative relevancy the closer to current times the genocide took place.

It's minor is terms of of body count, and too much is made of it, Israel still acts like it was their generation who went through it.

While true, this is also irrelevant. Are you trying to say that the Holocaust.. what the..???

its only the second page.. how did the Holocaust got into this thread so early?
IDF around?
:confused:

what the..???

its only the second page.. how did the Holocaust got into this thread so early?
IDF around?
:confused:

You'd think so, but apparently he delegates his trolling to proxies these days, you know kinda like how conservatives get think tanks to put their crazy opinions out.

Just wondering, what difference are you implying?

A great many differences. That it was done so methodically and scientifically by what was considered a first rate civilized and technologically advanced nation nation, the scale and speed, the fact that it was literally industrialized (as in they had factories designed for killing and disposing, living Jews walked in, killed by industrial chemical processes like Zyklon B, and ashes came out), the area over which entire cultures were wiped out completely, etc.

It's minor is terms of of body count, and too much is made of it, Israel still acts like it was their generation who went through it.

Minor? What crack are you smoking?

It's minor is terms of of body count, and too much is made of it, Israel still acts like it was their generation who went through it.

At least twelve million, with possibly up to twenty million, is minor in terms of body count?! What the hell is your standard?!

Also, please do not accuse me of trolling for another player. I'm just trying to understand your viewpoint here, as it confuses me.

I suppose I should point out my own: I don't consider the Holocaust more important than other genocides; as I said before, they're all equal in my mind. To the Israelies, however, it is extremely important, as it should be, considering it involved their people. Do they over obsess about it? That's an issue for debate, and one I don't have a position on.

Minor? What crack are you smoking?

Why is it that no one knows about the millions of other victims of genocide, they only think of the Jews, when compared to the other genocides of the world and in the context of the amount of attention just the Jewish part receives, yes it is minor.

Rwanda anyone?

Rwanda was at most 1 million people (probably between 500,000 and 800,000), done in third world nation (of course that does not change the value in terms of human costs, but it does in terms of what the genocide was, and what makes it different, or in this case more like, standard genocides), not industrialized or even all that methodical, and lasted all of 100 days.

Compare with Holocaust and come back to me.

At least twelve million, with possibly up to twenty million, is minor in terms of body count?! What the hell is your standard?!

Also, please do not accuse me of trolling for another player. I'm just trying to understand your viewpoint here, as it confuses me.

I suppose I should point out my own: I don't consider the Holocaust more important than other genocides; as I said before, they're all equal in my mind. To the Israelies, however, it is extremely important, as it should be, considering it involved their people. Do they over obsess about it? That's an issue for debate, and one I don't have a position on.

No, that's a fact, they do, when they are in conflicts with the Arabs it's somehow a comparison to the holocaust, they say Arafat is like Hitler, Israeli politicians refer to Iran having a nuclear weapon as a 'flying concentration camp' they use it to justify occupation of the WB and murdering of Arabs under a perverse national racial militaristic cult.

Jews, when compared to the other genocides of the world and in the context of the amount of attention just the Jewish part receives, yes it is minor.

No, it isn't. Again, what crack are you smoking?

Why is it that no one knows about the millions of other victims of genocide, they only think of the Jews, when compared to the other genocides of the world and in the context of the amount of attention just the Jewish part receives, yes it is minor.

Biggest Genocide was Stalin's. (20 million or more)

Biggest Death count caused by stupid dictator was the massive famine caused by Mao's Great Leap Forward. (Around 70 million deaths 45 mil at least)

Holocaust 12-20 million.

Holocaust is far from minor.

No, that's a fact, they do, when they are in conflicts with the Arabs it's somehow a comparison to the holocaust, they say Arafat is like Hitler, Israeli politicians refer to Iran having a nuclear weapon as a 'flying concentration camp' they use it to justify occupation of the WB and murdering of Arabs under a perverse national racial militaristic cult.

True enough. But that's what politicians do: they harp on about some issue to try and raise fears or otherwise motivate people into continuing to elect them. We see this in every country, including my own.

Now, does the average Israeli over obsess about the Holocaust? That is the real question, and I probably should have specified as such.

No, that's a fact, they do, when they are in conflicts with the Arabs it's somehow a comparison to the holocaust

They don't always do that.

Arafat is like Hitler

Certainly the mainstream ones haven't in the last 15 years.

Israeli politicians refer to Iran having a nuclear weapon as a 'flying concentration camp'

Show me the quote.

they use it to justify occupation of the WB and murdering of Arabs under a perverse national racial militaristic cult.

Show me a single quote from a mainstream politician justifying the West Bank with the Holocaust. Specifically saying that Israel is in the West Bank because of the Holocaust. Specifically.

My instincts say arab countries, China, North Korea, Cuba, and maybe Venezuela vs US, Israel, India, and some EU, Australia, and New Zealand assistance.

* War breaks out betweem Israel and its neighbors
* US intervenes on Israel's side.
* Other arab nations are threatened, join the war -- including Egypt and Jordan.
* EU gives US some support, India acceptd a request of war on Pakistan.
* China fels threatened, joins the arabs (maybe full-out, maybe just some assistance), and pressures North Korea, Cuba, and maybe Venezuela into helping.

I'm not saying this (or any war of such epic proportions) is likely, but this seems like the most plausible.

Actually having a Non-Nuclear World War III or even a smaller scale war would be good, that way we can have cool battles with tanks, planes and guns, yet we don't have to use nukes so everyone looses, kinda like turning off the superweapons in Ra2 because their overbalanced.

Oh golly yes! And think about all of those cool explosions of those tanks, planes, and guns...resulting in awesome human brains and gore flying everywhere. And think about all of those sweet blood covered fields, and those nifty widows who would lose their husbands, and those daughters who would lose their fathers.

Oh! And the rapings of men and women alike by angry victors who lost their comrades.

Not to mention, of course, the cool decimation of so many towns, cities, etc, and the displacement of so many people.

Yet, I agree. War rocks. :rolleyes:

Much more fun for the people who deny the horrors of the Holocaust, and other calamities that come with World Wars.My favorite is trench foot.

World War III could very well become a three-way war, with the West on one side, the Russians or Chinese and their allied dictatorships on another, and the radical Muslims trying to blow everyone up (themselves included).

World War III could very well become a three-way war, with the West on one side, the Russians or Chinese and their allied dictatorships on another, and the radical Muslims trying to blow everyone up (themselves included).

That would be a fifteen minute war then wouldn't it?

United States and her allies getting ready for inasion of mainland china and the defence of the US' sounthern boarder. China, Russia, and North Korea getting ready for invasion and defence from Godzilla and Mothra and the Middle East, assuming that the ifadels are fighting for their Allah given oil blow torch their refineries and blow themselves up after some radicle cleric declares jihad against the world for being such devilish infadels.

And the US and China would be all "wtf?" and just stop fighting out of confusion on what just happened.

We all know that nuclear war is devastating, and most nations will avoid using nuclear weapons wherever possible. But most nations have fewer qualms about going to war and fighting with conventional weapons. So the question is: if a war on the scale of the last two world wars, who would it be between, what would be some of the likely causes?
It'll be over water.

At least twelve million, with possibly up to twenty million, is minor in terms of body count?! What the hell is your standard?!


I thought it was around some 6 million people of Jewish descent with the remainder being gypsies, homosexuals, political dissidents and Russian civilians?

Why is it that no one knows about the millions of other victims of genocide, they only think of the Jews, when compared to the other genocides of the world and in the context of the amount of attention just the Jewish part receives, yes it is minor.

As has already been pointed out to you, the Holocaust was not limited to Jews. Trade unionists, communists, Russians, Jehovah's witnesses, homosexuals...

My guess for WWIII goes like this;

Some time in the next twenty years, the oil starts to run out. China, whose booming economy depends on oil, invades the Middle East, snapping up oil in Iran and Iraq. India, also needing oil, follows China, attacking both the mid-east and China. Over west, the leaders of the United States are facing immense pressure from its citizens to stop China's advance into the Middle East, and declares war on China. China sends its navy out to stop the U.S from landing troops, and America quickly involves the rest of NATO. Either Russia or China takes this war as an excuse to launch an attack on the other, China aiming for Russia's northern gas fields to maintain wartime production.

The Winner: Who knows, my guess is a high tech WWI, with no side able to make advances.

(Please feel free to correct me if I made any major political errors, I made this up on the spot.)

I thought it was around some 6 million people of Jewish descent with the remainder being gypsies, homosexuals, political dissidents and Russian civilians?

That is where it goes up to 11 million (more realistic an estimate than the 20 million sometimes stated).

Actually having a Non-Nuclear World War III or even a smaller scale war would be good, that way we can have cool battles with tanks, planes and guns, yet we don't have to use nukes so everyone looses, kinda like turning off the superweapons in Ra2 because their overbalanced.

yea cuz huge destructive wars are just ever so fun...:rolleyes:

World War III could very well become a three-way war, with the West on one side, the Russians or Chinese and their allied dictatorships on another, and the radical Muslims trying to blow everyone up (themselves included).

You've been playing too much Command and Conquer Generals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_%26_Conquer:_Generals)...

Mugabe will do something and cause Zimbabwe to be the central cause of WW3

It'll be over water.


Water is a renewable resource!



Does longhaul make sense to anyone?

Mugabe will do something and cause Zimbabwe to be the central cause of WW3

It is very difficult for me to imagine Mugabe still in office in a few months. What he has done is to take Zimbabwe to the brink of collapse - and then beyond. That poor nation is perhaps the least likely to affect the geopolitical situation in any way.

Had he not been an absolute idiot when it comes to producing economic output or resources of any kind, he could have been a threat.

It is sad irony that the tragedy of the nation that was until recently a powerhouse of production in Africa, is also what keeps danger at bay at least from that side.

If, however, a competent and benign government was installed in Zimbabwe, the wast resources and huge agricultural capacity could create an economic centre capable of stabilizing the entire Southern Africa. This could really help bring about some needed changes in what is quite possible the most troubled region in the world today.

Unfortunately the corruption has been deeply set in that country.

Water is a renewable resource!

Clean, drinkable water is not, at least not without huge expenditures of energy in desalinization, cleaning, and transport to areas (like the Middle East) that are scarce on water.

I thought he/she was talking about Dark Reign.

That has water as a resource and I think it is renewable...

Clean, drinkable water is not, at least not without huge expenditures of energy in desalinization, cleaning, and transport to areas (like the Middle East) that are scarce on water.

Desalination is not that hard.

Saudi Arabia already gets most of their water from it.

I thought he/she was talking about Dark Reign.

That has water as a resource and I think it is renewable...

What gave you the impression that this was about Dark Reign? Was it mentioned in this thread at all?

Desalination is not that hard.

Saudi Arabia already gets most of their water from it.

But desalinating water leaves you with a lot of salt. And if you rely on desalination for supplying a nation (or more) with water, you are left with LOTS of salt. You can but it back to the sea, but diffusion acts with limited pace, so you'll get a highly saline environment where you drop off the salt. You can dispose it on land, but then it just lies around - or blows away so as to render otherwise arable land close to useless.

A better solution is to clean and perhaps even recycle used water. or to reduce water usage through more effective infrastructure. All options do require some amount of resources to start off with, however.

So, could wars be fought over water? Possible, though to wage war you'll also need resources. What it ultimately is about when people resort to violence to gain resources, is that their region is unable to sustain their current way of life. Over population and overuse of resources happen from time to time, though nature solves the problem herself through her tragic mechanisms.

War about economic and political dominance is, from my point of view, a more likely scenario. Just as an individual may resort to violence towards other individuals to ensure its survival, geopolitical groups - the more classic minded of you might say ideologies - may go to war. This sounds a bit like a cold-war-gone-hot-(but-not-too-hot)-scenario.

This post is getting too far and it is getting late; thus I shall not care to read the post through so as to remove spelling-, grammar,- or factual errors.

What gave you the impression that this was about Dark Reign? Was it mentioned in this thread at all?

Just the water bit.

A better solution is to clean and perhaps even recycle used water. or to reduce water usage through more effective infrastructure. All options do require some amount of resources to start off with, however.

Tell that to my state government.

Just the water bit.

I think you have been playing WAY too much Dark Reign then. That is worse than assuming we are talking about C&C Red Alert if someone mentions ore.

World War III would be an economic slugfest leading into war! Here are the main players: USA, Russia, North Korea, China, Israel, Islamic nations.

Europe has been progressively democratized and connected so no negative sentiments between Euro countries would arise there. But Asia is changing its and that is the future theater.

Here's the situation....
As China grows more and more prosperous it gets bold, just imagine a turn of the century Germany with billions of people. Their resources and space are running thin. Large natural resource rich yet underdeveloped countries like Mongolia and former Central Asia Soviet blocs are swallowed up and taken under control. Russia is furious and begins to reactivate and assemble their Cold War surpluses. A nationalistic regime within China rises up and stirs the people. They begin assembling a large military to control and defend the country. Annoyed by the constant yet puny threat of North Korea they invade it followed by the invasion of South Korea, Taiwan and the rest of southeast Asia. Disgruntled Islamic countries threaten by Chinese influence in central Asia and Indonesia begin an alliance with Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iran. Israel constantly suspicious of others in the Middle East takes a retaliatory defensive stance. Its hidden military finally emerges as a powerful and precise force in the Middle East. China attempts to plunder Russia's vast resources in Siberia and points east and draws first blood. Russia responds with a long suppressed Cold War force. With the invasion of Russia the West has to respond. Nations such as Britain, France, and Germany pledge aid to Russia. The United States and Canada come across via Alaska to also aid Russia. The Middle East becomes a hot bed as the atheist Chinese tear down mosques and temples in Chechnya, Tajikistan and Indonesia. Its sheer numbers allows it to fight on both ends of Asia. Acting on their own Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia truce with their radical bretheren and begin make calculated yet devasting terrorist attacks on China. The war gets out of hand as several camps emerge. The Islamic camp, The Western Camp, and the Chinese camp. Both of these camps have or have access to nuclear weapons and eventually someone uses them. Nuclear war will aways been immient. Conventional warfare is a thing of the past.

World War III would be an economic slugfest leading into war! Here are the main players: USA, Russia, North Korea, China, Israel, Islamic nations.

Europe has been progressively democratized and connected so no negative sentiments between Euro countries would arise there. But Asia is changing its and that is the future theater.

Here's the situation....
As China grows more and more prosperous it gets bold, just imagine a turn of the century Germany with billions of people. Their resources and space are running thin. Large natural resource rich yet underdeveloped countries like Mongolia and former Central Asia Soviet blocs are swallowed up and taken under control. Russia is furious and begins to reactivate and assemble their Cold War surpluses. A nationalistic regime within China rises up and stirs the people. They begin assembling a large military to control and defend the country. Annoyed by the constant yet puny threat of North Korea they invade it followed by the invasion of South Korea, Taiwan and the rest of southeast Asia. Disgruntled Islamic countries threaten by Chinese influence in central Asia and Indonesia begin an alliance with Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iran. Israel constantly suspicious of others in the Middle East takes a retaliatory defensive stance. Its hidden military finally emerges as a powerful and precise force in the Middle East. China attempts to plunder Russia's vast resources in Siberia and points east and draws first blood. Russia responds with a long suppressed Cold War force. With the invasion of Russia the West has to respond. Nations such as Britain, France, and Germany pledge aid to Russia. The United States and Canada come across via Alaska to also aid Russia. The Middle East becomes a hot bed as the atheist Chinese tear down mosques and temples in Chechnya, Tajikistan and Indonesia. Its sheer numbers allows it to fight on both ends of Asia. Acting on their own Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia truce with their radical bretheren and begin make calculated yet devasting terrorist attacks on China. The war gets out of hand as several camps emerge. The Islamic camp, The Western Camp, and the Chinese camp. Both of these camps have or have access to nuclear weapons and eventually someone uses them. Nuclear war will aways been immient. Conventional warfare is a thing of the past.

Interesting...But, with conflict all this conflict around the Indian subcontinent how would India get involved...would they be actively fighting or would they be Switzerland?

Wouldn't this just end up being China v Everyone?

India being part Hindu and part Islamic would be a nation divided. It has nuclear capabilities. It is economically thriving. Yet it would not enter the war unless provoked. And it has natural defenses aka Himalayas!

But those Islamic nations are that variable!

They could for us or against us or just fighting their own battle.

For those who say the next war will be in the Middle East is mistaken. Its a powder keg like the Balkans but it has little or no military force and most of the islamic nations are just above third world status. Also Israel would destroy each and every ME country. They literally have no patience with them and have developed such precise tatics to deal with radical islamics. So I think a holy war would occur there but Israel would come out victorious. China will become America's rival like the former Soviet Union sans the communism. They have the right mixture for a fascist regime to thrive their. Atheism, A strong national pride, economically powerful, and they need room and resources.

Fortunately, religion doesn't dominate the US the way it dominates the mideast.

But those Islamic nations are that variable!

They could for us or against us or just fighting their own battle.

For those who say the next war will be in the Middle East is mistaken. Its a powder keg like the Balkans but it has little or no military force and most of the islamic nations are just above third world status. Also Israel would destroy each and every ME country. They literally have no patience with them and have developed such precise tatics to deal with radical islamics. So I think a holy war would occur there but Israel would come out victorious. China will become America's rival like the former Soviet Union sans the communism. They have the right mixture for a fascist regime to thrive their. Atheism, A strong national pride, economically powerful, and they need room and resources.

I think the Middle East would become a friend to the West or at least to the US... like Afghanistan in the 80's...IMO to them, Atheist Chinese (Commies?) would be worse than Imperialist Americans...but that's just IMO